Air Marshals/Armed Pilots/Incident

NousDefionsDoc · 12-12-2005, 20:04

How does the recent incident impact your thinking on arming pilots?

Goggles Pizano · 12-12-2005, 20:15

I have always espoused the armed pilot. They should be trained properly of course but their responsibility to the passengers should not halt with their knowledge of flight. Add to that a ramp up of security measures prior to boarding and I'd feel safer flying the friendly skies again.

Terrorist Math: Five terroists with knives vs. Three flight officers with handguns.

You lose Haji.

**The Reaper** · 12-12-2005, 20:18

Last line of defense, as long as it is kept in the cockpit.

If you can't train them and trust them with a gun, they shouldn't be hauling around 500 people and half a million pounds of fuel and aluminum.

Definitely yes.

TR

Blarney · 12-12-2005, 20:18

Quote:

Originally Posted by NousDefionsDoc

How does the recent incident impact your thinking on arming pilots?

i would say the pilots need a gun, or at least a trained operative on board that can effectively wield one, esspecially in that situation, or even in the air. Pilots though need to be thorughly trained and screened, cant have a crazy on board with the power of bullets. I'm not an expert, but the benefits outweigh the risks and results. Though there is that potential to have the pilot fail though and the hijacker could get the gun, but pilots should be trained effectively. So, yes I would say that pilots should carry a sidearm to protect the plan in such an emergency.

Doc · 12-12-2005, 20:21

Yes.

I think it could be another layer of the onion (protection).

Doc

Sacamuelas · 12-12-2005, 21:25

The recent incident didn't affect my opinion as the poll sort of suggests, but I don't care if they are armed as long as the requirements are for use in the cockpit only as a last line of defense. IMO, the threshold for action by the actual cockpit crew should fall into the scenario of entire loss of control of the aircraft.

I wouldn't want a pilot coming out into coach or 1st class to confront a potential threat . I would prefer a true expert in that CT field perform that action. If not, at least an federal AM or other LEO do it verses a minimally trained crew member/pilot who would risk breaching the security of the cockpit to come out to attempt to handle the problem.

**Roguish Lawyer** · 12-12-2005, 21:29

I don't think it necessarily matters how good the pilots would be in action because there likely would be some level of deterrent effect. But I defer to the experts.

NDD, the poll is lopsided right now. When are you going to tell everyone why they're wrong?

Sacamuelas · 12-12-2005, 21:33

I thought the TS didn't like the idea of armed pilots from a thread in the past. But I have been wrong before...

**Roguish Lawyer** · 12-12-2005, 21:34

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sacamuelas

I thought the TS didn't like the idea of armed pilots from a thread in the past. But I have been wrong before...

I believe you are correct.

12-12-2005, 21:45

Personally, I would want to leave that to air marshalls.

j

**The Reaper** · 12-12-2005, 21:50

Quote:

Originally Posted by eva05

Personally, I would want to leave that to air marshalls.

j

1. It is public knowledge that not every flight has air marshals.

2. The air marshal(s) will likely be neutralized before the assault on the cockpit. Ready to go where they want to take you?

3. Since you are not being asked to do anything other than sit in your seat, what is your opposition to it based on?

TR

Gypsy · 12-12-2005, 21:53

My vote is absolutely yes, with proper training and as a last line of defense. The most recent incident didn't have anything to do with my vote however.

Huey14 · 12-12-2005, 22:06

I'm of mixed opinion. I've met pilots who have no business being in charge of a dodgem car, let alone a 747/A380 and a shotgun (or whatever).

How armoured are the cockpit doors these days (without going into OPSEC of course)? Might it be worth it to take out the first few rows of first class and add an extra security area for cockpit access?

BTW:

Quote:

A law allowing armed air marshals to operate on flights to and from New Zealand is likely to be introduced next year.

Transport Safety Minister Harry Duynhoven says the government wants to amend legislation to allow foreign armed air marshals to be deployed on foreign airlines arriving or departing from New Zealand.

He says air marshals would only be permitted on flights if the security situation changed drastically. He says New Zealand has to be prepared for that eventuality.

Duynhoven says so far no requests have been received from other countries, to place armed in-flight security officers on flights to New Zealand.

A spokesperson for the Airline Pilots Association Paul Lyons says pilots expect to be fully consulted if a decision is made to introduce air marshals.

12-12-2005, 22:20

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Reaper

3. Since you are not being asked to do anything other than sit in your seat, what is your opposition to it based on?

My opposition is simply that I don't feel comfortable with people who have little to no training being armed and put on a plane with me.

I also wonder if it really would be much of a deterrent? People who are getting on a plane to crash it into a building (such as in the case of 9/11) are prepared to die anyway. Losing one or two of their people taking the cockpit, is that really going to stop them? What's to prevent them from using human shields or executing people until the pilot opens that door?

I fly a lot for my job, so I want airplanes to be a safe place where I don't have to worry about someone hijacking the plane. I just don't see how giving pilots Glocks is going to help.

Personally I'd rather pay an extra $100 a ticket to pay for an air marhsall or two to be on every flight. Know that that person has been trained to deal with that situation and can respond to it. Or pay an extra $150 for extra screening and security on the aircraft itself and all passengers boarding the plane.

j

**Ambush Master** · 12-12-2005, 22:21

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Reaper

Last line of defense, as long as it is kept in the cockpit.

If you can't train them and trust them with a gun, they shouldn't be hauling around 500 people and half a million pounds of fuel and aluminum.

Definitely yes.

TR

I totally concur here.

The ONE thing that most of the "Public" fail to consider, is that BEFORE 9-11, the general rule was to placate the hijackers. Today, what will definitely happen is that the "Bubbas" will step in and overwhelm the Tangos, probably before the FAMS have to disclose!!!

The Miami scene was at the gate and not an in-flight incident, TOTALLY different scenario parameters!!!

The cockpit doors have been significantly reinforced and armored.

Later
Martin

(A frequent flier and I've lived in the industry for over 30 years!!)