riggerrob 561 #101 December 19, 2004 Business Aviation magazine covered this issue last year. They concluded that the best way to prevent hijacking of corporate jets involved: 1) only hauling passengers well-known to the personnel department. 2) only landing at well-patrolled airports 3) only shutting down at well-guarded FBOS 4) hiring local guards know to the FBO & corporation 5) sending pilots to decent hotels, so they can get their beauty sleep BA Magazine concluded that arming pilots was a bad idea. Far wiser to let them concentrate on flying the airplane, and if there is a serious security risk, invite someone from the security department along for the flight. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
diverdriver 5 #102 December 19, 2004 QuoteI like the idea of armed, unidentified air marshals on most flights a lot better, because they can be selected for their crowd-control and weapons skills instead of their ability to fly an NDB approach. I think the best 'weapon' pilots have right now is the cockpit door. They don't build lavatories in the cockpit Bill. Sometimes that door has to come open. Doesn't matter how strong it is. I am FOR arming more pilots. I hope one day to become a FFDO. (pronounced Fi-Doe) ChrisChris Schindler www.diverdriver.com ATP/D-19012 FB #4125 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
diverdriver 5 #103 December 19, 2004 QuoteHorrible idea. Pilots can barely fly from point A to point B let alone trust them with firearms in a combat situation. I mean have you taken a look at the morons recently? Tell you what. When they can show up for work without their blood alcohol level higher than the Eifel Tower I'll consider it. Until then let's give these geniuses as little responsibility as possible. I'll take that as a personal attack. You don't have a clue what you are talking about. I happen to take pride in the job I do. And I don't drink and fly and 99.99% of my coworkers don't either. You always have the one in there and they usually get caught at some point. Not ONE...let me repeat since you seem dense...NOT ONE airline crash has EVER been attributed to an intoxicated flight crew member. NOT ONE. Put that in your pipe and smoke it dipstick.Chris Schindler www.diverdriver.com ATP/D-19012 FB #4125 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
diverdriver 5 #104 December 19, 2004 QuoteWhich brings up an interesting idea... what if it's possible to program a flight path into that trusty Honeywell that intercepts a fairly tall building. No human hijackers necessary... the pilots wouldn't have much of an idea of what's going on or how to stop it... I guess they could take out their guns and blast away at the control panel, but I doubt that that would do much more than frighten the paxers. That 737 would then be no less of a guided missile than a Tomahawk... Well it seems you really are still learning to fly. We program the Honeywell/Collins and then we also make sure it's doing what it's supposed to be doing. We just don't sit back and sleep on takeoff. If someone runs into a building it's because they meant to do it or they had a situation that overwhelmed them from flying away from the building (engine failure/mechanical failure). Really.....stop wathching your "Die Hard 2,3,4,5" whatever since you clearly don't know anything about airliners.Chris Schindler www.diverdriver.com ATP/D-19012 FB #4125 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,672 #105 December 19, 2004 QuoteQuoteWhich brings up an interesting idea... what if it's possible to program a flight path into that trusty Honeywell that intercepts a fairly tall building. No human hijackers necessary... the pilots wouldn't have much of an idea of what's going on or how to stop it... I guess they could take out their guns and blast away at the control panel, but I doubt that that would do much more than frighten the paxers. That 737 would then be no less of a guided missile than a Tomahawk... Well it seems you really are still learning to fly. We program the Honeywell/Collins and then we also make sure it's doing what it's supposed to be doing. We just don't sit back and sleep on takeoff. If someone runs into a building it's because they meant to do it or they had a situation that overwhelmed them from flying away from the building (engine failure/mechanical failure). Really.....stop wathching your "Die Hard 2,3,4,5" whatever since you clearly don't know anything about airliners. Hey Chris, isn't there a FAR that says pilots have to be paying attention when below 10,000ft? Can't be working on your investment portfolio or reading the NYT. ... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 7 #106 December 19, 2004 Quoteok the pilots obviously have to leave the cockpit for bathroom breaks correct? And if they are carrying the gun with them to the bathroom, conceivably a terrorist could ambush him, get the gun, and bad things would happen. So I am ok with pilots carrying guns, but only if they are qualified, and if they leave the gun in the cockpit during the flight. You clearly don't understand how they system is designed to work. The pilots are not going to carry tham like sidearms. They are going to be carried to the plane and then left in the cockpit in a locked box."No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
LearningTOfly 0 #107 December 19, 2004 Okay, ouch, that was a tad rough, but your call... I'll admit I have a bit to learn here and there, but I may have a little more up my sleeve than you assume. I'm well aware of the professionalism of commercial pilots, and share in that degree of professionalism myself. By saying "...except for the landing...", I was simply making a facetious comment that any other pilot in the know would take lightheartedly as well. The point I was trying to make is that what if it's possible for a third party to install a virus type program onto the autopilot system that cancels the programmed plan as the aircraft is climbing through 10,000 say, and reprograms a rather doomed flight plan back into the system. After that, the interface available to the pilot may be useless... couple that with the great fly by wire technology, and the crew will be left scratching their heads. After that, everybody's just along for the ride... On a slightly different note, just because I'm curious... how would having an engine failure overwhelm someone enough to cause them to put it into a building? Most pilots I know would want to LIVE after an unscheduled arrival... but to each his own. (I've never seen any of the "Die Hard(s)" you speak of....) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,465 #108 December 19, 2004 >I'll take that as a personal attack. It's not. People can attack pilots, democrats, the french, Rumsfeld etc. all they want. That's what this board is for. They just can't attack imdividual people who post here. >Put that in your pipe and smoke it dipstick. Consider this your one warning. No personal attacks, even if you think you have been wronged. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
diverdriver 5 #109 December 20, 2004 Quote>I'll take that as a personal attack. It's not. People can attack pilots, democrats, the french, Rumsfeld etc. all they want. That's what this board is for. They just can't attack imdividual people who post here. >Put that in your pipe and smoke it dipstick. Consider this your one warning. No personal attacks, even if you think you have been wronged. I'm getting a warning? You're defending Tunaplanet? Ok... if you must. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 7 #110 December 20, 2004 QuoteIt's not. People can attack pilots, democrats, the french, Rumsfeld etc. all they want. That's what this board is for. They just can't attack imdividual people who post here. Can they attack oh say Moderators (as a group, not a single one)"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 7 #111 December 20, 2004 QuoteI was simply making a facetious comment that any other pilot in the know would take lightheartedly as well. I'm a pilot, and it seemed to me that you were slamming them also."No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,465 #112 December 20, 2004 >Can they attack oh say Moderators (as a group, not a single one) Sure - as long as you agree it's OK to attack all men named Ron! (a much larger group than the puny group of moderators) (obligatory disclaimer - the above was a joke.) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 7 #113 December 20, 2004 QuoteSure - as long as you agree it's OK to attack all men named Ron! (a much larger group than the puny group of moderators) People do now, but I can't ban them for it"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
LearningTOfly 0 #114 December 21, 2004 QuoteQuoteI was simply making a facetious comment that any other pilot in the know would take lightheartedly as well. I'm a pilot, and it seemed to me that you were slamming them also. Okay, sorry about that then, I take it back... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
