Sky Marshals For Qantas?
Guest
Posts: n/a
Sky Marshals For Qantas?
It is reported this morning that Qantas International flights, NOT domestic, will soon be carrying armed guards/sky marshals?
Not sure if this is a good idea or not? Guess they have to if most other International Airlines are doing it.
Any thoughts?
Not sure if this is a good idea or not? Guess they have to if most other International Airlines are doing it.
Any thoughts?
lame
I think governments, not airlines, will be making this decision. It will probably come down to: "How badly do you want to fly to our country? If you want to fly here you WILL have someone riding shotgun."
I would be interested to hear opinions from flight attendants as they now have an even greater vested interest. Things have changed, no matter how dire things are in the cabin they can no longer expect tech crew to come to their assistance. If I were a flight attendant I think I would like some backup in the cabin.
I think governments, not airlines, will be making this decision. It will probably come down to: "How badly do you want to fly to our country? If you want to fly here you WILL have someone riding shotgun."
I would be interested to hear opinions from flight attendants as they now have an even greater vested interest. Things have changed, no matter how dire things are in the cabin they can no longer expect tech crew to come to their assistance. If I were a flight attendant I think I would like some backup in the cabin.
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Somewhere in FADEC
Posts: 30
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think you're right frisbee. Its like the non smoking rules. The government says its happening, and its then a rule of carriage into that country.
Id be more concerned with the quality of air marshall Id receive on my flight. Having walked past most of the "CHUBBy" security provided at SYD (QF)showing a pack of winfield blue as ID....what hope have you got against a real threat????
The pointy end crew should have the option to carry weapons, and the FSD should also have access to a weapon. This also takes away the confusion caused when people (air marshalls) in civilian clothing jump out of their seat...you cant tell them from the threat!!! If the staff with weapons are in uniform, then its easier to say everyone else with a weapon is a threat.
Then again, proper security at checkin and a cockpit door not made of laminate would alleviate the risk far more.
The question must be asked....how many pointy end crew WOULD carry a firearm if allowed?????
Id be more concerned with the quality of air marshall Id receive on my flight. Having walked past most of the "CHUBBy" security provided at SYD (QF)showing a pack of winfield blue as ID....what hope have you got against a real threat????
The pointy end crew should have the option to carry weapons, and the FSD should also have access to a weapon. This also takes away the confusion caused when people (air marshalls) in civilian clothing jump out of their seat...you cant tell them from the threat!!! If the staff with weapons are in uniform, then its easier to say everyone else with a weapon is a threat.
Then again, proper security at checkin and a cockpit door not made of laminate would alleviate the risk far more.
The question must be asked....how many pointy end crew WOULD carry a firearm if allowed?????
Guest
Posts: n/a
Trouble is, IF the FSD has "access" to a weapon, so do the hijackers.......
This was the reason the fire axes were removed from aircraft, so hijackers could not use them as a weapon, although I believe some fire axes are back again?
Also I guess the same applies to the air marshals being in uniform, sure the cabin crew would know who they were, but so would any hijackers??
This was the reason the fire axes were removed from aircraft, so hijackers could not use them as a weapon, although I believe some fire axes are back again?
Also I guess the same applies to the air marshals being in uniform, sure the cabin crew would know who they were, but so would any hijackers??
Guest
Posts: n/a
Fire axes are still in place on many aircraft LAME.
This brings me to a point that I have been meaning to make on pprune for some time.
Like so many other people who have red ASIC's, I think airport security is complete JOKE. Imagine the folly of a pilot and his crew who are personally responsible for the safety of their aircraft being stopped at security for carrying a leatherman, yet the aircraft that they are flying has a MASSIVE CRASH AXE on board!!! Do they think that the pilot is going to stab himself in the guts or what?
given that the security risk is not the pilot and crew who have valid ASIC's anyway, why do these people insist on harassing security pass holders going about their daily tasks?? It's just a PIA and adds friction to everybodies day.
There are so so many other areas of security that need to be addressed (I wont metion them here for obvious reasons) before people holding valid airside security clearance are hastled.
Does anyone have an interesting security frustration storey to share....you tell yours and I will tell mine
Regarding weaponry on aircraft, I can't see that any crew should be armed with a firearm, however some pepper spray in the restraint bag migt be the go
This brings me to a point that I have been meaning to make on pprune for some time.
Like so many other people who have red ASIC's, I think airport security is complete JOKE. Imagine the folly of a pilot and his crew who are personally responsible for the safety of their aircraft being stopped at security for carrying a leatherman, yet the aircraft that they are flying has a MASSIVE CRASH AXE on board!!! Do they think that the pilot is going to stab himself in the guts or what?
given that the security risk is not the pilot and crew who have valid ASIC's anyway, why do these people insist on harassing security pass holders going about their daily tasks?? It's just a PIA and adds friction to everybodies day.
There are so so many other areas of security that need to be addressed (I wont metion them here for obvious reasons) before people holding valid airside security clearance are hastled.
Does anyone have an interesting security frustration storey to share....you tell yours and I will tell mine
Regarding weaponry on aircraft, I can't see that any crew should be armed with a firearm, however some pepper spray in the restraint bag migt be the go
Guest
Posts: n/a
That is what I said, I believe some are back on Aircraft, I can only assume that someone figured there was more danger from a fire than from a hijacker????
However most, if not all, WERE removed many years ago, I did quite a few myself and the ER/EO whatever it was? said reason was to prevent them being used by hijackers.
The same would apply to any sort of spray you speak of, or as I mentioned before a weapon accessible to the cabin crew?
Equally, IF one was wanting to hijack an Aircraft, which I am NOT, I would think the same effect would be available by using one of the portable cabin fire bottles. So will we ban them too, and just hope there are no cabin fires????
Very tough where you draw the line????
See where some Airlines have banned all metal cutlery, only using plastic, but again where to you draw the line? Some of those metal ball point pens would make a very lethal weapon?????
However most, if not all, WERE removed many years ago, I did quite a few myself and the ER/EO whatever it was? said reason was to prevent them being used by hijackers.
The same would apply to any sort of spray you speak of, or as I mentioned before a weapon accessible to the cabin crew?
Equally, IF one was wanting to hijack an Aircraft, which I am NOT, I would think the same effect would be available by using one of the portable cabin fire bottles. So will we ban them too, and just hope there are no cabin fires????
Very tough where you draw the line????
See where some Airlines have banned all metal cutlery, only using plastic, but again where to you draw the line? Some of those metal ball point pens would make a very lethal weapon?????
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Living next door to Alan
Posts: 1,521
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Crew carry weapons? You must be joking! All you do is give the hijacker another means of taking over the A/C. We are not trained in the use of guns and knives, and IMHO nor should we be. Personally I would not carry a gun.
Pepper/capsicum spray? Pilots, make sure you do your oxygen drill BEFORE you use it in anger. You'll get a similar effect as to firing off a Dry Chem extinguisher in a confined space. Particularly on a flight deck.
Lame, you've been away from the pointy end of A/C too long. All the A/C I fly have crash axes, and have done so for many years. Yes, you could use a BCF as a weapon, but the effects wear off very quickly. And for it to work you have to inhale it. You'd be better off hitting them over the head with the bottle than spraying it in their faces.
I must agree with prunehead. Airport security is a joke. You have a sheltered workshop of contractors running domestic security in YSSY, and NO security at the majority of regional outports. It's laughable. All you would need to do if you were a terrorist is RUN away. They would never catch you!
This issue is similar in many ways to unruly/drunk passengers. A lot of this can be stopped at the gate, but it isn't. Usually because of slackness/laziness on the part of gate staff who find it "too hard" to exercise their responsibility and duty to the travelling public. "It's okay, the crew will sort it out". What a load of crap...
The key to all this is to make every effort to stop potential threats BEFORE they get through the gate. Anything else is closing the gate after the horse has bolted.
Here are a couple of suggestions for reducing the threat:
1. Get rid of the security contractors and make it a federal police or customs responsibility at ALL RPT airports. We need highly trained individuals, not 1 week wonders from Centrelink work for the dole.
2. Increase/intensify screening procedures. If that means pax have to check in earlier, and be subject to full bag searches, then so be it. I bet you won't get any complaints from them in light of recent occurences...
3. Minimise or eliminate carry-on baggage. This would not only reduce the threat, but improve on-time performance
Just ask any F/A
Cost, you say? The cost of the WTC tragedy is sitting around $80bn at the moment, and rising.
What cost safety? Ask Dick Smith
Over to you.
[ 01 October 2001: Message edited by: Hugh Jarse ]
Pepper/capsicum spray? Pilots, make sure you do your oxygen drill BEFORE you use it in anger. You'll get a similar effect as to firing off a Dry Chem extinguisher in a confined space. Particularly on a flight deck.
Lame, you've been away from the pointy end of A/C too long. All the A/C I fly have crash axes, and have done so for many years. Yes, you could use a BCF as a weapon, but the effects wear off very quickly. And for it to work you have to inhale it. You'd be better off hitting them over the head with the bottle than spraying it in their faces.
I must agree with prunehead. Airport security is a joke. You have a sheltered workshop of contractors running domestic security in YSSY, and NO security at the majority of regional outports. It's laughable. All you would need to do if you were a terrorist is RUN away. They would never catch you!
This issue is similar in many ways to unruly/drunk passengers. A lot of this can be stopped at the gate, but it isn't. Usually because of slackness/laziness on the part of gate staff who find it "too hard" to exercise their responsibility and duty to the travelling public. "It's okay, the crew will sort it out". What a load of crap...
The key to all this is to make every effort to stop potential threats BEFORE they get through the gate. Anything else is closing the gate after the horse has bolted.
Here are a couple of suggestions for reducing the threat:
1. Get rid of the security contractors and make it a federal police or customs responsibility at ALL RPT airports. We need highly trained individuals, not 1 week wonders from Centrelink work for the dole.
2. Increase/intensify screening procedures. If that means pax have to check in earlier, and be subject to full bag searches, then so be it. I bet you won't get any complaints from them in light of recent occurences...
3. Minimise or eliminate carry-on baggage. This would not only reduce the threat, but improve on-time performance
Just ask any F/A Cost, you say? The cost of the WTC tragedy is sitting around $80bn at the moment, and rising.
What cost safety? Ask Dick Smith
Over to you.
[ 01 October 2001: Message edited by: Hugh Jarse ]
Guest
Posts: n/a
Hugh Jarse,
Quite possibly, but does not change the point.
These WERE all removed once BECAUSE of the possibility a hijacker may use them, now they are back on board, why?
What is the use of stopping Ladies taking nail files and nail scissors on board, banning metal cutlery in the galleys etc, when there is a bloody great axe on board for the hijackers to use?
Best regards,
"lame"
[ 01 October 2001: Message edited by: lame ]
Quite possibly, but does not change the point.
These WERE all removed once BECAUSE of the possibility a hijacker may use them, now they are back on board, why?
What is the use of stopping Ladies taking nail files and nail scissors on board, banning metal cutlery in the galleys etc, when there is a bloody great axe on board for the hijackers to use?
Best regards,
"lame"
[ 01 October 2001: Message edited by: lame ]
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Living next door to Alan
Posts: 1,521
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Gidday lame.
On my A/C, they are located in a place not easily accessed by non-Tech Crew
Crash axes are used not only for cutting metal, but prising trim panels, etc when (God help us) looking for the source of smoke in an emergency, or moving things that are too hot to the touch (fire).
They are also useful in a survival situation such as after a forced landing.
[ 01 October 2001: Message edited by: Hugh Jarse ]
On my A/C, they are located in a place not easily accessed by non-Tech Crew
Crash axes are used not only for cutting metal, but prising trim panels, etc when (God help us) looking for the source of smoke in an emergency, or moving things that are too hot to the touch (fire).
They are also useful in a survival situation such as after a forced landing.
[ 01 October 2001: Message edited by: Hugh Jarse ]
Evertonian
I think arming anyone on a flight is false security. The solution for me is an impenetrable cockpit door and some sort of knockout gas for the cabin (I have no idea if the latter is feasible). To make the reinforced door idea work, you would have to re-educate ALL pilots in the idea that, if the terrorists get into the cockpit, there is a very real possibility that your aircraft will be used as a weapon. This means you must ignore the screams from behind you and land your plane immediately. Sure, easy to say, but now that the civilian aircraft is a potential weapon, I don't think there's much choice.
As for security screening, anyone, ANYONE, that wants to get to aircraft MUST be checked. I don't care if it's TJ himself, once you eliminate a source for weapons to be taken on board, there is no need to put one on for them.
As for security screening, anyone, ANYONE, that wants to get to aircraft MUST be checked. I don't care if it's TJ himself, once you eliminate a source for weapons to be taken on board, there is no need to put one on for them.
Having shot an automatic 9mm in comp. I don't have any hangups with guns as such. But I would not want them in the cockpit or cabin under any circumstance, undertrained crew members are more likely to shoot a window out(or try to improve their position on the seniorit list)before the threat of highjacking might need to be considered. Well trained airmarshals should be the only armed people, if any, carried on the aircraft.
Perhaps your taser type weapon if any may be more appropriate, this may also be interesting with modern FBW aircraft. I believe some types of modern projectile weapons have been designed to not penetrate the aircraft hull, but no details.
People of ill intent will always find a weapon on the aircraft. They would not have to look past the bar cart on our operations, we still serve beer in stubbies - memory goes back to a bad bar fight.
Don't know the answer but I wouldn't mind my leatherman back in the bag.
Perhaps your taser type weapon if any may be more appropriate, this may also be interesting with modern FBW aircraft. I believe some types of modern projectile weapons have been designed to not penetrate the aircraft hull, but no details.
People of ill intent will always find a weapon on the aircraft. They would not have to look past the bar cart on our operations, we still serve beer in stubbies - memory goes back to a bad bar fight.
Don't know the answer but I wouldn't mind my leatherman back in the bag.
Medicinal Moderatreuse
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Adelaide, Australia
Posts: 149
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I would not like to see guns carried by Crew. As already pointed out, 1) there is the risk that you don't hit what you're supposedly firing at, esp when ill-experienced and under extreme pressure, and 2) you're giving any potential hijacker another weapon at his disposal. I don't know what the answer is, although a more secure door sounds like a good place to start, and some very hard and fast procedures about contact with the FD. Interesting times.
Guest
Posts: n/a
I also think it preferable to have NO guns on board at all, and I was also thinking of the damage to the Aircraft, and/or decompression.
However saw a very interesting segment on one of the cable news channels the other day, all about these sky marshals in the USA. Showed the weapons they use, and their ammunition, I cannot remember the technical term for it, but it is special ammunition that will not penetrate anything much more dense than a person. So although it will still very effectively wound and/or kill a hijacker, it will NOT penetrate the aircraft skin or even windows etc.
However saw a very interesting segment on one of the cable news channels the other day, all about these sky marshals in the USA. Showed the weapons they use, and their ammunition, I cannot remember the technical term for it, but it is special ammunition that will not penetrate anything much more dense than a person. So although it will still very effectively wound and/or kill a hijacker, it will NOT penetrate the aircraft skin or even windows etc.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Ozmate
Posts: 376
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As an airline pilot,I am not sure where I stand regarding arming tech crew.
However,regarding the possibility of an armed crew members (or sky marshals) gun being taken from him/her and used by a hijacker,the technology is available for a handgun to be "coded" to a particular user. That is,by fingerprint (or similar)arming technology. If the weapon was attempted to be used by an unauthorised person,it is rendered useless.
This technology is available from an Australian company called "Metal Storm",who have some other amazing technology and weaponry.Such technology used in conjunction with "safe" bullets may be an answer?
Regarding locking of cockpit doors,rather than carrying around (and losing)door keys by crew members,as an interim measure until long term cockpit security is assessed I suggest combination locks be fitted which can be programmed from the inside and changed when required. They could be programmed with a new code each flight or even changed in flight if a threat was assessed?
Not perfect,but better than what we have at present.
Food for thought.
However,regarding the possibility of an armed crew members (or sky marshals) gun being taken from him/her and used by a hijacker,the technology is available for a handgun to be "coded" to a particular user. That is,by fingerprint (or similar)arming technology. If the weapon was attempted to be used by an unauthorised person,it is rendered useless.
This technology is available from an Australian company called "Metal Storm",who have some other amazing technology and weaponry.Such technology used in conjunction with "safe" bullets may be an answer?
Regarding locking of cockpit doors,rather than carrying around (and losing)door keys by crew members,as an interim measure until long term cockpit security is assessed I suggest combination locks be fitted which can be programmed from the inside and changed when required. They could be programmed with a new code each flight or even changed in flight if a threat was assessed?
Not perfect,but better than what we have at present.
Food for thought.
Guest
Posts: n/a
woftam,
This is absolutely NOT a reflection on any Airline, more a reflection on the safer and innocent times of past, compared to now.........
Speaking a locking cockpit doors and not losing the key, I don't think this would be done now? However for many years while the B727 was in operation, it had a lockable cockpit door, and in the forward toilet adjacent to said door, was the key to the cockpit door, hanging on a piece of cord just long enough to reach the cockpit door......
Of course in those days there was not the big concern of terrorists.
Best regards,
"lame"
This is absolutely NOT a reflection on any Airline, more a reflection on the safer and innocent times of past, compared to now.........
Speaking a locking cockpit doors and not losing the key, I don't think this would be done now? However for many years while the B727 was in operation, it had a lockable cockpit door, and in the forward toilet adjacent to said door, was the key to the cockpit door, hanging on a piece of cord just long enough to reach the cockpit door......
Of course in those days there was not the big concern of terrorists.
Best regards,
"lame"