New reinforced cockpit doors
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: by the river
Posts: 431
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
New reinforced cockpit doors
Approved doors are now available for the Airbus 319-20-21's at US$ 23'000 a piece according to a post on Radio Cockpit. The will be standard they say for planes delivered from August.
Same coming for the A330/340's at US$ 29'000 ... soon.
Anybody know anything mor official on this ?
Same coming for the A330/340's at US$ 29'000 ... soon.
Anybody know anything mor official on this ?
Join Date: Jun 2001
Posts: 55
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Click Here
Wednesday, May 22, 2002
High-Security Cockpit Doors Approved
BLAGNAC, France (AP) - New bullet-proof, high-security doors for the cockpits of Airbus jetliners have been approved by aviation authorities, the European aircraft maker said Tuesday.
The doors, designed after the Sept. 11 hijack-suicide attacks for installation on existing jets, have a bulletproof main panel and a switch that lets the crew bar access.
The doors, costing $23,000 for single-aisle planes and $29,000 for wide-body jets, were approved by the European Joint Aviation Authority, Airbus said. It said it expects approval from the U.S. Federal Aviation Admininstration in the next few weeks.
"Airbus engineers have designed a solution which can be easily introduced onto our aircraft, while minimizing the burden for our customers and operators,'' Patrick Gavin, Airbus executive vice president, said in the statement.
Traditionally, cockpit doors have been designed to let pilots escape in an emergency. But the Sept. 11 attacks on the World Trade Center and Pentagon forced airline officials to think of ways to keep intruders out.
Wednesday, May 22, 2002
High-Security Cockpit Doors Approved
BLAGNAC, France (AP) - New bullet-proof, high-security doors for the cockpits of Airbus jetliners have been approved by aviation authorities, the European aircraft maker said Tuesday.
The doors, designed after the Sept. 11 hijack-suicide attacks for installation on existing jets, have a bulletproof main panel and a switch that lets the crew bar access.
The doors, costing $23,000 for single-aisle planes and $29,000 for wide-body jets, were approved by the European Joint Aviation Authority, Airbus said. It said it expects approval from the U.S. Federal Aviation Admininstration in the next few weeks.
"Airbus engineers have designed a solution which can be easily introduced onto our aircraft, while minimizing the burden for our customers and operators,'' Patrick Gavin, Airbus executive vice president, said in the statement.
Traditionally, cockpit doors have been designed to let pilots escape in an emergency. But the Sept. 11 attacks on the World Trade Center and Pentagon forced airline officials to think of ways to keep intruders out.
From the Airbus website...
AIRBUS’ HIGH-SECURITY COCKPIT DOORS GAIN CERTIFICATION
21 May 2002
Airbus has today gained certification from the Joint Aviation Authority (JAA) for its new cockpit doors that meet all recently introduced and pre-existing safety and security regulations. The first conversion kits will be available for in-service aircraft from the end of May, while all aircraft from the production line will have the doors fitted as standard from August. This certification for the Single Aisle Family paves the way for the door certification of the other members of the Airbus product range and the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) within the next few weeks.
“We have certified, within a very demanding schedule, a new door that both meets the new security requirements and is fully compliant with all current regulations, including the critical rapid decompression criteria,” said Airbus Executive Vice-President Engineering Alain Garcia. “We are very proud to be the first large airliner manufacturer to have achieved this.”
The new cockpit door protects the crew from unauthorised entry while also delivering a number of safety contingencies. It features reinforced attachments, a reinforced and bullet proof main door panel, an escape panel, electrical door latching, an electronic entry pad located in the cabin, and a warning light and buzzer in the cockpit. In addition, a toggle control in the cockpit enables the crew to control access to the cockpit and secure the door in case of need.
“Airbus engineers have designed a solution which can be easily introduced onto our aircraft, while minimising the burden for our customers and operators,” said Airbus Executive Vice President Customer Services Patrick Gavin.
Conversion kits are offered to customers at a reduced price: US$ 23,000 for the single-aisle kits, and US$ 29,000 for widebodies. All certification and engineering costs have been assumed by Airbus. In addition, downtime for the retrofitting of in-service aircraft has been kept to an absolute minimum so airlines retrofitting the doors to their Airbus single-aisles can do so within 48 hours.
The new cockpit doors are just one of a series of complementary measures being made available by Airbus. These also include a stand alone video camera system allowing the cabin area outside the door to be monitored from the cockpit. The full provisions for this system will be installed as standard on all Airbus aircraft from August. Airbus has also developed two possible solutions to ensure that the transponder signal from the aircraft to air traffic control cannot be interrupted in the event of an attack. And, to further improve communication between crews in the cabin and in the cockpit, Airbus has found a way for crew in each part of the aircraft to alert other crew members should an emergency situation arise.
AIRBUS’ HIGH-SECURITY COCKPIT DOORS GAIN CERTIFICATION
21 May 2002
Airbus has today gained certification from the Joint Aviation Authority (JAA) for its new cockpit doors that meet all recently introduced and pre-existing safety and security regulations. The first conversion kits will be available for in-service aircraft from the end of May, while all aircraft from the production line will have the doors fitted as standard from August. This certification for the Single Aisle Family paves the way for the door certification of the other members of the Airbus product range and the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) within the next few weeks.
“We have certified, within a very demanding schedule, a new door that both meets the new security requirements and is fully compliant with all current regulations, including the critical rapid decompression criteria,” said Airbus Executive Vice-President Engineering Alain Garcia. “We are very proud to be the first large airliner manufacturer to have achieved this.”
The new cockpit door protects the crew from unauthorised entry while also delivering a number of safety contingencies. It features reinforced attachments, a reinforced and bullet proof main door panel, an escape panel, electrical door latching, an electronic entry pad located in the cabin, and a warning light and buzzer in the cockpit. In addition, a toggle control in the cockpit enables the crew to control access to the cockpit and secure the door in case of need.
“Airbus engineers have designed a solution which can be easily introduced onto our aircraft, while minimising the burden for our customers and operators,” said Airbus Executive Vice President Customer Services Patrick Gavin.
Conversion kits are offered to customers at a reduced price: US$ 23,000 for the single-aisle kits, and US$ 29,000 for widebodies. All certification and engineering costs have been assumed by Airbus. In addition, downtime for the retrofitting of in-service aircraft has been kept to an absolute minimum so airlines retrofitting the doors to their Airbus single-aisles can do so within 48 hours.
The new cockpit doors are just one of a series of complementary measures being made available by Airbus. These also include a stand alone video camera system allowing the cabin area outside the door to be monitored from the cockpit. The full provisions for this system will be installed as standard on all Airbus aircraft from August. Airbus has also developed two possible solutions to ensure that the transponder signal from the aircraft to air traffic control cannot be interrupted in the event of an attack. And, to further improve communication between crews in the cabin and in the cockpit, Airbus has found a way for crew in each part of the aircraft to alert other crew members should an emergency situation arise.
Join Date: May 2002
Location: West Sussex, UK
Posts: 220
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I dunno..its all fair enough being bullet proof..its not the door you`ve really gotta worry about..whats holding it on..the hinges!!,4 men..weighing 10 stone each ramming it and trying to kick it down..i sure hope it can stop them too!!!
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Oop North, UK
Posts: 3,076
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ETOPS - if you are sitting there listening to people kicking the door in you are not being very clever, I for one would be flying the aircraft in such a manner as to make it VERY hard for a hijacker to stand up, never mind try to kick in the door
Reducing the volume of the cockpit call (and HF call) buzzer should be an easy job but at the moment Airbus seem unable to do it. It amazes me that it got certified like that, at the risk of playing into the Airbus haters hands it seems amazing that an aircraft is certified with the call buzzer so loud that is impossible to hear the radio over it.
As far as the doors go I believe that we are planning to fit them in the very near future to our A330's but the 320/321's will be a bit longer coming. It seems we (as pilots) have no choice in the matter and they are coming for whole industry so we had better get used to it.
My own point of view is that if I were travelling as a passenger I would rather not be on an aircraft where the rest of the crew have no access to the flightdeck unless it is unlocked from within. It is only a matter of time before a flyable aircraft crashes with an unconcious flightcrew at the controls who could have been roused with O2, helped out by a doctor or relieved by a positioning/resting crew member.
Now that I face the rest of my career locked in behind a bullet proof door and having very little contact with the rest of the crew I really wonder if I want to do the job at all anymore. How sad and lacking in fun this business has become, oh well only 25 years to go!.
As far as the doors go I believe that we are planning to fit them in the very near future to our A330's but the 320/321's will be a bit longer coming. It seems we (as pilots) have no choice in the matter and they are coming for whole industry so we had better get used to it.
My own point of view is that if I were travelling as a passenger I would rather not be on an aircraft where the rest of the crew have no access to the flightdeck unless it is unlocked from within. It is only a matter of time before a flyable aircraft crashes with an unconcious flightcrew at the controls who could have been roused with O2, helped out by a doctor or relieved by a positioning/resting crew member.
Now that I face the rest of my career locked in behind a bullet proof door and having very little contact with the rest of the crew I really wonder if I want to do the job at all anymore. How sad and lacking in fun this business has become, oh well only 25 years to go!.
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Oop North, UK
Posts: 3,076
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Max Angle, I agree with your sentiments, and personally think that the locked cockpit door is the biggest DETRIMENT to safety for a long time , I think the pilot associations should be working against this, also I believe that were someone to be sacked for not locking the door they would have a very good defence in claiming it as an unsafe practice - but don't expect me to be the one to put this to the test!
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Pacific
Posts: 731
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Correct me if I am wrong, but the FAA has not changed the recommendation for flight crews to cooperate with a hijacker (certainly the company I work for has twice in the last three months reminded us if this ruling, since the airlines will usually follow FAA recommendations). Given that this is true, of what use is a locked and strengthened door if the first thing we are told by the hijacker is to open it?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: by the river
Posts: 431
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Fish
Bigger door - more surface - more dough ??
Everybody else
Thanks guys you just proved that teamwork brings much more to the table than 1 man on his own - I learnt a lot.
I do understand the crew who regret the next 25 years behind a locked door - but did we not learn from 9-11 that that is NOT where any of us want to end up - as a strawbury jam sandwich in a pile of ex building rubble. However slight the risk that are still millions of kamikase fools out there, fanatics, depressed, whatever
------------------------------------
Wouldn't it be nice if PPRuNe had an automatic spellchecker like my e-Mail can be configured to -
Everybody else
Thanks guys you just proved that teamwork brings much more to the table than 1 man on his own - I learnt a lot.
I do understand the crew who regret the next 25 years behind a locked door - but did we not learn from 9-11 that that is NOT where any of us want to end up - as a strawbury jam sandwich in a pile of ex building rubble. However slight the risk that are still millions of kamikase fools out there, fanatics, depressed, whatever
------------------------------------
Wouldn't it be nice if PPRuNe had an automatic spellchecker like my e-Mail can be configured to -
Alba Gu Brath
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Merseyside
Age: 55
Posts: 738
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think Max Angle hits the nail on the head re pilot incapacitation. Given that most flight decks now contain 2 occupants, what is the procedure should one becoming incap? It is highly unlikely that both pilots would become incapacitated at the same time however what if one were renderred unusable due to a dodgy chicken curry? How easy is it to open the flight deck door to assistance when sitting in the seat flying the aircraft?
Union Goon
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: New Jersey, USA
Posts: 1,097
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MAXANGLE.
You never heard of an autopilot? PUT the aircraft on the autopilot while you wrestle with the other guy, don't handfly the aircraft while wrestling with the controls. If ytou are flying an Airbus, it isn't even necesary to deal with him, just lock out his control stick, then pull the pin in the door at your leisure. Furthermore the permanent doors are supposed to have a switch from that you can reach from the controls to allow the flight attendant in, should an emergency cause you to need them. It is astounding to me that people are still foolish enough to deny the need to be able to lock out the bad guys! Does anyone really think this is over? The only thing that has changed is that it will take 10 people instead of 5 this time to take control of the aircraft.
Boofhead,
There is no longer "the common strategy" where you cooperate with the Hijackers, and spreading that nonsense is just dangerous as it will encourage others to try it again
Wino, I've edited your paragraph above. E-mail me at [email protected] and I'll tell you why. (I would have e-mailed you, but you've got your e-mail address restricted.)
Foxmouth,
You will kill lots of people on the aircraft with your actions. Most of em in the back where the effects will be much worse than up near the cockpit door. Yanking and banking will be of limited value to save you, and the airplane isn't nearly as strong as you seam to think it is, Ask the crew of American Airlines 587. You should really study the injury patterns in various upsets before you try and shake the plane. You will turn the people in the back half of the aircraft into strawberry jam, the front half will just have a fun ride.
And furthermore, an unlocked door is far more clearly a case of negligence. Since sept 11 there have been 2 more seroius assaults on the cockpit, and in the 5 yeras before it there was a half a dozen more. BUt I guess you would prefer that some crazy person auger a 747 into the ground over Africa than you be in the slightest inconvienced.
You never heard of an autopilot? PUT the aircraft on the autopilot while you wrestle with the other guy, don't handfly the aircraft while wrestling with the controls. If ytou are flying an Airbus, it isn't even necesary to deal with him, just lock out his control stick, then pull the pin in the door at your leisure. Furthermore the permanent doors are supposed to have a switch from that you can reach from the controls to allow the flight attendant in, should an emergency cause you to need them. It is astounding to me that people are still foolish enough to deny the need to be able to lock out the bad guys! Does anyone really think this is over? The only thing that has changed is that it will take 10 people instead of 5 this time to take control of the aircraft.
Boofhead,
There is no longer "the common strategy" where you cooperate with the Hijackers, and spreading that nonsense is just dangerous as it will encourage others to try it again
Wino, I've edited your paragraph above. E-mail me at [email protected] and I'll tell you why. (I would have e-mailed you, but you've got your e-mail address restricted.)
Foxmouth,
You will kill lots of people on the aircraft with your actions. Most of em in the back where the effects will be much worse than up near the cockpit door. Yanking and banking will be of limited value to save you, and the airplane isn't nearly as strong as you seam to think it is, Ask the crew of American Airlines 587. You should really study the injury patterns in various upsets before you try and shake the plane. You will turn the people in the back half of the aircraft into strawberry jam, the front half will just have a fun ride.
And furthermore, an unlocked door is far more clearly a case of negligence. Since sept 11 there have been 2 more seroius assaults on the cockpit, and in the 5 yeras before it there was a half a dozen more. BUt I guess you would prefer that some crazy person auger a 747 into the ground over Africa than you be in the slightest inconvienced.
Last edited by McD; 27th May 2002 at 03:36.
Wino
Regarding the pilot incapacitation scenario - autopilot or no autopilot surely there should always be someone sat at the controls?
Remote door release would seem to be the answer - so you could let in cabin crew to attend to an incapacitated colleague without leaving your seat.
Regarding the pilot incapacitation scenario - autopilot or no autopilot surely there should always be someone sat at the controls?
Remote door release would seem to be the answer - so you could let in cabin crew to attend to an incapacitated colleague without leaving your seat.
Union Goon
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: New Jersey, USA
Posts: 1,097
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Stagger,
Remote access is in the certification standards for the permanent door.
Stagger, In a perfect world yes, however your emergency authority does give you wiggle room on this one. If would be your call as to whether to open the door, But I can tell you that on the AA Katy bar doors it is 1 pin reachable in most fleets from your seat and the widebodies 1 sec away to pull the pin. It would be a judgement call as to whether or not the incapacitated person would need assistance. At the end of the day I would have no problems withsome stepping up for 1 sec to pull the safety pin, and if that bothers you, simply put a lanyard on the pin so you can pull it from your seat. How hard is that?
Cheers
Wino
Remote access is in the certification standards for the permanent door.
Stagger, In a perfect world yes, however your emergency authority does give you wiggle room on this one. If would be your call as to whether to open the door, But I can tell you that on the AA Katy bar doors it is 1 pin reachable in most fleets from your seat and the widebodies 1 sec away to pull the pin. It would be a judgement call as to whether or not the incapacitated person would need assistance. At the end of the day I would have no problems withsome stepping up for 1 sec to pull the safety pin, and if that bothers you, simply put a lanyard on the pin so you can pull it from your seat. How hard is that?
Cheers
Wino
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Oop North, UK
Posts: 3,076
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wino - Yes the manouvering MAY injure a few, but do you REALLY think these hijackers are not going to do a little more than INJURE the pax to try to pursuade you to open the door!
As far as the aircraft taking the manouvers goes, you only need about a half "G" negative followed by a positive pull and I am sure there are not too many aircraft not capable of that!
As far as "inconvenience" goes, I am more frightened of being trapped in the cockpit after an accident than worried about a little inconvenience (being American how long would it take your relatives to have a lawyer suing because you died for this reason), this I would suggest is going to happen MUCH more often than attempted hijacking.
N.B. please could you get my user name right, or doyou not realise it is an aircraft type.
As far as the aircraft taking the manouvers goes, you only need about a half "G" negative followed by a positive pull and I am sure there are not too many aircraft not capable of that!
As far as "inconvenience" goes, I am more frightened of being trapped in the cockpit after an accident than worried about a little inconvenience (being American how long would it take your relatives to have a lawyer suing because you died for this reason), this I would suggest is going to happen MUCH more often than attempted hijacking.
N.B. please could you get my user name right, or doyou not realise it is an aircraft type.
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Austria
Age: 63
Posts: 66
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In the history of civil aviation the safety of passagers, crew and AC has always been a primary issue. Encapsulating the cockpit has been discussed for a long time and over all this concept was regarded to lessen the saftey of pax and AC and especially the safety of the cockpit crew.
The new aspect after 9/11 is not so much new arguments for AC safety but the nature of the parties which are involved in the discussion. It was Airline Customers, Pilot Unions and Airline Management before; now a new and very powerfull group has its say: "Non flying citizens".
This group is not so much concerned about the safety of the airplanes but about the safety of their towns or the security of the neighbourhood atomic power station. This new participant in the discussion does not mainly see the airplane as something to be protected but as something from which she or he needs to be protected from.
Given the size of the new party, big politcs has no other way but to get involved in the discussion and ecapsulated cockpits seem to enhance the protection of towns from those "guided 500mph 200t Keosin missiles".
As an airline pilot I do not embrace the idea of working in a no contact environment for the rest of my career. But as least in the moment I get the impression that the discussion is fruitless. In all the resent national and international safety and security meetings there was no other concept giving the people on the ground an comparable amount of safer feeling and their opinion has by far the strongest weight.
The new aspect after 9/11 is not so much new arguments for AC safety but the nature of the parties which are involved in the discussion. It was Airline Customers, Pilot Unions and Airline Management before; now a new and very powerfull group has its say: "Non flying citizens".
This group is not so much concerned about the safety of the airplanes but about the safety of their towns or the security of the neighbourhood atomic power station. This new participant in the discussion does not mainly see the airplane as something to be protected but as something from which she or he needs to be protected from.
Given the size of the new party, big politcs has no other way but to get involved in the discussion and ecapsulated cockpits seem to enhance the protection of towns from those "guided 500mph 200t Keosin missiles".
As an airline pilot I do not embrace the idea of working in a no contact environment for the rest of my career. But as least in the moment I get the impression that the discussion is fruitless. In all the resent national and international safety and security meetings there was no other concept giving the people on the ground an comparable amount of safer feeling and their opinion has by far the strongest weight.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Fantasy Island
Posts: 555
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As a high-mileage SLF these measures are very reassuring (together with the new cabin crew/flight deck crew relationship proceedures).
However, what I'm more concerned about is current moves in the US to re-admit unticketed passengers back into the airside, and the serving of champagne in real, hefty glass bottles. Anyone care to comment?
However, what I'm more concerned about is current moves in the US to re-admit unticketed passengers back into the airside, and the serving of champagne in real, hefty glass bottles. Anyone care to comment?
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: U.S.
Posts: 26
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Maxrpm,
I wholeheartedly support your rejection of the "no contact" approach. Most of the proponents of that idea, that I've ever spoken to, were completely oblivious to occassions that absolutely necessitate your being able to see and hear what you can of your aircraft.
It's incredibly irresponsible for these passenger union types to force regulation in an industry where they lack intimate experience and knowledge. I happen to think it behooves our politicians to remind those folks that if they're laboring under the misconception that the only reasons that pilots leave the cockpit are to hit the head or chat people up, then it's time to tie those tongues and educate themselves before any further consideration to proposed restrictions on pilot mobility will be granted.
But, alas, I'm the last person in the world who'd bother to hold my breath, waiting for politicians to exhibit any behaviour that would indicate the presence of a spine... So, I think it'll come down to legitimate industry opinions having to be the squeekier wheel.
I wholeheartedly support your rejection of the "no contact" approach. Most of the proponents of that idea, that I've ever spoken to, were completely oblivious to occassions that absolutely necessitate your being able to see and hear what you can of your aircraft.
It's incredibly irresponsible for these passenger union types to force regulation in an industry where they lack intimate experience and knowledge. I happen to think it behooves our politicians to remind those folks that if they're laboring under the misconception that the only reasons that pilots leave the cockpit are to hit the head or chat people up, then it's time to tie those tongues and educate themselves before any further consideration to proposed restrictions on pilot mobility will be granted.
But, alas, I'm the last person in the world who'd bother to hold my breath, waiting for politicians to exhibit any behaviour that would indicate the presence of a spine... So, I think it'll come down to legitimate industry opinions having to be the squeekier wheel.
Last edited by mriya225; 24th May 2002 at 19:03.