 |
   |
  |
|
| BACK
* RushOnline.com * Links
* War Photos * Visitor
Index |
|
|
|
|
|
| BACK
* RushOnline.com * Links
* War Photos * Visitor
Index |
(page 1 of 2)
December 28, 2001
FLIGHT CREWS
As Security Demands Grow, Street Smarts Take to the Air
By DANA CANEDY with KATHERINE E. FINKELSTEIN
Jared Leeds for The New York Times
Tammy Mauzey says she feels safer in the air knowing passengers will help.MIAMI, Dec. 27 — Cristina Jones is hurting, literally, and angry. Her hand is swollen, her back is bruised and whatever sense of security she managed to hold on to after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks is gone."One moment I'm O.K. and the next day I feel like I'm going to have a nervous breakdown," said Ms. Jones, the flight attendant on American Airlines Flight 63 who struggled with a passenger trying to light a fuse in his shoe on the flight bound for Miami from Paris on Saturday. The man, a Briton identified as Richard C. Reid, shoved and bit Ms. Jones on her hand, leaving her with more than physical wounds.
"Me grabbing him and getting bitten was nothing compared to the next three hours," she said. It was the waiting — watching him, and not knowing what his actions signified — that was worse, she said.
In an interview, Ms. Jones recounted a harrowing experience of a midair struggle that has left her distraught and, like many pilots and flight attendants at airports across the country this week, wondering about the growing demands on flight crews to play bigger roles in airline security.
Ms. Jones and the eight other cabin crew members on Flight 63, a Boeing 767 carrying 197 people, were together for the first time today since the incident. They met for more than five hours at Miami International Airport for a "critical incident debriefing" with representatives from their union and airline. Though the crew members declined to comment after the meeting, Ms. Jones said earlier that she believed that flight attendants did not have the support and authority they would need to do what was becoming an increasingly dangerous job.
"I'm on new ground here," she said. The union that represents Ms. Jones and thousands of other flight attendants supports more aggressive training, like instruction in devices and defensive techniques, for subduing unruly passengers. "We might need to begin looking into some sort of self- defense training," said Rick Musica, vice chairman for the Miami chapter of the Association of Professional Flight Attendants.
Meanwhile, flight attendants said, security had become a matter of street smarts. "Basically, it's your own instincts, because the airlines don't have enough time to send 20,000 flight attendants through additional training right now," said Sheree Kinney, a flight attendant for Delta Air Lines. She said the security briefings crews held before each flight were helpful, because flight attendants taught each another. "Someone else brings something in they've learned from a different flight," she said. " `O.K., watch for this.' "
Pilots and crew members at Reagan National Airport in Washington said that after the confrontation Saturday on Flight 63 pressures and on-the-job stresses had once again been heightened. "If someone walks in the galley, I watch them," said a flight attendant who would not give her name. "I watch everything now."
Some pilots at Reagan National said that in this new environment they would not hesitate to use evasive flying maneuvers to try to thwart a terrorist attack. "It's better to break one passenger's arm than to risk the lives of the entire flight," said a US Airways pilot, who frequently flies domestic routes in and out of Reagan.
A flight attendant at Logan International Airport in Boston said it gave her an extra measure of security to know that passengers like the ones on Flight 63 were now willing to assist in restraining possible terrorists. "It gives us more strength," said Tammy Mauzey, who works for Continental Airlines and was on a stop in Boston on her way to Newark. "They're looking out for us."
Ms. Mauzey said she had only been uneasy about one passenger since Sept. 11. "There was one Middle Eastern man — I think in my own mind I was profiling," Ms. Mauzey said. "Because he had a turban, and that was just a week after the 11th, I cringed a little bit at the sight. But he didn't do anything. In fact, he was a frequent flier."
At Miami, Brenda Leal, a flight attendant with Grupo Taca of Guatemala, an airline serving Central America, said she was concerned about airlines in countries where airport security was not as stringent as it is now in the United States. "We're not even close to the security here in the United States," Ms. Leal, who is based in Guatemala, said, "but we fly to New York, Miami, Los Angeles and San Francisco, and those are key points."
Ms. Leal said airlines should consider some training in terrorist profiling and suspicious passenger behavior. Lisa Ciseros, a flight attendant for American for two years, said that crews had become creative. "We make sure we have things around us to protect ourselves," she said. "We make sure we have some hot coffee going in case we have to use it."
* * * The only reason I am writing today is because you have a better chance than I do on having an impact on the thick headed (So called ) Security experts that are in charge of security both at our airports and on our commercial air planes.
The plans they are putting in place will help make the sky's a safer place but there are better ways to go about protecting our passengers and the people on the ground, however this requires them to think out side the box so to speak.
The long and short of it is this; you can not protect people in the air completely with ground based methods, and ground based methods will only truly work well if we violate peoples Constitutional rights and become very intrusive. ( The liberals are all for this). The answer is that the protection must be on the air plane and always be on the airplane with every flight.
Do we add extra personnel ? "NO" we change and add to job descriptions of people who are already on the airplane!
1. Arm the flight deck crew.
2. Change the flight attendants job description to include security function and arm them too. ( this would be cheaper than sky marshals on every flight).
3. Armored cockpit doors that remain locked during flight with no exceptions.
With this plan in place it wouldn't matter "IF" hijackers did get on board with a few knives or even a gun, the attendants would be trained to think in terms of the total aircraft and loss of life and act in that accordance, and shoot to kill first!
A few more changes like requiring every passenger to remain in his/her seat with the seat belt on would also be a good idea (potty trips would be escorted) , and close circuit TV for the flight engineer to be able to monitor the cabin.
With this plan in place the ground based security would be less important, and any slip up would be minimized. No system can be 100% , but this plan would be a lot closer than anything the FAA plans! Adding your voice to mine might help them hear this idea otherwise I am a lone voice that will never be heard!
Dr Watson
* * * We the people of the United States of America cannot be free unless we allow airlines to take the time to check all bags in airports. Bleeding hearts have had their day.
People who complain about the time it takes in Airports to check bags and airplanes, stay home. We the people want to fly but fly safe. Time is all we have now. There are thousands of people dead, thousands of families affected by the inability of bleeding hearts to understand the power of punishment in our country. We provide these liberals the platform but they took our freedom.
Now what?
If you don't like it here, in a free country, try living in Cuba or Mexico or other countries that only care about those on top, the man with the money the man with the military walking with him in his every step. The only way those leaders can walk around is with guns to protect their sorry ___es. America is truly the home of the brave. We have forsaken many people today with a lack of holding these terrorist up and exposing them for the burden they are.
Punishment should be a reality in our country, now will you keep the security in airports tight? Many have paid the price! How many more times will the people of America pay the price because you let the bleeding hearts wear you down. So now will you keep the security tight? Airports, Airlines, Pay the scale. Hire the best! The primo people! The people who are truly interested in making our country a wonderful place for all to live and raise their families.
Freedom does have a price. You need to take a hold of what needs to be done and do it. These spies in our government should be put away permanently, they do not deserve a trial by their peers, they have no peers at that point. Americans try to understand what the heck the government does in their business meetings and business attire, lets get to work, roll up those sleeves, think a minute about the cost of freedom. We the people can be patient as long as you are doing something, no more Mr. Nice Guy, America. Check my bags in the airport, be patient and we will be free.
* * * I wanted to put a thought out and this might be a good way to have it tested.
Among the news and commentary yesterday, two concepts were clear:
1. a commercial airliner is an excellent destructive weapon at a very low-cost to the malevolent party.
2. Airport security is a nothing but a nuisance to honest travelers.
To keep air travel viable, I suggest the following: all commercial jets be modified so that the cockpit has a separate entrance, separate lavatory and separate galley. There should be no access to the cockpit from the rest of the plane. Terrorists will still be able to hi-jack planes, intimidate forced landings, and even destroy them - BUT they will not be able to fly them. That would make a huge difference in future safety of all of us.
It would put an end to small children being able to see the driver, but it is a small price to pay to eliminate a route to catastrophe.
Bill - Ambler, PA
* * * It is a tragic ending that did not have to happen! The FAA could have helped stop this terrible act by keeping a program in place that no longer exists. This program was known as "Sky Marshals". These FAA officers were placed on planes as a security or police officer for the plane and its occupants.
If these officers were placed on those planes today, this tragedy would not of happened. A pair of highly trained individuals for this very situation is needed without question. But, due to financial reasons life and safety were sacrificed.
It is a terrible day for all Americans to have there lives placed below the interests of saving a buck! The FAA and the Federal government need to wake up and place human life in place of the interests of big airline business.
* * * Rush's comments; (9-12-01) regarding how it is a plane load of people would let someone with a knife or box cutter control them.
Obviously, you have never been accosted by someone with a weapon and your life threatened. It takes mental and physical preparation to deal with a knife or similar object, especially if the attacker is determined to sacrifice his or her life as part of the attack.
I doubt that the vast majority (95% or more)of the passengers never had the training or need to use hand to hand combat to defend themselves. I am not an expert in combat, but did grow up in an area that required me to meet and handle armed thugs. So, I would like to make the following observations and recommendations:
1. These passengers did not have a clue until it was too late, that they needed to act immediately to disarm the terrorists (you rightly pointed this out)
2. Law abiding citizens have been systematically disarmed and indoctrinated that we can safely rely on the government to protect us (911 did not even believe one caller).
3. I wonder how long the terrorists would have survived on El-Al, Swissair, or Lufthansa. We should examine why these airlines have not had similar take-overs in recent years.
4. Once upon a time, armed air-marshals were on our planes. Is there a reason why we don't do this anymore? Or were the air marshals comforting stories and never existed?
5. Is there a reason why we trust the pilots and air crew to fly these planes and yet not have a means to protect themselves?
6. Finally, you had a caller lamenting why malls in San Diego closed yesterday. Obviously, we cant do this very long, but he must have forgotten how the terrorists managed to plant a bomb under the car of the wife of the US Navy commander of the guided missile cruiser that shot down that Iranian Air bus a few years ago. These are determined terrorists, and some prudence is advised. We cannot go along glibly like this was a pipe bomb explosion. I would like that caller to name a place that is not a target. Try rural or semi-rural towns.
Thanks for letting me vent.
So Cal Guy
* * * Why aren't our pilots armed ?!! Every pilot should wear, or have easy access to, a side arm. Stewardess should have the same, and ALL trained to USE them !! The idea that loonies can take over an airliner with a (plastic) knife is absurd. Armed pilots has been talked about, but the anti-gun crowd cried and wept -- they got their way, and what we all saw happen was their fault and could have been prevented. The plane that crashed in PA was done by a very brave pilot who didn't have a gun, but was quick enough to do what he HAD to do.
Also - they now have a gas that could be triggered in any plane that would put everyone, except the pilots, (with masks) to sleep. Then land and wait for all to awaken, with the police handy.
Airport security is a joke. There has to be much more serious steps taken in the air.
Warren
* * * Terrorism and Travel
While the short-term goal of terrorists may be murder, their ultimate goal is terror, and the fundamental changes that terror creates in everyday lives.
Today I have heard reports that yesterday's attacks on the flight crews were in some cases conducted with razor blades from shaving kits. Apparently, as a result of this, proposals for airport pre-boarding security measures are being made that would prohibit curb-side check-in, disallow carry-ons, etc.
The only way to approach actual establishment of security at the pre-boarding point is to additionally strip-search all passengers, since plastic knives could easily be taped to arm or leg. If we follow this line of reasoning to its logical conclusion, no person with martial arts or military hand-to-hand combat training can be allowed to be a passenger on a commercial aircraft, either.
And what about baggage, cleaning, and food delivery crews? Who will thoroughly search every inch of each plane after service and before boarding to make sure no weapons were left for co-conspirators? Who verifies the integrity of these searches, or the searchers?
While statements like, "We're doing something" and "I'm confident that the American public will accept the inconvenience in exchange for safety" make for easy political rhetoric, these procedures will in reality depress an already shaky airline industry and its ancillaries (car rental, etc.).
If four to six hours are required for check-in and security, and businessmen are not allowed to take their briefcases or laptops, more people will drive rather than fly. No one uses commercial aircraft because they enjoy it; they travel this way for the speed and convenience. Take that away and people won't support the airlines because they think it's patriotic; they'll find a better way, if it's available.
All of this restriction in freedom of travel rewards the terrorists by allowing them to achieve their ultimate goal. Please don't misunderstand - I don't advocate a complete abandonment of pre-boarding precautions. It's just that safety against this type of terrorism simply cannot be achieved at the pre-boarding/pre-departure stage.
The real vulnerability in our system, the one which allowed Tuesday's terrorists to attack the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, is our policy regarding hijacking. We have always told flight crews to go along with hijackers, and in the past this has worked. But now things have changes, and what we really need to do is address security in flight.
To that end, I suggest a policy change should be made to keep hijackers off the flight deck. Period. No matter what they may threaten. Reinforce the cockpit door so that it can't be forced open with a shoulder. Add a video camera so the flight crew can view the aisle before making a bathroom break, etc. There is certainly a risk in the short term to flight attendants and passengers, but once hijackers learn they won't be humored, even for a few minutes, there's no more prize.
Install a panic button in the form of a "dead man's" switch. Not something that requires entry of a code to activate, but a pressure-sensitive switch that responds, perhaps, to the pilot's weight in the seat. When the pilot gets up, the switch triggers a transponder, unless the pilot deactivates it first by entering a code. A simplistic overview, but workable details could easily follow. If the transponder goes off, and air traffic controllers can't reach the pilots, scramble the fighters to check things out.
Reinstate the sky marshal program. This worked pretty well a few years ago. A less expensive alternative to sky marshals, and one that liberals everywhere will decry as being worse that Tuesday's attacks, is to enact a national, shall-issue, concealed weapon permit system to replace the current hodgepodge of state laws. Allow those citizens with legitimate permits to carry their weapons on planes. Publicize the fact that commercial aircraft are no longer risk-free havens for terrorists or criminals who expect to be the only armed people on the plane.
The safety of the traveling public, and the viability of our transportation systems, depend on no-nonsense policies and procedures that close the real vulnerabilities.
Jon Cheney
* * * Air Safety
I would like to see you put the Aircraft designers on the spot and ask them why we can not get Hi-jack proof Airplanes.
In light of the 09/11/01 Hijacking spree isn't about time we design these aircraft to be Hijack Proof? Why is there a door from the cockpit to the passenger cabin? Could we make an exterior entrance to the Cockpit so hijackers cannot reach the cockpit at all? So the pilots can not open the door under threats against the crew.
Then Bullet Proof the Wall between the cabin and the cockpit so the pilot can not be shot through the bulkheads. This way taking the passenger cabin will result in an emergency landing and a SWAT team being called. Not the control of a flying bomb being turned over to determined nuts.
Why can't they set a computer program on the aircraft to engage the Autopilot with a very sophisticated ground command? During a Hijacking the computer will send the plane to a preset (unpopulated) coordinate to circle. That way no one on the plane can change the settings.Only a special release code sent from the ground can return control of the plane. This will prevent pilots from Hijacking their own planes.
Isn't it about time we remove all carry on luggage bins and design Bomb Proofed Luggage Holds under the passenger cabins that can be emptied / dropped in flight.So when the terrorist claims to have a bomb the pilot can dump the risk in some deserted lake or field.
Why don't they get creative? Damn it! 10's of thousands are now dead. Lets say never again.It's time for the aviation engineers to shine. Design the High Jack Proof plane. Be American Engineers. Be American Heroes!
Steve / Phoenix AZ.
* * * Preventing airplane hijacking
It is very upsetting to me listening to the people in authority saying that this terrorist tragedy could not have been prevented. Or that it was "unimaginable". Clearly it was imaginable - Tom Clancy's book etc. It is my opinion that our government and military have failed us by not incorporating safeguards into the design of the airplanes to absolutely prevent this possibility. Surely they knew of the possibility of terrorists doing just what they did and if they had taken it seriously could have come up with ways to prevent it.
For example: 1) A secure locked door to prevent access to the cockpit from the main cabin or 2) preventing access to the controls via computer password lockout.
The following describes some ideas relating to computer controls.
Airplanes (large commercial ones at least) could be equipped with Global Positioning Systems and a navigation computer which would be programmed before takeoff with their next flight path. The airplane would not be able to deviate markedly from the programmed flight path without the pilot entering a password. The pilot would not know the password but would only be able to obtain this from ground control. The auto-pilot controls would override any attempt to deviate markedly from the pre-programmed flight destination unless the password was obtained from ground control and entered. Thus a hijacker could not take over control of the plane without permission from ground control.
Alternatively if auto-pilot override is considered too difficult or dangerous (or as a first-pass partial solution) at least the plane should be able to detect its own marked deviation from its pre-programmed path and radio an SOS warning to the military. This would give an early warning so intercepting planes could be scrambled as soon as the plane deviated from its programmed course.
Another alternative would be to have the airplanes designed to be able to be flown under remote control from ground control. If the plane deviated markedly from the pre-programmed path the on-board GPS and navigation computer would detect this and ground control would be immediately alerted and could take over the piloting of the plane piloting it remotely completely overriding the on-board controls. This would require that the ground override control could not itself be hijacked. Passwords could be required to come from multiple ground control locations which were extremely secure.
A self-destruct device should also be considered. This would need many fail-safes and perhaps only the President of the US would have the password or authority to activate it. If the above prevention methods should fail and it was clear that the plane was being flown into a building or such the President could remotely activate the self destruction of the aircraft before collision. This could also be used in non-terrorist situations where a mal-function of the airplane has occurred and it is clear the plane is going to crash into something critical.
Of course this is only a brief description of the ideas. I am a computer consultant and systems programmer of lifelong experience and understand the complexity of these proposals but also realize that it is well within the realm of our current technological ability. Reliability would be addressed with redundancy in the hardware. Considering the expense which goes into the design of large commercial airplanes this extra cost would be a drop in the bucket.
Sincerely
John of Lompoc CA
* * * Dear Sir
In light of large passenger aircraft recently under enemy control would it not be incumbent on us to make future attempts patent failures.
If every commercial aircraft outfitted with auto pilot also had a secondary (hijack) program in the event of a hijack(for any purpose) a crew member or ground control could engage the secondary program making it impossible for any person on board to control the plane for any length of time. Of course the avionics involved would have to be impossible to reach while in the air. The aircraft would be diverted to a safe area such as the New Mexico desert for a controlled crash if necessary or under fighter escort land at perhaps Edwards or Canaveral after the plane exits the hijack program from an outside source or return pilot control 200' AGL at the emergency landing area. Similar landing areas should be available worldwide for any plane in the air.
This is a hard solution but I believe it to be the only one that is workable. It needs to stop now.
Thank you
Ken
* * * I believe the airline industry should bear much of the responsibility for our nation's recent tragedy because it did not provide the security necessary to prevent such an event. We have experienced numerous worldwide hijackings for years, plus the newer wrinkle called air-rage. Nevertheless, both airplane physical structures and the security provided on-board have essentially remained the same for decades. My understanding, according the latest issue of the U.S. News and World Report, is that the industry leaders have rejected security-enhancing modifications and procedures in the past because of the perceived high expense. I certainly hope our nuclear power industry does not operate with this same philosophy.
The airline industry executives should feel a personal responsibility for what happened. The executives of the major carriers are primarily at fault because they set the precedent. Before this tragedy, when they knew there was a problem, they did not take a hard stance when they had the opportunity to do so. I believe these people, when they receive federal funds, should voluntarily take a major pay cut / sacrifice their personal financial compensation. I have heard no talk from them along these lines.
What do you think?
Richard
* * * Wake up America!!!
I'm a little ticked off today! Everybody cheered last night when the president declared that we were going to do everything possible to bring these terrorists to justice. That we were going to commit our young men and women to conflict to go in and find them and extract them. There were standing ovations for all the acts that we, as a nation, were going to do. BUT then I listened to Tom Seleck on TV say that the Broadway play he was in (that was packed out and setting attendance records before September 11th) was closing due to a lack of tourists coming to the play because Americans are nervous about the terrorists hitting New York again.
Then I heard from my niece (she flies for United Air Lines) that the planes are all empty because Americans are nervous that the terrorists might get on their airplane. I watch the stock market plummet because Americans are nervous about putting money on stocks that might drop because other Americans are nervous about putting their money on stocks that might drop because... THEN THE TERRORISTS HAVE WON!!! THEY HAVE ACCOMPLISHED THEIR PURPOSE!!! WE ARE LIVING IN TERROR!!! Every one of you that has changed YOUR plans because YOU don't want to face the possibility that YOU might be involved in their next act has voted against the President and in favor of the terrorists.Could they, would they, will they, hit us again. Probably so! I don't know. But if each of us give in at this point, we are sending them a message 'Keep it up, we are giving in!" I had planned to drive back to a family reunion this weekend because frankly I can't afford to fly four of us back to Indiana.
BUT I have decided to fly! I have decided to fly with my wife and two kids because I for one REFUSE to give up America to the terrorists. Am I nervous about it? To be honest, yes, a little. And so are my wife and kids. But we have peace with Jesus Christ, and we have to live with ourselves. I can't go enlist in the Marines; but, I can do something. I can send a message to the terrorists "IT DIDN'T WORK!!!! YOU AREN'T GOING TO DESTROY MY AMERICA BY SCARING ME!!" I'm going to get on an airplane and keep on LIVING!
So wake up America. Go back to work, go on with living! Go on those vacations! Make those business trips! Put that money in those stocks you were planning to buy! Yes you might lose a little money or we might have to fight another terrorist on an airplane; but, we need some more HEROES that are willing to take a little chance! That's what they did on flight 93! LET'S GET OUR HEADS OUT OF THE SAND! You are no safer in your homes than you are on the road or in the air. Let's send those terrorists a message! NOT IN MY LIFETIME!!
Rick
* * * Guns and Airline Safety
They make ammo for home owners. They do not pass through walls. Mag-Safe is one product. Made for almost all calibers. However if the person being targeted has a leather jacket it may not penetrate.
There are many other self defense weapons that can be used. IE: rubber bullets, Stun guns etc.
However I would suggest a gas that could be released that would make everyone but the cockpit crew unconscious.
* * * Arming Pilots
Even the most experienced law enforcement personnel have to take the greatest precautions that their own weapons are not taken by offenders. The danger in arming pilots is that their weapon can be used against them and passengers. unless the pilots go through rigorous training, they should not be armed. Put up an impenetrable door and change the policy in regards to allowing other pilots to have courtesy permission to fly up front.
Law Enforcement in Louisville - Susan
* * * why sky marshals won't work
Dear Rush and Concerned Airline Passengers:
My uncle & I were debating the "'sky marshals' for commercial flights" idea and he brought up 2 excellent points. 1) the reason the idea is no good and 2) a better solution. Please pose these thoughts to your listeners and let them run with it. Of all of the suggestions I have heard the media make, neither of these has been mentioned.1. SKY MARSHALS are not a good idea b/c you will still have 1 guy outnumbered by X-amount of terrorists and the X-amount of waif-like men & women flight attendants who are unable to defend themselves properly would still be there, in danger. The 1 guy per plane-thing isn't even much of a deterrent, much less a solution!
2.The SOLUTION: replace the frail image of the flight attendant which was originally designed to 'entertain' passengers with a brute-like force of "armed attendants" (retired cops, reservists and the like) who are designed to meet the challenges of this "new world" we find ourselves in. Salaries would remain comparable and training would be re-designed. Replace the glamour with security. I can't imagine anyone who wouldn't welcome the "swap" to enhance their safety!
Sincerely,
Keith & his niece, Alicia
* * * Possible solution for Aircraft Hijacking/using the aircraft as a "missile".
I am a licensed pilot, using available GPS technology and navigational equipment. I have discussed this with commercial aviation pilots and as yet, cannot find the flaw in this possible solution:
All commercial Jets have an auto pilot system which allows the aircraft to arrive at its programed destination. So reliable is the system that transoceanic flights have a "wake up alert for the flight crew. The on board computer is capable of landing the aircraft at any major airfield. The problem is that the auto pilot system cannot use "reverse thrusters required after touch down, to assist in braking so that the aircraft will not roll off the end of the runway.
The technology for the following solution not only exists today, but for the most part is already in place in today's commercial airliners. The auto pilot "nearest runway lookup, and emergency broadcast features need to be programed into a single "hijacking in progress switch. This cockpit cockpit-mounted "hijacking in progress switch would activate an auto pilot sequence which would do the following:The pilot could not, under any circumstances regain control of the aircraft.
Locate the nearest runway upon which the aircraft could land with the remaining fuel. This could be sites such as Edwards Air force base, Cape Canaveral, The great Salt Lake in Utah. Other sites could be programed into the auto pilot program.
Steer clear of major metropolitan areas. Broadcast to the FAA over the emergency frequency (121.5) , all flight information, as well as the "new destination of the aircraft. (This would allow the appropriate military response to to be waiting at the location in advance of the airliner.)
Variations could be programed into the system, such as: Allow governmental agencies on the ground to override the system in the event of some unforeseeable need.
James / Westlake Village, CA
* * * Air Line Bailout
I cant take credit for this concept, but it makes damn good sense. When we bail out the domestic airlines, we need to get for our money 15 billion dollars in travel vouchers for government employees, and Military travel. I stole this idea from the Heritage Foundation website but it make to much sense to pass up so I have called both of my Senators and my Representative and made this suggestion.
--
Michael -SSGT. USAFR
* * * The Only Way to Rebuild Trust in Air Travel
EYES IN THE SKY
Realistic air travel safety can only be accomplished in and around the aircraft. The watchful eye needs to be more focused. The interior of every aircraft must be affixed with cameras for real-time monitoring by ground-level observers. And, just as aircraft can be operated remotely from the ground, remote controlled immobilizing devices, akin to stun-guns, are needed in the cockpit.
Constant ground-controlled monitoring and activation of in-flight counter-measures will provide the only true safety in this isolated environment. Commercial buildings have surveillance posts with real-time monitoring of loading docks and trash dumpsters. Surely, we can do the same for citizens who fly. The time has come to abandon the "black box" data and voice recovery mentality and implement air-to-ground real-time video and data transmission.
On the ground, the eye of security needs to be trained more at the aircraft. Passenger delusion that the aircraft they soon board will be safe results when travelers erroneously translate security clearance anger from long lines, emptying pockets, re-entering metal detectors, and x-ray machines into a feeling of heightened in-flight safety.
Airport security is improperly focused when attention is trained on airport parameters because there are simply too many points of infiltration. If the concern is the aircraft, then position the security measures at the aircraft -- not half-mile away at a terminal. Clearly, airports have become small cities, and if you're trying to guard a bank in a city, you place your sentry at the bank -- not at the gates to the city.
Existing boarding gate areas must be geared more toward the security of the particular departing flight, with those airline employees traveling on the flight more involved in this last layer of security. The traveling public will have more confidence in a safety system that actively involves those traveling on the flight. And more use of remote boarding is needed as it arguably lends itself to a more secure environment as the aircraft is positioned away from the terminal and those boarding are more easily scrutinized.
We're not talking rocket science here. The most intense security procedures need to be focused in and about aircraft, with the last mammal to leave any aircraft before takeoff being an explosive/drug trained dog -- not an airline gate agent.
We need to immediately implement an air travel security system that is focused, one that constantly monitors all in-flight and ground-level aircraft activity.
Kevin
* * * Airplane Security Measures that Should be Taken:
1. Install a sleeping gas system with a backup of the gas going through the oxygen
system to cover all of the ship except the pilot's area.
2. Install monitors in the pilot's cabin
3. Install a separate air conditioning system for the air type cabin.
4. Install a steel roll type door on the passenger side of the air type cabin door controlled by instant remote.
Wayne
* * * Safety in the Air
The Airlines.........they've taken away the food, and the knives on most flights.....But, what about the alcohol????? Alcohol exacerbates the problems that occur with passengers......So why is alcohol consumption such a SACRED COW ? ?
We don't allow people to smoke tobacco on flights, do we?? What about my safety ?? I guess my safety rates behind that ....Is this really what the Airlines are ALL about ? ? What America is ALL about??---- Revenue from alcohol consumption ! ! Are there some things we won't do without, no matter the risks to public safety??
Perhaps so.Alan - Irving, Texas
* * *10.25.01
I just made a quick trip to Phoenix and back VIA Southwest Airlines and thought I'd let you know about their security checks.
I had a customer in Phoenix who had a problem with some photo equipment which we had sold them, so I flew out Thursday evening (Oct. 18) buying a one way ticket on SW Airlines. Since I am over 65, I was flying on a senior fare. I did not know when I would return so I bought a one way ticket since the penalty for change on a return fare was $100.
Evidently the one way ticket bought the same day fit their "terrorist profile". I told them at the counter that the bag I was checking contained tools and parts. They searched it completely, taking everything out. No problem, seemed like a good idea to me. When I got to the gate, they told me that they would be pre-boarding me. I said, "Why is that?". They said they would be searching me and wanding me, and they would call me in about 30 minutes. I asked "Don't you think that it is pretty stupid to tell me to come back in 30 minutes to be searched? How dumb would someone have to be to try to carry something through after being told they were going to be searched?" All I got was a shrug of the shoulders and a blank look. When I returned for the search, there was me, an old couple that had to be in their '80's, and another guy who must have been 75.
I returned home Saturday night with the same scenario repeated. At least the people in Phoenix acknowledged that my question deserved some thought.
Other than that, the security was good and I had no problem with it. I think that searching and wanding the old folks probably indicates that their "terrorist profile" has a few holes in it however.
Ernie
* * * Airport Security
The clear solution is to put the military in charge. They are already employed by the government with the purpose of protecting the public's best interest.
thanks,
Larry
* * * I was watching or listening to a new outlet, I don't remember which one, but I heard the reason the government is not going to be hired for airport security is that if government personnel were hired, if they weren't doing Their job, to fire them would be very hard. When people are hired for government positions, it is a life time position.
This is a pretty scary thought to me, if our government officials aren't doing the job, they can't be fired with out legalities and months, maybe years of controversy
If we can't get some one out of office that is doing a bad job, can we feel secure? Maybe government personnel shouldn't have such a cemented position. maybe they should be hired and fired just as in any other job. If you aren't doing the job you've been hired for, you're out of there!!!
But then I can't have an opinion on that because I am just an American citizen, I can only say how things are, not how they are supposed to be.From Andrea
* * * MY NAME IS TIMMY G. I HAVE AN IDEA TO HELP ELIMINATE THE PROBLEM OF SECURITY ON THE AIR LINES. WHY NOT MAKE IT MANDATORY - ONLY POSSIBLE TO PURCHASE A TICKET- THROUGH A TRAVEL AGENCY. ALL BACKGROUND WORK WOULD BE DONE THROUGH THEM ONLY. I
I SUGGEST THIS BECAUSE MOST TRAVEL AGENCIES ARE ALREADY ON LINE. ALL BAGGAGE WOULD STILL HAVE TO BE CHECKED AT THE AIRPORT, ETC. BUT ALL BAGGAGE WOULD BE CHECKED BEFORE BOARDING AT THE GATE. ALL TRAVEL FROM OUTSIDE THE COUNTRY MUST BE MADE A MINIMUM OF FIVE DAYS FOR BACKGROUND CHECK, OF ALL CUSTOMERS. CHECK THEM LIKE YOU DO FOR BACKGROUND CHECKS FOR PISTOL PERMITS.
THANKS
TIMMY
* * * AIRLINE SCREENERS...
So,
The Federal Government. will take the SAME underpaid, under-trained workers and put the same uniform badges and clothing on them------------- AND SHAZAAM ! We'll all be safer..... I Don't Think so. It will take a Very Long Time for all this Government. Supervised Training and Standards to be implemented to a proper and acceptable working level. And OUR Safety will suffer until they someday GET IT RIGHT !
Alan Hare
Irving, Tx.
* * * I'm an Airline Pilot, and was a security screener, I must disagree with you I love your show, and agree with you 99.9% of the time; However, I must disagree with you on the Airport security issue.
I worked in Lexington Ky, as an airport security checkpoint screener for several years. I have since moved on and become an Airline pilot. I actually now work in a different field, but that's another story. Take it from a Checkpoint screener, the system needs to change. I don't think they should make the current screeners Federal Employees, they need to fire the companies supplying the people, and put a trained organization in place, I think the US Marshals would be the best. I am not for bigger Government, but it doesn't mean that ALL changes in ALL cases are wrong...believe me this one is right. This is one of the BEST ways we can start to make flying safe. I worked the job, and I know the aviation industry from the inside...trust me your off base on this one.
The current airport security is an "ABSOLUTE JOKE", purely a facade to comfort the passengers...I know many would disagree, but it is the truth, not opinion. (We are after the truth, even if we disagree with what it might be right?) Every one I worked with was older than dirt, (no offense please excuse the broad generalization) and they had NO CLUE what they are doing. I feel bad for them; it's not their fault. They are mostly retired, and workout their shifts worrying about when their next break is, or who is on the X-Ray machine during the next rotation. I have seen this pattern in EVERY airport I have been through (as a pilot). In many airports, Dallas and Miami for example, I don't think many of the screeners even spoke English..(Not an exaggeration, unfortunately)
As far as rewards for better performance, they do give rewards when you nab a federally "wanted" person... One time I found $200,000. Cash in the bag of a little old lady (you can only travel with $10,000. max) Turned out she was a Philippine Drug lord(less), and there was a $10,000. Reward for me, Unfortunately my supervisor took the reward, telling the FBI that since he was the supervisor on duty, it was company policy that he receives it (Of course that wasn't true). He was in the office reading a Popular Science at the time I discovered the cash. Oh well back to safety.
About 65% of the time when a test item (lead gun, grenade, knife) is sent through the machine (X-Ray) in the same old empty briefcase, it was missed, and quietly brought to the attention of the screener, and then sent back through with the screener now aware it was there. They did this because if the test item was failed to be detected, the Airline in charge of security (in Lex it is Delta) was fined up to $20,000.00 per mistake so it was made obvious when a test item was sent through. Interestingly enough the metal detector was constantly being re-adjusted (illegally) to be less sensitive to speed things up. The screeners were supposed to randomly search baggage, but that only occurred when the "old man" would emerge from his desk of doodles and magazines and naps, to alert us to "search a few", then we would pick someone who looks like they have an attitude, and search them. The people working checkpoint are nice, and they do take their jobs seriously (by their definition) I guess, but they just aren't qualified enough to put the flying public's lives in their hands.
I could tell you more stories that would make you cringe, and I promise if you really knew what gets through, or what really goes on at Checkpoint Security, you would NEVER FLY AGAIN. As I mentioned I'm an Airline pilot. My Father also feels the same way as I do, and he has flown, as a captain, for a Major Airlines for 36 years. TRUST ME IT'S NOT SAFE. Much of this is moot anyhow, they don't even scan/check bags checked in at the curb, or at the ticket counter, so even if they boosted ALL security at the checkpoint, a bomb could be put directly into the belly of the plane and no one would know. (They do check baggage on international flights).
I could go on, but I don't want to scare anyone, and I could easily tell you stories that would scare you. I just wanted to give an insider view, and shed a little truth on the subject. I am a Conservative Christian Republican, and am not for "Big Government", but in this case, they definitely need to federalize Airport Security. Not by making existing people federal employees, but by replacing them with highly, specially trained professional police/security.
The security checkpoint screeners, although clueless and extremely ineffective, are mostly nice people, and they don't realize they are clueless, so it's not their fault; they are playing the game by the current rules. That is why we need the change. Also, don't forget, these people make ROCK BOTTOM minimum wage. I get the feeling that more money would NOT increase these peoples level of competence. One could easily earn more at McDonalds or the local convenient store.
A good comparison of Federal employees versus contracted labor would be the difference between the "60 yr old DMV worker upset about her long hours, and not seeing the grand kids enough" versus a 36 yr old US Marshall, or FBI agent, or even a seasoned police officer. Federal doesn't always mean Good, but it doesn't ALWAYS mean bad, or, that some change is not NEEDED.
I have worked in almost every aspect of the industry, and I know the hidden inside secrets that you are not going to be told elsewhere. All I ask is that you do an in depth unbiased investigation yourself. You could easily put an intern on the investigation, have him get hired locally and report to you from the inside It is very easy to get hired, they are always hiring people, in fact I guarantee he/she would get hired. Don't worry the training only takes 2 hours of videotape watching.
You are a very intelligent man, and you seem to make informed arguments and opinions, please research more before you dish out the political aspect of this. It isn't always about the politics; in this case it's about MASS Consumer safety.
Please don't "hack" me about the poor phraseology and vernacular of this letter, I wrote this in a hurry, and I am not very good at expressing what I want to say. Because I disagree with you on this issue, I hope you don't think that I am some radical fanatic I'm not. I love your show, and usually agree with your words of wisdom. I just happen to know the scoop on this one.
Thank you for your dedication during these difficult times, and your relentless pursuit of the truth.
Sven
* * * border/airport security
I have an idea on how to solve the question of private vs. government security for airports and borders. I don't know the entire history but, some time ago the US government formed and organization under the supervision of the US Army known as the Department of Civilian Marksmanship, (DCM). The army supplied organizations and individuals with decommissioned military riffles and surplus ammunition. The idea being, if there was ever an evasion of the American homeland civilians could be
prepared to defend their homes and families. The target matches are conducted in military fashion and require the use of a military style weapon. There is more information I could provide about the DCM but I am getting away from my main idea.Many, many, many Americans want to do something, anything to help. We have donated blood, donated time, given money. When it was indicated there would be a revival of the Air Martial program many of us checked into the possibility of joining up only to be told anyone over 35 would not be considered. The same holds true for military service. Americans will volunteer to do anything that will help. I know this is not the attack on US soil the DCM was originally organized to defend against
but, it could still work.Why not have volunteers under the direction of the Army, FBI, CIA, heck state or local police departments work in conjunction with private companies as security. Every town I have ever lived in has an auxiliary police program where local citizens can volunteer to work a few hours a month as a cop. Why not as border or airport security?
This would save a lot of tax dollars and let us do something we would consider to be taking an active role in defending our
country.David M.
* * * Airport Security
Rush,
As a frequent flyer, over 100 flights a year, everyone is overlooking the roll of airport security screeners!!!! There is more to their job description than just rooting around inside everyone's suitcase looking for nail files and fingernail clippers and going through their dirty laundry !!!!
The screeners should also be profiling the passengers, looking for the actions and stress levels that would indicate a possible threat. This is why the security people need to be career law enforcement type people, maybe not
FEDERAL but DEFINITELY NOT FUTURE BURGER FLIPPERS.I have flown several times since 9-11-01, both domestically and internationally, and I don't know what disturbs me more, the attempt at extra security or the lack of competence of the people doing the screening!!!
I will continue to fly out of necessity but will reduce my trips whenever possible until I feel the people doing the security checks are as dedicated to their jobs as they are to their county!!!
Mike / Palm Harbor, Florida
* * * Federalizing Airline Workers
If we're to federalize baggage, check-ins, etc. - why not pilots? Or, ground crews? or, mechanics? Give me a break! Marv Poliquin
* * * Back to Unions
Rush, you haven't mentioned that the federalizing of security workers,all 30,000 of them will be paying 30 dollars a month union dues, of which totals 900,000 dollars a month, which will go to the unions, pay back for the union vote. The Democrats don't care about security; they care about buying votes.
JACK
* * * I disagree with the federalization of airport security for the following reasons.
Airline security is being blamed for the attacks taking place instead of focusing on immigration, student visas, and our open borders. If it had not been for our lax policies in these areas, there would not have been a 9-11.
Yes, we need to take some measures at our airports such as updating scanners, ensuring that those who do the screening are american citizens, speak english, have a high school education, and have a clean criminal background.
Our main focus should be on ensuring that no-one is able to enter our country without our knowledge by having a substantial waiting period, making clear that if you lie on your application that you will be kicked out of the country and never allowed to return or apply for work, student, or travel visas or citizenship, and that anything you have made in the U.S. will be confiscated.
To become an american citizen you should have to speak english, and adopt to our society and culture. This is not asking too much if you really want to live in our country.
Once in this country, if you do not attend school, or fail to live up to your agreement for entry into the U.S., or if you commit any crime while here, you should immediately be kicked out and never allowed to return.
We should only allow those into our country who will benefit our country while they are here. After they have the education, etc. send them home and let them benefit thier own country.
Hold the education system responsible for not tracking the students attending thier schools on visas. Hold businesses responsible for hiring illegals or for not reporting people on work visas who have left thier employment.
Lets remove anybody who is already here on expired visas or illegally and make sure that they go through the system the same as everybody else. We should not grant them immunity for lying or cheating which they have already done. You don't become lax on a criminal because he has already committed the crime and you didn't catch him right when he committed it.
Don't let immigration be dictated by our own needs for cheap labor, or to satisfy a political need with another country. Don't grant the same rights or protections to non-citizens as we do to ourselves until they have earned the right to be called an american. They should not be able to use our laws against us or our social service system.
Lets build back the military by reinstituting the draft. Young people need the discipline and structure regime of entering the service. Many kids have nothing else to build thier pride, confidence, and self-esteem, and disicpline. By having been in the military, they will always have something in thier lives they can associate with and take pride in. It also will help to create a sense of loyalty towards the United States.
Thank You,
Larry
GO TO: Page 2
AutoRentals.com * RealEstateVisits.com * UsedTrucks.com * WAR Index
