U.S. pilots will not be armed... (merged)
Guest
Posts: n/a
palgia,
Which planet are you on pal. There's been plenty of threats in Europe including a serious one in the last few days according to news reports. Your arrogance is beyond belief and according to your profile you're not a pilot anyway. There seems to be plenty of mahogany bomber pilots on this thread with lots of advice for those of us that may have to fight off these towelheads. Your post may come back to haunt you.
Which planet are you on pal. There's been plenty of threats in Europe including a serious one in the last few days according to news reports. Your arrogance is beyond belief and according to your profile you're not a pilot anyway. There seems to be plenty of mahogany bomber pilots on this thread with lots of advice for those of us that may have to fight off these towelheads. Your post may come back to haunt you.
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Uk
Posts: 13
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SKOL
I choose not to write pilot in my profile..............but
and what difference does it make he can still have an oponion, driver or not.
AND TOWELHEAD IS OFFENSIVE
he could be a sihk for all you know
I choose not to write pilot in my profile..............but
and what difference does it make he can still have an oponion, driver or not.AND TOWELHEAD IS OFFENSIVE
he could be a sihk for all you know
Join Date: May 2001
Location: New Jersey Shore
Age: 92
Posts: 601
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
APSA - Must Read
http://www.secure-skies.org/
Airline Pilots Security Alliance.
A wealth of information and topics here.
Airline Pilots Security Alliance.
A wealth of information and topics here.
Union Goon
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: New Jersey, USA
Posts: 1,097
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I hope it wont be considered crass when I say "I told you so" to palgia.
So Islamic terrorists only target the US and ISrael, huh?
Exactly whose aircraft was hijacked to Antebbee?
And Where exactly is the Eiffel tower located which was also targeted with an aircraft?
That's it bury your head in the sand. The shame of it is that you aren't playing only with your life.
Cheers
Wino
So Islamic terrorists only target the US and ISrael, huh?
Exactly whose aircraft was hijacked to Antebbee?
And Where exactly is the Eiffel tower located which was also targeted with an aircraft?
That's it bury your head in the sand. The shame of it is that you aren't playing only with your life.
Cheers
Wino
Wino: repeat after me, "not all terrorists are Arabs, not all Arabs are terrorists" - it must begin to get through in the end.....
Oh yes, Europeans never take proactive measures....maybe you ought to ask the 2 SAS men who led the German GSG9 storming of the hijacked LH plane in Mogadishu - the German government wanted to give them the Bundesverdienstkreuz, but they couldn't accept 'cos it would reveal the fact they were there. They both got UK civil decorations the next year, no reason given! And which sort of terrorists hijacked the plane? GERMAN communists!
Oh yes, Europeans never take proactive measures....maybe you ought to ask the 2 SAS men who led the German GSG9 storming of the hijacked LH plane in Mogadishu - the German government wanted to give them the Bundesverdienstkreuz, but they couldn't accept 'cos it would reveal the fact they were there. They both got UK civil decorations the next year, no reason given! And which sort of terrorists hijacked the plane? GERMAN communists!
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Oxfordshire. U.K.
Posts: 48
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Any other ways to incapacitate terrorists ?
It's already been said that most Europeans put highest priority in getting the ground security right rather than taking firearms on the flight deck ... I tend to agree ...
But if the terrorists are on board, then how do PPRuNe members rate their chances ?. Presumably pilot training counsels co-operation and let the security forces do their work. (Obviously no help for September 11th).
Sky marshals are occasionally discussed - but if people start exchanging fire on board, how robust is the aircraft ... (let alone PAX in the cross fire ...) Stun guns presumably lack range ...
My question is - are there any other viable ways to prevent an aircraft being taken over once the terrorists are on board ?.
Cockpit doors may not be much use if the cabin crew are going to be murdered any second unless you open up ...
What about rapidly decompressing the aircraft ?. Could it be done quickly enough to be of use ?. ("Knock out" gas in the Oxygen system is presumably only in Hollywood ...).
Some of this may seem a bit naive to more seasoned crew ... but all I'm suggesting is that more options for flight crew would be good ...
D 129
But if the terrorists are on board, then how do PPRuNe members rate their chances ?. Presumably pilot training counsels co-operation and let the security forces do their work. (Obviously no help for September 11th).
Sky marshals are occasionally discussed - but if people start exchanging fire on board, how robust is the aircraft ... (let alone PAX in the cross fire ...) Stun guns presumably lack range ...
My question is - are there any other viable ways to prevent an aircraft being taken over once the terrorists are on board ?.
Cockpit doors may not be much use if the cabin crew are going to be murdered any second unless you open up ...
What about rapidly decompressing the aircraft ?. Could it be done quickly enough to be of use ?. ("Knock out" gas in the Oxygen system is presumably only in Hollywood ...).
Some of this may seem a bit naive to more seasoned crew ... but all I'm suggesting is that more options for flight crew would be good ...
D 129
Moderator
Nailclippers, or THE USS NIMITZ I could of got them both airside pre 9/11 .
Moderator
We need to be about the business of making sure that you have the capability of throwing over command of your aircraft to a ground unit that will guide you onto a militarized airfield, where you'll be met by a well equipped and highly trained anti-terrorist team, and providing you with security onboard.
Everyone on board will be dead long before the atc guy is able to land the aircraft anyway.
If the bad guys get in the cockpit, it is all over no matter what cockamamy stuff is installed.
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: U.S.
Posts: 26
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You know as well as I do, that if it comes to that--we will shoot you down.
I want to live in a society that has enough backbone to make tough decisions that prevent greater tragedies. But I don't ever want to live among people who'd casually order it, without first addressing every possibility for a more optimistic outcome.
The goal is for you to survive; the tragedy is that you may not.
I don't want us to become the moster--I want us to outwit him. If this idea is no better than the rest, in producing that effect--fine--we go back to the drawing board. I'm not married to any idea will not ultimtely contribute to your success.
I want to live in a society that has enough backbone to make tough decisions that prevent greater tragedies. But I don't ever want to live among people who'd casually order it, without first addressing every possibility for a more optimistic outcome.
The goal is for you to survive; the tragedy is that you may not.
I don't want us to become the moster--I want us to outwit him. If this idea is no better than the rest, in producing that effect--fine--we go back to the drawing board. I'm not married to any idea will not ultimtely contribute to your success.
foxtrot xray
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Midwest USA
Posts: 84
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
guns in cockpit
ALPA lost the battle 30 years ago when it did not object to aircrew security searches/security checks along with...and having the same status as...... the pax. Where is the Capatain's authority? There isn't any now: pilots are treated the same as the guys in the back of the bus and must take part of the blame for this situation.
However, now is the time to regain control of the ship. Captains should refuse to fly if there is not an armed crewmember IN the cockpit to protect it and its crew from the crazies.
CARPE DIEM!
However, now is the time to regain control of the ship. Captains should refuse to fly if there is not an armed crewmember IN the cockpit to protect it and its crew from the crazies.
CARPE DIEM!
Union Goon
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: New Jersey, USA
Posts: 1,097
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Steamchicken,
My reply was to Paglia who in his post said that Europe has nothing to fear from Islamic terrorists other than walking near a US embassy when it explodes.
It was that silly statement that I was poking at. Yes I am quite aware that there are other terrorists other than Islamics terrorists.
Cheers
Wino
My reply was to Paglia who in his post said that Europe has nothing to fear from Islamic terrorists other than walking near a US embassy when it explodes.
It was that silly statement that I was poking at. Yes I am quite aware that there are other terrorists other than Islamics terrorists.
Cheers
Wino
Bottums Up
Congratulations to MRIYA225 & AKAAB for particularly well presented and sane ideas.
skol & B Sousa
Your comments re r@gheads, Mohammeds & towel heads are offensive. They also show you to be as racist and lacking in understanding of different people's views or cultures as the fanatics who perpetrate events such as Sept 11.
skol & B Sousa
Your comments re r@gheads, Mohammeds & towel heads are offensive. They also show you to be as racist and lacking in understanding of different people's views or cultures as the fanatics who perpetrate events such as Sept 11.
Last edited by Capt Claret; 26th May 2002 at 09:20.
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Seattle
Posts: 3,197
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
...and now we have to worry about unqualified "air marshals", too!
from Friday's USA Today front page
Air marshals' skills doubted
New hires allowed to fly without passing advanced firearms test
By Blake Morrison
USA TODAY
WASHINGTON -- The government has cut training for federal air marshal applicants and put new hires on flights without requiring the advanced marksmanship skills the program used to demand, USA TODAY has learned.
During a Senate hearing Tuesday, Transportation Security Administration head John Magaw cited the expertise of marshals in explaining his opposition to allowing pilots to carry guns. ''The use of firearms aboard a U.S. aircraft must be limited to those thoroughly trained members of law enforcement,'' he said.
But TSA officials acknowledged Thursday that they no longer require applicants to pass the more difficult shooting test that some argue was the program's critical requirement. The government considers the marshals, who
fly incognito, a critical deterrent to hijackings.
Current and former marshals say the advanced training helped prepare them to fire accurately in the close confines of passenger jets. They and others within the TSA say agency officials, under pressure to meet congressional deadlines for hiring, are lowering standards to get marshals aboard more flights quickly.
''Before Sept. 11, if you couldn't pass that test, you couldn't be an air marshal,'' a source with knowledge of the top-secret program said. ''That's how important it was.''
A senior TSA official disputed the characterizations and said that the agency has actually raised standards and enhanced training. Applicants still must pass a firearms proficiency test and will have to requalify more often than marshals did before Sept. 11. They'll also get ongoing training in intelligence, surveillance and the advanced marksmanship that used to be required to qualify.
Many come with skills their predecessors lacked, the official said. The entire training regimen ''goes far beyond what has ever been envisioned for this program,'' he said.
Supporters of the program have argued that any armed officer aboard a flight is better than none. But a source who works in the program calls the decision to no longer require the advanced marksmanship training a threat to passengers.
''It's pathetic,'' the source said. ''It's insecure and unsafe.''
The source estimated that as many as three-quarters of marshals deployed today were not required to pass the advanced marksmanship test. The source said that many of the proficient marshals are reluctant to team with marshals who haven't passed.
That test is timed and requires shooters to fire quickly at targets about 7 yards away. ''If you miss it by a tenth of a second, you flunk,'' a former marshal said. ''And if you miss the target by a quarter of an inch, you flunk.''
Before Sept. 11, fewer than 50 marshals provided protection on flights. Most flew overseas routes considered possible targets. While the program has grown, precisely how many marshals work aboard flights is classified. Transportation Secretary Norman Mineta promised the Senate committee Tuesday that the agency ''will remain exactly on track with the targets'' for marshal staffing that it gave Congress in a closed meeting.
from Friday's USA Today front page
Air marshals' skills doubted
New hires allowed to fly without passing advanced firearms test
By Blake Morrison
USA TODAY
WASHINGTON -- The government has cut training for federal air marshal applicants and put new hires on flights without requiring the advanced marksmanship skills the program used to demand, USA TODAY has learned.
During a Senate hearing Tuesday, Transportation Security Administration head John Magaw cited the expertise of marshals in explaining his opposition to allowing pilots to carry guns. ''The use of firearms aboard a U.S. aircraft must be limited to those thoroughly trained members of law enforcement,'' he said.
But TSA officials acknowledged Thursday that they no longer require applicants to pass the more difficult shooting test that some argue was the program's critical requirement. The government considers the marshals, who
fly incognito, a critical deterrent to hijackings.
Current and former marshals say the advanced training helped prepare them to fire accurately in the close confines of passenger jets. They and others within the TSA say agency officials, under pressure to meet congressional deadlines for hiring, are lowering standards to get marshals aboard more flights quickly.
''Before Sept. 11, if you couldn't pass that test, you couldn't be an air marshal,'' a source with knowledge of the top-secret program said. ''That's how important it was.''
A senior TSA official disputed the characterizations and said that the agency has actually raised standards and enhanced training. Applicants still must pass a firearms proficiency test and will have to requalify more often than marshals did before Sept. 11. They'll also get ongoing training in intelligence, surveillance and the advanced marksmanship that used to be required to qualify.
Many come with skills their predecessors lacked, the official said. The entire training regimen ''goes far beyond what has ever been envisioned for this program,'' he said.
Supporters of the program have argued that any armed officer aboard a flight is better than none. But a source who works in the program calls the decision to no longer require the advanced marksmanship training a threat to passengers.
''It's pathetic,'' the source said. ''It's insecure and unsafe.''
The source estimated that as many as three-quarters of marshals deployed today were not required to pass the advanced marksmanship test. The source said that many of the proficient marshals are reluctant to team with marshals who haven't passed.
That test is timed and requires shooters to fire quickly at targets about 7 yards away. ''If you miss it by a tenth of a second, you flunk,'' a former marshal said. ''And if you miss the target by a quarter of an inch, you flunk.''
Before Sept. 11, fewer than 50 marshals provided protection on flights. Most flew overseas routes considered possible targets. While the program has grown, precisely how many marshals work aboard flights is classified. Transportation Secretary Norman Mineta promised the Senate committee Tuesday that the agency ''will remain exactly on track with the targets'' for marshal staffing that it gave Congress in a closed meeting.
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 106
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I really can't believe the idea of arming pilots was ever a idea considered.
This isn't some kind of movie where the pilot leaps to his/her feet and saves the day by shooting some one dead.
It's the cabin crew who need BETTER training in security related areas.
Guns would PERHAPS protect aircraft from the "september 11th" style hi-jack. On the other hand gun's could aid hijackers who seek to detain passengers over numerous days. They are not the answer most of us would want.
We all have different ideas of preventing hi-jacking. But surely this crazy idea has to be left for the hollywood actors.
"Stun" guns of nature and restraint have to be the future.
The cabin crew MUST be the BEST line of defence, NOT the pilots.
Sadly pictures and statements like this don't help aviation security.
Swiss Airlines
This isn't some kind of movie where the pilot leaps to his/her feet and saves the day by shooting some one dead.
It's the cabin crew who need BETTER training in security related areas.
Guns would PERHAPS protect aircraft from the "september 11th" style hi-jack. On the other hand gun's could aid hijackers who seek to detain passengers over numerous days. They are not the answer most of us would want.
We all have different ideas of preventing hi-jacking. But surely this crazy idea has to be left for the hollywood actors.
"Stun" guns of nature and restraint have to be the future.
The cabin crew MUST be the BEST line of defence, NOT the pilots.
Sadly pictures and statements like this don't help aviation security.
Swiss Airlines
Last edited by Mooney; 26th May 2002 at 17:58.
Hollywood actors...
That is the last thing I am thinking about. I have no personal
desire to carry a weapon, its not a glamour thing. It is the last chance to stop terrorists before one of two things happens, they turn it into a cruise missle, or we get shot down. Cabin training is a great idea, as are LEO's. They add a layered defence against hijackers. You hope that they will never make it through the door, but you plan for the worst, and that they will. Sept11 was exceedingly effective, who is to say it won't be tried again.
Some here have said that they will be pulverized by the pax, look at the UA flight where they fought back against the bad guys, they crashed. While better to put it into an open field than a building, its not the desired outcome. Imagine being on a plane with a number of hijackers taking it over, bent on destruction. Sitting, watching as they break into the cockpit. You know your best chance is a flight deck that can fight back rather than giving up the plane once the door is breeched. As the hijackers go through the door, you now know your fate rests with the hijackers and/or some politician who is about to order the trailing fighter to shoot. That scenario may still come true with an armed pilot, but at least one more link in the chain to possibly stop it.
Every time you get on an air carrier aircraft, you are putting your life in our hands. You trust in our abilities to get you from A to B. Arming pilots is just an extends our ability to do so. As hazards to aviation are recognized, pilots adapt to new procedures, and welcome new equipment to overcome them. Be it CFIT, runway incursions or hijackings, give us the training and equipment to try to overcome.
That is the last thing I am thinking about. I have no personal
desire to carry a weapon, its not a glamour thing. It is the last chance to stop terrorists before one of two things happens, they turn it into a cruise missle, or we get shot down. Cabin training is a great idea, as are LEO's. They add a layered defence against hijackers. You hope that they will never make it through the door, but you plan for the worst, and that they will. Sept11 was exceedingly effective, who is to say it won't be tried again.
Some here have said that they will be pulverized by the pax, look at the UA flight where they fought back against the bad guys, they crashed. While better to put it into an open field than a building, its not the desired outcome. Imagine being on a plane with a number of hijackers taking it over, bent on destruction. Sitting, watching as they break into the cockpit. You know your best chance is a flight deck that can fight back rather than giving up the plane once the door is breeched. As the hijackers go through the door, you now know your fate rests with the hijackers and/or some politician who is about to order the trailing fighter to shoot. That scenario may still come true with an armed pilot, but at least one more link in the chain to possibly stop it.
Every time you get on an air carrier aircraft, you are putting your life in our hands. You trust in our abilities to get you from A to B. Arming pilots is just an extends our ability to do so. As hazards to aviation are recognized, pilots adapt to new procedures, and welcome new equipment to overcome them. Be it CFIT, runway incursions or hijackings, give us the training and equipment to try to overcome.
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: U.S.
Posts: 26
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You know what annoys me about the Sky Marshall plan? Trust them to turn the program into this wierd FBI structured ordeal... Hell, we've got scads of time and money--let's just reinvent the friggin wheel while we're at it...
We have battle trained, equipped servicemen and women (both active duty and guard) that are sitting on base out of rotation (as in, not currently deployed) that are already being paid--stick them on a flight! We'll suit them up in formal dress (might as well take advantage of the good pr) and a knife big enough to hack through a steer's neck and let 'em ride...
The worst that can happen is that they'll be called up, in which case--they'd just end up moving through the system until they can rendezvous with their unit. What is so complicated about this? Do these people need a schematic, or what?!
We have battle trained, equipped servicemen and women (both active duty and guard) that are sitting on base out of rotation (as in, not currently deployed) that are already being paid--stick them on a flight! We'll suit them up in formal dress (might as well take advantage of the good pr) and a knife big enough to hack through a steer's neck and let 'em ride...
The worst that can happen is that they'll be called up, in which case--they'd just end up moving through the system until they can rendezvous with their unit. What is so complicated about this? Do these people need a schematic, or what?!
Last edited by mriya225; 26th May 2002 at 19:19.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Capt. Claret,
There's nothing like a debate like this that brings out the PC brigade quite as well. The terrorists, or murderers if you want to call them that, are muslims and see themselves doing God's work . While you might not agree with me that's the way I feel about them.
I've got my doubts about those on this site who call themselves CAPT, don't specify a licence and call themselves a "pillot" on their profile. Maybe it should be "pillock".
Are you sure you are not a mahogany bomber pilot?
There's nothing like a debate like this that brings out the PC brigade quite as well. The terrorists, or murderers if you want to call them that, are muslims and see themselves doing God's work . While you might not agree with me that's the way I feel about them.
I've got my doubts about those on this site who call themselves CAPT, don't specify a licence and call themselves a "pillot" on their profile. Maybe it should be "pillock".
Are you sure you are not a mahogany bomber pilot?
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 136
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Pilot Responsibility
I've said before- this serious thread has been hijacked by
non- aviators & the politically correct who will watch the horror unfold on CNN.
Those who are practicing aviators & peddling the anti-gun PC
line I say just this- I respect your right to be a conscientious objector in the war against terrorism-but in doing so you have abdicated your command responsibility towards your passengers & crew & I dispute your right to hold a command.
The very fact that the flight deck is fortified & armed will go a long way towards making a suicide hijack too difficult to attempt.
One terrorist organisation has stated " Why attack the tiger when there are plenty of sheep."
The fortified & armed flight deck makes it a tiger.
non- aviators & the politically correct who will watch the horror unfold on CNN.
Those who are practicing aviators & peddling the anti-gun PC
line I say just this- I respect your right to be a conscientious objector in the war against terrorism-but in doing so you have abdicated your command responsibility towards your passengers & crew & I dispute your right to hold a command.
The very fact that the flight deck is fortified & armed will go a long way towards making a suicide hijack too difficult to attempt.
One terrorist organisation has stated " Why attack the tiger when there are plenty of sheep."
The fortified & armed flight deck makes it a tiger.
Last edited by Capt. Crosswind; 27th May 2002 at 08:11.
Moderator
Join Date: Jul 1997
Location: Europe
Posts: 3,228
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Captain Claret
Absolutely !! And appropriate measures taken 
skol & B Sousa
Your comments re r@gheads, Mohammeds & towel heads are offensive. They also show you to be as racist and lacking in understanding of different people's views or cultures as the fanatics who perpetrate events such as Sept 11.
Your comments re r@gheads, Mohammeds & towel heads are offensive. They also show you to be as racist and lacking in understanding of different people's views or cultures as the fanatics who perpetrate events such as Sept 11.