• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

what to do about homicidal pilots?

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Linflas said:
When you get some evidence that showed that he crashed the plane to effect some political change that in his mind would benefit his cause then come back with your your terrorist act stupidity.
Click to expand...

the political change will be new laws, new taxes. why are you so obtuse?
 
maddogchen said:
if google can make self-driving cars, they can make self flying airplanes! 😛
Click to expand...

Autopilot can handle most of the routine operations of flight from takeoff to landing. The pilot's primary jobs are to program and supervise the autopilot, take over in case of an emergency, navigate, and land at airports that might not have an ILS.

To go fully automated would be pretty costly. It's not just about installing more sophisticated AI in the planes themselves. Ground systems would also have to be upgraded to administer flight plans and handle air traffic control. Which isn't a problem for most first world countries but will be an expensive endeavor for others.

Of course the other issue with automated planes is what happens if a sensor is faulty.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turkish_Airlines_Flight_1951
 
So, what will happen when a pilot "jokes" about crashing a plane? Will they get tackled, beaten and arrested?

$10 say no, no they won't.
 
tynopik said:
So now that the '9/11' cockpit security doors may have killed more people than they saved, what's the solution? ...
Click to expand...

They killed almost 3,000 people? Really?

Anyway, there's more to the 9/11 security precautions than locking doors. There are procedures to go along with it. We adopted the procedure that there *must* be 2 people in the cockpit at all times. It seems Europe (or at least some of Europe) did not.
 
Last edited:
In all seriousness- nothing should change, other than the mandate of 2 people in the control room at all times. This is now the 3rd murder suicide by a pilot in ... 17 years? How many MILLIONS of flights have happened over that time period where this wasn't an issue?

No need to implement some insane protocols over something that is extremely rare (as sad as the situation is).
 
17.51 The Telegraph's Education Editor, Javier Espinosa, has the full statement from easyJet about a change in their policies thant there will be two crew members in the cockpit at all times.

easyJet can confirm that, with effect from tomorrow Friday 27 March, it will change its procedure which will mean that two crew members will be in the cockpit at all times. This decision has been taken in consultation with the Civil Aviation Authority.

"The safety and security and of its passengers and crew is the airline's highest priority."
Click to expand...
Txt
 
Effed up situation.

After 2001, it seems like passengers and flight attendants routinely zerg rush trouble makers on flights. That can probably be factored into any new security policies.
 
z1ggy said:
In all seriousness- nothing should change, other than the mandate of 2 people in the control room at all times. This is now the 3rd murder suicide by a pilot in ... 17 years? How many MILLIONS of flights have happened over that time period where this wasn't an issue?

No need to implement some insane protocols over something that is extremely rare (as sad as the situation is).
Click to expand...

Flight crew can carry firearms. If they want to crash a plane, they will. Having a second person in the cockpit is just as much security theater as sniffing my shoes.
 
Pantoot said:
Flight crew can carry firearms. If they want to crash a plane, they will. Having a second person in the cockpit is just as much security theater as sniffing my shoes.
Click to expand...

How would a 2 person mandatory rule be a bad thing? Seems like it would have at least helped in this situation.
 
there is really zero reason the pilot has to be on the plane anyway, just make it remote controlled and you can have every pilot supervised on the ground. the military flies drones the size of large aircraft all the time, all by remote. the plane actually can pilot itself apart from landing and taking off anyway



remove the pilot from the plane. problem solved
 
touchstone said:
there is really zero reason the pilot has to be on the plane anyway, just make it remote controlled and you can have every pilot supervised on the ground. the military flies drones the size of large aircraft all the time, all by remote. the plane actually can pilot itself apart from landing and taking off anyway



remove the pilot from the plane. problem solved
Click to expand...

what if the control network is hacked and all planes in the sky are simultaneously ordered to crash?
 
touchstone said:
there is really zero reason the pilot has to be on the plane anyway, just make it remote controlled and you can have every pilot supervised on the ground. the military flies drones the size of large aircraft all the time, all by remote. the plane actually can pilot itself apart from landing and taking off anyway
Click to expand...

If we lost contact with a remotely-flown passenger plane (inevitable) and it crashed, hundreds of civilians would die.

If the military lost contact with a drone and it crashed, dozens of civilians WOULDN'T die. Big difference.
 
tynopik said:
please show where a secure cockpit door has saved ANYONE

you can argue that the mere presence of such doors has deterred attacks, but that's purely speculative
Click to expand...
That's just it: You can't possibly know how many potential hijackings were never even attempted thanks to the change, but you can assume that there would be copycat attacks if nothing changed. Even so, there have been multiple attempts to storm cockpits since doors were beefed up. Not sure why you think they don't happen:
http://www.sfgate.com/crime/article/Attempted-S-F-American-Airlines-cockpit-break-in-2372003.php

Definitely NOT "speculative."
 
Last edited:
touchstone said:
there is really zero reason the pilot has to be on the plane anyway, just make it remote controlled and you can have every pilot supervised on the ground. the military flies drones the size of large aircraft all the time, all by remote. the plane actually can pilot itself apart from landing and taking off anyway



remove the pilot from the plane. problem solved
Click to expand...

Next problem: "How do we deal with hacker terrorists hijacking the remote control system to bring down planes?"
 
tynopik said:
please show where a secure cockpit door has saved ANYONE

you can argue that the mere presence of such doors has deterred attacks, but that's purely speculative
Click to expand...

I questioned the assertion that it has "killed more."

After seeing how effective the 9/11 attack was (killing almost 3,000) it's silly to think terrorists wouldn't keep doing that as long as it continued to be effective and achievable. New policies specifically discouraged that.
 
tynopik said:
please show where a secure cockpit door has saved ANYONE

you can argue that the mere presence of such doors has deterred attacks, but that's purely speculative
Click to expand...

CZroe said:
That's just it: You can't possibly know how many potential hijackings were never even attempted thanks to the change, but you can assume that there would be copycat attacks if nothing changed. Even so, there have been multiple attempts to storm cockpits since doors were beefed up. Not sure why you think they don't happen:
http://www.sfgate.com/crime/article/Attempted-S-F-American-Airlines-cockpit-break-in-2372003.php

Definitely NOT "speculative."
Click to expand...

Nice.
 
Judging from the look of many female flight attendants outside of the US/Europe airlines, having a flight attendant inside the cockpit may increase lockout situations even more which may or may not result in an unhappy ending.
 
Ichinisan said:
I questioned the assertion that it has "killed more."

After seeing how effective the 9/11 attack was (killing almost 3,000) it's silly to think terrorists wouldn't keep doing that as long as it continued to be effective and achievable. New policies specifically discouraged that.
Click to expand...

it's not the policies that stopped stuff, it was the attitude of the passengers and crew

previously it was all 'de-escalate, give the hijacker what they want, make sure no one gets hurt', now it's 'ZERG RUSH!!!1'

THAT more that any silly policy or armored door has prevented any successful hijackings since
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top