3 things we can do to make planes safer

Mister T

Diamond Member
Feb 25, 2000
3,439
0
0
Arm the pilots with guns

These guys are usually ex-Navy or Airforce, so having a side arm would not be a big deal.

Secure the cockpit door

Make the dam door is bulletproof. Once the engines start on the plane the door must be secured and never opened for any reason.

Require air marshalls to fly on all planes.

No uniforms - just specially trained individuals packing heat.


Getting rid of curb side check it wont do jack. People are always going to find something to get on a plane and use it as a weapon.
When the next set of dumbasses try to hijack a plane, a marhsall will be there to empty his 40 cal semi-auto into these individuals

 

ISAslot

Platinum Member
Jan 22, 2001
2,888
107
106
I'd like to see that there be no way to access the cockpit from the passenger compartment.

I was listening to a radio show this morning. A guy on there suggested there be a panic button the pilot pushes that gasses the passenger cabin putting everyone asleep. :p
 

desy

Diamond Member
Jan 13, 2000
5,442
211
106
Pilots don't have guns. . .
They wouldn't be much good to them, they are busy flying planes and are in a vulnerable position hunkered down backs to the door.

Air Marshals

Lock contained cabins with washrooms.

Greatly improved personal baggage and person checks on the ground.
The systems for this are already there it simply a matter using them!
 

rudder

Lifer
Nov 9, 2000
19,441
86
91
These guys are usually ex-Navy or Airforce, so having a side arm would not be a big deal

I flew a commercial jet, I was not in the military. Ever wonder what would happen if I missed? (although I am a pretty good shot)

Secure the cockpit door
How does this prevent the plane from being taken over? granted it cannot be used as a weapon then, unless it is stolen off the tarmac. Imagine a 747 loaded with 250+ people with a bomb in the cargo hold.

Require air marshalls to fly on all planes.
same deal.

My point is no matter what we do, a terrorist that is determined will strike. We need to wipe out thier base of operations and have the resolve to continue to do that.
 

Sugadaddy

Banned
May 12, 2000
6,495
0
0


<< a marhsall will be there to empty his 40 cal semi-auto into these individuals >>



He better have damn good aim, because if he shoots a window say bye bye to the plane...
 

teddymines

Senior member
Jul 6, 2001
940
0
0
How about:

1. Have live voice/data beamed up to a satellite so that real-time monitoring can occur. This is better than trying to find a black box in the wreckage, and the data can be shared across the air traffic controller network for analysis.

2. Have panic buttons installed in all seats (or those AirFone units). If more than 50% of the people indicate panic, the transponder signal for hijack is set, autopilot is engaged for flight over a desolate area, and the signal is sent to the satellite system. A full dump of all audio/video/control data is transmitted.

3. Allow remote control of the aircraft of a panic or hijack is detected. A base unit, through encoded signals bounced off satellites, can control the plane and possibly land it.

4. Have a panel in the cockpit that needs to have a PIN entered every 10 minutes by the pilot. The PIN is changed every flight. If the correct PIN is not entered on time, the plane goes to alert mode. The pilot can also enter a "fake" PIN that allows temporary control while secretly sending out necessary alerts, then locks out control after a while.

5. Have 2 types of knocks on the cockpit door for entry. One is the normal pass-knock for safe entry. The other would be a panic knock. A panic knock would alert the pilot to go to alert mode. Additionally, a heavier door would be prudent.

6. Have at least one armed marshal travel on each flight, disguised as a normal passenger.

7. Install the equivalent of a concussion grenade in the plane. This would render everyone incapacitated for a short time, and set the plane to alert mode. This can also be done with explosive decompression, or a very loud sound.

8. Install lots of hidden cameras: behind cockpit buttons, in the seats, on the ceiling, in the racks, wingtips looking in, tail looking forward...EVERYWHERE. These can collect and beam visual data directly to the satellite system, or save the data in a data pod.

9. Ejectable black boxes (or data pods). In addition to the main recorders, planes could have ejectable ones. On normal approach, this is disabled. On steep approaches, collision-alert conditions, or by manual means, this pod can be ejected from the plane for retrieval away from the plane. It could have a parachute and radio/light beacon for easy location.

10. Thoroughly search every individual, using pat-down. Also, open every piece of luggage, whether it is checked in or a carry-on. Limit the number and size of carry-ons.
 

natto fire

Diamond Member
Jan 4, 2000
7,117
10
76
all of these are good ideas. But we need to remember that safety is number TWO to these airlines. I'll let you gue$$ number one.
 

Dunbar

Platinum Member
Feb 19, 2001
2,041
0
0
I'm a pilot and work in the aviation field, I'll respond to these ideas. I think it's easy to sit here 3 days from a terrible terrorist event and say we'll tolerate these security measures. But what about a year or two from now, do you still think people will tolerate the additional costs and inconvenience (it's a rhetorical question.)



<< 1. Have live voice/data beamed up to a satellite so that real-time monitoring can occur. This is better than trying to find a black box in the wreckage, and the data can be shared across the air traffic controller network for analysis. >>



I don't see what good this would do, the event would have ended before they would have figured out what was going on. Do you really think an audio/video feed would have alerted people on the ground the planes were going to crash into the WTC?



<< 2. Have panic buttons installed in all seats (or those AirFone units). If more than 50% of the people indicate panic, the transponder signal for hijack is set, autopilot is engaged for flight over a desolate area, and the signal is sent to the satellite system. A full dump of all audio/video/control data is transmitted. >>



Just what we need, a whole bunch of false alerts. Every time you hit some turbulence or get a surly passenger the "alert" alarm is sounded.



<< 3. Allow remote control of the aircraft of a panic or hijack is detected. A base unit, through encoded signals bounced off satellites, can control the plane and possibly land it. >>



This would cost a whole bunch of money and take a long time to implement. If a hijacker couldn't control the plane wouldn't you think they would start killing passengers or set off explosives?



<< 4. Have a panel in the cockpit that needs to have a PIN entered every 10 minutes by the pilot. The PIN is changed every flight. If the correct PIN is not entered on time, the plane goes to alert mode. The pilot can also enter a "fake" PIN that allows temporary control while secretly sending out necessary alerts, then locks out control after a while. >>



Again, too many oppurtunities for false alarms. The idea of having a "panic" button, that can't be set off inadvertenly, is a good idea but you have to ask yourself what good it would do in future terrosist situations.



<< 5. Have 2 types of knocks on the cockpit door for entry. One is the normal pass-knock for safe entry. The other would be a panic knock. A panic knock would alert the pilot to go to alert mode. Additionally, a heavier door would be prudent. >>



Again, a hijacker would likely start killing passenger or set off explosives if they couldn't gain entry to the cockpit. Having the cockpit totally unreachable may discourage many terrorist acts though.



<< 6. Have at least one armed marshal travel on each flight, disguised as a normal passenger. >>



This comes down to cost, it would be VERY costly. We have to decide how much we're willing to spend on security (I'm neutral on this BTW)



<< 7. Install the equivalent of a concussion grenade in the plane. This would render everyone incapacitated for a short time, and set the plane to alert mode. This can also be done with explosive decompression, or a very loud sound. >>



What happens when the effects wear off?



<< 8. Install lots of hidden cameras: behind cockpit buttons, in the seats, on the ceiling, in the racks, wingtips looking in, tail looking forward...EVERYWHERE. These can collect and beam visual data directly to the satellite system, or save the data in a data pod. >>



The only place worth having them would be in the cockpit and passenger area only because it would help AFTER the event to figure things out. This is a cost and privacy issue (again I'm neutral here.) The pilots have, in the past, resisted cockpit cameras for fear of inappropriate use by their employers. This tradegedy may be enough, politically, to get them installed.



<< 9. Ejectable black boxes (or data pods). In addition to the main recorders, planes could have ejectable ones. On normal approach, this is disabled. On steep approaches, collision-alert conditions, or by manual means, this pod can be ejected from the plane for retrieval away from the plane. It could have a parachute and radio/light beacon for easy location. >>



As far as I know, all of the "black boxes" are still intact and "transponding" their location. They can withstand incredible odds so I don't see what having ejectable boxes would fix.



<< 10. Thoroughly search every individual, using pat-down. Also, open every piece of luggage, whether it is checked in or a carry-on. Limit the number and size of carry-ons. >>



Again, this goes back to my original point. Will we tolerate these levels of security and the inconvenience they cause us a year or two from now?...If someone is willing to sacrifice their life an event such as Tuesday's it's difficult to preclude. All they have to say is they have a hidden bomb and they are likely to get what they want.
 

marcio

Senior member
Feb 23, 2001
323
0
0
<<Also, open every piece of luggage, whether it is checked in or a carry-on. Limit the number and size of carry-ons.>>

This is one measure that has no cost to implement and it does not affect our civil liberties, so I don't understand why it's never mentioned. If you reduce the number of carry-ons, you can throughly search a larger percentage of the luggage brought into the passenger area with the existing man/equipment power.




 

SinMen

Golden Member
Oct 31, 2000
1,136
0
0


<< Arm the pilots with guns
These guys are usually ex-Navy or Airforce, so having a side arm would not be a big deal.
Secure the cockpit door
Make the dam door is bulletproof. Once the engines start on the plane the door must be secured and never opened for any reason.
Require air marshalls to fly on all planes.
No uniforms - just specially trained individuals packing heat.
>>


1. Great, I don't have to worry about getting a weapon in the plane. It's there already.
2. Anything happens to the pilots, we are screwed, even if we have anyone else on board who can fly the plane.
3. Marshals will be trained may be what 40 hours a week to protect us. Terrorists are probably trained days and nights to hijack the plane, especially when they know the weapon is already there. The terrorists might still have the upper hand.

I don't have any idea what we can do to make planes safer, but just like we try to make anything fool-proof, some fool is going to find a way to break it.
 

shifrbv

Senior member
Feb 21, 2000
981
1
0
I saw some of the security that Israel uses in their airports and planes. I must say it was impressive and they haven't had a hijacking since 1986.

They have double reinforced steel doors to the cockpit that are impenetrable. Passengers must check-in 2 hours before their departure and they have a myriad of checkpoints for luggage (x-ray, decompression chambers, etc.) to detect weapons, bombs, etc. Then they have 2 plain clothes commandos travelling incognito on every flight. In addition, they have thorough routine screening of airport workers, from pilots to baggage handlers.

I would think the US could learn alot by looking at their system. In their area and with the high tensions, it's impressive that there have been no incidents in over 15 years.

For people who say "is it necessary". Ask anyone of those people killed in the incidents and I'm sure no amount of money would be out of the question for them to have their loved ones back.

We've got to stop being complacent about this. The precendent has been set.
 

yoda291

Diamond Member
Aug 11, 2001
5,079
0
0
While we're at it, why don't we just fund xanadu? It's supposed to be able to capture and read brain waves, so we know who's planning on hijacking the plane. BTW, that was sarcasm. I'm not seriously asking you to fund Xanadu.
 

Dunbar

Platinum Member
Feb 19, 2001
2,041
0
0


<< <<Also, open every piece of luggage, whether it is checked in or a carry-on. Limit the number and size of carry-ons.>>

This is one measure that has no cost to implement and it does not affect our civil liberties, so I don't understand why it's never mentioned. If you reduce the number of carry-ons, you can throughly search a larger percentage of the luggage brought into the passenger area with the existing man/equipment power.
>>



Opening every piece of luggage sure has a cost, you have to hire people to do this and allow for the increase in time it takes to do (and the traveler is the one who pays.) It also does affect your civil liberties since it essentially assumes guilt. Again, I'm neutral here and I'm just pointing out these opposing views. I realize it's a hard position to take since the nation is still in shock. And you can mark my words, a year from now lots of people will be complaining about how inconvenient it is to fly...
 

SinMen

Golden Member
Oct 31, 2000
1,136
0
0
This might work.
1. No carry on luggage.
2. Everyone goes on the plane naked. No place to hide any weapon. Body searched of course.
 

Rudee

Lifer
Apr 23, 2000
11,218
2
76
Don't you realize that 5-6 terrorists armed with nothing more than a ballpoint pen, can hold a plane at hostage and inflict death and terror? You don't need knives, bombs or guns to kill people on a airplane.
 

desy

Diamond Member
Jan 13, 2000
5,442
211
106
The 50 Billion minimun this has cost is expensive too.
Air marshals would cost roughly 1 Billion a yr
5000 commercial flights a day
X1 marshal
X4 cause you would need 3 shifts + holidays sick etc
Means a force of 20,000 marshals
X 50,0000 in Salary not high cause you have to take in base wage, pension
Total 1 Billion
We've paid for 50 yrs of protection and if it means ticket prices increase consumers will pay if the choice is what it now is .. .
 

psteng19

Diamond Member
Dec 9, 2000
5,953
0
0


<< I was listening to a radio show this morning. A guy on there suggested there be a panic button the pilot pushes that gasses the passenger cabin putting everyone asleep. >>

The terrorists would just start wearing gas masks.



<< Arm the pilots with guns >>

If the terrorists didn't have guns while boarding the flight, they will once they take out the pilots and take their guns.



<< Require air marshalls to fly on all planes. >>

Too expensive. Same issue with the weapon already being on board.

Perhaps the best idea is just to secure the cockpit. They may slaughter all the passengers and the rest of the crew, but at least they won't take out an entire city. And once they ground the plane, they have the terrorists caught (unless they've killed themselves already).
 

Rudee

Lifer
Apr 23, 2000
11,218
2
76
What next? Are we going to insist women file down their finger nails before entering the plane? And a single Air Marshall against 4 or more terrorists spells disaster - whether the Air Marshall kills them all or not. Killing 4 terrorists with a gun requires 4 or more bullets. And 4 bullets whizzing by the small interior of an aircraft can result in disaster. I don't wan't anybody shooting guns off on any aircraft. Thats just crazy.
 

LAUST

Diamond Member
Sep 13, 2000
8,957
1
81
About Marshals being too expensive... Ehh it needs to be government funded not only will it be more safe but it will create more jobs which this country is in dire need of, and it's not some throw away job like all the people who worked for company's like "Get paid to surf"

 

Mister T

Diamond Member
Feb 25, 2000
3,439
0
0
I am truly amazed at the lack of willingness to increase security. The threat as seen on tuesday was not killing people on board the plane, but being able to use a plane as a BOMB.

<<Pilots don't have guns. . . They wouldn't be much good to them, they are busy flying planes and are in a vulnerable position hunkered down backs to the door.

Huh??? too busy flying the plane? You usually have 2-3 pilots and you have autopilot. Most of the time the plane is on autopilot anyway. The reason for arming them is that they would be the last line of defense in the event that the cockpit door was compromised.

<<How does this prevent the plane from being taken over? granted it cannot be used as a weapon then, unless it is stolen off the tarmac. Imagine a 747 loaded with 250+ people with a bomb in the cargo hold.

You can't take over a plane if you can't fly it wherever you want. Today's generation of terrorist do not care about killing the 200 people on board... they want to kill 10 times as many and bring a ciy to its knees.


He better have damn good aim, because if he shoots a window say bye bye to the plane...


The added cost of of making bullet proof windows is nothing compared to the cost of life lost on tuesday.

1. Great, I don't have to worry about getting a weapon in the plane. It's there already.

hahaha... you have been watching too many movies. You think the terrorists are going to get through a steel door and take the guns away from 2-3 armed pilots just like that? wake the fvck up.

Anything happens to the pilots, we are screwed, even if we have anyone else on board who can fly the plane.

If "something" happens which causes all pilots(2 or 3) to become incapacitated the plane is probably screwed anyway. This is a risk worth taking. Also, what scenario can you conceive of where this would happen? A lightening bolt taking out the cockpit or something? Electrronic are probably fried in that case as well.


Marshals will be trained may be what 40 hours a week to protect us. Terrorists are probably trained days and nights to hijack the plane, especially when they know the weapon is already there. The terrorists might still have the upper hand.

Do you seriously think all three planes would have crashed on tuesday if there was someone like a marhshall on board with a handgun? C'mon man, the plane that went down in PA was probably brought down by UNARMED passengers. I would take a trusty handgun over 4-6 armed holy warriors with swiss army knifes and box cutters.

Marshalls would be paid for by the government.

Perhaps those of you that feel strongly about not increasing security need to experience what it feels like to lose a loved one to terrosim. Selfish people piss me the fvck off.






 

Looney

Lifer
Jun 13, 2000
21,938
5
0
Nicely said Mister T

And just having armed pilots and an air marshall would probably deter terrorists. Israel has air marshalls on all flights, and when wsa the last time they had a plane hijacked?
 

Justarius

Member
Jul 25, 2001
35
0
0
One key factor in the idea of a bolted cockpit door, is not that it allows the passengers to be killed, but it prevents terrorists from utilizing planes, and perhaps end most hijackings.

If the US and other countries release a statement that the cockpit will NEVER be open ever on a flight, terrorists will most likely not hijack planes anymore. Most likely they'll simply stop assaulting planes altogether.