Quite right ! Here is something DL said which was worth jounalistic comment.

"The flight was scheduled from Alexandria, Egypt, to Cairo, but a passenger claimed to be wearing a suicide vest and wanted to go to Cyprus, so the captain did what he asked and flew him to Larnaca."

I imagine the fellow introduced himself to a member of the cabin crew and the conversation went something like this, "I wish to see my girl friend, I love her and miss her so, would you please ask the captain to take me to Cyprus". When she declined, he unzipped his tunic and said, "look, I know maybe you think it is a fake, but this is the most powerful suicide belt in the world and would blow my head clean off, you`ve got to ask yourself one question Do I feel lucky ?, well do ya, punk ?"

I suppose in future all cabin staff will be required to check the authenticity of all suicide vests by requesting the wearers to carry out a trial detonation.

David Learmount.

Would any UK based pilot have enough confidence in our security system to dismiss a passengers claim to be wearing an explosive vest, particularly if they had displayed a convincing looking device to the crew? I know for sure I wouldn't.

It then comes down to what they are demanding, a request to divert and land somewhere sounds like a great idea to me and would be exactly what I would be planning anyway.

What good was the skymarshal?

I wonder what the company SOP was regarding hijacking?

I may not have this right, but seem to recall that somewhere in the 60's / 70's the general approach to hijacking focused on getting the plane safely on the ground somewhere and then dealing with the :mad:s who were hijacking it.

The captain has a threat. Being captain he has to make a decision(and likely has to follow company SOP as best he can): is this credible or not, and how do I get all of my passengers back to the ground safely? A serious responsibility when dealing with the unknown and possibly lethal events subsequent to the announcement of a hijacking attempt.

I can only see as unhelpful the question offered to an official in Egypt regarding the Captain's decision.

From the Guardian, about the press conference by the Egyptian aviation minister: Why, the minister is asked, did the plane’s captain yield to the demands of a hijacker who might possibly have had a fake suicide belt?

Nice attempt to hang the Captain and put his judgment on the block: accusation by question. Not well played.

That, he responds, is a matter for a later investigation, once the urgent situation is over. The press conference ends.

What else could he say?

A man described as "psychologically unstable".

Kulverstukas- The photo is a cropped version of a posed photo taken by cabin crew at the request of the last passenger to leave. The passenger was to the right and grinning. A Yorkshire man of course- probably thought that he could sell it.

Here's the selfie

Ben Innes on EgyptAir hijacker photo: 'It was the best selfie ever' | UK news | The Guardian

Minor problem of determining what is a "convincing looking device"? Doubt they are marked Product of Islamic State' -- with a "best detonated by" date.

Even real ones may be made in someone's kitchen.

Who makes such determination, and how?

Invite member of flight crew to emerge from cockpit to inspect alleged bomb? (Is that task best performed by FO or Cptn?)

I'm not sure who is the biggest idiot the one on the left or the one on the right. You decide!!

EgyptAir: British passenger Ben Innes poses for happy snap with plane hijacker - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)

Are you quoting from somewhere, or did you just make that up ?

http://foto.russian.fi/photofull/15724.jpg

Dementia and courage

Might be better to read his full post on that issue, rather than jumping to conclusions. Or as they say, sometimes it is better to be quiet and thought, well, you know the rest.

And the issue of trust is a real one. Do i trust our western security maniacs (not to mention those in egypt)? Not at all. I can name, off the top of my hat, several easy enough possibilities to get explosives on board of an airplane, and so can everyone that works at an airport. All in all the security measures are merely a big business, and something to keep the unwashed masses calm.

TASS published big article on followup of hijack.

Just of interest: hijacker communicate with pilots in notes, showing his "suicide belt" via cabin CCTV. It was one of cabin crew who calmed him and talk him into release of paxes. Egypt Civil Aviation minister said that crew will be "rewarded".

MS742

Airport Security . . . .
 

If that is true, then it certainly won't be much encouragement for your PAX who indirectly pay your salary :ooh:

BBC Radio 4 - Today Programme
 

I'm appalled that the hijacking was referred to as a farce.
This WAS a hijacking, and the perpetrator must be brought to account.

Not just 'understandable', absolutely correct.

Couldn't agree more. Throw the book at him as an example to others.

You are.

He was trying to ascertain how real the belt was and if there was a 'dead man's handle' built into the device.

So, how come that he managed to board the flight? - or was a passport not needed for a domestic flight?