'hijack-proof' Airliner
Paxing All Over The World
It is so much easier to spend billions of $$$ on trying to make a machine that will solve a human problem. 
This is such a wonderful idea by the hardware manufacturers and defence companies. They will make millions before the concept is abandoned..
This is such a wonderful idea by the hardware manufacturers and defence companies. They will make millions before the concept is abandoned..
Psychophysiological entity
Many of the posts here just spell out why my miserable, almost science-fiction type of solution will eventually be the only way forward. The cost will be huge whichever way we go, but I have a terrible gut feeling that what we have now is the lull before the storm. I hope I'm wrong, but the ‘success' of 9/11 will not be missed on the planners of chaos.
An aircraft that weighs 20% more due to cast iron bulkheads and other daft ideas, will also be a burden to be paid for by nations not airlines...well, unless ticket prices double. Even then, to effect the winning of a battle, they only have to bring it down over a town. No need to be at the controls. All in all, it will be better to work towards carrying ‘sterile' passengers.
What I'm saying is, whichever way we go, it will be expensive: a partial rundown of aviation as we know it, before rebuilding the industry.
Of course, there is another route. Working towards some understanding of the hatred that these fanatics feel towards us, and working towards battle agreements that would leave aviation alone. I'm mindful of the IRA's policy of backing off after the mortar attack at Belfast. It was in their interest to leave aviation alone. Their determination was absolute, but I'm told there were several reasons for not attacking aviation. Just maybe there could be a common logic. Mmmm......Now I'm dreaming.
An aircraft that weighs 20% more due to cast iron bulkheads and other daft ideas, will also be a burden to be paid for by nations not airlines...well, unless ticket prices double. Even then, to effect the winning of a battle, they only have to bring it down over a town. No need to be at the controls. All in all, it will be better to work towards carrying ‘sterile' passengers.
What I'm saying is, whichever way we go, it will be expensive: a partial rundown of aviation as we know it, before rebuilding the industry.
Of course, there is another route. Working towards some understanding of the hatred that these fanatics feel towards us, and working towards battle agreements that would leave aviation alone. I'm mindful of the IRA's policy of backing off after the mortar attack at Belfast. It was in their interest to leave aviation alone. Their determination was absolute, but I'm told there were several reasons for not attacking aviation. Just maybe there could be a common logic. Mmmm......Now I'm dreaming.
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 74
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Very simple indeed. Build an aircraft which has absolutely NO access to the flight deck from the cabin ie pilots have their own entry door from the outside. In the cockpit is a galley and loo (as El Al have done to their 747s - door welded locked for the duration of the flight)
Paxing All Over The World
Well ... if the politicians chatted with the folks that hate them and try to find out WHY they hate them (it ain't difficult, coz they keeps telling us) then we don't need to have sterile pax or cast iron flying machines.
As I keep repeating, this is a human problem, created by humans. Machines and the deities are not needed.
As I keep repeating, this is a human problem, created by humans. Machines and the deities are not needed.
Too mean to buy a long personal title
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Ireland
Posts: 282
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well I know of at least one hi-jack that was ended with a gentle tap on the skull with a Flight Engineer's torch.
Not only a separate flight deck, but the ability to jettison the cabin would be a good start. A gentle para descent and flotation devices should limit the punters complaints.
One common factor to all the suggestions made in the original posting. They all need electrical power.
There lies the first weakness.
Not only a separate flight deck, but the ability to jettison the cabin would be a good start. A gentle para descent and flotation devices should limit the punters complaints.
One common factor to all the suggestions made in the original posting. They all need electrical power.
There lies the first weakness.
I'm sure the terrorist labor union is disturbed by this development.
Teams of terrorist operatives could always count on years of financial assistance while training, and maybe a small pension for their families. (jihadi video royalties)
Now they will be able to outsource these labor intensive teams to some disgruntled teenage computer hacker with a joystick.
Teams of terrorist operatives could always count on years of financial assistance while training, and maybe a small pension for their families. (jihadi video royalties)
Now they will be able to outsource these labor intensive teams to some disgruntled teenage computer hacker with a joystick.
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: U.K.
Posts: 266
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No mate the fallacy is that the public will pay! Not up front they won't.A mythical source will provide limitless cash.Oh that would be me would it? Subsidising air transport throgh taxation?
Do the aircrew do that? Or is it a specialist job?
Last edited by old,not bold; 12th Sep 2006 at 23:26.
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Way up north
Posts: 126
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hollywood gave "them" the idea of using aircraft for kamikaze. Don't remember the movie, but it's there... Long before 2001.
Shudder at the thought of what ships entering US harbours may do, the checks there not matching airports.
Kinda weird that "gods-own-country" may give control of their harbours to the very kind that they now are at war with.
Strange world, I say.
Shudder at the thought of what ships entering US harbours may do, the checks there not matching airports.
Kinda weird that "gods-own-country" may give control of their harbours to the very kind that they now are at war with.
Strange world, I say.
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: flyover country USA
Age: 82
Posts: 4,579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
About 25 years ago a C172 pilot attacked the White House and managed to damage a shrub, I believe, but it intensified D.C. security quite a bit; sharpshooters on the roof were the result I believe.
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: 'tween posts
Posts: 197
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
star wars
some time in the future.....
all flts will be "launched" out of an airfield in to the air and on board systems like automatic terrain aviodance coupled with gps coupled with google earth uplink
will prevent the aircraft from approaching terra firma at all parts of the globe except designated airfields determined by a encrypted uplink from acars.On approaching an airfield, video feed from the cockpit+biometric data will be verified against ref data by controller and company security, at which point the automatic terrain aviodance mode will change to ILS capture mode.In the event of a go-around system will revert back to terrain avodance mode.Any perfomance degradation that may lead to ditching/forced landing/fuel starvation is prohibitted by law
all flts will be "launched" out of an airfield in to the air and on board systems like automatic terrain aviodance coupled with gps coupled with google earth uplink
will prevent the aircraft from approaching terra firma at all parts of the globe except designated airfields determined by a encrypted uplink from acars.On approaching an airfield, video feed from the cockpit+biometric data will be verified against ref data by controller and company security, at which point the automatic terrain aviodance mode will change to ILS capture mode.In the event of a go-around system will revert back to terrain avodance mode.Any perfomance degradation that may lead to ditching/forced landing/fuel starvation is prohibitted by law
The plane is not the problem....
the passenger is.
As long as they maintain political correctness and these half-wit security measures we will have problems with people coming aboard with less then honorable intentions.
Everybody might be better off spending a little more on good security then spending millions making aircraft bomb-proof.
Example:
http://www.news24.com/News24/World/N...998462,00.html
Pilots do not need shoe bombs to bring down a plane...
As long as they maintain political correctness and these half-wit security measures we will have problems with people coming aboard with less then honorable intentions.
Everybody might be better off spending a little more on good security then spending millions making aircraft bomb-proof.
Example:
http://www.news24.com/News24/World/N...998462,00.html
Pilots do not need shoe bombs to bring down a plane...
