Skymarshals now? Where do we go from here?
Guest
Posts: n/a
Seems like Transport Secretary Stephen Byers is a PPRuNer! 
From today's Telegraph:
From today's Telegraph:
Planes may have armed guards: Byers
Armed guards on board planes, and isolated
cockpits to protect pilots, could be introduced, Transport Secretary Stephen Byers says.
Mr Byers, who has met fellow EU transport
ministers to agree common security procedures, says Israeli airline El Al had cockpits which could be isolated from the rest of the aircraft and security personnel on board.
He added: "This is a measure we will need to consider in the light of what happened (the terrorist attacks in America). This is a new form of terrorism and we need to respond to it in the appropriate way."
Mr Byers said: "What we need to do is to respond to the things we saw. We need to mourn the dead, we have to protect the living and we have to make sure our normal way of life is protected."
Mr Byers said the prospect of a suicidal terrorist, prepared to kill himself and all passengers, was a threat "our existing security measures had not taken into account".
Armed guards on board planes, and isolated
cockpits to protect pilots, could be introduced, Transport Secretary Stephen Byers says.
Mr Byers, who has met fellow EU transport
ministers to agree common security procedures, says Israeli airline El Al had cockpits which could be isolated from the rest of the aircraft and security personnel on board.
He added: "This is a measure we will need to consider in the light of what happened (the terrorist attacks in America). This is a new form of terrorism and we need to respond to it in the appropriate way."
Mr Byers said: "What we need to do is to respond to the things we saw. We need to mourn the dead, we have to protect the living and we have to make sure our normal way of life is protected."
Mr Byers said the prospect of a suicidal terrorist, prepared to kill himself and all passengers, was a threat "our existing security measures had not taken into account".
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: tropical jewel
Posts: 40
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Guvnor
I know we differ on this issue, but a change in my domain is taking place.
I have always been the final link in the safety chain. I have accepted this responsibilty because I have had very large sums of money spent on my training, years of experience, and I feel reasonably competent to fulfil my duties to my passengers.
You are now telling me the I could well end up a mere spectator in God knows what, because the last effective link may be several steps prior to me.
When all other links have failed, and the terrorist is battering his way through the cockpit door, I have to pick up my spare headset and the ops manual and turn to defend myself and my passengers, wielding my woeful weapons.
The only real weapon I will have is the expectation of certain death, and the unspeakable rage that helplessness will bring.
I know we differ on this issue, but a change in my domain is taking place.
I have always been the final link in the safety chain. I have accepted this responsibilty because I have had very large sums of money spent on my training, years of experience, and I feel reasonably competent to fulfil my duties to my passengers.
You are now telling me the I could well end up a mere spectator in God knows what, because the last effective link may be several steps prior to me.
When all other links have failed, and the terrorist is battering his way through the cockpit door, I have to pick up my spare headset and the ops manual and turn to defend myself and my passengers, wielding my woeful weapons.
The only real weapon I will have is the expectation of certain death, and the unspeakable rage that helplessness will bring.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Seasunsandfly - as a Captain, your ultimate responsibility is the safety of your aircraft, passengers and crew. Until Tuesday it was always assumed that hijackers were generally not kamikaze types but (vaguely) rational types that would want something for nothing - like a free trip to Cuba or Tripoli and lots of publicity for their cause.
Therefore, the previous mindset was: do nothing to antagonise them and everything will work out OK.
As of Tuesday, those rules changed.
I don't have any answers - all I have is the knowledge that aviation has changed forever. It's going to become a lot more expensive and inconvenient for everyone - including crews - and a lot of airlines are going to go to the wall as a result.
Personally, my view is that bringing back the Skymarshals will be the only viable option - the debate is going to be whether this is overt, covert or a combination of the two. Probably the latter from a PR viewpoint, though I'd prefer totally covert.
We've had the debate before about whether or not flight deck should get involved with air rage incidents - and I recall the concensus was an overwhelming no.
From a practical viewpoint, if we assume that your employer gives you a Glock and you're sitting doing your stuff and a professional terrorist bursts in without warning - what are you going to do? Trying to use a firearm from a seated position is extremely difficult - I know, I've done it. Trying to use it on someone behind you, in the confines of a cramped cockpit, is all but impossible. You're then in a very difficult situation - the hijacker wants your weapon, and your FO is going to be killed if you don't hand it over. What do you do?
Or take scenario B. You're carrying Skymarshals and there has been a successful takeover - they've been neutralised. You have the flight deck door secured, but there's a terrorist on the other side who's telling you to open it - and to make his point, he's just killed one of your cabin crew. He has a female passenger as a human shield - you have 10 seconds to open the door or she gets killed as well. What do you do?
I'll tell you one thing - I hope never to be in a position where I have to make any decisions like those.
Therefore, the previous mindset was: do nothing to antagonise them and everything will work out OK.
As of Tuesday, those rules changed.
I don't have any answers - all I have is the knowledge that aviation has changed forever. It's going to become a lot more expensive and inconvenient for everyone - including crews - and a lot of airlines are going to go to the wall as a result.
Personally, my view is that bringing back the Skymarshals will be the only viable option - the debate is going to be whether this is overt, covert or a combination of the two. Probably the latter from a PR viewpoint, though I'd prefer totally covert.
We've had the debate before about whether or not flight deck should get involved with air rage incidents - and I recall the concensus was an overwhelming no.
From a practical viewpoint, if we assume that your employer gives you a Glock and you're sitting doing your stuff and a professional terrorist bursts in without warning - what are you going to do? Trying to use a firearm from a seated position is extremely difficult - I know, I've done it. Trying to use it on someone behind you, in the confines of a cramped cockpit, is all but impossible. You're then in a very difficult situation - the hijacker wants your weapon, and your FO is going to be killed if you don't hand it over. What do you do?
Or take scenario B. You're carrying Skymarshals and there has been a successful takeover - they've been neutralised. You have the flight deck door secured, but there's a terrorist on the other side who's telling you to open it - and to make his point, he's just killed one of your cabin crew. He has a female passenger as a human shield - you have 10 seconds to open the door or she gets killed as well. What do you do?
I'll tell you one thing - I hope never to be in a position where I have to make any decisions like those.
Join Date: Aug 1998
Location: The World
Posts: 388
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi Apollo
Just a little history...
NWA mail pilots carried arms officially, up until the '60's.
Some AC pilots armed themselves after our first hijacking, I know, I was there. I spoke, read drank, with many US pilots who admitted carrying arms in their flight bags into the '70's.
Remember that it was probably more or less legal (?) in those days to carry arms.
There was great discussion among the world pilot group in those days as whether or not the carrying of arms was a good idea. Sound familiar..
We are in a new century and things have taken a very tragic turn. What to do? I don't know...Every solution seems to present unforeseen other problems.
Just a little history...
NWA mail pilots carried arms officially, up until the '60's.
Some AC pilots armed themselves after our first hijacking, I know, I was there. I spoke, read drank, with many US pilots who admitted carrying arms in their flight bags into the '70's.
Remember that it was probably more or less legal (?) in those days to carry arms.
There was great discussion among the world pilot group in those days as whether or not the carrying of arms was a good idea. Sound familiar..
We are in a new century and things have taken a very tragic turn. What to do? I don't know...Every solution seems to present unforeseen other problems.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: tropical jewel
Posts: 40
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
But Guvnor, by the time the terrorist is kicking his way into the cockpit, he has already either got superior weaponry to the Skymarshal, or has taken the marshal down and has his weapon, so it is immaterial to him whether or not there is a weapon in the cockpit. He will already have killed at least one in the cabin and will have no compunction in killing the cockpit crew. The cockpit will certainly be aware something is amiss.
Things are desperate.
I am not going to sit quietly in the drivers seat, am I ? If the a/p is working it will be on , and I, and probably f/o too, will be out of the direct line of fire if at all possible. I admit in present equipment I will have c/b indents all over me for a long time, but say what.
All we have left is me, or the f/o , or else it's the empire state, eiffel tower, or what have you.
You think I won't have the fear/courage to shoot to kill?
Things are desperate.
I am not going to sit quietly in the drivers seat, am I ? If the a/p is working it will be on , and I, and probably f/o too, will be out of the direct line of fire if at all possible. I admit in present equipment I will have c/b indents all over me for a long time, but say what.
All we have left is me, or the f/o , or else it's the empire state, eiffel tower, or what have you.
You think I won't have the fear/courage to shoot to kill?
None but a blockhead
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: London, UK
Posts: 535
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
While better screening of pax is an option, it is more of a problem with international flights. If I fly over to the US and want to make internal flights, will I have be registered on some central database? To be honest, I can see the introduction of global citizen registration being one of the long-term effects of the September 11th attack -- and if you're not registered, you don't get in to Europe or America. Even longer term, this could be the start of the World State, with all that implies for terrorism and our personal liberties (which, after all, we are trying to defend). Don't forget that any such tools are potentially vulnerable to compromise and corruption by terrorists.
We will never be utterly safe from attack, no matter what precautions we take. For me, that's an acceptable risk in return for the benefits of aviation and as a pax I'm prepared to accept responsibility for following the rules and not adding to the risk through stupidity or selfishness.
Security is everyone's business, and I hope that message is made clear in the aftermath.
R
We will never be utterly safe from attack, no matter what precautions we take. For me, that's an acceptable risk in return for the benefits of aviation and as a pax I'm prepared to accept responsibility for following the rules and not adding to the risk through stupidity or selfishness.
Security is everyone's business, and I hope that message is made clear in the aftermath.
R
Guest
Posts: n/a
Much better idea - how about remotely controlling the aircraft from the ground? That at least would completely negate the value of hijacking an aircraft as it wouldn't make the slightest difference to those on the ground - and unless it was blown up in mid air there's nothing that a hijacker could do to use it as an airborne weapon.
Of course, one slight drawback is that pilots would become surplus to requirements - but that's the price you've got to pay for safety!
Of course, one slight drawback is that pilots would become surplus to requirements - but that's the price you've got to pay for safety!
Everything is under control.
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Washington, D.C.
Posts: 435
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Union says pilots must be aggressive. "The pilot must be prepared to kill a cockpit intruder."
http://www.wjla.com/showstory.hrb?f=n&s=17179&f1=n
[ 15 September 2001: Message edited by: Eboy ]
http://www.wjla.com/showstory.hrb?f=n&s=17179&f1=n
[ 15 September 2001: Message edited by: Eboy ]
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: California
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In the knee jerk responses we have seen so far, it is absolutely true that we are doing the terrorist's work for him in taking away our own freedoms and destroying our own economies and way of life in the guise of increasing 'security'. In a world that is lead by the truly stupid, what else can we expect?
In blaming every other country, including the UK and Canada for their own failings, the US risks destroying the relationships forged in blood.
Many countries categorise the PIC as a "special constable" and as part of maritime tradition he has a responsibility to his crew and passengers. If this means he must be armed, then that is the end of the discussion. If he does not want to be armed when that is a requirement for the job, let him get a new job.
Put a secure electronic lock on the flight deck door, operated by a four digit code set by the PIC before every flight. He can give the code to the purser or not, as company policy dictates. He can still open it from his seat as before, so if the cabin crew want access they can call ahead. But no-one gets into the cabin unless he allows it. He should also have a panic button which will put a solid lock on the door, so that it cannot be kicked in or forced (maybe a stronger door needed, with no blowout panels or smaller ones). In an emergency he can set this lock, which cannot be released in flight. No matter the threats, he will not be able to open the door.
This would solve the problem we saw in this attack, but make other attacks harder to combat. Is it what we want?
In blaming every other country, including the UK and Canada for their own failings, the US risks destroying the relationships forged in blood.
Many countries categorise the PIC as a "special constable" and as part of maritime tradition he has a responsibility to his crew and passengers. If this means he must be armed, then that is the end of the discussion. If he does not want to be armed when that is a requirement for the job, let him get a new job.
Put a secure electronic lock on the flight deck door, operated by a four digit code set by the PIC before every flight. He can give the code to the purser or not, as company policy dictates. He can still open it from his seat as before, so if the cabin crew want access they can call ahead. But no-one gets into the cabin unless he allows it. He should also have a panic button which will put a solid lock on the door, so that it cannot be kicked in or forced (maybe a stronger door needed, with no blowout panels or smaller ones). In an emergency he can set this lock, which cannot be released in flight. No matter the threats, he will not be able to open the door.
This would solve the problem we saw in this attack, but make other attacks harder to combat. Is it what we want?
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Upstairs
Posts: 62
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The security question needs to be addressed at the many "lines of defence".
As has been said before, Airline Security begins at the point of check-in. Vetting may be incorporated at the booking stage but as previously noted, a large database would be needed and may not help with "clean" terrorist operatives.
Check-in security must be much stricter. Any kind of knife, pen-knife or blade must be carried in checked in luggage (carried in inacessible holds) or confiscated at the x-ray/security/customs. Maybe further x-rays/frisk searches at the jet bridge or gate.
As for carrying AirMarshalls, the deterrent element would be there. If someone knows an AirMarshall is carried on a particular airline, maybe there is less chance of someone attempting to take over the aircraft. SkyMarshalls should not be a "visible" deterrent, being in uniform would single that person out for the first attack/incapacitation. (I'm guessing a "sleeper" is non-visible). By introducing a firearm into a secure environment you are providing the attacker with a means of threatening the crew/passengers. Sounds dodgy to me.
Maybe it would be possible to carry prefilled, one-shot syringes, containing an incapacitation drug, concealed at various points in the aircraft (under seats/in galleys/on the flight deck). This would require being in close quarters but could be administered to the arm, leg or hand (maybe while you are keeping your head down in the isle seat).
The last line of defence is actually the flight deck door and not the flight deck crew. If the attacker gets the flight deck door open then you are already in trouble. the door does not need to be fully open to point a gun barrel inside!
There will no doubt be many suggestions on how security can be improved. We should all hope that the powers that be look into it as much, if not more intensely as we PPruners.
Clang, clang...the sound of stable doors closing!
My thoughts and prayers to all those affected by these tragic events, especially those of the FDNY who lost their lives going in to help...
"When I'm called to duty God, wherever flames may rage, give me the strength to save a life, whatever be their age...."(Firemans Prayer)
[ 15 September 2001: Message edited by: Top Loadie ]
As has been said before, Airline Security begins at the point of check-in. Vetting may be incorporated at the booking stage but as previously noted, a large database would be needed and may not help with "clean" terrorist operatives.
Check-in security must be much stricter. Any kind of knife, pen-knife or blade must be carried in checked in luggage (carried in inacessible holds) or confiscated at the x-ray/security/customs. Maybe further x-rays/frisk searches at the jet bridge or gate.
As for carrying AirMarshalls, the deterrent element would be there. If someone knows an AirMarshall is carried on a particular airline, maybe there is less chance of someone attempting to take over the aircraft. SkyMarshalls should not be a "visible" deterrent, being in uniform would single that person out for the first attack/incapacitation. (I'm guessing a "sleeper" is non-visible). By introducing a firearm into a secure environment you are providing the attacker with a means of threatening the crew/passengers. Sounds dodgy to me.
Maybe it would be possible to carry prefilled, one-shot syringes, containing an incapacitation drug, concealed at various points in the aircraft (under seats/in galleys/on the flight deck). This would require being in close quarters but could be administered to the arm, leg or hand (maybe while you are keeping your head down in the isle seat).
The last line of defence is actually the flight deck door and not the flight deck crew. If the attacker gets the flight deck door open then you are already in trouble. the door does not need to be fully open to point a gun barrel inside!
There will no doubt be many suggestions on how security can be improved. We should all hope that the powers that be look into it as much, if not more intensely as we PPruners.
Clang, clang...the sound of stable doors closing!
My thoughts and prayers to all those affected by these tragic events, especially those of the FDNY who lost their lives going in to help...
"When I'm called to duty God, wherever flames may rage, give me the strength to save a life, whatever be their age...."(Firemans Prayer)
[ 15 September 2001: Message edited by: Top Loadie ]
Guest
Posts: n/a
A stronger flight deck door would help. When was the present deliberately weakened flight deck door last needed for an emergency rescue? Unfortunately this strengthened door could lead to a situation where the pilots sit safely behind the door as the F/A's and passengers are individually murdered trying to force access. Not much fun.
Removal of all potential weapons at a security check point is a non-starter. All that is needed for a weapon, for instance, is a modified ball-point pen (solid steel tip, high strength plastic shank). The World aviation system can not work with the extensive checks that would be needed. Nice idea but would in effect shut down the airline industry. The six pax who got through the security check would not want to pay for the whole cost of the flight.
Properly trained sky marshals could help. We would need a whole bunch of them (what would there duty time be?) and there is the obvious cost. Who would pay, the airline or the government? If the airlines paid we would get more $7.50 an hour, 25 IQ, renta-cops - comforting thought! Does the sky marshal override the wishes of the Captain as an incident unfolds? What size aircraft must have a sky marshal, only "big" jets or commuters as well?
Arm a crew-member? In this case it may have helped and certainly could not have hurt. If you know everyone on the aircraft is going to die you might as well lose just a few to flying bullets because you are going to lose them all if you do nothing. You have an oxygen mask in case of depressurisation, why not a pistol in case of hijack? Liability? Training? Firearm issued by seniority or by ablity?
Removal of all potential weapons at a security check point is a non-starter. All that is needed for a weapon, for instance, is a modified ball-point pen (solid steel tip, high strength plastic shank). The World aviation system can not work with the extensive checks that would be needed. Nice idea but would in effect shut down the airline industry. The six pax who got through the security check would not want to pay for the whole cost of the flight.
Properly trained sky marshals could help. We would need a whole bunch of them (what would there duty time be?) and there is the obvious cost. Who would pay, the airline or the government? If the airlines paid we would get more $7.50 an hour, 25 IQ, renta-cops - comforting thought! Does the sky marshal override the wishes of the Captain as an incident unfolds? What size aircraft must have a sky marshal, only "big" jets or commuters as well?
Arm a crew-member? In this case it may have helped and certainly could not have hurt. If you know everyone on the aircraft is going to die you might as well lose just a few to flying bullets because you are going to lose them all if you do nothing. You have an oxygen mask in case of depressurisation, why not a pistol in case of hijack? Liability? Training? Firearm issued by seniority or by ablity?
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Newcastle/UK
Posts: 1,476
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Pardon me if I'm talking out of my arse here, but is it not possible for any aircraft to pull a zero g parabolic dive as in that NASA Vomit Comet?,again probably not a very practical way of disarming someone.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: tropical jewel
Posts: 40
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Guvnor
Your idea although not without merit, is perhaps a little ahead of its time.
It is not as though it is a banking system computer which only causes much irritation when it is down. When it glitches, people die.
Think of it, if every time your ATM, or office computer went funny, two or three hundred people died, population would be under control in two shakes of a duck's tail.
I have recently transitioned from steam driven to high tech, and the amount of glitches and "wierd sh*t" that I have come across allow me to state with some certainty that the human touch is not likely to be redundant for some time yet.
Your idea although not without merit, is perhaps a little ahead of its time.
It is not as though it is a banking system computer which only causes much irritation when it is down. When it glitches, people die.
Think of it, if every time your ATM, or office computer went funny, two or three hundred people died, population would be under control in two shakes of a duck's tail.
I have recently transitioned from steam driven to high tech, and the amount of glitches and "wierd sh*t" that I have come across allow me to state with some certainty that the human touch is not likely to be redundant for some time yet.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Dagger Dirk....
Interesting Solution. But reliability would be a serious question. I don't use INOP stickers on the flightdeck all to often, but they are there at times. I'd hate for that system to have a brainfart and think that boggy marsh 50 miles to the east is an 11'000
foot ashphalt runway. Or worse, black out the cockpit, at night over the north atlantic. I'm starting to think maybe the skymarshal bit is possibly the best course of action.
Like others, I can't get certain images outta my head. And to prevent the cause of those images is going to be tough job. A costly job. A never ending job.
I'll just sit here and shake my head......
speechless......
Interesting Solution. But reliability would be a serious question. I don't use INOP stickers on the flightdeck all to often, but they are there at times. I'd hate for that system to have a brainfart and think that boggy marsh 50 miles to the east is an 11'000
foot ashphalt runway. Or worse, black out the cockpit, at night over the north atlantic. I'm starting to think maybe the skymarshal bit is possibly the best course of action.
Like others, I can't get certain images outta my head. And to prevent the cause of those images is going to be tough job. A costly job. A never ending job.
I'll just sit here and shake my head......
speechless......
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: Bechuanaland
Posts: 183
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Apollo
That was a bit of a dismissive red herring old chap. ("thinking that boggy marsh 50 miles to the east is an 11'000
foot ashphalt runway...). simply because.....
If you look at the credentials of the chap (Rainman) giving the endorsement of the whole idea, he is THE Boeing and McDD auto-flight control expert. He writes extensively upon the subject on the Bluecoat glass-cockpit technician's closed forum. He has many years in the field; in fact many more years than the autoland systems that he does the design accreditation of. Those systems are fail-safe and that is the key. Having the Robolander as a fall-back position would at least avoid the thousands of casualties (that will now grow exponentially because of the many years of war to come).
The religious wars of the 21st Century are going to go on for many decades and will despoil the earth and deprive my children of what might have otherwise been a quite joyous life. And what's more worrying, I am not at all convinced that, once a Jihad is called by the clerics, that Freedom and Democracy will prevail. We lack the mindless conviction of the other side and just may not make it through to "Last Man Standing".
My government has decided to invest in a significant number of Global Hawks. They only did that after looking at the warrantied failure probabilities. They are far lower than your chances of winning the national lottery.
The concept is described in detail at this URL
That was a bit of a dismissive red herring old chap. ("thinking that boggy marsh 50 miles to the east is an 11'000
foot ashphalt runway...). simply because.....
If you look at the credentials of the chap (Rainman) giving the endorsement of the whole idea, he is THE Boeing and McDD auto-flight control expert. He writes extensively upon the subject on the Bluecoat glass-cockpit technician's closed forum. He has many years in the field; in fact many more years than the autoland systems that he does the design accreditation of. Those systems are fail-safe and that is the key. Having the Robolander as a fall-back position would at least avoid the thousands of casualties (that will now grow exponentially because of the many years of war to come).
The religious wars of the 21st Century are going to go on for many decades and will despoil the earth and deprive my children of what might have otherwise been a quite joyous life. And what's more worrying, I am not at all convinced that, once a Jihad is called by the clerics, that Freedom and Democracy will prevail. We lack the mindless conviction of the other side and just may not make it through to "Last Man Standing".
My government has decided to invest in a significant number of Global Hawks. They only did that after looking at the warrantied failure probabilities. They are far lower than your chances of winning the national lottery.
The concept is described in detail at this URL
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: USA
Posts: 8
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As for arming Sky Marshalls: you might arm them with a non-lethal weapon that shoots short lengths of charged wire behind a dart (e.g. Taser). These get the attention of most people when the first one lands. That stops the problem of bullets whizzing around, but I can't begin to imagine what the 50,000 volt discharge will do to radio communications.
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: land of the free
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
elliottgr,surely by then, QRM is the least of the problems, take the man down, then talk on the radios.
It is said that El Al has never had a successful hijack incident, but I believe they have had several instancess of dead terrorists on board. Their security people are armed I understand, so they seem to have figured it out. It is probably not rocket science, only good training in sensible techniques.
It is said that El Al has never had a successful hijack incident, but I believe they have had several instancess of dead terrorists on board. Their security people are armed I understand, so they seem to have figured it out. It is probably not rocket science, only good training in sensible techniques.
Another factor which I would like to throw into this thread is the number of personnel on the flightdeck.
Years ago many aircraft would usually have four or more crew members on the flightdeck, the extra personnel being flight engineers, navigators, even radio operators in early days of flying. These "extra" crew members must have given an extra layer of protection between the cabin and those up the sharp edge who are controlling the machine.
Perhaps some consideration should be given to having an extra person on the flight deck specifically tasked with security and equipped accordingly.
Reference the previous comments on El Al I believe they first put skyguards on their aircraft many years ago. Not long after there was an attempted hijack and the skyguards immediately shot the hijackers in the air. I don't recall that they have had any problems since then!
Years ago many aircraft would usually have four or more crew members on the flightdeck, the extra personnel being flight engineers, navigators, even radio operators in early days of flying. These "extra" crew members must have given an extra layer of protection between the cabin and those up the sharp edge who are controlling the machine.
Perhaps some consideration should be given to having an extra person on the flight deck specifically tasked with security and equipped accordingly.
Reference the previous comments on El Al I believe they first put skyguards on their aircraft many years ago. Not long after there was an attempted hijack and the skyguards immediately shot the hijackers in the air. I don't recall that they have had any problems since then!