Thanks, I will.
Have you seen the pictures of a jet that was pressurized to similateMac wrote:
[snip]
Why non-lethal? If there is a minor problem such as a drunk or rowdy
passenger, the other passengers can deal with it just fine. An
undercover
security guard should reveal his or herself only when there is a
probability of hijacking or serious bodily injury, and in that
situation,
it seems to me that lethal force might be the way to go. Especially if
there is only one guard and several hijackers.
That's standard operating procedure. It would be trivial for one
hijacker to start a commotion and have the marshalls try to break it up,
revealing themselves in the process.
Have members of the cabin crew equipped with cattle prods or something
similar to put down obnoxious passengers.
Sealing off the cockpit;the current reinforced door was already
breached by
cabin cleaners using a beverage cart,knocked it clear off the hinges.
Plus the door must be opened for toilet breaks,or for other reasons.
IOW,not practical.
Well, as part of a multi-tiered effort, it is probably not a bad idea.
But
arming the pilots and or putting under-cover feds on the airplanes could
also be part of the solution.
Sometimes I joke that instead of taking away sharp things from
passengers
they should give knives to every passenger as they board. Think about
it.
The good guys always outnumber the bad guys. What we need is to make
sure
the bad guys can't overcome this numerical superiority with weapons.
Strangely, I have never found anyone who agrees with me. ;-)
A friend of mine (ex military intelligence) suggested allowing people
with concealed weapons permits to carry onboard aircraft. Aside from the
problem that there is no guarantee of a minimum level of competence
among civilians permitted to carry weapons (there really isn't for
police either), I don't think its a bad idea.
--
Paul Hovnanian mailtoaul@Hovnanian.com
------------------------------------------------------------------
At some point it becomes necessary to behead all the architects and
begin construction. -- Abi-Bar-Shim (Project Mgr. - Great Pyramid)
You still have extra salaries and pensions to pay,and after some time,they
Ain't gonna happen;theres too many aircraft already in service,and couldSealing off the cockpit;the current reinforced door was already
breached by cabin cleaners using a beverage cart,knocked it clear off
the hinges. Plus the door must be opened for toilet breaks,or for
other reasons. IOW,not practical.
Actually, I was thinking total isolation of the pilots; no physical
path between cockpit and passenger zone, with no communication forward
except a single button in the passenger area, secured with a code,
that meant 'emergency, land as soon as possible'. They would need
their own bathroom...
Along with US Law Enforcement personnel that might be travelling.
This is a myth.it even was debunked on Mythbusters TV show.
The pilots do not have control over the O2 levels.
Yes,it is a strict TSA rule.
So you have a bunch of terrorist carrying weapons, the general public pulls
Really, I dont think that is the case ( trace my IP), where I work we have
Scott Adams: "Atheist Airlines":
;-)
Communication satellites - Arthur C Clarke, 1945, albeit he might have
actually make it work."
Reminds me of my idea to keep Jihadist terrorists from boarding the plane.
It was indeed 'real science'.
Actually it was *geostationary* satellites that he forsaw ! Pretty clever to
Reference the Ahoha flight that had a huge section of skin tear off and
If the terrorists know (or suspect)that there are armed people aboard,they
The test that was performed was of an amount of plastic explosives
Not really. The flight crew has minimal control over cabin pressure
aul@Hovnanian.comNo. I think the terrorists would loose bladder control at that point.
aul@Hovnanian.com