Sky Marshals In Australia By New Year.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Sky Marshals In Australia By New Year.
Sky marshals by new year
From AAP
19nov01
THE nation's first sky marshals should be posted on flights by the end of the year, the federal government said.
Justice Minister Chris Ellison said the first intake of Air Security Officers (ASOs) were about to start training which should finish by December 20.
They would be then manning flights before the new year.
The Australian Protective Service (APS) had been given the job of running the ASOs training program, with the initial trainees coming from the service.
Senator Ellison said the training will be conducted by Australian officers, with extensive liaison with the United States' Federal Aviation Administration.
"In implementing the ASO program, extensive liaison with the aviation industry and with federal, state and territory police will also be undertaken," he said in a statement.
Australian flights are to be manned by ASOs as part of the government's response to the terrorist attacks on the World Trade Centre and Pentagon in September.
The total number of officers is not being released out of security concerns.
The type of training, the placement of officers on planes and other operational information is being withheld for fearing of telegraphing information to potential terrorists.
A spokeswoman for Senator Ellison said further intakes of ASOs, who are expected to come from outside the APS, would undergo a longer training program.
Senator Ellison said ASO trainees will undergo a stringent selection process that includes psychological, medical and fitness training.
From AAP
19nov01
THE nation's first sky marshals should be posted on flights by the end of the year, the federal government said.
Justice Minister Chris Ellison said the first intake of Air Security Officers (ASOs) were about to start training which should finish by December 20.
They would be then manning flights before the new year.
The Australian Protective Service (APS) had been given the job of running the ASOs training program, with the initial trainees coming from the service.
Senator Ellison said the training will be conducted by Australian officers, with extensive liaison with the United States' Federal Aviation Administration.
"In implementing the ASO program, extensive liaison with the aviation industry and with federal, state and territory police will also be undertaken," he said in a statement.
Australian flights are to be manned by ASOs as part of the government's response to the terrorist attacks on the World Trade Centre and Pentagon in September.
The total number of officers is not being released out of security concerns.
The type of training, the placement of officers on planes and other operational information is being withheld for fearing of telegraphing information to potential terrorists.
A spokeswoman for Senator Ellison said further intakes of ASOs, who are expected to come from outside the APS, would undergo a longer training program.
Senator Ellison said ASO trainees will undergo a stringent selection process that includes psychological, medical and fitness training.
Nunc est bibendum
What a croc. In the last 24 hours I've come across:
1. No tower visits in case the ATC boys and girls tell us to prang it,
2. Sky Marshalls on board aircraft (and who knows if the crew will know. Do we wait for the cavalry to charge or take the idiots on ourselves)
3. Plastic knives in the crew meals in case the crew want to slit their own wrists,
4. Metal knives still in the cart though in case we needed to cut our fruit,
5. Crew having nail clippers taken off them in case we wanted to use them instead of the crash axe or fire extinguisher behind us to destroy the aeroplane.
What a waste of time, money and effort and in the mean time, what have they done to protect the cockpit a bit better? Nothing!!
I wish they'd spend all the money they are spending on the Sky Marshals on maknig the door a bit more secure!!
Thanks for the info LAME. Message firing off to the local member and anyone else I can think of when I get home from my trip!
1. No tower visits in case the ATC boys and girls tell us to prang it,
2. Sky Marshalls on board aircraft (and who knows if the crew will know. Do we wait for the cavalry to charge or take the idiots on ourselves)
3. Plastic knives in the crew meals in case the crew want to slit their own wrists,
4. Metal knives still in the cart though in case we needed to cut our fruit,
5. Crew having nail clippers taken off them in case we wanted to use them instead of the crash axe or fire extinguisher behind us to destroy the aeroplane.
What a waste of time, money and effort and in the mean time, what have they done to protect the cockpit a bit better? Nothing!!
I wish they'd spend all the money they are spending on the Sky Marshals on maknig the door a bit more secure!!
Thanks for the info LAME. Message firing off to the local member and anyone else I can think of when I get home from my trip!
Join Date: Feb 2000
Posts: 78
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
KEG,
I agree 100%.
Purely political and will not increase safety at all, possibly create more trouble.
I would love to know what consultitive process was undertaken.
As the Captain of the aircraft were will I stand with regards to Rambo down the back.
What authority does he/she have.
As soon as I have finished on PPRUNE I will be asking these questions to my local member, put money on the fact that he will not have a clue.
I agree 100%.
Purely political and will not increase safety at all, possibly create more trouble.
I would love to know what consultitive process was undertaken.
As the Captain of the aircraft were will I stand with regards to Rambo down the back.
What authority does he/she have.
As soon as I have finished on PPRUNE I will be asking these questions to my local member, put money on the fact that he will not have a clue.
Moderate, Modest & Mild.
The one that "amused" me most, while I was Dunnunda last month, was the repeated warnings in the airports stating that unoccupied cars would be towed away immediately (obviously for fear of explosives).
Where do they think the hijackers on ALL the aircraft were, on Sept 11??
But it's still okay to park a car underneath a crowded shopping centre
On the subject of nail clippers - my wife inadvertently left a pair in her carry on, ex BNE, and they were subsequently detected by "security", who were going to "confiscate" them. I asked them under what law or legislation they had the right to do that, and as I know there is NOTHING that does allow them that action, told them I would charge them with theft unless they forwarded them on. Don't be bluffed - they have the facility to put the article(s) in an envelope and put it in the hold for collection on arrival.
Additionally, with the extra locks and strengthened doors WE now have fitted, the door is virtually impenetrable from the cabin side. So which crew member needs a pair of nail clippers to hijack his own aircraft?? - the bl00dy FMS tries it regularly!!
The problem with MOST of this "upgraded" security is (that) it is designed to be highly visible by the public to make it APPEAR that something is being done.
Professional hijackers (and flight crew) find it useless and a waste of money and unnecessary time. However, Keg I, for one, am in favour of "sky marshalls", as long as they are adequately trained to know their limits!
Where do they think the hijackers on ALL the aircraft were, on Sept 11??
But it's still okay to park a car underneath a crowded shopping centre
On the subject of nail clippers - my wife inadvertently left a pair in her carry on, ex BNE, and they were subsequently detected by "security", who were going to "confiscate" them. I asked them under what law or legislation they had the right to do that, and as I know there is NOTHING that does allow them that action, told them I would charge them with theft unless they forwarded them on. Don't be bluffed - they have the facility to put the article(s) in an envelope and put it in the hold for collection on arrival.
Additionally, with the extra locks and strengthened doors WE now have fitted, the door is virtually impenetrable from the cabin side. So which crew member needs a pair of nail clippers to hijack his own aircraft?? - the bl00dy FMS tries it regularly!!
The problem with MOST of this "upgraded" security is (that) it is designed to be highly visible by the public to make it APPEAR that something is being done.
Professional hijackers (and flight crew) find it useless and a waste of money and unnecessary time. However, Keg I, for one, am in favour of "sky marshalls", as long as they are adequately trained to know their limits!
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: No fixed abode
Posts: 28
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How many CHUBB SECURITY GUARDS per aircraft?
Here's a scenario.
8 hi-jackers on board, 2 or 3 attempt takeover of a/c. Sky marshals try and stop them. So now they have been identified to the other 5-6 hi-jackers. Now what...they grab some pax, threaten to shoot them unless marshals put down guns and we're back too square one.
Yes, doors can be stregthened but pilots need to get in and out to visit the "facilities" so they can't be permanetly locked/bolted shut....well unless they build a toliet in the flight deck! Might make those emergency escapes a bit tricky.
Details for the Air Security Officer (Air Marshal) below as sighted in West Australian, Saturday 17th November:
-Salary up to $55,000pa +operational allowance.
-Must be over 18yrs of age and Oz citizen.
-Be able to obtain national security clearance to the SECRET LEVEL.
-Sucessfully complete training program of up to 13 weeks
-Experience or aptitude in law enforcement or military service. Capable of demonstrating a high level of proficiency in the use of firearms and other defensive tactics. Etc etc.
More details for those interested.
Air Marshal
Can't get the URL link thing to work, you'll have to copy/paste!
[ 19 November 2001: Message edited by: N One ]
Here's a scenario.
8 hi-jackers on board, 2 or 3 attempt takeover of a/c. Sky marshals try and stop them. So now they have been identified to the other 5-6 hi-jackers. Now what...they grab some pax, threaten to shoot them unless marshals put down guns and we're back too square one.
Yes, doors can be stregthened but pilots need to get in and out to visit the "facilities" so they can't be permanetly locked/bolted shut....well unless they build a toliet in the flight deck! Might make those emergency escapes a bit tricky.
Details for the Air Security Officer (Air Marshal) below as sighted in West Australian, Saturday 17th November:
-Salary up to $55,000pa +operational allowance.
-Must be over 18yrs of age and Oz citizen.
-Be able to obtain national security clearance to the SECRET LEVEL.
-Sucessfully complete training program of up to 13 weeks
-Experience or aptitude in law enforcement or military service. Capable of demonstrating a high level of proficiency in the use of firearms and other defensive tactics. Etc etc.
More details for those interested.
Air Marshal
Can't get the URL link thing to work, you'll have to copy/paste!
[ 19 November 2001: Message edited by: N One ]
I can't think of anything scarier than the government legislating for someone to bring a weapon onto the aircraft - it just saves the terrorists from having to think of a way to do it. Everybody knows how people in certain professions have a particular look, so all the terrorists will have to do is look for the "pax" with the "SKY MARSHALL" tattoo on the forehead and they'll be able to obtain the weapon that they need.
Kaos says that they will be very well trained, however, I wouldn't trust them unless thay are actually SAS personnel - anything less and they are dangerous amateurs.
The government says that they will be liasing with the industry, but, despite every industry executive pushing for no Sky Marshalls, the government seems hell bent on pushing this through. John Howard - WAKE UP!!
Kaos says that they will be very well trained, however, I wouldn't trust them unless thay are actually SAS personnel - anything less and they are dangerous amateurs.
The government says that they will be liasing with the industry, but, despite every industry executive pushing for no Sky Marshalls, the government seems hell bent on pushing this through. John Howard - WAKE UP!!
Don Quixote Impersonator
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Australia
Age: 77
Posts: 3,403
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Call em what you like, I just call em a very bad idea.
13 weeks training doesn't even start to cut it in evaluating, assessing and taking effective action in the face of a serious well trained hijacker/s.
As someone else said they might as well have SM tattooed on their forehead, the really dangerous baddies will have done their homework as the recent events showed.
There wont be any way you could talk the bad guys down, even if you had the skills, the only other way to stop them is to disable them or take them down. Pity about the collateral damage.
Yeah lets shut the door after the horse is gone, that's a real good idea.
The idea is for them not to get on the aircraft or at least with anything that resembles a weapon in the first place.
They have sensors that can sniff on you what the person who was sitting in your seat the flight before had for breakfast the day before, or in my fathers case, snorted up. (I'll never forget the look on his face when the sniffer puppy came and sat down next to him in the customs hall.) They can photograph your cars number plate from space. They routinely x-ray trucks for illegals at border crossings. I had an ultrasound on the budgies the other day that showed their entire structure in 3D, you wouldn't think such insignificant things could cause so much trouble in the world.
But I digress.
Why is it then, so hard to cop the bad guys before boarding. If you do that properly, and lock the reinforced cockpit door then you have done ALL that you reasonably and safely can.
Win lose or draw, you can't possibly cover all the bases, as there is always a way if you look hard enough. As Malcolm said in Jurrasic Park 11, "life will find a way"
There was much comment by the security people after WTC, about the lack of intelligence assets "on the ground" nowadays.
Correct on both points "lack of intelligence" and "assets on the ground" which is where they belong.
The thought of a firefight on an aircraft started by someone with 13 weeks training against someone with a death wish and dreams of the houris in paradise is the stuff of nightmares.
13 weeks training doesn't even start to cut it in evaluating, assessing and taking effective action in the face of a serious well trained hijacker/s.
As someone else said they might as well have SM tattooed on their forehead, the really dangerous baddies will have done their homework as the recent events showed.
There wont be any way you could talk the bad guys down, even if you had the skills, the only other way to stop them is to disable them or take them down. Pity about the collateral damage.
Yeah lets shut the door after the horse is gone, that's a real good idea.
The idea is for them not to get on the aircraft or at least with anything that resembles a weapon in the first place.
They have sensors that can sniff on you what the person who was sitting in your seat the flight before had for breakfast the day before, or in my fathers case, snorted up. (I'll never forget the look on his face when the sniffer puppy came and sat down next to him in the customs hall.) They can photograph your cars number plate from space. They routinely x-ray trucks for illegals at border crossings. I had an ultrasound on the budgies the other day that showed their entire structure in 3D, you wouldn't think such insignificant things could cause so much trouble in the world.
But I digress. Why is it then, so hard to cop the bad guys before boarding. If you do that properly, and lock the reinforced cockpit door then you have done ALL that you reasonably and safely can.
Win lose or draw, you can't possibly cover all the bases, as there is always a way if you look hard enough. As Malcolm said in Jurrasic Park 11, "life will find a way"
There was much comment by the security people after WTC, about the lack of intelligence assets "on the ground" nowadays.
Correct on both points "lack of intelligence" and "assets on the ground" which is where they belong.
The thought of a firefight on an aircraft started by someone with 13 weeks training against someone with a death wish and dreams of the houris in paradise is the stuff of nightmares.
Guest
Posts: n/a
The biggest threat to security is not in the air, it is on the ground. Perhaps a more rational apporach to aviation security is necessary that patrols all the areas of need, not just the ones that people see being patroled.
Looks like the APS wanted to create a new cruisy job for its people in a trendy area. Nothing More. This is not an informed decision, and has obviously been taken lightly.
I just hope that security types read these posts and LEARN.
**edited because my original post may have suggested areas of security that were deficient that may have put the wrong ideas in the wrong heads**
[ 19 November 2001: Message edited by: prunehead ]
Looks like the APS wanted to create a new cruisy job for its people in a trendy area. Nothing More. This is not an informed decision, and has obviously been taken lightly.
I just hope that security types read these posts and LEARN.
**edited because my original post may have suggested areas of security that were deficient that may have put the wrong ideas in the wrong heads**
[ 19 November 2001: Message edited by: prunehead ]
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: orstralia
Posts: 16
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm prepared to be the leper on this one...
If some psycho/s are intent on securing a place in nirvana or elsewhere by, let's say for arguments sake, flying a 737 into a tall building, then surely having one of these chaps on board may be rather beneficial.
Given that the Sept 11 ******s were armed with little more than stanley knives, it would be interesting to see if the outcome would have been different had there been an armed marshall onboard even one of the doomed flights.
It's almost a cliche now - but the world did change on that day, and I'm not sure if slipping back into complacency will solve an ongoing security issue. These tossers have probably set the new benchmark in take overs - If you're gonna do it - don't worry about learning how to lower the gear.
Sure - it looks like bin liners days may be numbered, but there will surely be a lot of very pissed wannabe martyrs out there looking for revenge.
The general line of thought on this thread seems to be that Dirty Harry himself will be offered the job, along with The Terminator, Wyatt Earp and a couple of Bruce Willis's gun toting characters. I don't think that would be the case somehow.
My two cents worth.
If some psycho/s are intent on securing a place in nirvana or elsewhere by, let's say for arguments sake, flying a 737 into a tall building, then surely having one of these chaps on board may be rather beneficial.
Given that the Sept 11 ******s were armed with little more than stanley knives, it would be interesting to see if the outcome would have been different had there been an armed marshall onboard even one of the doomed flights.
It's almost a cliche now - but the world did change on that day, and I'm not sure if slipping back into complacency will solve an ongoing security issue. These tossers have probably set the new benchmark in take overs - If you're gonna do it - don't worry about learning how to lower the gear.
Sure - it looks like bin liners days may be numbered, but there will surely be a lot of very pissed wannabe martyrs out there looking for revenge.
The general line of thought on this thread seems to be that Dirty Harry himself will be offered the job, along with The Terminator, Wyatt Earp and a couple of Bruce Willis's gun toting characters. I don't think that would be the case somehow.
My two cents worth.
Join Date: Jan 1998
Location: somewhere in the nth of Oz, where it isn't really cold
Posts: 884
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
not every Tom Dick or Harry that applies for the job is going to get a guernsey .. gee, I wonder why they've negotiated for TRAINED/EXPERIENCED Police Officers to be seconded from various services around the country on short term placement - all positions that will be filled, training which by the way commences 11 Feb 2002 are NON ONGOING (read temporary) positions for 6 months THAT MAY BE EXTENDED ...
we don't all have morons emblazened across out foreheads ...
time for bed methinks ...
[ 19 November 2001: Message edited by: The Voice ]
we don't all have morons emblazened across out foreheads ...
time for bed methinks ...
[ 19 November 2001: Message edited by: The Voice ]
Nunc est bibendum
I reckon that this one is up there with one of the suggestions that is supposed to improve safety but actually may work against it!
Wonder if the Sky Marshalls do any CRM stuff.
Or, smuggle a gun on board, tell the F/As you are the SKy Marshal and must talk to the Captain and gain instant access to the crew!!
Bad joss this one!!
Wonder if the Sky Marshalls do any CRM stuff.
Or, smuggle a gun on board, tell the F/As you are the SKy Marshal and must talk to the Captain and gain instant access to the crew!!
Bad joss this one!!
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Planet Earth
Posts: 20
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What everyone is missing here is that most of the increased security, cockpit doors, sky marshals, etc, are all based on El Al security measures which were put in place after the airlines only hijacking back in the 70s (I think it was).
The cockpit doors on all El Al aircraft are double-doors, which prevents direct entry into the cockpit, as only one of the doors can be opened at once (ie. when the food gets brought it, a hijacker can't push in, as one door is still locked). Other measures which were put in place were increased passenger and baggage screening on all flights, air marshals, etc, etc.
The only difference is that these measures have all been governement sanctioned, supported, regulated and funded, and STILL are. I am afraid to think that all these measures introduced today will slowly disappear tomorrow, and that is what the politicans are hoping for in time, when we start to feel more secure. This is clearly evident in the US where the government is going to regulate and fund airport security screeners, but is going to allow airlines and airport operators to revert back to their own security in 2-3 years time.
If having air marshals on aircraft may prevent a hijacking, then I am all for it. While it increases risk, Air Marshals will be trained and instructed in resolving the problem at hand. The only people on the aircraft that will know who the air marshal is, is the air marshal and the captain of the aircraft. The captain of the aircraft is still the ultimate authority of the aircraft, but the air marshal has the authority to act on security threats. (This is my understanding based on what a friend has said who works for the US Marshals).
So where does this leave us? I believe if the whole issue of security is addressed, and these continue in the long-term, then we will be better of. But if they aren't (and most likely won't) going to continue then this is just a waste of time and money.
The cockpit doors on all El Al aircraft are double-doors, which prevents direct entry into the cockpit, as only one of the doors can be opened at once (ie. when the food gets brought it, a hijacker can't push in, as one door is still locked). Other measures which were put in place were increased passenger and baggage screening on all flights, air marshals, etc, etc.
The only difference is that these measures have all been governement sanctioned, supported, regulated and funded, and STILL are. I am afraid to think that all these measures introduced today will slowly disappear tomorrow, and that is what the politicans are hoping for in time, when we start to feel more secure. This is clearly evident in the US where the government is going to regulate and fund airport security screeners, but is going to allow airlines and airport operators to revert back to their own security in 2-3 years time.
If having air marshals on aircraft may prevent a hijacking, then I am all for it. While it increases risk, Air Marshals will be trained and instructed in resolving the problem at hand. The only people on the aircraft that will know who the air marshal is, is the air marshal and the captain of the aircraft. The captain of the aircraft is still the ultimate authority of the aircraft, but the air marshal has the authority to act on security threats. (This is my understanding based on what a friend has said who works for the US Marshals).
So where does this leave us? I believe if the whole issue of security is addressed, and these continue in the long-term, then we will be better of. But if they aren't (and most likely won't) going to continue then this is just a waste of time and money.
Evertonian
Hmmm LAME. That made me think. What if an '89er was the Sky Marshall and....never mind!
Sorry, I'll go with the majority here, crap idea putting a gun on the plane no matter how good the guy holding it is. I still think that impenetrable doors to the cockpit & extensive pilot training is the answer. ie even though there are screams outside the door, do nothing but land the plane)
Sorry, I'll go with the majority here, crap idea putting a gun on the plane no matter how good the guy holding it is. I still think that impenetrable doors to the cockpit & extensive pilot training is the answer. ie even though there are screams outside the door, do nothing but land the plane)
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Nowhere
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I was going to tell you all about the Sky Marshals but it is all SECRET..... But can confirm that they will be [deleted sentence] and the captain will [deleted also].
Of interest is that the Marshals will be trained in Aviation Med, Emergency Procedures for each type and I believe called upon in serious air rage incidents.
Pretty damn useful chap if utilised properly... nearly forgot, someone mentioned SAS.. ex-SAS guy is running the program...
Of interest is that the Marshals will be trained in Aviation Med, Emergency Procedures for each type and I believe called upon in serious air rage incidents.
Pretty damn useful chap if utilised properly... nearly forgot, someone mentioned SAS.. ex-SAS guy is running the program...
Guest
Posts: n/a
I believe his name is.........
Maxwell Smart, Agent 86 of Control......
He was quoted today as saying........
We will have 100 fully trained and armed Marshals on every flight...
Would you believe 10 Marshals, some armed?
Would you believe 1 very angry old lady with an umbrella............
Maxwell Smart, Agent 86 of Control......
He was quoted today as saying........
We will have 100 fully trained and armed Marshals on every flight...
Would you believe 10 Marshals, some armed?
Would you believe 1 very angry old lady with an umbrella............
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Planet Earth
Posts: 20
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Talking about guns on planes...In the US, President Bush and Congress has signed and approved a new law which allows for Pilots to carry hand-guns.
I am more concerned about this idea than having Air Marshals on board. Atleast the Air Marshals are trained and continually tested on fire-arm procedures and shooting. How often would a pilot fire his gun???
I am more concerned about this idea than having Air Marshals on board. Atleast the Air Marshals are trained and continually tested on fire-arm procedures and shooting. How often would a pilot fire his gun???
We should expect this sort of behaviour when a Texan is running the show.
Guns in cockpits are as useless as tits on a bull, and a hell of a lot more dangerous.
TL
Guns in cockpits are as useless as tits on a bull, and a hell of a lot more dangerous.
TL