NZ Domestic flights at 'high risk' according to report
 

Link to Stuff.co.nz article

Do these numptys have a clue? :mad: Drunks, Grudge holders and those with mental illness pose the greatest threat, so you're going to increase screening for Captain Smith and FO Jones, so that they will be unable to bring on those ever so deadly screwdrivers and pliers they require in the course of their duties?

The story does continue on to suggest strengthening cockpit doors on all aircraft (This is a good idea, but wouldn't this be prohibitively expensive, particularly B1900/Jetstream size which don't have one to begin with?), "security committees at airports" (to talk about security and do not a lot) and "enhanced training and education for airport workers".

I agree something needs to be done, but a report full of such mindless drivel? :yuk:

You can't have a reinforced cockpit door on an aircraft that doesn't have an emergency egress in the cockpit.

You can't have a cockpit door closed for the duration of the flight on an aircraft that doesn't have a flight attendant, so reinforcing it is a moot point.

Screening of crew (especially flight crew) won't acheive anything but delays (like the current sceening of crew on larger aircraft).

It would be nice to screen pax and carry-on baggage but I think the cost-benefit ratio is prohibitive.

A simple statistical check should sort this.....

1 plane attempted hijack.....since....?

How many domestic flights per day.......since....?

hmmm seems the odds are relatively low, no point passing on even more cost to the passenger when times are tough enough to get bums on seats.:ugh:

FL440

Cant really see anywhere NZ is really a prize target for OBL and the boys, can you?

You guys don't get it do you?

It's all about growing the security industry, nothing to do with common sense.

I wonder who did the review. I'd be willing to bet that Avsec had a fair bit of input. Their empire stands to gain from this, more staff, means more managers which means more money for the people at the top since they have a bigger empire to look after.

Have to agree with FL440

Profiling of Pax would be better value for money.

As for screening, a determined hijacker can probably get some sort of weapon past the screening. I reckon a stainless Parker Pen could do enough damage in the right hands.

All screening does is piss of the travelling public. We all probably know at least one person that doesn't fly as often now because of the hassles and delays caused by the screeening process.

Then of course once we screen the Pax the crew will need screening as well, and of course the groundy's and the fuelly's etc, the whole process mushrooms. I think I might run off now and set up a security company to take up all this new work. $$$$$$$$$$$$$

Another story on stuff.co.nz today :bored:

Aviation security report 'bunkum' - travel | Stuff.co.nz

I'd say it's more to do with CAA knee-jerk reaction. Just like their stance on post maintanence system check flights after the A320 accident.

Bout time NZ got with the times.....