Black boxes? Plane security??

flot

Diamond Member
Feb 24, 2000
3,197
0
0
So I'm pretty baffled as to how exactly a handful of people (?) can manage
to overtake a plane using nothing but knives... which brings me to two
questions...

Have planes ever had "security guards" on board? At least internationally,
I believe trains usually do. Why not in the air? Historically I'm
curious if anything like this has ever led to that sort of security - you'd
think if there was ONE armed, plainclothes person on every
flight, the potential for violence would be pretty drastically reduced. Of
course there's the issue of cost and training, but how many people (at this
point) would object to a flat security surcharge on every plane ticket? Or
for that matter, is the airline crew allowed to carry any kind of weapon?
Obviously guns and planes don't mix. Tazers? Clubs?

And I have to look into black boxes. Is the technology there as dated as
the rest of the airline industry? Again they mentioned they record
the last 30 mins of plane activity... with all the recent advancements in
compression and solid state technolgy (128 mb nonvolitile
flashram: $49.95) have those systems been updated?!? For about $1500 I could
imagine a device capable of recording conversations throughout the plane cabin,
with a capacity of easily 120-240 minutes. How hard is it to make something
the size of a brick indestructable? And we all know the refusal to let passengers
use cell phones is utter nonsense. Most of those planes "let you send and
receive email" via their airphone service anyway. Why not have the plane
automatically connect and upload history to a central location every 15 minutes?
Then the only "searching" for the black box would be for the last 15 minutes of
conversation.

The whole thing amazes me. I keep hearing how much planning must have gone
into this attack. I think that's ludicrous. Sounds to me like a handful
of people who got lucky getting into the planes. But planning wise, how
difficult was it to find 4 cross-country flights that left at the same
time?! Clearly there's nothing you can do to stop this sort of violence.
But the low tech approach to mayhem is becoming more and more popular, and
unfortunately I'm sure this success will inspire many more...


 

Keego

Diamond Member
Aug 15, 2000
6,223
2
81
A lot of planning DID go into this plan, that's obvious because of the timing. As for black boxes... If it's not broken, dont fix it? It is most likely a waste in R&D since not that many planes crash/year that really need the black box to figure out what went wrong (stats anyone?)

A security guard would be a good idea, but that also is a waste of money once you think about how many hijacked planes there are per year (in the US).

I'm trying to look at it from a money perspective, duh it would be better to use flash or something (are those babies waterproof?) but I really doubt the aviation people would even know how to spell non volitale because obviously I can't even spell it :)
 

vegetation

Diamond Member
Feb 21, 2001
4,270
2
0
I'll agree that technology does not seem to take precedence on airlines, no doubt, due to budgetary concerns. Modern tech would allow cabin mounted cameras with high resolution and zoom capabilities (like those in LV casinos) to be transmitted and controlled from a regional ground center. If this simple tool existed, the suspects would have been identified already, and all their connections would have been found only hours after the tragedy.
 

downhiller80

Platinum Member
Apr 13, 2000
2,353
0
0
Everyone keeps on going on about how much planning was needed for that sort of co-ordingation. Bull-shit I say.

They hijacked two consequtive airplanes from Boston and they both hit the towers. Not much planning required for that. They took off 15minutes apart and hit 15minutes apart.

Car bomb etc would just be on a timer, easiest thing in the world to do.

The pentagon one was quite a bit later.

I mean, if they'd co-ordinated all impacts withing a minute or two of each other THEN I'd be impressed, but this took about an hour in all - seems pretty sloppy to me.

- seb
 

Keego

Diamond Member
Aug 15, 2000
6,223
2
81
They hijacked **4** planes you guys, all had a california destination so that means they had a considerable amount of fuel. If you think this was a spur of the moment thing that a bunch of guys thought up while watching monday night football, you sir, are dillusional.




<< I mean, if they'd co-ordinated all impacts withing a minute or two of each other THEN I'd be impressed, but this took about an hour in all - seems pretty sloppy to me. >>



damn that is a bad comment.
 

TRUMPHENT

Golden Member
Jan 20, 2001
1,414
0
0


<< I mean, if they'd co-ordinated all impacts withing a minute or two of each other THEN I'd be impressed, but this took about an hour in all - seems pretty sloppy to me. >>



It sounds like the passengers on the Plane 4 had gotten word of the earlier bombings from their cellphones and realized the jig was up. We will never know if they intervened until that black voice box is recovered and analyzed. It will be the easiest to find. I find this to be as remarkable as anything. The crew and passengers of that plane should be awarded a medal of honor. That was a selfless act.
 

TRUMPHENT

Golden Member
Jan 20, 2001
1,414
0
0


<< I mean, if they'd co-ordinated all impacts withing a minute or two of each other THEN I'd be impressed, but this took about an hour in all - seems pretty sloppy to me. >>



I forgot to mention. The terrorists were at the mercy of the airlines schedules. If there were no delays, hmm, the timing may have been tighter maybe. The window of tactical surprise was pretty well utilized. If thier best chances were to use the planes chosen, I would have to say they did their attack very well. That is scarey to say the least. Three of four planes make it all the way. The effects were devastating. I wonder if the second tower would have remained standing if not hit and after the first tower fell. It would have been a national tragedy if only one plane made it to target, whichever one. You should be impressed, I am. I am waiting eagerly to see what the responses will be. I hope the wrath of God lands on the perpetrators.
 

shifrbv

Senior member
Feb 21, 2000
981
1
0
I think it's very impressive as well. If you think of the hundreds of flights in the US each day, they only got a very, very, very small percentage. Yet of that, they mangaged to overtake all 4 planes successfully which means their strategy worked and it worked very well.

C-SPAN reported this morning that from one of the cell phone calls they had determined on one of the flights that many of the flight crew had been stabbed. I think the terrorists operated on a "panic" strategy. Create as much chaos, start stabbing people in a very short amount of time then overtake the plane. Remember, these incidents happened right after take off and the planes were ultimately destroyed in all less than an hour.

I can easily see how it might happen. Earlier reports this year of "air rage" weren't even handled properly by many flight staff and people had been hurt. Knowing this, that staff are often improperly trained to deal with violence in the air, and the fact that cockpits aren't locked shut during flights and have no camera access to the outside cabins, the whole situation was just a ticking time bomb.