At the risk of repeating something posted a year or wo ago on pprune;

I had to chair a discussion with a group of an Arab carrier's flight deck aircrew in 2000 on the subject of airborne security and prevention of hijacking.

The irony was that several of the people in the room were past practitioners, reformed into law-abiding aircrew.

The single conclusion that they came to, with no-one dissenting, was that the ONLY way to ensure that airborne piracy fails is to have an impenetrable barrier between cabin and flight deck and never to open it while the engines are running, FOR ANY REASON WHATSOEVER.

Thus there needs to be facilities for peeing or worse, food and water, and an ability on the part of the crew to ignore whatever is happening in the cabin, including murder, while they get to an airfield for landing, land, and wait until the authorities arrest or kill the terrorists.

Quite a tall order, really, but they were absolutely right. They knew, as we all do, that an aircraft can only be taken over by gaining control of the flight deck. Armed pilots may kill or injure a terrorist, but are more likely to be killed themselves before they achieve that. If an armed and fanatical terrorist breaks into a flight deck he or she can probably shoot the people there before they even begin to react. If the terrorist is slowed down or prevented by the barrier, then that proves the point about the barrier being the key.

Arming pilots achieves very little. Arming cabin staff would be a lot more effective.

EDIT: But please don't even begin to think of arming cabin staff; I just said that to make the point!

Old, not bold,

I am with you on this one. I was part of a team that looked at security for aircraft as well and the conclusions that we came to was that there was no longer any need whatsover of access to the cockpit from the passenger cabin. There is NOTHING that we need from the cabin that can't be done with a camera.

All new aircraft should be designed they way the 757pf (package freighter) was with a solid bulkhead between the cockpit and the main cabin, and the only access to the cockpit is from a door on the outside of the aircraft. (if you look at UPS's 757s you will see the front doors are further forward than i the pax aircraft) Put a lav and a galley in the cockpit (just like the PF) and be done with it. Then there is no need for guns in the cockpit. It doesn't matter what rude things you do to the passengers you are not getting controll of the aircraft.

At that point the use of aircraft as weapons would be over. You could still blow em up, but thats about it.



But unfortunately as it stands now, the armored door, only represents time, and not as much of it as you would think. The gun behind the armored door represents some MORE time to get the aircraft on the ground and turn it into a building instead of a cruise missile.

Guys will whine about how they need to see the pax etc. but thats just ego talking. The cabin crew are trained to handle the cabin, there is nothing for you to do back there.


Cheers
Wino

Dateline: WASHINGTON The Transportation Department inspector general found airport security screeners on several dozen occasions failed to catch guns and simulated explosives, even after the September terrorist attacks, a person familiar with the report said Monday.
Inspector General Kenneth Mead's report found screeners missed knives 70 percent of the time, guns 30 percent of the time and simulated explosives 60 percent of the time, said the source, speaking on condition of anonymity.


You will never stop guns from getting through security period .The ramp agents , caterers , mx , etc all have free access to the airplane without going through security . How are you going to stop that from being a threat ?

Question of Sanity
 

I'm not going to get into the merits or disadvantages of having an armed cockpit crew.

What I would have thought is if you are happy that the person in the seat next to you is sound enough of mind to be in control of the aircraft whilst you go to the toilet then he/she is sound enough of mind to carry a weapon! If you don't feel that way then all this CRM has been for naught!

Intelligence led prevention is the answer...
 

By intercepting threats on the ground, preferably before they get themselves anywhere near an airport terminal - and investing in such an ingelligence approach is the only answer.

The vast majority of us in the Great White North find the prospect of firearms on our aircraft unnecessary, unpalatable, and the FFDO programme a US knee jerk reaction which increases risk rather than reducing it.

1. Decompression:

I'm surprised that pilots here think that a bullet can cause a decompression. I'm sure everyone of us has seen lightning strikes and other "holes", which cause whistling noises, but no decompression.


2. Guns in the cockpit:

I'm pro guns in the cockpit. But as it looks, not only FFDOs are cowboys, but also the TSA specialists that wrote down the regulations. Why are the guns worn at the hips??? Isn't that the part of your body under your seat belt? I'm pretty sure that you are faster in grabbing your gun in your crew bag or a dedicated bunk next to you. How about safety in case of a crash and you in your seat and the gun gets pinned into your lower body?? :eek:
Those TSA guys are just officers and they think that a gun is always at the hip...

3. In my military carrier I have seen several accidents with unwanted release of guns.


Conclusion:

The gun belongs in a sealed containment in the aircraft, the magazine inserted, but not locked, and of course no bullet in the chamber. The FFDO is only allowed to draw when there is apparent danger. He draws, clicks in the magazine, starts shooting. You can do this in a split second - when trained correctly. The FFDO is not allowed to service this gun, he has his own training gun at home and is not allowed to take it with him. That's how it should have been done.

Dani

I haven't gone thru the whole 6 pages, but one interesting story is the Fed Ex experience with the whack job. He was company employee allowed to ride onboard (pre-9/11), did not have a weapon, but managed to use the crash ax to very nearly overcome 3 crewmembers and hijack the plane with the intent of crashing it into FedEx HQ. The lessons:

We already have weapons onboard

Security cannot be absolute. I don't know if crews were checked then. It was after a PSA employee shot the pilots and crashed a 146 that we started getting security checked.

Even with 3 guys, holding off a determined man AND fly the plane is not easy, with 2 it might have worked for the bad guy, in this case.

A gun probably would not have helped as the odds are a good guy would have been shot rather than the bad guy. 3:1 odds.

As I did learn in a self-defense course, a man with a knife at close quarters with a man with a gun probably holds the advantage. The knife can do fast work and doesn't have to be perfect to inflict damage, the gun has to be nearly perfectly.

The crash ax maybe all we need.

GF

Also, it must be pointed out that Arab airlines have been victims of many hijackings over the years. I've flown into LHR with local Arab skymarshals in years past. One might presume the Israelis have done likewise for some time now as well. It is a little humorous to see the alleged furor over Western countries doing the same thing.

We did have a couple of guns fire accidentally in flight. One was supposedly secured in a storage area so the explaination of the discharge was difficult. Another incident involving a 747 classic occured on final to LHR. A skymarshal was sitting on a cockpit jumpseat trying to take the last round out of his weapon to prepare for UK arrival formalities. The gun was jammed and he attempted to free the round with a little extra force. Somehow, the round was fired into the base of the captain's seat. The local pilots heard the bang and looked back at the expat PFE. He told me that he scanned his gauges, everything was OK and then they looked back and saw the skymarshal with an apologetic demeanor. Fortunately, no injuries in either of these incidents.

It has been said that El AL airplanes have dual, spaced, armored cockpit doors with interlocks; in flight only one door can be opened at a time. :ooh:

Auburn Calloway was allowed to ride onboard and still would be post 9-11. He was a FedEx pilot (flying the line as a 727 FE).

He carried a duffle bag with hammers, a speargun and a knife. Hopefully these would be a little harder to get onboard these days.

More here:

http://www.tailstrike.com/070494.htm

Question
 

Again I shall ask, dose the Captain of a flight have the right to not allow the carriage of a weapon on the flight deck? Yes I have not been involved in this due to the fact I work for a forgien carrier and it is not allowed.
If nobody cares to answer could you maybe point me in the right direction to find out.

Mods, Sirs,

Isn't is it time this went to JetBlast, rather than deleing posts??

GlueBall made a sensible remark about having an "airlock" between cockpit and cabin, for instance. Pity it disappeared.

Pictures:
 

A question;
 

If this bullet had struck a cockpit window at cruise level, rather than nothing important on approach, would the consequences have been as harmless.?
Would we still be talking about a harmless, whistling bullet-hole.?
Has this been tested ?.
Would there be sudden and total decompression of the cockpit ?
After the pilots have failed to recover from the shock, and get their
oxygen masks on within the period of useful conciousness, does the
aircraft fly on til it runs out of fuel, because the passengers and cabin
crew, who have automatic drop-down masks available, cannot access
the cockpit to revive/assist the flight crew.?

OK, that was more than one question.

Please tell me I'm wrong, and why.

Have mercy on me, I'm not a professional pilot, just a weekend worrier.

So baring in mind that this was not an intentional "discharge" (so much for the flight crew meal tables on the airbus being able to take the weight of a hosty), what would happen if both crew were injured/killed by the bullet, while they are behind a locked door. I guess the cabin crew wouldn't know nor necessarily be able to access the cockpit if they did. Would the aircraft be shot down by fighers when it didn't respond to ATC?

I don't know the Airbus pressurisation system. Could a single bullet destroy the controller causing a depressurisation as it could in my aircraft?

I see terrorist taking over the cockpit as a potential threat but I view a gun in the cockpit as a bigger one.

Chips

OK I'm no expert as a SLF but consider this quote albeit from someone whose views I have respected in the past.

What about the Greek crash, surely now with the info in the public eye if after de-compression and knowing that oxygen supply only lasts 10-15 mins what chance if your ideas were implemented.

Secondly how is it that I can fly around Europe with plastic knives and forks but as soon as I board an aircraft in the Middle East on a connecting flight to "xxxxxx" I seem to be proficient and safe enough to use the 'normal metal' type we have at home in our house??? Confused that where the majority of where the terrorists come from is in that area but there they are trusted??

As having been in the forces for a total of 15 years still vehemently resist this "so called right to carry arms as a civilian". Shoot first ask questions later?? It never happened across here in N.I. and is IMHO not the way of a civilised world.

Can anybody confirm this?
It would be much like the "airlocks" used at banks, which at least are dissuasive.

It would certainly defeat several of the scenarios suggested here.

I agree it would raise issues of weight and space.

But it would also be the perfect place to discharge an unhealthy dose of teargas or similar, without affecting the pilots.

So, since firearms were allowed on the flight deck: How many pilots carry one? How many sectors have they been carried on? How many incidents have occurred?

Great story bloke! I loved the Lone Ranger, I'm glad you didn't have Tonto get it in the (rear) end!:p

I can see you are enjoying this story guys so read more here:-

http://www.wcnc.com/news/topstories/....2652f207.html