View Poll Results: What do you think about arming pilots?
Useful addition to the prevetion of hijacking
139
20.14%
Useless. They should concentrate on getting the aircraft on the ground
465
67.39%
I think our (non US) pilots should also be armed
95
13.77%
I have no opinion
16
2.32%
Multiple Choice Poll. Voters: 690. This poll is closed
Armed Pilots (Merged)
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 24
Likes: 0
From: Arkansas
Mike Jenvey,
You worry about small stuff. The bigger issue is preventing thousands dying at the hands of a 757 guided missile.
I'm all for doing what is needed to prevent cockpit takeover. Many pilots are stepping up to the plate by signing up for the Federal Flight Deck Officer program.
A armed cockpit is a good thing.
It's a done deal. More money has been set aside for the training and the program is off and running.
Looking forward to my FFDO class and the added layer of protection.
You worry about small stuff. The bigger issue is preventing thousands dying at the hands of a 757 guided missile.
I'm all for doing what is needed to prevent cockpit takeover. Many pilots are stepping up to the plate by signing up for the Federal Flight Deck Officer program.
A armed cockpit is a good thing.
It's a done deal. More money has been set aside for the training and the program is off and running.
Looking forward to my FFDO class and the added layer of protection.
Last edited by gohogs; 13th May 2003 at 03:22.
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 69
Likes: 0
From: Spain
Armed Pilots
Well of course girls this is a red herring.
Delightful scene is it not? Going down the ILS in a 40kt. cross wind
and having a shoot out over your shoulder,at the same time trying to drink a cup of tea without spilling it all over the asassin?
The best way to avoid these problems is for the Captain to take a bomb or handgun on board on every flight. Think about it----- what are the chances of their being TWO bombs (or hand guns) on board?
Over to you staticians.
FPG.
Delightful scene is it not? Going down the ILS in a 40kt. cross wind
and having a shoot out over your shoulder,at the same time trying to drink a cup of tea without spilling it all over the asassin?
The best way to avoid these problems is for the Captain to take a bomb or handgun on board on every flight. Think about it----- what are the chances of their being TWO bombs (or hand guns) on board?
Over to you staticians.
FPG.
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 413
Likes: 47
From: FL, USA
Delightful scene is it not? Going down the ILS in a 40kt. cross wind and having a shoot out over your shoulder,at the same time trying to drink a cup of tea without spilling it all over the asassin?
Delightful scene is it not? Going down the ILS in a 40kt. cross wind at the same time trying to drink a cup of tea without spilling it all over the asassin?
Lets have a PPrune poll.
Which scenario would the group prefer to be in out of the two above?
Red or Blue?
Delightful scene is it not? Going down the ILS in a 40kt. cross wind at the same time trying to drink a cup of tea without spilling it all over the asassin?
Lets have a PPrune poll.
Which scenario would the group prefer to be in out of the two above?
Red or Blue?
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 844
Likes: 0
From: USA
Thats why Bruce Willis should fly.
Think about the movie rights, we could all be rich.
But if I spilt my tea and burnt myself, Being the good American that I am I would have to sue the F/a for serving it to me too hot as the woman with Macdonalds did.
Think about the movie rights, we could all be rich.
But if I spilt my tea and burnt myself, Being the good American that I am I would have to sue the F/a for serving it to me too hot as the woman with Macdonalds did.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Does this mean that all those skymarshalls will be out of a job???
And if they are still taking to the skys, what sort of contingency is in place to prevent a captain from accidentally shooting a marshall that is trying to stop an assasin?
This just boggles my mind. Should Mcdonalds employees be trained as lawyers in case of accidentally being sued over spilled coffee?
And if they are still taking to the skys, what sort of contingency is in place to prevent a captain from accidentally shooting a marshall that is trying to stop an assasin?
This just boggles my mind. Should Mcdonalds employees be trained as lawyers in case of accidentally being sued over spilled coffee?
'nough said
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 1,025
Likes: 0
From: Raynes Park
What happens if an aircraft flown by an armed pilot gets successfully hijacked? Will the authorities/airline/airport concerned (i.e. lawyers) blame the pilot for not using his/her gun to foil it - and thus automatically absolve anybody else who should have done their bit to stop the perps boarding in the first place?
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 768
Likes: 0
From: Paros, Greece
How many people honestly believe that the next attempt at a major attack will be a 9/11 copycat complete with 'storming of cockpits'? The options for causing just as much carnage by other methods are virtually limitless - the chances are it won't even involve the use of aircraft next time. If it does, it'll be somthing completley different; how about an inside-job performed by a captain brought-up and groomed for the cause over his entire life perhaps? An Egypt Air style (alleged) crash? How far is it from the EWR ILS to downtown NY - 20 seconds? He could even use his shiny new weapon to ensure the f/o counldn't intervene. Far-fetched - sure! but so was 9/11.
I guess what I'm trying to say is that I don't believe this fight can ever be won. We've all got just as much chance of dying now as we did before, but now we have lost (thrown-away) our freedom too! After reading 11 pages of discussion on this matter, I'm now even more convinced of this than I was before.
I guess what I'm trying to say is that I don't believe this fight can ever be won. We've all got just as much chance of dying now as we did before, but now we have lost (thrown-away) our freedom too! After reading 11 pages of discussion on this matter, I'm now even more convinced of this than I was before.
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 24
Likes: 0
From: Arkansas
knobbygb,
What if the "groomed captain" is taken out by the armed FO? FOs will be packing heat as well.
We can do what ifs all day.
Fact, the Federal Flight Deck Officer program is a done deal. Get used to first officers and captains being armed.
What if the "groomed captain" is taken out by the armed FO? FOs will be packing heat as well.
We can do what ifs all day.
Fact, the Federal Flight Deck Officer program is a done deal. Get used to first officers and captains being armed.
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 413
Likes: 47
From: FL, USA
"Does this mean that all those skymarshalls will be out of a job???"
No, but it would be a last line of defense if the marshall failed to stop an attack.
"And if they are still taking to the skys, what sort of contingency is in place to prevent a captain from accidentally shooting a marshall that is trying to stop an assasin?"
I would suspect training and procedures best left off a public forum.
"Will the authorities/airline/airport concerned (i.e. lawyers) blame the pilot for not using his/her gun to foil it...? "
I believe as the pilots will be considered Federal Officers and are absolved of liability in performance of defense. Being an idiot outside this duty may not protect said pilot though from lawsuits.
"How many people honestly believe that the next attempt at a major attack will be a 9/11 copycat complete with 'storming of cockpits'?"
You would have to be an idiot to believe the Islamic fundelmentalist scum aren't still thinking of an 9/11 style attack. It was horribly successful. They liked the results.
knobbygb, anyone with the slightest cell of intelligence can only look at the 1983 Bombing of the US Marine barracks in Beirut. It was also a horribly successful attack. Now knobbygb, in 1984, would you also state "who would honestly believe the next attack would be with a copycat truck bomb?"
"how about an inside-job performed by a captain brought-up and groomed for the cause over his entire life perhaps? An Egypt Air style (alleged) crash?"
What if? What if? What if?
How do you face the fear by getting out of bed in the morning?Your "what if?" can happen with a gun, or without a gun. It is irrelevent to this debate.
"I guess what I'm trying to say is that I don't believe this fight can ever be won."
Maybe not. But then again you should never quit a fight in the first round. Personally I thing a couple things need to be done and one has started already. First, pull out of Saudi Arabia (already happening). They don't like us? I don't like them. Block them from the US while we're at it.
Second, push the Palestinian/Isreal issue to resolution. Since the Isrealis have started to scream bloody murder, I think the posturing and back channel pressuring has begun.
Third, if the first two are successful, much of the extraneous noise will be cut out and those hard core bastards will still exist, except it will be easier to weed them out. Then we continue what has already started. Kill those that can't be arrested or are of little value alive. Give many more a secret trip to Gitmo and dump them quietly in the Caribbean sea when through with them. Develope a excellent intel program to indentify instigators at the mosques. For the radical ones preaching death and mayhem for the US, run them over with a range rover while they cross a street. This method does open up a can of worms if used against simple dissent against the US or some US corporate interest locally.
After awhile if successful you end up like German FW190 pilots in March of 1945. Not very many of them, not trained well and easy to pick off.
Ok,
Let's try this again.
Which scenario of my Red and Blue quotes does the group prefer?
No, but it would be a last line of defense if the marshall failed to stop an attack.
"And if they are still taking to the skys, what sort of contingency is in place to prevent a captain from accidentally shooting a marshall that is trying to stop an assasin?"
I would suspect training and procedures best left off a public forum.
"Will the authorities/airline/airport concerned (i.e. lawyers) blame the pilot for not using his/her gun to foil it...? "
I believe as the pilots will be considered Federal Officers and are absolved of liability in performance of defense. Being an idiot outside this duty may not protect said pilot though from lawsuits.
"How many people honestly believe that the next attempt at a major attack will be a 9/11 copycat complete with 'storming of cockpits'?"
You would have to be an idiot to believe the Islamic fundelmentalist scum aren't still thinking of an 9/11 style attack. It was horribly successful. They liked the results.
knobbygb, anyone with the slightest cell of intelligence can only look at the 1983 Bombing of the US Marine barracks in Beirut. It was also a horribly successful attack. Now knobbygb, in 1984, would you also state "who would honestly believe the next attack would be with a copycat truck bomb?"
"how about an inside-job performed by a captain brought-up and groomed for the cause over his entire life perhaps? An Egypt Air style (alleged) crash?"
What if? What if? What if?
How do you face the fear by getting out of bed in the morning?Your "what if?" can happen with a gun, or without a gun. It is irrelevent to this debate.
"I guess what I'm trying to say is that I don't believe this fight can ever be won."
Maybe not. But then again you should never quit a fight in the first round. Personally I thing a couple things need to be done and one has started already. First, pull out of Saudi Arabia (already happening). They don't like us? I don't like them. Block them from the US while we're at it.
Second, push the Palestinian/Isreal issue to resolution. Since the Isrealis have started to scream bloody murder, I think the posturing and back channel pressuring has begun.
Third, if the first two are successful, much of the extraneous noise will be cut out and those hard core bastards will still exist, except it will be easier to weed them out. Then we continue what has already started. Kill those that can't be arrested or are of little value alive. Give many more a secret trip to Gitmo and dump them quietly in the Caribbean sea when through with them. Develope a excellent intel program to indentify instigators at the mosques. For the radical ones preaching death and mayhem for the US, run them over with a range rover while they cross a street. This method does open up a can of worms if used against simple dissent against the US or some US corporate interest locally.
After awhile if successful you end up like German FW190 pilots in March of 1945. Not very many of them, not trained well and easy to pick off.
Ok,
Let's try this again.
Which scenario of my Red and Blue quotes does the group prefer?
I've only made a few posts so I don't feel the need to order a Personal Title and help support PPRuNe
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 207
Likes: 0
Looks like WhatsaLizad?'s got it all sussed. 
Can you get any more rednecked than that? 
Shouldn't there be a minimum IQ requrement before allowing that kind of post? Just hope the FFDO program has enough screening to prevent that kind of mentality but after seeing the results of the TSA I wouldn't hold my breath.
Can you get any more rednecked than that? Shouldn't there be a minimum IQ requrement before allowing that kind of post? Just hope the FFDO program has enough screening to prevent that kind of mentality but after seeing the results of the TSA I wouldn't hold my breath.
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 413
Likes: 47
From: FL, USA
Relax Cargo boy. My comments are reserved for only the very worst of a nasty bunch. As I mentioned, the problem would be the abuse of such a program for reasons other than pure national security.
What is your suggestion? I'd love to hear it. The problem is that our adversary wants complete and total submission.
What is your suggestion? I'd love to hear it. The problem is that our adversary wants complete and total submission.
Last edited by WhatsaLizad?; 15th May 2003 at 04:00.
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 24
Likes: 0
From: Arkansas
nurjio,
GlueBall assumes that aircraft destruction is the terrorist mission.
Taking control of the cockpit and using the jet as a weapon has proven to have maximum effect.
I agree, terrorists may attempt to shoot down or blow a jet out of the sky but, preventing cockpit breach will eliminate the use of the jet as a guided missile.
Why not cover all the bases?
GlueBall assumes that aircraft destruction is the terrorist mission.
Taking control of the cockpit and using the jet as a weapon has proven to have maximum effect.
I agree, terrorists may attempt to shoot down or blow a jet out of the sky but, preventing cockpit breach will eliminate the use of the jet as a guided missile.
Why not cover all the bases?
Guest
Posts: n/a
????????????????????????????????????
I would suspect training and procedures best left off a public forum.
We might as well be training skymarshalls to fly!
Joined: Jan 2000
Posts: 2,372
Likes: 1
From: Asia
http://www.usatoday.com/news/sept11/...-usat.htm#more
If we all had this sort of security ,we wouldn't need to be armed.Dream on
If we all had this sort of security ,we wouldn't need to be armed.Dream on
I am a figment of my own imagination
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 726
Likes: 0
From: Jeddah, Saudi Arabia
It would be a personal observation and complete guess, but I believe the ratio of ex-service airline pilots may well be higher in the US than in most other countries. These individuals are weapon trained, and probably not averse to using them in a reasonably competant manner. The culture and gun laws in the country also ensures that many more who are civilians probably own and are completely familiar with handguns and why they will probably be most receptive to the idea. I acknowledge the fact that many however do not.
All airline pilots however should by now be aware that they may well be obliged to take casualties aft of the armoured door in the event of another hijacking by terrorists in order to prevent the taking of their plane for the use in an even larger atrocity. The liklehood of suicide terrorists using acts of extreme violence to coerce the crew into co-operating is 100%. They have no compunction in killing that is their aim and the sooner everybody realises it the safer we will all be. The various governments have already taken the step of instituting shoot down policies, in acknowledgement of this new reality.
Your hostesses and cabin crew will be the first target, they are fellow crew members, known to the pilots and the threat of their death will be most effective in attempted coercion. Hijackers of this type have been trained to maximise shock and terror, it is among their arsenel of weapons and they want to incapacitate the pax numb them into inaction. Violent and bloody death will have that effect.
Low velocity rounds tailored for maximum tissue damage and minimum chance of puncturing the pressure vessel will probably be rounds of choice for cockpit weapons. The weapon may well be of a breakdown type with the Captain carring an essential portion such as a smart trigger componant mached to him, ie not his hand on the weapon it doesn't fire. It will probably be in a secure safe in the cockpit. The Captain already posseses the means to kill everybody on board he doesn't need a weapon to do it for the psyco/gung ho/cowboy thought crowd
Whether we like it or not the phenomenon of terrorist action in the air has escalated. These killers actively train how to best achieve their aim, they are looking for the weak spots in society's armour. They will exploit any chinks and are totaly ruthless. We have had warning after warning. Example after example. There should be little doubt in anybodies mind that these people can, and will, strike again. They are in well used words 'armed and dangerous'. It is here, it is now, and we would be well advised to take a good hard realistic look at our options. Not every hijacking will be of this type, however there should be a realistic acknowlegement of it's possibility
The passengers on the flight that attempted to overcome the 9/11 terrorist hijackers were armed with nothing but their will to try to do something with their bare hands, it wasn't enough. But they in the last few minutes had realised that they were going to die anyway. The hijacking and crash of the Ethiopean 757 was well prior to 9/11 and the pilot crash landed while being phsicaly attacked. There is a strong likelehood of repeat attempts including the potentialy more difficult to control scenarion of SA shoulder mounted missiles and which no pistol aboard will help, but even thateventuality is already being assessed by the US government. The cost is horrendous the alternative is cessation of air travel. There is already a multiple airline ban on airtravel to Kenya for this very reason. It is here it is happeneing now
There are so many things about a flight upon which our lives already depend, I for one, do not think that the introduction of a properly supervised, suitable new technology self defensive weapon, to the cockpit crew, with some training and proper procedures, can do anything but be a small layer of additional protection to this new menace we face on a worldwide basis.
All airline pilots however should by now be aware that they may well be obliged to take casualties aft of the armoured door in the event of another hijacking by terrorists in order to prevent the taking of their plane for the use in an even larger atrocity. The liklehood of suicide terrorists using acts of extreme violence to coerce the crew into co-operating is 100%. They have no compunction in killing that is their aim and the sooner everybody realises it the safer we will all be. The various governments have already taken the step of instituting shoot down policies, in acknowledgement of this new reality.
Your hostesses and cabin crew will be the first target, they are fellow crew members, known to the pilots and the threat of their death will be most effective in attempted coercion. Hijackers of this type have been trained to maximise shock and terror, it is among their arsenel of weapons and they want to incapacitate the pax numb them into inaction. Violent and bloody death will have that effect.
Low velocity rounds tailored for maximum tissue damage and minimum chance of puncturing the pressure vessel will probably be rounds of choice for cockpit weapons. The weapon may well be of a breakdown type with the Captain carring an essential portion such as a smart trigger componant mached to him, ie not his hand on the weapon it doesn't fire. It will probably be in a secure safe in the cockpit. The Captain already posseses the means to kill everybody on board he doesn't need a weapon to do it for the psyco/gung ho/cowboy thought crowd
Whether we like it or not the phenomenon of terrorist action in the air has escalated. These killers actively train how to best achieve their aim, they are looking for the weak spots in society's armour. They will exploit any chinks and are totaly ruthless. We have had warning after warning. Example after example. There should be little doubt in anybodies mind that these people can, and will, strike again. They are in well used words 'armed and dangerous'. It is here, it is now, and we would be well advised to take a good hard realistic look at our options. Not every hijacking will be of this type, however there should be a realistic acknowlegement of it's possibility
The passengers on the flight that attempted to overcome the 9/11 terrorist hijackers were armed with nothing but their will to try to do something with their bare hands, it wasn't enough. But they in the last few minutes had realised that they were going to die anyway. The hijacking and crash of the Ethiopean 757 was well prior to 9/11 and the pilot crash landed while being phsicaly attacked. There is a strong likelehood of repeat attempts including the potentialy more difficult to control scenarion of SA shoulder mounted missiles and which no pistol aboard will help, but even thateventuality is already being assessed by the US government. The cost is horrendous the alternative is cessation of air travel. There is already a multiple airline ban on airtravel to Kenya for this very reason. It is here it is happeneing now
There are so many things about a flight upon which our lives already depend, I for one, do not think that the introduction of a properly supervised, suitable new technology self defensive weapon, to the cockpit crew, with some training and proper procedures, can do anything but be a small layer of additional protection to this new menace we face on a worldwide basis.