Cutting air marshals as warnings about new hijackings occur

[Ale]

Being this a matter of concern mostly to US citizens I´m reluctant to make comments, however I should point that I find rather amusing that the US goverment is willing to spend one billion dollars a week in Iraq for it´s supposed security among other things against terrorism while get´s all penny pinching regarding more tangible measures like air marshals.

[Duckster]

*Originally posted by Ale *
**Being this a matter of concern mostly to US citizens I´m reluctant to make comments, however I should point that I find rather amusing that the US goverment is willing to spend one billion dollars a week in Iraq for it´s supposed security among other things against terrorism while get´s all penny pinching regarding more tangible measures like air marshals. **

Ah, no.

Australia was negotiating to put armed sky marshals on passenger jets flying from Australia to the United States and Singapore, the government said today.

Attorney-General Daryl Williams said that would be an extension of current arrangements where armed security guards are posted randomly on flights within Australia.

“The government is currently negotiating with the United States and Singaporean authorities to expand the program to international flights,” he told a security conference in Canberra.

Australia introduced the air security officer program about 18 months ago with the initial intakes drawn from officers of the Australian Protective Service (APS), now a division of the Australian Federal Police (AFP).

Source: http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/07/31/1059480460394.html

I still believe as long as the cockpit crew thinks they can play Rambo, with or without guns in the cockpit, hijackings will always remain a distinct possibility. No matter what happens in the passenger cabin, the cockpit door should never be opened by the cockpit crew.

[Ale]

Ah, no.

No what? :dubious:

[Broomstick]

*Originally posted by Duckster *
I still believe as long as the cockpit crew thinks they can play Rambo, with or without guns in the cockpit, hijackings will always remain a distinct possibility. No matter what happens in the passenger cabin, the cockpit door should never be opened by the cockpit crew.

I’m always fascinated by the assumption that the “cockpit crew thinks they can play Rambo”. Where do you get this? Do you have any reason to support the assertion that any cockpit crewmember harbors this fantasy?

I keep hearing this thrown out, but it clashes with what I know of pilots, and the pilots I know. I know quite a few pilots, and I can’t think of one of them - whether they own guns or not - who wouldn’t rather fly the airplane than take on armed Bad Guys. Is there a cite that, somehow, pilots are more likely to leap up, screaming like a rabid wolverine, and dive into a fray than anyone else? Fact is, quite a few pilots are against arming the flight crew - opinions in the aviation world are by no means monolithic in this regard. In fact, NO ONE is requiring that pilots be armed - the most extreme position is for the option of being armed, not a mandate to pack a pistol.

So, please provide a cite that provides some backing for the assertion that ANY “cockpit crew” would “play Rambo”.

[blowero]

*Originally posted by Duckster *
I still believe as long as the cockpit crew thinks they can play Rambo, with or without guns in the cockpit, hijackings will always remain a distinct possibility. No matter what happens in the passenger cabin, the cockpit door should never be opened by the cockpit crew.

How would the pilots eat? They don’t have a kitchen in the cockpit, do they?

[Broomstick]

I guess the pilots would have to bring a cooler full of sandwhiches.

After lunch, when the sandwhiches are gone, they could use the cooler as a chamber pot, since they won’t be allowed to leave to go to the lavatory.

:rolleyes: