Hijack Response

[Winstun]

The QF Mel-Tassie hijack topic closed. Frankly, I was alarmed at some of the responses made by persons employed in air travel. Some appear reticent to accept their responsibilty and exhibit complacency of the real risk and threat of a hijack attempt. This may be due to a lack of risk awareness or fear. Both can be corrected with industry education which I think should be extended to the general public and school students. The urgency of a hijack situation post 9/11 cannot be overemphasized, where it is imperitive for all abled pax and crew to neutralize the attacker(s) immediately. I expect a natural reaction, and the more the better.

Buster, on the previous topic you requested I answer your question. I thought I did, otherwise I did not understand your question.

[Winstun]

Take the lead from the people trained to evaluate and deal with it as professionals And exactly WHICH people might that be?
I am thankful the wider public does not take your view. The assumption must be so. Suicide attacks are time critical and any threatening pax must be taken down immediately, regardless of intent. The consequences of inaction are great.

[Kaptin M]

Reluctantly I am breaking my own promise of not replying to this twit (and thus bringing it to the top again).

But you are getting BORING and REPETITVE to the extreme, Winstun!

You have only ONE solution for EVERY situation - attack the attempted hijacker, regardless of EVERYTHING else....."after all we're all going to die anyway".

Go away and grow up, son.

You're a danger to your:mad:self, and everyone else around you - a loose cannon!

[Winstun]

Go away and grow up, son. Sort of childish comment I expect from someone without any valid viewpoint. Kaptin, if you find it boring and repetitive, don't look at this topic. 289 hits in less than 24 hours tell me many people take this issue very seriously. My information on the 9/11 flights: some flight attendants and front business pax were getting their throats slit within first 30 seconds, pilots killed within the first 2 minutes. I would like Lance to point out which professionals, and what evaluation and dealings are they proposing?

[Buster Hyman]

I did not understand your question.

Here endeth the lesson! :rolleyes:

[Winstun]

If, therefore, you tackled the hijacker & I went down the back, opened the door & jumped, we'd both be of equal standing as we both knew we were a fair chance of dying. Am I reading you right? Are you seriously suggesting this is a clear and logical question? "be of equal standing"? Give me a friggin bone!
My answer was: If you went down the back and jumped - or everyone did nothing- I would say you were almost guaranteed to die. I also say that myself and the wider public will be attacking the hijacker(s) and we will all have a more than fair chance of living. Now, exactly what don't you understand?:rolleyes:

[Buster Hyman]

:rolleyes: Alright. Last time seeing you've completely missed my point!:rolleyes:

You implied that the crew were not heroic in their actions. Fair enough, your opinion.

If, therefore, running head on at some loony with a gun or any instrument that could inflict death upon ones self is not heroic, then is it not dissimilar to one just jumping out the back door? And don't play semantics about could cause death & would cause death. You imply (if I'm reading you right) that the survival instinct of fighting back is not heroic, in these circumstances. Hiding is also a survival instinct

My point is that standing up to an agressor and giving in to an agressor are two entirely different sets of actions and bravery can't be arbitrarily dismissed in this case.

[mo_gravy]

I'll settle this

the only beating the average pilate is capable of administering is to "the meat". similarly the only flogging a pilot could dish out is to "the log". get it yet? or do i need to explain further?

ok. consider the humble "chicken". thats the only thing i ever heard of a skinny-armed pilate choking successfully.

still maybe thats why they call them a hijacker??? could be were all missing something here...

i admit if the hi-jacker attacked passengers with a gherkin then the pillock would be well-trained to try jerkin it away from her.

no hijerker could withstand that over-developed right arm.

gravy™

[Winstun]

Buster, I find your thoughts illogical. I always maintained the crew of this flight did an excellent job. 'Heroic' and 'brave', etc is just a bunch of nonsense the over -the- top press in this country are caught up with, along with some of the pandering here for whatever reason, makes them feel good I expect. Don't get me wrong. Pre 9/11, someone risking their life to take out an armed hijacker, I would accept as 'brave' - for those of you who relish these terms. Now it's Post 9/11 : A line has been drawn. And we, the good citizens of the world, have drawn it. Sure there will be fear in these situations, and some may instinctively hide. But I can assure you the wider public have much anger, and most will indulge in a rapid mass response attack. Personally, if I find myself in a hijack situation, I will be passively going for a kill on the perpertrator. Not just for fun. These hijackers want to die, and they can well do it on my time, not theirs. I encourage other pax also familiar with martial arts or unarmed combat to aim for the same. I cringe at the thought of hijackers having the opportunity to be sentanced by your average Aussie judge, like the recent example, 18 months non parole. Not only incompetant but a disgrace.

[mo_gravy]

I will be passively going for a kill on the perpertrator. hahahahahaaaaa ! ! ! sorry im just picturing it. no really thats a good line too. but a bit hard to work out the meaning tho dont you think? stick to my simpler ones. see my earlier comments on beating of the meat

dont forget to take ya gherkin when you dish out that flogging

gravy™

[Winstun]

For the simpler minds here: what this means is there will be no witness to my real intent. As I am familiar with unarmed combat, and acting in self defense, I am able to "accidentally" make a quick and effective kill without any weapon. Obviously this is not something for Joe Public, but I encourage all who are trained to indulge. Not only do we get these monsters off the street, it saves the taxpayer considerable taking these people to trial.:ok:

[ferris]

What a great attitude to the mentally ill!
How very........Spartan of you.

[mustafagander]

ferris,

Are you infering that I'd be less dead if the hijacker who destroyed my a/c was mentally unstable??

Wake up to reality. If someone genuinely threatens our lives s/he may well die for it. When you think the scenario through, and I hope all professional aviators have, it is very obvious that all hijackers must be completely disabled if we and/or the pax attack them - there'll be no second chances, so mercy and fair play go by the board. Survival situations are just that. Ensure the threat is neutralised before ceasing action.

Personally I'm very sad that we now must think these formerly unthinkable thoughts, but the world has, as we all know, changed radically.

[Hugh Jarse]

Gidday Mustafagander....God bless the Crash-Axe I say. Easy for us to access, and used appropriately it is an excellent suppressant in close quarters situations such as the flight deck......:ok:

[ferris]

Not inferring anything of the sort. I was responding toI am able to "accidentally" make a quick and effective kill without any weapon.
Nobody would be silly enough to suggest that "hijackers" need not be disabled.
But some seem silly enough to suggest the above. Very macho. Even if the "hijacker" in question is clearly alone and quite ill. On the contrary, if said person was to get killed in the course of being subdued, that is one thing. But to set out to do so is quite another.

[Winstun]

The crash axe is a nice weapon, but I fear not effective enough for an initial flight deck defense from professional terrorists. I highly recommend tasers for your flight deck and infrared for your aircraft. :ok:

[Buster Hyman]

Semantics it is then....oh well.

Whoa! Look at that! I just noticed that my visa for planet Winstun has just expired! Gotta go....:rolleyes:

[maflsc]

I agree with you winston, it is about time that we draw the line in the sand and say no more. If you try to hijack any any aeroplane you will be attacked by not only the crew but also passengers. With freedom also comes reposibility. You ether make a stand for your freedom to freely travel any way without the threat of some one trying to kill you or you stay at home and hope that some one else will defend your freedom.

[Spotlight]

Its true I tell you!

Well how do you know?

Why my dog told me!

[DutchRoll]

Tasers? Infrared? 'Going for a kill on the perpetrator'? 'A quick and effective kill without any weapon'?

I'm having difficulty figuring out who would be the bigger problem to control on my aircraft in a potential hijack situation. The hijacker or Winstun?

[Lloyd Braun]

In the not too distant future we will see an all female crew on the cover of FHM.

Something that stuck in my mind was a comment from the male QF flight attendent was that he felt relief when he heard other male voices etc helping him to subdue the hijacker.

I'm sure it would be discriminatory to require a certain number of male cabin/tech crew on every flight but what would have been the outcome if no men were around to sort out the situation the other day ??

[Winstun]

Not relevant. Maybe if it were a granny charter flight. It's a numbers game, I would be very surprised if airline hijackers were not outnumbered by plus several to one. I would be more comforted by more than half of the female population assisting me than many an obese or wimpy pilot I see floating around as off duty pax. He talked kind of homo, maybe that was the reason.
Dutchie, are you suggesting that if you had the equipment, you would not use a taser to defend your flight deck or infrared to defend your aircraft? I don't see what control problem you have with me and my good friends terminating a hijacker down the back for you. You're welcome. :hmm:

[Four Seven Eleven]

Q: What's the difference between Winstun and a terrorist?


















A: It may be possible to negotiate with a terrorist ;)

[dghob]

I think maybe Winstun lives in a little fantasy world. Beaten up at school every day, but who gives a sh#t - he's the high score player on the shooting gallery down at the mall. Wears his fatigues & all I'd reckon. The only thing he can kill is an otherwise good thread.

[Winstun]

A: It may be possible to negotiate with a terrorist Tell that to the relatives and friends of 9/11 victims.
Wears his fatigues & all I'd reckon Pay all this tax money and get friggin yobbos. Get an education please!!!:rolleyes:

[Kaptin M]

I highly recommend tasers for your flight deck and infrared for your aircraft.
An infrared what, Winstun? Remote control?
And WHO is going to get it onboard?

Now as a self-confessed "assassin" :hmm: Winstun, you advocate,"As I am familiar with unarmed combat, and acting in self defense, I am able to "accidentally" make a quick and effective kill without any weapon."...yet anyone who confesses to possessing the skills that YOU claim :rolleyes: also knows the PRIMARY rule, "Any weapon YOU use, can - and WILL - be (taken from you and) used AGAINST you".

Methinks you have but one thought in that skull, Winstun - and it's bouncing around from side-to-side because there's nothing else in there to stop it. :ok: :{

[Winstun]

Infrared missile protection is installed on all Israeli airliners and Matador is available on all Gulfstreams. Similar systems should be required equipment for all airliners. Tasers should be available on the flight deck as a last resort defense. You can modify their operation with a safety feature: activation code entry required which is flight specific and given to the pilots before departure. There should also be barrier systems installed and deployed to prevent intrusion anytime the flight deck door is opened in flight. Kaptin, even without someone of my combat capabilities in cabin, I firmly believe any hijackers will be taken down by the pax group on the day. Now, I think the wider public would not be sadened if one or two could be taken out at the same time by myself and others, in fact grateful. Do you not value the life of the innocent? I am suspecting you are some religious kook that accepts fate and forgives murderers. I see your Aussie flag. If it makes a difference to you, be reminded there were Aussies on those 9/11 planes and in those buildings.