Locked Flight Deck Doors - Ryanair
Controversial, moi?
Am I the only one sick of reading these threads bashing Ryanair?
I have no love of their chief executive or what his company is doing to the aviation business but if they are that bad then market forces will be there comeuppance.
The animosity generated by the mention of the name Ryanair is quite staggering.
Still it does reduce the slagging that we in BA get.
I have no love of their chief executive or what his company is doing to the aviation business but if they are that bad then market forces will be there comeuppance.
The animosity generated by the mention of the name Ryanair is quite staggering.
Still it does reduce the slagging that we in BA get.
Last edited by M.Mouse; 15th Sep 2002 at 09:24.
Another 'price-sensitive' UK-based airline has now introduced a locked-door policy. Trouble is, the number one has the key, to which is attached a big orange streamer labelled 'flight deck door'.
So all a potential bad guy would have to do is to watch the activity of the cabin staff, identify the one with the orange-streamered key and.......
Which is why I always ask for Row 1. Because I'd be one of the first to stop anyone who tried to do such a thing. Kept a close eye on a 'person of Arabian colour' in Row 2 yakking on his mobile whilst we were taxying once; fortunately the number one gave him such a boll*cking that he sat meek and mild for the rest of the trip!
So all a potential bad guy would have to do is to watch the activity of the cabin staff, identify the one with the orange-streamered key and.......
Which is why I always ask for Row 1. Because I'd be one of the first to stop anyone who tried to do such a thing. Kept a close eye on a 'person of Arabian colour' in Row 2 yakking on his mobile whilst we were taxying once; fortunately the number one gave him such a boll*cking that he sat meek and mild for the rest of the trip!
Is this really worth a thread in "Reporting Points" ?
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Somewhere probing
Posts: 301
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
shredder - w.r.t. How well it will work in the event of an another attack will depend on crews following their SOPs... uhm, one would imagine that the crews aboard the 911 aircraft all followed SOP's ( as best they could under the circumstances ), and likewise it would not be beyond the imagination to think that the flight-crew didn't have much of a chance to consult what their QRH has to say about being hijacked ( but, given the circumstances, it would not of helped them ), and of course one would also imagine that the flight deck door was locked ( as per the FAR's ).
So please run it by me again, i.e. how sticking to SOP's is going to stop an assault on the flight deck, by a group of fit, highly trained desperado’s, and particularly so when they don’t care if they live or die ?!
Basically, unless airlines fit something akin to what ElAl have then no current ‘locked flight deck door policy’ is going to work, i.e. all the time that pilots have to eat, drink, and / or take a p!ss or a crap then the door has on occasions to be opened when in-flight – and at that moment, whether it’s reinforced or not, will have little effect ( coz the door is then open ! ), and perhaps worse is the fact that should terrorists actually get into the flight deck they’ll close and lock that nice, new, heavily armoured door such that it will then protect them from being ejected from the flight deck – and veritably it’s a “GOTCHA !”
So please run it by me again, i.e. how sticking to SOP's is going to stop an assault on the flight deck, by a group of fit, highly trained desperado’s, and particularly so when they don’t care if they live or die ?!
Basically, unless airlines fit something akin to what ElAl have then no current ‘locked flight deck door policy’ is going to work, i.e. all the time that pilots have to eat, drink, and / or take a p!ss or a crap then the door has on occasions to be opened when in-flight – and at that moment, whether it’s reinforced or not, will have little effect ( coz the door is then open ! ), and perhaps worse is the fact that should terrorists actually get into the flight deck they’ll close and lock that nice, new, heavily armoured door such that it will then protect them from being ejected from the flight deck – and veritably it’s a “GOTCHA !”
Join Date: May 2002
Location: uk
Posts: 165
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
a locked flightdeck door would buy you time. Ask yourself this, all non pilots, if you were a passenger on a flight and you seen someone, in uniform or not, trying frantically to get into the cockpit through a locked door, what would you do ?
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Somewhere probing
Posts: 301
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Indeed WiskeyZ.
brownstar, (imho) they aren't going to try and get through a locked door, they'll just wait until it's been unlocked by the pilots ( e.g. when some eight stone hostie brings the pilots their teas and coffees ) and I'd very much doubt that there'd be just one person involved in a properly organised attempt ( rather than a nutter acting alone ) to commander an airliners flightdeck, i.e. as per what happened onboard all the aircraft on 911.
Imho, if you're a pax sitting in your seat, before you'd even had a chance to suss what's going on it'd all be too late - they'll be in the flightdeck, and the newly reinforced secure door will be locked behind them. And do you really believe that from a state of sitting relaxed in your seat that in the space of a few seconds you'd be able to convert yourself into somebody who can take on fit, trained, merciless killers ? Especially when you bear in mind that they've prepared & planned for this, are psyched-up for it, and probably have improvised weapons - whereas you on the other hand probably have none of those advantages as you wade in to take them on ! Indeed, just when was the last time you were involved in a vicious brawl (never mind one that's likely to be to the death) ?
So let's stop fooling ourselves, the so called locked flight deck door policy will not work all the time that we keep opening it.
The only system that will work is what ElAl have fitted - but that costs LOADS to install and as such is unlikely to happen ( what price your safety, huh ? ), especially so when it's the airlines that are having to foot the bill for installing it. I.e. There is no Government help for this and, uhm, on the flip-side just what have the Government done to facilitate improvements in pax pre-boarding checks, how much money has been spent by them on introducing profiling systems, etc…..
Everybody is seemingly putting a lot of store in the last line of defence, i.e. an armoured (but often open) flight deck door. It's laughable really.
brownstar, (imho) they aren't going to try and get through a locked door, they'll just wait until it's been unlocked by the pilots ( e.g. when some eight stone hostie brings the pilots their teas and coffees ) and I'd very much doubt that there'd be just one person involved in a properly organised attempt ( rather than a nutter acting alone ) to commander an airliners flightdeck, i.e. as per what happened onboard all the aircraft on 911.
Imho, if you're a pax sitting in your seat, before you'd even had a chance to suss what's going on it'd all be too late - they'll be in the flightdeck, and the newly reinforced secure door will be locked behind them. And do you really believe that from a state of sitting relaxed in your seat that in the space of a few seconds you'd be able to convert yourself into somebody who can take on fit, trained, merciless killers ? Especially when you bear in mind that they've prepared & planned for this, are psyched-up for it, and probably have improvised weapons - whereas you on the other hand probably have none of those advantages as you wade in to take them on ! Indeed, just when was the last time you were involved in a vicious brawl (never mind one that's likely to be to the death) ?
So let's stop fooling ourselves, the so called locked flight deck door policy will not work all the time that we keep opening it.
The only system that will work is what ElAl have fitted - but that costs LOADS to install and as such is unlikely to happen ( what price your safety, huh ? ), especially so when it's the airlines that are having to foot the bill for installing it. I.e. There is no Government help for this and, uhm, on the flip-side just what have the Government done to facilitate improvements in pax pre-boarding checks, how much money has been spent by them on introducing profiling systems, etc…..
Everybody is seemingly putting a lot of store in the last line of defence, i.e. an armoured (but often open) flight deck door. It's laughable really.
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: London
Posts: 26
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I would advocate removing the flightdeck door.
2 reasons:
1) The First Officer terrorist
2) Passenger/Cabin Crew intervention
-----------------
1 - Bin Laden spent hundreds of thousands of pounds training a dozen odd men to learn to fly. That took a couple of years to do.
It is perfectly feasible to select half a dozen young men dedicated to the cause and put them through a full ATPL and type course in that time and for similar money.
A frozen ATPL would cost around £60,000. A Boeing 737 type rating around £15,000. It could all be done inside 18 months. There are several airlines in Europe currently looking for type rated 737 First Officers. Many of those positions are for London bases.
It would be perfectly possible for an organisation with Bin Ladens resources to forge/create an impressive CV for their agent. He could be provided with plausible documents backing up a CV listing a decent degree in AeroEng plus other 'tasty' qualifications. If need be I am sure they could supply the funds for him/her to acquire some turbine hours or similar.
In essence they could create a terrorist with a B737 type rating and a good CV for around £100,000 and 2 years of effort.
He or she would then stand a good chance of being recruited into a - say - British airline looking for 737 rated FO's. Lets give a budget of a £1,000,000 and create 10 agents. Lets say half of them are successful and gain jobs flying out of Stansted, Luton and Gatwick.
They wait for a day when they are all rostered to be flying at about the same time. Hey presto, Sept 11th II.
These agents under a locked door policy will be immune from interference from the Cabin Crew after they have decapitated the Skipper with the fire hatchet. They can reasure the Cabin Crew on the interphone that all is well. Similarly ATC would not get a squawk and would hear the same familiar practiced voice...
If the door were re-inforced the terrorist agent is even safer from Cabin Crew or Pax intervention.
Were there to be NO flightdeck door then both Pax and Cabin Crew would have a chance of detecting the Skippers decapitation. Similarly they would have a chance to intervene.
2) Lets say the First Officer is not a terrorist and that instead the scenario is a stormed flightdeck.
We all know that a well briefed terrorist can effect entry to the flightdeck on most B737's by waiting for a cabin crew entry/exit or a pilot needing a pee. With an armoured door this would still work. At the moment of course he/she could simply kick down the door. Five well built fit young men would easily be able to kill
the Cabin Crew and effect entry to the flightdeck.
So an armed door just means they have to pick their timing. After entry is effected they can hide behind the armoured door.
With the current doors they can simply kick them down at any time.
Lets take the door away and put an able bodied pax on the jumpseat instead on our mythical B737. Here the terrorists would have to get through the jumpseat pax causing a rumpus that would alert the crew and pax to a hi-jack situation.
This alertness might lead to crew/pax intervention ulitmately saving the flightdeck before it is stormed. If the flightdeck IS stormed by terrorists then at least everybody can see it AND there is no armoured door stopping them for attempting to re-take the aircraft. Albeit succeeding in crashing the aircraft into the sea/open land rather than Canary Wharf.
------------
The pax asked to sit on the jumpseat could act very much like the established principle of the Able Bodied Passenger currently tasked with sitting near emergency exits.
The crew could select someone to ask to sit on the jumpseat prior to departure. For long haul flights you might need a couple of pax but as the pax are more numerous this should be just as easy.
They could select someone who is an airport official, an airline employee, a man travelling with a young family, an off duty police officer or member of the military. Basically anyone who is able bodied, willing and quite frankly (using common sense) highly unlikely to be a terrorist themselves.
Most such pax would jump at the chance of spending the flight, or some portion, in the cockpit. As an established aviation routine I am sure most flights would have several volunteers at check in each sector.
Their only obligation would be that if a bunch of terrorists try to storm over their seat would they kindly make a lot of noise and try to repel them with this fire hatchet. You needn't cover the bit about squealing if one pilot decapitates another!
The jumpseat pax acts as a first line defence, a trip wire alerting the crew and an insurance against the flightcrew as terrorist scenario.
There are numerous other benefits including defence of the flightdeck when one pilot leaves for a pee plus
much improved crew communication during non-terrorist ops (99.999% of the time).
Its an out of the box idea. Feel free to shoot it down.
Ben.
2 reasons:
1) The First Officer terrorist
2) Passenger/Cabin Crew intervention
-----------------
1 - Bin Laden spent hundreds of thousands of pounds training a dozen odd men to learn to fly. That took a couple of years to do.
It is perfectly feasible to select half a dozen young men dedicated to the cause and put them through a full ATPL and type course in that time and for similar money.
A frozen ATPL would cost around £60,000. A Boeing 737 type rating around £15,000. It could all be done inside 18 months. There are several airlines in Europe currently looking for type rated 737 First Officers. Many of those positions are for London bases.
It would be perfectly possible for an organisation with Bin Ladens resources to forge/create an impressive CV for their agent. He could be provided with plausible documents backing up a CV listing a decent degree in AeroEng plus other 'tasty' qualifications. If need be I am sure they could supply the funds for him/her to acquire some turbine hours or similar.
In essence they could create a terrorist with a B737 type rating and a good CV for around £100,000 and 2 years of effort.
He or she would then stand a good chance of being recruited into a - say - British airline looking for 737 rated FO's. Lets give a budget of a £1,000,000 and create 10 agents. Lets say half of them are successful and gain jobs flying out of Stansted, Luton and Gatwick.
They wait for a day when they are all rostered to be flying at about the same time. Hey presto, Sept 11th II.
These agents under a locked door policy will be immune from interference from the Cabin Crew after they have decapitated the Skipper with the fire hatchet. They can reasure the Cabin Crew on the interphone that all is well. Similarly ATC would not get a squawk and would hear the same familiar practiced voice...
If the door were re-inforced the terrorist agent is even safer from Cabin Crew or Pax intervention.
Were there to be NO flightdeck door then both Pax and Cabin Crew would have a chance of detecting the Skippers decapitation. Similarly they would have a chance to intervene.
2) Lets say the First Officer is not a terrorist and that instead the scenario is a stormed flightdeck.
We all know that a well briefed terrorist can effect entry to the flightdeck on most B737's by waiting for a cabin crew entry/exit or a pilot needing a pee. With an armoured door this would still work. At the moment of course he/she could simply kick down the door. Five well built fit young men would easily be able to kill
the Cabin Crew and effect entry to the flightdeck.
So an armed door just means they have to pick their timing. After entry is effected they can hide behind the armoured door.
With the current doors they can simply kick them down at any time.
Lets take the door away and put an able bodied pax on the jumpseat instead on our mythical B737. Here the terrorists would have to get through the jumpseat pax causing a rumpus that would alert the crew and pax to a hi-jack situation.
This alertness might lead to crew/pax intervention ulitmately saving the flightdeck before it is stormed. If the flightdeck IS stormed by terrorists then at least everybody can see it AND there is no armoured door stopping them for attempting to re-take the aircraft. Albeit succeeding in crashing the aircraft into the sea/open land rather than Canary Wharf.
------------
The pax asked to sit on the jumpseat could act very much like the established principle of the Able Bodied Passenger currently tasked with sitting near emergency exits.
The crew could select someone to ask to sit on the jumpseat prior to departure. For long haul flights you might need a couple of pax but as the pax are more numerous this should be just as easy.
They could select someone who is an airport official, an airline employee, a man travelling with a young family, an off duty police officer or member of the military. Basically anyone who is able bodied, willing and quite frankly (using common sense) highly unlikely to be a terrorist themselves.
Most such pax would jump at the chance of spending the flight, or some portion, in the cockpit. As an established aviation routine I am sure most flights would have several volunteers at check in each sector.
Their only obligation would be that if a bunch of terrorists try to storm over their seat would they kindly make a lot of noise and try to repel them with this fire hatchet. You needn't cover the bit about squealing if one pilot decapitates another!
The jumpseat pax acts as a first line defence, a trip wire alerting the crew and an insurance against the flightcrew as terrorist scenario.
There are numerous other benefits including defence of the flightdeck when one pilot leaves for a pee plus
much improved crew communication during non-terrorist ops (99.999% of the time).
Its an out of the box idea. Feel free to shoot it down.
Ben.
Last edited by Ben Evans; 14th Sep 2002 at 18:00.
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: SE UK
Posts: 242
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wise words Ben. Practicalities versus Perception. And the winner is.....
Devils Advocate. I would gladly accept a cockpit that was fully enclosed with its own toilet. A packed lunch at check in and an armful of papers before push back. Sadly, it will take another Sep 11th before we get what you describe. Consequently I hope to never see a fully enclosed cockpit purely because I don't want another Sep 11th.
Devils Advocate. I would gladly accept a cockpit that was fully enclosed with its own toilet. A packed lunch at check in and an armful of papers before push back. Sadly, it will take another Sep 11th before we get what you describe. Consequently I hope to never see a fully enclosed cockpit purely because I don't want another Sep 11th.
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: World
Posts: 35
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ben,
At last a commonsense comment on this whole sorry tale. Locking the door is about as useful a a f*rt in a spacesuit to paraphrase Billy Connolly.
Boeing and Airbus want to supply armoured doors and video surveillance systems at hug cost and no improvement in security. The whole industry will have to spend a fortune to get no extra security just to boost the egos of a few faceless civil servants who know as much about aviation and aviation security as a apig knows about a bank holiday.
Keep thnking outside the box Ben. It might even catch on!!
Commonsense is a commodity that's not very common.
At last a commonsense comment on this whole sorry tale. Locking the door is about as useful a a f*rt in a spacesuit to paraphrase Billy Connolly.
Boeing and Airbus want to supply armoured doors and video surveillance systems at hug cost and no improvement in security. The whole industry will have to spend a fortune to get no extra security just to boost the egos of a few faceless civil servants who know as much about aviation and aviation security as a apig knows about a bank holiday.
Keep thnking outside the box Ben. It might even catch on!!
Commonsense is a commodity that's not very common.
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Hartlepool
Age: 79
Posts: 74
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ladies and Gentlemen,
At the risk of getting my head bitten off, I really don't think that debating the alleged security short comings of any airline in an open forum such as this, is either sensible or helpful.
Well I suppose it might well be helpful to someone who was intent at causing mischief!
Packsonflite
At the risk of getting my head bitten off, I really don't think that debating the alleged security short comings of any airline in an open forum such as this, is either sensible or helpful.
Well I suppose it might well be helpful to someone who was intent at causing mischief!
Packsonflite
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Somewhere probing
Posts: 301
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Why not ?
You have heard of / read parable of the ‘Emperors new clothes’ ? i.e. that sticking ones head in the sand and pretending to go along with something for fear of making somebody look foolish is ultimately just folly.
E.g. Just because the powers that be (DETR) have ordered that we must keep the flight door locked, does not detract from the fact that it is on occasions un-locked - and it really doesn't take too much to figure out that during those ‘open’ moments (and there’s normally a fair few of them) the flight deck is then vulnerable to attack - veritably all a potential assailant has to do is to do is to pick their moment.
Now aside from the single opportunist nutter, it would be fair to assume any determined terrorist group will be all to well aware of the fact that the door is often open for operational reasons, and accordingly discussing it on here will make not one iota of difference to their actions.
It might however be hoped that airing this in public provides something of a wake-up call to those who believe that a locked flight deck door policy somehow makes them immune from attack – coz, imho, it does not !
Now is this all too bleedin’ obvious, or is it just me ?!
You have heard of / read parable of the ‘Emperors new clothes’ ? i.e. that sticking ones head in the sand and pretending to go along with something for fear of making somebody look foolish is ultimately just folly.
E.g. Just because the powers that be (DETR) have ordered that we must keep the flight door locked, does not detract from the fact that it is on occasions un-locked - and it really doesn't take too much to figure out that during those ‘open’ moments (and there’s normally a fair few of them) the flight deck is then vulnerable to attack - veritably all a potential assailant has to do is to do is to pick their moment.
Now aside from the single opportunist nutter, it would be fair to assume any determined terrorist group will be all to well aware of the fact that the door is often open for operational reasons, and accordingly discussing it on here will make not one iota of difference to their actions.
It might however be hoped that airing this in public provides something of a wake-up call to those who believe that a locked flight deck door policy somehow makes them immune from attack – coz, imho, it does not !
Now is this all too bleedin’ obvious, or is it just me ?!
