Hard for me to understand why the non flight crew types here get in a flap about our opinions about security in our industry, including TSA types, maybe because as crewmembers traveling around the world, we see the many inconsistancies throughout the system. For instance I was recently based in ATL, I would swipe my ID in the card reader and if the light turned green I would then be able to walk through the turnstyle, the TSA would be sitting on the far side of the turnstyle to check that the picture matchs my face, no xray, no metal detector and no bomb sniffing, simply a valid ID.

This is the security at one of worlds busiest airport, now in the city I live, I am scrutinized like the mad shoe bomber, while ramp staff that got a job two weeks ago bypass security altogether, this my friends is why I feel airport security is window dressing for the public, what a farce:yuk:

Dream Land

Been keeping an eye on replies;)

Carlton Browne FO has the best.

There is a lot, lot, more to airport security than what you and pax see at the 'coal face'. Things you don't see, and never will, no matter how many gold rings you have around your sleeves.

And many of the sy operatives are degree educated, trained in surveillance, and other skills.

Don't be fooled by what you erroneously think is 'inside the uniforms'. :cool: ;)

Sorry, can't relate at all to this thread/ I always seem to breeze through several Canadian airports and Heathrow as staff and pax.

Some US airports are now requiring that a video camera also be passed through security separately (as well as a computer).
Does anyone know if a laptop (or camera) has ever been used in a hijack attempt?

The whole issue is a joke so long as security only applies to the crew and passengers while the rest of the airport gets a free pass. Like paying for security service on your home and they put a detector on the front door only, leaving the back door and windows unguarded. What amuses me is that so many people buy the whole TSA garbage, even pilots.

You CAN fool all of the people all of the time! The TSA (and their equivalents) are proving it every day!

One day security at CPH took my leatherman of me. As we are cargo crew, we have to carry our bags ourselves to the the airplane therefore we take everything as carry on luggage. They opened and emptied my suitcase, found everything suspect like a box of minidisks with music I carry, finally found my leatherman. It's got a knife with a blade of 7 cm; the maximum allowed is 6.5 cm; you ought to know that! This one is an illegal arm.
What we have to do now is go to another counter, one for luggage-hold luggage, where these things àre allowed... and then pick up the luggage on the other side of the wall, airside.
The CPH security people absolutely fail to see the absurdity

My 2 cents ... In Canada, being screened for a US departure, the laptop has to come out of the bag and is (usually) subject to a quick scan with some sort of swab that is then inserted into a machine which gives the ok. If unsure if they want to have it taken out, I ask. Simple.

As crew, I never hurry. If they want to go through all my stuff, I take my time and fold coat/jacket carefully before putting them in the tray for scanning, etc. Same thing at the other end. In the US when shoes have to be put on, I take my time and if it holds others up, too bad! I'm not looking like an idiot hopping around with shoelaces undone trying to get out of everybody's way. If they yell at me or otherwise upset me, I'm going for a leisurely coffee to regain my composure before going to the cockpit.

Another thing. If security are going to do a manual search of my belongings, they better have gloves on ... I insist on it. They don't like it, but tough. Who knows where their hands have been or what they have been handling just before I came along.

Fortunately, for most airport in Canada, Canadian crews can go through a special bypass where IDs are checked against a master list. Some will then scan all your stuff, and others will do a random search. A good system. Going through US Airports all the time would drive me nuts.

ZYX
 

You may believe you have a greater knowledge of what goes on behingd the scenes than the rest of us, and you may well do. But it is and has to be a joke when security staff spend 10 minutes carry out a "trace detection test" on a flight attendant walking with the rest of the crew, passengers allowed to proceed through unhindered. This is at a small port were the security people recognise most crew as we go through there at least once a week.
Arrive at aircraft to find catering people, unscreened sitting in a business class seat reading newspaper while waiting for delayed crew.

Engineers can and some would bring anything you liked to the aircraft for you, again unscreened as would baggage handlers.
So if you belive all is wonderful and we are not aware of whats going on explain how that makes any sense.

The qualifications for security people in Australia is the same qualification as the one rrequired to work as a bouncer at a night club.

It is a joke!

In my 30 odd years of flying around various airports of the world I have seen vast differences in security standards and their application. Obviously the tragic events past have caused a major rethink of the subject, nevertheless we all seem to forget that the common element here is the human being. It matters not a toss what profession you are in - you will always find the arrogant, egotistical, inconsiderate, rude inflexible characters - in this case both sides of the barrier(both gender & security)! You have to remember that more often than not the security staff are only implementing the policy decided upon from up above(ie aiport management) and invariably it is those people who interpret the DofE rules differently which is why there are discrepancies from airport to airport.
It is true there are some who are perhaps overly enthusiastic with their authority but in my experience they are the minority. As has already been said, tolerance and politeness go 99% of the way to ensuring a less stressful path to the a/c. Besides, without all the anecdotes what else would we find to discuss! One of my favourites occurred on deployment to the Gulf from Brize Norton where we were made to put our weapons through the XRay - sorry what do you expect to find hidden in a gun; another gun? Personally I always travel with a leatherman(as crew) and it has never caused a problem and my best weapon against jobsworths is calmness & composure.

Fly Safe

if security were that, then we would not have all tese upset people. it is just one great big shabai[joke] that does nothing but show joe q public some window dressing. now tsa is upset because crowds of people are gathering for security checks[mind you now, they made this mess] and are worried terroist wil strike there next. when in god's name will somebody get a real program of security?

With the greatest of respect, I think ZYX was trying to gently point out that the daily security pantomime you are asked to participate in has a slightly different purpose than its more obvious purpose.

its somthing us pilots are going to have to keep contantaly hounding people to get this changed. i bet that soon there even goin to scan GA pilots, like far enough you got to check the pilot out just incase its a person dressing up as a pilot but if the security see the pilot all the time well of course hes the pilot and should be able to just walk on threw the gates without a problem. thats what lacks in this world is comon sence. its costing time and money.

hercboy

Just playing Devil's Advocate;

Have you considered the implications of your statementWhat about the day when his family are being held hostage under fear of death and he is instructed to carry a 'package' airside due to his 'obviously known status' and ability to 'just walk through the gates'?

Security is all about risk assessment and minimalisation of that risk. Layers of effective security means the target moves lower down the target list of the terrorists as they want to go for the biggest impact with the least risk of failure. They seek the security loopholes that give them the chance of success that they want. Whilst I agree that current security policies can seem a little pointless in certain cases (like removing nail clippers from a flight deck crew member), others are not quite so pointless. It is always a balancing act between having enough layers to be effective/ what is acceptable/ and inconvenience caused.

Be careful and think a little deeper about the implications of your suggestions with regards to security and you might find that what seems benal at first may actually make a little more sense than you thought.

PP

Might have been better if that bright idea hadn't appeared on here PP!

Renurp, it is worse than a joke. The authorities promise us safety in flying on the airlines if we submit to their control ("You don't accept it, you don't fly"). They KNOW they are ineffective. One example: there is no armed response available in the security area, so that if they ever did apprehend a real terrorist in the security line, they could do nothing about it. Even if there was an odd policeman with a weapon standing around, he could not shoot the terrorist without killing other passengers or provoking the terrorist to unleash his weapons. When this farce started, they at least had the National Guard posted in the security halls, even though their weapons were unloaded. Those guys were totally bored and had to be pulled out because even then they knew there was no chance they would ever be needed, nor could they be effective in such a crowded, chaotic environment. More proof? In LAX a Crazy (not a terrorist or at least not in the definition we use) shot up a lot of passengers at the El Al counter. The only way he was stopped was by private security guards; the authorities had no procedure to stop this type of attack and still don't, hence their bleating now about the "crowds".
And the TSA is complaining about manpower, wanting to fire more of their staff (of course only the security checkers, not the supervisors or off-airport police who get the big bucks). When the available checkers have to use random or computer-generated screening, and be seen to be "doing their job" (ie hassling innocent passengers and crew) it is impossible for them to be effective. They simply don't have time to do what they should be doing, which is identifying the real threats and mounting protections against them. El Al manages to do it quite successfully, while the rest of us simply go through the motions.
And I repeat; if security only applies to the 'front door' (crew and passengers) while the rest of the airport staff and workers get a free pass, it is completely worthless.
Promising us that they are making us safe, while doing nothing effective, is a lie and we are fools if we accept it.

Few Cloudy

I don't think that anybody intent on this kind of thing would have learnt anything from what I posted..........as the idea of not searching people going airside as they are 'known' will not be happening.

PP

Pilot Pete


roger that,

i never really thort about it that way. kinda like in that movie i think it was called overnight bandet.

I have just read this thread from the beging as it is a subject that rally p*sses me off. There are many good comments here and a few naieve ones as well The one that knocked me off my perch was the one about "airside being sterile"!

The lack of sterility airside is the weakest link in the security chain! Engineers, especially, carry all manner of objects onto aircraft that flight crew are barred from carrying through "security", Leathermans, Swiss Army Knives, screwdrivers and all sorts of other blades that they require for their work. I have been told that one airline has installed Leatherman tools in their flight decks for the use of the crew since they can now no longer carry their own!

This b*ll!!!!! of having to go through the same security as pax is demeaning for a crew; to have to strip off jackets, belts, watches and shoes in front of pax I find embarrasing. If we must do this then all airports should have a seperate area only for crew.

I find it hard to believe that in this day and age that the average passenger really believes that, when they see us being harrassed by the "secuity staff", they are saffer. Every one knows about the flight deck door, which is another subject but I will touch on here briefly.

One has to wonder if the suspected suicide of the Egypt Air F/O had taken place post 9/11, and he had locked himself onto the flight deck, whether the authorities would have then torn them out!

Anyway my rant is over and I will just say that a chain is only as strong as its weakest link!

And only last week, I was at a Swiss airport where they were selling swiss army knives in the terminal.

Another recent example of the window dressing not working............The multiple "Armed with firearms" hi jackers of an armoured truck on the "SECURE" airside at Schiphol who then drove it off the airport. What a joke! Always knew that the air crew security check that was visible for passing Pax's to see was a PR effort. Now will they start screening the cleaners , caterer's engineers using the same standard they use on aircrew?

Would love to fix your airplane but the paper work for the screwdriver is not yet approved.

Hogwash wrote:
Why is it demeaning that passengers can see you going through a security check? Are you worried about them seeing you go in to the restroom too?

What is embarrassing with current state of security is that it is little more than a show for the well behaved passengers. Anyone with intent to create harm will have little more trouble than a few years ago.

I believe that anyone asked to step through the metal detectors three times find it frustrating. If you then know a little bit about the full picture doesn’t help but in no way does that excuse anyone from refusing to go through again and just leave.

If the pilot did as was alleged in the beginning of this thread then he is not fit for his position. Nor are the persons who allow someone to walk away and don’t apprehend her in the next few moments. That he was allowed not only to enter the plane but also had time to taxi out is a sad confirmation of the current state.

Security for flightcrews
 

One day, as we were going to operate a ferry flight, at a time when no scheduled flights were leaving from that airport, we found the security checkpoint umanned, except for one security guard who was not mandated to search us. When he saw two pilots show up, he kindly asked us to wait while he called on his intercom for screening personnel to come to the screening area to search us. As we waited on the side for them, a duty free employee walked up pushing a cart loaded with about 24 sealed cardboard boxes. The security guard pushed the door button and let the guy and his cart in, unsearched, while we waited. A few minutes later the screening people came, searched us kindly and waved us through. Some poeple have no idea what we go through.........

I’m always amazed at the naivety of people that think the present security system is safe. Folks its no safer now then prior to 9/11 in fact if anything its less safe because of the money been wasted on security that should be spend on aviation infrastructure.

Boofhead, You nailed the situation, in a nutshell............

Screening flight crews in ineffective eyewash. It serves no security purpose whatsoever. We are subject to passenger screening to harbor the illusion of security (to alleve the fears of the flying public). We are screened for weapons that might allow us to take over an airplane, right before we do just that. We are there to take over an airplane, armed or not! Regardless of the screening performed prior to getting in the cockpit, I still have complete control of a potential WMD when I get there, so either I am trusted, or I am not. If I am NOT trusted, then I shouldn't be sitting in the cockpit.... If I am trusted, then I shouldn't have to undress before going to work. Which is it?

I can't speak for other countries, but here in the states, the only major employee groups (at most airports) that are required to be screened as passengers are flight crew, who, ironically, are the only employees that don't need to bring a weapon aboard to take over an airplane.

To answer the "terrorist take a pilots family hostage" scenario...... Why would they go to the bother? Their chances of getting caught go up immeasurably as more people get involved..... It's the same thing with them trying to impersonate a pilot. It would be a lot harder for the run of the mill bad guy to pretend to be a pilot, than say a bag handler.... They can simply get a job as a "trusted employee" (provisioner., fueler, bag thrower, cleaner etc.......) and waltz in the back door UNCHECKED!!!! It doesn't take a PhD to figure out the easily achieved possibilites due to this well known loophole.

What's worse is that the head of the tsA says that ALL employees are screened now...... He is either wrong, misinformed or just plain lying! I vote for the latter.......

It's surreal......... 9/11 should have been a wake up call..... What will it take to make my industry more secure?

That said, there is NOTHING to be gained by making a stand center stage at the security show......... Just cooperate and hope that the guy in front of you gets their attention so you can get to work without further hassle.......

This nonsense is nothing new....... prior to 12/7/87, flightcrew entered the "sterile area" like all the other employees, but due to the actions of a disgruntled former ramper (mass murder), flight crew are now subject to pax screening......but rampers are not.

A SOS should have been done right at the beginning, but, the politicians and bureaucrats kept appeasing ALPA by saying that we were going to get super duper universal SIDA access badges. Then we could be as trusted as a provisioner!!!!! I am still waiting for mine! :rolleyes:

People, people, . . . . lets stop for a while shall we, . . . and go back to the 911 reports !!!

Correct me if i am wrong, . . . please, . . . but were the 911 culprits AIRCREW or HIJACKERS ???

So why are we (the aircrews) being hasled at the security points. An MAS guy got strip searched 3 times at LAX upon entry b'coz his name had a "Bin" attached to it. Was all the hijackers in 911 wearing those airline's pilot's uniforms??? Were they NOT passengers who hijacked the plane and flew them into the twin towers and so on???

Most Jewish people have "Ben" in their names too, and some flying El-Al, does that mean that they are terrorsists??? Why then does the Israeli security trust them? Maybe the Israelis are the only ones who realize that the 911 incidence was the result of a hijaking and NOT the work of Airline Pilots???

I fail to see any logical explanation to harassing the Aircrew other than a panic attempt to hide something by the authorities involved, because I follow all the reports and it was amazing the way those guys manage to enter the aircrafts and flew into the twin towers in such precission timings. So they must be a well organized group and the CIA must have been up their arses for a long time, and if they can get through the airport securities, it is NO wonder because even now they seem to be looking the WRONG WAY, . . . us decent and honest working for a bite to eat, . . . . .

A food for thought, . . . .

PS, . . . . is a nassle scissors with rounded end and small (2 cm cutting edge) a dangerous weapon? if NOT, would somebody tell those MORONS in Ozland, please

L_D.

Going through Glasgow (a BAA Airport), the Captain who I was flying with showed his ID which was a Birmingham Airport ID. The security dork waved him through as he had not seen one of those before and thought it must be right.

I then get refused through because I have an Edinburgh ID (also a BAA Airport) and the card is not in the Glasgow system. What a moron he was.

Was all the hijackers in 911 wearing those airline's pilot's uniforms??? Were they NOT passengers who hijacked the plane and flew them into the twin towers and so on???

GOOD & PROPER QUESTION, MATE!!!

Let the "know-it-alls" take it from here!

Forcing certified pilots to pass through passenger security is a big joke!!!

As mentioned before - pilots need no nailcutters nor pistols - they can only push the yoke forward and end it all.

SO - WHY force the sincere and professional commander of an a/c through such demeaning "security" measures? Get real, somebody out there!

:confused: :confused: :confused:

A lot of people have commented that putting pilots through the security hoops is all for show - to satisfy passengers.
I think that underestimates peoples common sense.
More than once - while having my flight bag riffled through by security - I've had the passenger standing beside me say "huh? you mean YOU GUYS get searched too? whats the point of that?"
Its all crap.

For my money the reason we all have such a hard time, crew and pax alike, especially at US borders, is that the people manning the desks are low paid, low esteem blobs who have official sanction for being nasty.

Security is still !!!!e at the back door. It always will be while outsourcing continues to be the management mantra.

Things being seen to be done will always be the policy, The tombstones are still relatively small in number despite the enormity of Sept 11. The risks are still low compared with, say, driving. If you want reasonable but effective security get rid of the bean counters and the politicians.

LOL.... you're right! The powers that be either think that :

J.Q.Public is really stupid..........

OR,

They are really stupid themselves! (I vote for a combination of both!)

That said............. Back in '88, when this nonsense started, I did have a lady comment (as I cut in front of her in the security show line) that she was impressed by the increase in security after PSA 1771, since even the pilots were getting checked! I didn't have the heart, or time, to explain it to her..........

It is all for show........ Screening flight crews accomplishes exactly nothing..........

Tripower, you are absolutely right in that holding aircrews' families hostage would be more effort than getting a job as a trusted employee. That is why it is essential that everyone should be searched going airside- the only exception being the armed police patrols.
Besides, it makes the security staff a bit more sympathetic if they also get searched going to work! :)

I do not understand the logic of some of the goings on in the US.
They say they are worried that the relatives of a pilot may be held hostage blah blah.

Yet, they publish the name and address of license holders?

I do not comprehend the logic behind this at all! :confused:

Actually, I've heard this argument mostly from non US folks on the PPrune......... Personally, I find it a fairly weak argument, but there is SOME logic in it, which is the reason that the US authorities have never even thought of it.

Don't feel bad..... there is no logic to it. It is all eyewash to appease a squeamish public.

A fairly weak argument? Possibly... but it IS a possibility. At least it represents an attempt to shut the stable door before the horse bolts.

I get screened upto 20 times a day. My job involves going airside a lot. EVERYONE should be screened and I can't see why you should object.
If you feel you're the victim of a job's worth, run him not the system.
I've yet to see a good reason why crew should not be screened.
You're above the clouds, not the law.
..... ducks and dons hard hat....

It's not the screening, nobody objects to that. It is the insanity that surrounds the whole procedure. Aircrew SHOULD be given different rules, they SHOULD be allowed to carry screwdrivers, small knives (Leatherman etc) and such. Whenever possible, they SHOULD be given separate screening lines. Attention needs to be shifted from nailfiles to better detection of REAL threats. So much effort is put into the present utterly stupid procedures (making women drink their own breast milk, removing shoes, etc etc) that there is no time to just step back and see what is going on, and more particularly, to identify those who do constitute a treat and come up with procedures to handle that.

So far, with only the "front door" being secured, and no idea of how to handle a terrorist or terrorist group if it ever was caught in the act (and that has NEVER happened, and probably never will), it is simply an exercise in panic. The authorities are like terrified dogs, running around and barking, upsetting the traveling public with their noise and activity, driving people away from flying with the result that aviation has been damaged so much many major carriers are in, or about to enter, bankruptcy.

Only now, after four years, has aviation in the US reached the pre-2001 level, and the standards, service and such are so far below that level it is like a different industry. On other fronts, freedoms and rights have been taken away and the US has used its power to force other nations to comply with their draconian rules, such as deciding on who will be allowed to fly a foreign-registered airplane into the US, virtually shutting down training schools by denying visas to foreigners, and imposing thirty mile restricted airspace over the US president whenever he travels (OK those are not airline related, but the heavy hand of government does not care. If it flies, swat it!).
And has it resulted in an improvement in security? No.

The TSA's own inspectors are finding that they can smuggle the SAME percentage of guns and knives onto airplanes as was the case with the previous private security firms before 9/11. We all know of ways to beat the system, and to get dangerous weapons on board, and no matter how tough they get it will always be possible to take over an airplane in flight using available tools (bottles, etc) or just physical strength and bluff (look at the hijackings and attempted hijackings that have occurred recently; none used a gun, one used a pocket knife (failed attempt), none used a computer or shoes or keys or belt, one used a TV remote control (successful), one used a pair of wooden chopsticks, one attempt, almost successful, had three men break into the flight deck and beat up the pilots. The point is that the TSA and other airport security agents can do NOTHING to protect us from these threats.

So should we do away with screening? No, of course not. It weeds out the obvious, removes most of the threat from guns and large knives, maybe from explosives as well, but that remains to be seen. It needs to be no more intrusive than it was before 9/11 (the screeners of that time did their job and stopped all illegal weapons, even tried to stop the perpetrators. Today's screeners will do no better, despite the aggressive approach). The successful systems, such as the EL AL model, need to be studied and adopted. More use of phsychological screening needs to be done, and the oppressive presence of the authorities should be scaled down so that there are no long lines (terrorist heaven) at major airports and people are not made afraid to fly. If the back doors of the airports cannot be screened at a similar level, then prepare for the inevitable confrontation rather than make crew and passengers suffer. An even-handed, common sense approach.

And remember that hijackings, by definition, happen in the air. That is where we must concentrate. NO hijacking has ever been stopped on the ground (nobody who has had a gun taken during preflight checks has been charged with being a terrorist or even with attempted hijacking; they are all seen as boobs who tried to beat the system or were unaware that there was a weapon in their bag or pocket). 9/11 WOULD NOT HAVE HAPPENED if we, the pilots, had been told of the threat, and if the FAA had cancelled their policy of "cooperation" when they learned of it (and they did, we now know). Some hijackers will always manage to beat the system, so we need to be prepared and ready. Trusting in airport security alone is wrong-headed.

There is still a way to go, with training and tools for the flight crews (especially the cabin crew) needed, but so long as the threat is seen as being an airport one rather than an airplane problem, we will never get there and the present unbearable stupidity will continue to destroy the industry we all care so much about.

Some very narrow minded attitudes here...Perhaps you should consider a few wider options.

The threat of families being held hostage has been mentioned, probably wouldn't happen? Tell that to numerous bank employees....Is it too much trouble? No, all very easy really.

Short memories many of you, in the early 80's a woman was stopped taking a bag through LHR, which she had packed, only she didn't know the bottom was made of explosives and the calculator her 'boyfriend' had giiven her was in fact a timer detonator.

Yes, of course you can push the stick foreward and crash into whatever you like, no security is going to stop that possibility.

However, the search is to stop you taking something through you either don't know the contents of or to stop you giving something nasty to someone else, either intentionaly or otherwise.

I agree the search shouldn't be carried out in public, it should be done with respect and in a way that preserves your dignity, but so far, like CarltonBrowne the FO says, I have seen no reason to except aircrew from searches.

Narrow minded attitudes? Or just attitudes with which you disagree?
Perhaps it's wider knowledge and experience which leads many of those who have it to conclude that searching aircrew is nothing more than a window-dressing exercise.


"Just doing our job"
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v1...ds/EC135_6.jpg

"Just doing my job"
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v1.../NoParking.jpg
The pilot of an Austrian EMS helicopter illustrates the perfect reaction - let him get on with it.
Trying to overcome a 'rules are rules' stance with reasoned arguments rarely works.

Pictures copied from the Rotorheads Around the World photo collection in the Rotorheads forum.
More amazing pics here.

Hi all,
Roy Hodd got it right in his answer. As a pilot I got annoyed almost daily be so called secutity checks. Some are straightforward and do make sense while at other airports I do have my doubts to say the least... And after all I'll sit in the flight deck just close to a fire axe, fire extinguisher... and I'm in control of a considerable mass of metal and jetfuel. And the worst: at many airports all the people working in and around my plane
(catering, engineers, cleaners...) don't pass any security checks at all. And they could do harm, if they wanted...


enjoy flying, jojodel

FL

No, a narrow minded attitude...or perhaps a refusal to look beyond what is obvious...

Broader experience and knowladge? Or perhaps a dislike of anything that appears to be a slight on aircrew?

If you want an honest opinon, ALL searches are window dressing, nothing more. A determined terrorist will find a way through. Security is a reaction, mostly with an added bit of guess work as to what might get tried next.

There is nothing new about searches of crew, it's been going on for years, long before 9/11, and not only crew either (in the UK) anyone (with a couple of exceptions)who goes airside.

Searches may be window dressing, but if it prevents a terrorist attack, which they have on at least 3 occations that I am aware of, then it's worth it.

By the way, your photos appeared in Police magazine a while ago, and are not what they appear to be. But then, if you don't think in narrow terms there was always that possibility!

Some thoughts about security checks for aircrew.

First, making a group of people exempt from scanning per se could possibly provide a means for a determined and organised terrorist to exempt HIMself. i.e. A uniform which could possibly be used as a means of gaining an exemption. So, through the scanner we must go.

However, there is absolutely NO point in taking away a tool from myself and my colleagues at a security check and to do so at a public check area would completely undermine the confidence of any public witness in any event. For that reason, aircrew should be screened separately.

We do our own daily checks on our aircraft and we do actually NEED tools in order to open cowlings and pierce engine oil cans etc. The aircraft toolkit, not surprisingly, contains tools such as pliers, screwdrivers, etc, shock, horror! If I wanted, I could stab myself in the neck with any one of them in flight. :rolleyes: