Bomb in shoe joke lands AF pilot in hot water
Guest
Posts: n/a
The Security organisations, in my experience, display warnings at checkpoints to the effect that "Security Is Not a Joke" and "All Statements Will Be Taken Seriously". If they don't all do this, then they can only expect misunderstandings.
If the pilot in question's employer had'nt trained him in this aspect and if warnings were not displayed at the Security point in question, then you'd have to give him the benefit of the doubt.
Otherwise, he qualifies as an unbelievable idiot, does he not ?
The Security Authorities have certainly achieved one of their objectives !..........the message has spread - "Don't joke with Security Personnel !"
If the pilot in question's employer had'nt trained him in this aspect and if warnings were not displayed at the Security point in question, then you'd have to give him the benefit of the doubt.
Otherwise, he qualifies as an unbelievable idiot, does he not ?
The Security Authorities have certainly achieved one of their objectives !..........the message has spread - "Don't joke with Security Personnel !"
Eight Gun Fighter
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Western Approaches
Posts: 1,126
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
prattbrat
Pedestal? In truth, perhaps. I have respect for any true professional, especially those who deal skillfully with complex events in dangerous environments (read: any flight). In any group there will be some prats.
Usually I prefer to put women on a pedestal, and look up their skirts.
Usually I prefer to put women on a pedestal, and look up their skirts.
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Singapore
Posts: 61
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
anthony
Have to disagree with you, if security is to be effective, no forms of normal social interaction should be discouraged. If we encourage everyone to act in a certain standard, uncommunicative and unnatural manner, then we actually make it easier for a highly stressed individual to pass unnoticed.
Have to disagree with you, if security is to be effective, no forms of normal social interaction should be discouraged. If we encourage everyone to act in a certain standard, uncommunicative and unnatural manner, then we actually make it easier for a highly stressed individual to pass unnoticed.
Plastic PPRuNer
Who screens the screeners? Or could anyone with the right uniform, a faked pass and some knowledge of the setup turn up for work and slip a previously unarmed pax a weapon?
bat fastard
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Back home in Alba
Posts: 141
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Remeber it takes 2 pilots sometimes 3 to fly an airliner. If one pilot tries to take over aircraft to turn it into a WMD I'm pretty sure the others will try to stop him or her unless they are also in on it. Logical solution : put bomb in shoe and blow the thing to pieces then no one will be able to stop you. Now ask yourself what if this was the case with the AF pilot? what if the security guard let him pass and he blew the aircraft to bits somewhere over the pond? what would happen to said security officer? It would be him facing jail. The guy was just doing his job, you can hardly blame him for covering his own @rse.
Ok the security officer probably didn't look at it from this point of view but it's a hypothetical situation.
Ok the security officer probably didn't look at it from this point of view but it's a hypothetical situation.
I've only made a few posts so I don't feel the need to order a Personal Title and help support PPRuNe
Join Date: Sep 2000
Posts: 207
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Come on! Get real. If the Air France pilot had a bomb in his shoe and intended to get around the 'two or more' pilots in the cockpit concept you are throwing around then why would he announce it to the TSA amoeba? You are missing the whole point just like the TSA dipstick did.
Following your logic that every scenario has to be a possibility you might as well never leave your home because apart from the possibility that you may be subject to terrorism you are also far more likely to be killed on the way to the airport by another brainless TSA monkey driving recklessly.
As robmac has stated, if you try for some form of conformity without the usual giveaway tell-tale signs that would put stress on someone with harmful intent then how are you going to notice it. Not that those TSA tosspots would figure out how to deal with that.
All the rest of the discussion about pax trying to board with knives or whatever, that doesn't matter. You only have to worry about those who have malicious intent and there is almost nothing in the presennt security system to prevent them from boarding. Don't forget, they don't nead sophisticated weapons either, just a nice glass bottle of highly flammable Cognac would do. If you can't turn that into a weapon then you deserve to be caught.
Cracking a joke about the irony of the situation to a brain dead loser and getting arrested for it shows how the mental patients have taken over the asylum.
Following your logic that every scenario has to be a possibility you might as well never leave your home because apart from the possibility that you may be subject to terrorism you are also far more likely to be killed on the way to the airport by another brainless TSA monkey driving recklessly.
As robmac has stated, if you try for some form of conformity without the usual giveaway tell-tale signs that would put stress on someone with harmful intent then how are you going to notice it. Not that those TSA tosspots would figure out how to deal with that.
All the rest of the discussion about pax trying to board with knives or whatever, that doesn't matter. You only have to worry about those who have malicious intent and there is almost nothing in the presennt security system to prevent them from boarding. Don't forget, they don't nead sophisticated weapons either, just a nice glass bottle of highly flammable Cognac would do. If you can't turn that into a weapon then you deserve to be caught.
Cracking a joke about the irony of the situation to a brain dead loser and getting arrested for it shows how the mental patients have taken over the asylum.
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 319
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
After 1988, all staff had to be scanned; I have no objection to it, but it makes no sense if all staff aren't subject to it.
The way it was explained at my last company was like this: as pass holders, whether aircrew or ground employees, we are trusted. However, if it became known that any employee group were able to enter the secure areas unsearched, those employees' families could be held hostage to force an honest employee to take something airside.
By searching me, the security staff are causing me a few seconds of inconvenience- but protecting my family from harm.
PS. In the UK, the maximum penalty for "joking" that you have a bomb in your luggage is seven years imprisonment. He should have known better; I wonder if he still has a job?
The way it was explained at my last company was like this: as pass holders, whether aircrew or ground employees, we are trusted. However, if it became known that any employee group were able to enter the secure areas unsearched, those employees' families could be held hostage to force an honest employee to take something airside.
By searching me, the security staff are causing me a few seconds of inconvenience- but protecting my family from harm.
PS. In the UK, the maximum penalty for "joking" that you have a bomb in your luggage is seven years imprisonment. He should have known better; I wonder if he still has a job?
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: The Sandpit
Posts: 555
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just a small point here but from my experience of going through US/Canadian security Security ask for shoes to be removed if they cause the detector to beep. (I wear steel toe caps for work) Perhaps this hapless pilots' shoes caused the dreaded beep a metal buckle perhaps and upon being asked to remove his shoes replied in faltering english 'what you think there is a bomb in there?' Where upon he was clapped in irons. Easily done you know!!!
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: this side of the hill
Posts: 127
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Two observations
1/ The Air France F/O (50 years old) probably does not speak English very fluently which more than likely created more confusion and misunderstanding. I can imagine that when he realised that things were going sour he tried to calm down the security staff member in a rather clumsy way.
2/ I can see the grin on the face of the security staff involved. Finally we have a frog that we can stick on our fork. The anti-French atmosphere must still be around after the Iraq war.
Too far fetched?
1/ The Air France F/O (50 years old) probably does not speak English very fluently which more than likely created more confusion and misunderstanding. I can imagine that when he realised that things were going sour he tried to calm down the security staff member in a rather clumsy way.
2/ I can see the grin on the face of the security staff involved. Finally we have a frog that we can stick on our fork. The anti-French atmosphere must still be around after the Iraq war.
Too far fetched?
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: NC USA
Posts: 91
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As SLF let me weigh in-
First- the AF crewmember deserves what he got- as does anybody who jokes- the signs are posted and very clear. Lack of command of English is the worst possible excuse.
How often do aircrew fly with members they don't know well? If you can't guarantee that a crew member won't "drop" or put something in a locker, then stop complaining about security. The object is the creation of a "clean & secure" area. That means everybody gets screened. I thought we were all in this "together".
I'm also tired of airlines and their employees who act like they are doing me a favor for letting me PAY for transport. When I fly tomorrow it will be on a low fare carrier who wants my business and treats me with respect. Just so you know- between security- which I'm not fond of either-but understand the need for and the cr@p service, as well as the obscene fare (non-stop) to where I'm going I almost drove the 9 hours instead of flying.
First- the AF crewmember deserves what he got- as does anybody who jokes- the signs are posted and very clear. Lack of command of English is the worst possible excuse.
How often do aircrew fly with members they don't know well? If you can't guarantee that a crew member won't "drop" or put something in a locker, then stop complaining about security. The object is the creation of a "clean & secure" area. That means everybody gets screened. I thought we were all in this "together".
I'm also tired of airlines and their employees who act like they are doing me a favor for letting me PAY for transport. When I fly tomorrow it will be on a low fare carrier who wants my business and treats me with respect. Just so you know- between security- which I'm not fond of either-but understand the need for and the cr@p service, as well as the obscene fare (non-stop) to where I'm going I almost drove the 9 hours instead of flying.
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Singapore
Posts: 61
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Back to cargo Boys eminently sensible remarks. There are so many scenarios that if you want to be paranoid, don't leave home, and even then an out of control bus will probably demolish it and kill you.
What G-ALAN has inadvertently highlit, is that the USA seems to be driven by CYA than combatting a realistic threat.
What if a real terrorist had gotten through while TSA and the police were busy focusing their attention on a Pilot (for christs sake !!!)
Carltonbrowne, I imagine the 7 years is for the tosser who actually intends harm, by making a malicious false bomb threat.
For my money garp has hit on the only logical motive for this pantomime performance, strange about the pilot being French, isn't it ?
robmac
What G-ALAN has inadvertently highlit, is that the USA seems to be driven by CYA than combatting a realistic threat.
What if a real terrorist had gotten through while TSA and the police were busy focusing their attention on a Pilot (for christs sake !!!)
Carltonbrowne, I imagine the 7 years is for the tosser who actually intends harm, by making a malicious false bomb threat.
For my money garp has hit on the only logical motive for this pantomime performance, strange about the pilot being French, isn't it ?
robmac
Trash du Blanc
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: KBHM
Posts: 1,185
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Once I enter a screening area I will nod or shake my head but I refuse to utter one word, other than "get your supervisor." Three major airline pilots in this country have lost their jobs for comments made, and the AF FO will probably be number four.
Yes, everyone needs to be screened. What gets up my nose is when pilots are "randomly" chosen for gate screening. I deadheaded on a flight out of KMIA one morning, got the SSSS curse on my boarding pass, and stood in line for my special treatment. In line with me were a World guy and a Polar guy. So... the only 3 out of ~100 to be "randomly" searched passengers were deadheading pilots - each of us with a 10 year FBI background check and fingerprint screening!
Let's all go reread "Catch-22" - becoming more and more a non-fiction book....
Yes, everyone needs to be screened. What gets up my nose is when pilots are "randomly" chosen for gate screening. I deadheaded on a flight out of KMIA one morning, got the SSSS curse on my boarding pass, and stood in line for my special treatment. In line with me were a World guy and a Polar guy. So... the only 3 out of ~100 to be "randomly" searched passengers were deadheading pilots - each of us with a 10 year FBI background check and fingerprint screening!
Let's all go reread "Catch-22" - becoming more and more a non-fiction book....
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 319
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I get screened every working day. They recognise me at security, so if anything they possibly relax a little too much: my briefcase must look pretty jumbled, what with a headset, pens, a clipboard (lotsn of metal clips on it), calculator, sometimes a small square lump of organic material (we have to bring our own meals 
)... they rarely stop me, although sometimes the x-ray operator stops the belt at my case, long enough to see whose it is.
When they ask to look inside my bag, or to frisk me, I smile, say "Sure" and do as I'm told. It's over very quickly, and the security staff never hassle me. Of course, this is in an environment where all staff have been searched for nearly 15 years (since 21 December 1988 in fact). As for the US: hopefully, if they stop getting a rise out of pilots, the screeners on a power-trip will lose interest in giving you grief eventually...
I don't mean any of the above as a dig at the US; the searches are never going to stop, but if you obviously don't mind, they'll leave you alone and hassle your grumpy old captain instead!
)... they rarely stop me, although sometimes the x-ray operator stops the belt at my case, long enough to see whose it is.When they ask to look inside my bag, or to frisk me, I smile, say "Sure" and do as I'm told. It's over very quickly, and the security staff never hassle me. Of course, this is in an environment where all staff have been searched for nearly 15 years (since 21 December 1988 in fact). As for the US: hopefully, if they stop getting a rise out of pilots, the screeners on a power-trip will lose interest in giving you grief eventually...
I don't mean any of the above as a dig at the US; the searches are never going to stop, but if you obviously don't mind, they'll leave you alone and hassle your grumpy old captain instead!
Moderator
Tripower455,
Your argument is only valid if a pilot only had access to his/her individual aircraft. Once beyond security gates, that is not the case.
Your argument is only valid if a pilot only had access to his/her individual aircraft. Once beyond security gates, that is not the case.
Sure it seems assinine to hassle a pilot over scissors, etc., when he will shortly be sitting next to a fire axe, and in command and control of a passenger-laden craft.
But surely you can see how any employee group, if routinely not screened, has the potential to smuggle firearms/explosives for distribution to comrades in the secure area, for taking control of multiple aircraft.
I believe it's different elsewhere, but in the states, the only employees that are required to be screened are non SIDA employees, and flight crew. Every other employee (including those with entry level ramp/ops positions) on the airport walks in the back door. I will repeat my question: Does it make sense to screen the ONLY employees who don't need a weapon to "take over" an aircraft, while letting most of the others in the back door? Let me put it another way. Who would the average person place more trust in, an airline captain with many years of verifiable experience in aviation, or a new hire baggage handler?
I don't see terrorists and any employee group being mutually exclusive. If ramp employees are for some reason considered such, I fail to see the logic. Especially considering that a would-be terrorist would find it much easier attaining such a job.
Airport security is indeed a bit of a joke, both for ridiculous policies in some cases, as well as having to deal with the rent-a-cop screeners. Same mentality as the as the mall security guard, or nightclub security 'bouncer', etc. ... they love being the big fish in their little pond at times.
Still...noone should be 'trusted' to the point of coming and going as they please.
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Infinity and Beyond
Posts: 59
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
............been laughing at some of these remarks
Question: does anyone KNOW what the AF pilot actually said? No? thought not.
So how can we judge wether or not he deserved it.
Question: does anyone know if the security chap understood what the AF pilot actually said? No? thought not.
Agreed: IF the AF pilot made a remark stating that he had a bomb in his shoes and it was understood that way the he is a right
BUT, you're talking about the good ole USA where second raters take an over zealous approach to an important job, ( I have experienced this technique there many a time) and the anti-french feeling may well have hightened a red-neck's attitude to the anyone from that part of the world. (NO I am not saying that the security chap WAS/IS a red-neck, just listing the posibilities)
When checking through the security in to / out of USA, I keep my mouth shut, answer Yes/No if possible and I am always polite because I know that this very thing could happen if any security chap/chapess got out of bed the wrong side that morning and wanted to make a point. (The childlike 'I have more power than you do' type of thing)
And by the way, even with two flight deck members, it only takes one to keep the flight deck door locked when the other goes for a p**s. So it is still feasible for just one pilot to turn his aircraft into a WMD
Happy landings all, off for a sim ride and hope I dont get stuck in security with my Leatherman multi-tool
Question: does anyone KNOW what the AF pilot actually said? No? thought not.
So how can we judge wether or not he deserved it.
Question: does anyone know if the security chap understood what the AF pilot actually said? No? thought not.
Agreed: IF the AF pilot made a remark stating that he had a bomb in his shoes and it was understood that way the he is a right
BUT, you're talking about the good ole USA where second raters take an over zealous approach to an important job, ( I have experienced this technique there many a time) and the anti-french feeling may well have hightened a red-neck's attitude to the anyone from that part of the world. (NO I am not saying that the security chap WAS/IS a red-neck, just listing the posibilities)
When checking through the security in to / out of USA, I keep my mouth shut, answer Yes/No if possible and I am always polite because I know that this very thing could happen if any security chap/chapess got out of bed the wrong side that morning and wanted to make a point. (The childlike 'I have more power than you do' type of thing)
And by the way, even with two flight deck members, it only takes one to keep the flight deck door locked when the other goes for a p**s. So it is still feasible for just one pilot to turn his aircraft into a WMD
Happy landings all, off for a sim ride and hope I dont get stuck in security with my Leatherman multi-tool
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Wet Coast
Posts: 2,335
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
strange about the pilot being French, isn't it ?
Rivere was at a security checkpoint Friday at John F. Kennedy International Airport when he allegedly said he had a bomb in his shoe, Port Authority spokesman Tony Ciavolella said. Ciavolella would not say whether Rivere could have been joking.
dolts.
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Earth
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have believed the common view here that's it's silly to search pilots, since they're the one controlling the airplane, have access to the crash axe, etc.
However, Cyrano makes an important point: The pilot could deliver guns, weapons, etc. to another player past the security checkpoint.
A fictional scenario IF pilots weren't searched: Air Egypt pilot, (who happens to be a closet Islamic Fundi radical in his spare time) smuggles guns into the boarding gate area at JFK. Passes gun(s) off to other radicals who then board an American Airlines flight and hijacks it to oblivion.
Or, substitute an American pilot whose family is being held hostage at home by bad guys ("give this package to Mr. X or your kids get it")
It's easy for us to screen/investigate American pilots, baggage handlers, etc. Mystifies me why we don't screen ground personnel. I guess they made a determination that the foreign pilot Islamic threat was greater than domestic Islamic threat.
But we have no control whatsoever over the pilots that fly to the states. The TSA guys are probably very frustrated over their inability to screen the foreign pilots that fly into New York. Any Saudi airline pilot could steer the plane into the Statue of Liberty before we could warm up an F-16's engine.
So the best we can do is screen ALL pilots in hopes of stopping a foreign pilot from giving weapons to others in the boarding area. We can't just screen foreign pilots. That would be un-PC.
However, Cyrano makes an important point: The pilot could deliver guns, weapons, etc. to another player past the security checkpoint.
A fictional scenario IF pilots weren't searched: Air Egypt pilot, (who happens to be a closet Islamic Fundi radical in his spare time) smuggles guns into the boarding gate area at JFK. Passes gun(s) off to other radicals who then board an American Airlines flight and hijacks it to oblivion.
Or, substitute an American pilot whose family is being held hostage at home by bad guys ("give this package to Mr. X or your kids get it")
It's easy for us to screen/investigate American pilots, baggage handlers, etc. Mystifies me why we don't screen ground personnel. I guess they made a determination that the foreign pilot Islamic threat was greater than domestic Islamic threat.
But we have no control whatsoever over the pilots that fly to the states. The TSA guys are probably very frustrated over their inability to screen the foreign pilots that fly into New York. Any Saudi airline pilot could steer the plane into the Statue of Liberty before we could warm up an F-16's engine.
So the best we can do is screen ALL pilots in hopes of stopping a foreign pilot from giving weapons to others in the boarding area. We can't just screen foreign pilots. That would be un-PC.
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Canada
Age: 69
Posts: 261
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It has been with some interest and bemusement that I have been reading some of the input to this thread.
Surely, the screener was complying with his or her regulations utilizing the training and parameters that have been provided to them by their employer. (Which I guess now is the United States federal government) What is there to gain by vilifying this individual for allegedly doing their job? As others have pointed out I suspect that a language and or cultural difference may be at the root of the problem on this occasion. I am giving the benefit of doubt to a professional flight crewmember that he would know better than to intentionally make jokes of this nature.
If people have a problem with the screening, or some aspects of it, then it is those that legislate and enforce the system that should come under fire. There is not a politician out there however that would think of retreating from the current system. But you also must remember what the whole screening process (and similar measures) is for. The whole exercise is merely for public consumption. It is meant to appease the travelling public that “big brother” is looking after you. The reality is however, that any person(s) bent on mal intent will always know the where, when and how and that gives those individuals the advantage every time. Short of a police state there is not much that can be done about that.
Like screening or not it’s today’s reality. Deal with it, get over it and move on
Surely, the screener was complying with his or her regulations utilizing the training and parameters that have been provided to them by their employer. (Which I guess now is the United States federal government) What is there to gain by vilifying this individual for allegedly doing their job? As others have pointed out I suspect that a language and or cultural difference may be at the root of the problem on this occasion. I am giving the benefit of doubt to a professional flight crewmember that he would know better than to intentionally make jokes of this nature.
If people have a problem with the screening, or some aspects of it, then it is those that legislate and enforce the system that should come under fire. There is not a politician out there however that would think of retreating from the current system. But you also must remember what the whole screening process (and similar measures) is for. The whole exercise is merely for public consumption. It is meant to appease the travelling public that “big brother” is looking after you. The reality is however, that any person(s) bent on mal intent will always know the where, when and how and that gives those individuals the advantage every time. Short of a police state there is not much that can be done about that.
Like screening or not it’s today’s reality. Deal with it, get over it and move on
Moderator
However, Cyrano makes an important point: The pilot could deliver guns, weapons, etc. to another player past the security checkpoint.
A fictional scenario IF pilots weren't searched: Air Egypt pilot, (who happens to be a closet Islamic Fundi radical in his spare time) smuggles guns into the boarding gate area at JFK. Passes gun(s) off to other radicals who then board an American Airlines flight and hijacks it to oblivion.
What they got was:
Airline Employees must surrender their ID when they are no longer employed by the airline (Makes perfectly good sense)
Individual Airports had to come up with an FAA approved SIDA (secure ID access) plan for all employees that have access to the ramp (Another good idea, if done correctly)
And, finally, Pilots and flight attendants (but, ironically, not ground ops folks) must submit to passenger screening. (makes absolutely NO sense when viewed in context)
At first, the reason given for the last part was that since pilots and fa's travel to many airports, and SIDA badges are only issued for individual airports, then they couldn't be verified as employees due to the differences in the SIDA programs around the nation. ALPA and other unions tried for YEARS to get some sort of universal SIDA ID for flight crews, especially since we not only go through the local SIDA procedure at our bases, we are much more thoroughly vetted as aircrew to begin with. Why we are still not provided with some sort of biometric ID is beyond me, given the damage that can be done if someone is able to impersonate a pilot all the way to the cockpit. Even Disney World uses biometrics to identify annual pass holders.
IMHO, the reason that we have not gotten any type of universal aircrew ID is due to the eyewash factor of having flight crews screened in front of passengers. Many folks see an easily recognized, authority figure going through the same rigamorole as they are, and conclude that things must be really secure, if they are even checking the pilots (never giving the unseen minions on the ramp/behind the gate podiums, in ops, in provisioning, in mx, cleaners etc etc etc, a second thought).
Or, substitute an American pilot whose family is being held hostage at home by bad guys ("give this package to Mr. X or your kids get it")
It's easy for us to screen/investigate American pilots, baggage handlers, etc. Mystifies me why we don't screen ground personnel. I guess they made a determination that the foreign pilot Islamic threat was greater than domestic Islamic threat.
IMHO, the only reason that we are still screened has all to do with eyewash and public perception. Ironically, all screening crews does is inconvenience the paying passengers even more when 10 flightcrew jump to the front of the long "security" lines.
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: london
Posts: 52
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I wonder how much the stress of being locked up in the flt deck had on this .
You see crew getting peed off all the time , our jobs are no longer secure and the terrorists are after us . The AF pilot should claim stress , take 6 months off ( paid ) come back and sue the TSA for causing some of the stress in the first place .
Plenty of people go thru security without being searched so the argument of taking something thru and handing it to someone else is flawed .
You see crew getting peed off all the time , our jobs are no longer secure and the terrorists are after us . The AF pilot should claim stress , take 6 months off ( paid ) come back and sue the TSA for causing some of the stress in the first place .
Plenty of people go thru security without being searched so the argument of taking something thru and handing it to someone else is flawed .