Senator Tells TSA: Arm Pilots or Lose Funding

Cybercast News Service. ^ | April 02, 2004 | Robert B. Bluey

[archy]

One pilot and one co-pilot armed with .45 ACP semi-auto handguns would probably have easily defeated five islamofascist terrorists armed with box-cutters. But, yeah arming pilots is a stupid idea.

If that had been all with which they were armed.

[SendShaqtoIraq]

"And why is it that those who fear an armed America ALWAYS trot out the same disproven irrational fears, time and again?"

He's an idiot or a communist. Take your pick.

[connectthedots]

BOXER is for this, there's got to be a catch.

The catch is Boxer packs heat.

[supercat]

Most navy pilots will tell you 92F they carry is more useful cracking walnuts once you hit the ground than it is an effect defense.

Against what sort of adversary would havy pilots have to use their weapons, and in what sort of conditions?

Unless you believe that an airplane cockpit could come under attack from multiple invaders from multiple directions aremed with assault rifles, I would think the situations would be quite different.

[TLI]

The average commericial pilot is as likely to shoot himself accidentally than kill a hijacker.

AAAHA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA!

gasp....

Ok, ok, I can say this....

breathing . .

Source? . . . Buwaaahahahahahahahaha ! !

[XHogPilot]

Both Sen. Boxer (D CA), and Sen. Feinstein (D CA) have been publicly pushing TSA to improve the Federal Flight Deck Officer program. Even a broken clock is right twice a day...

[Sal]

Boxer and Feinstein are simply continuing in their well established hypocrisy. Both believe in concealed carry for themselves and any bodyguards they may feel the need for.

It's just the peons who deserve to be disarmed--that would be you and me and all our friends and families. Both of them are worried ONLY about their own skanky butts.

In effect, the armed pilots would be functioning as THEIR OWN armed bodyguards for their frequent and necessary air travel. It's just an unimportant side effect that the peons will be protected too. IMO.

[archy]

2. In response to those who cry that "the pilot should be flying the plane!!", at least one will be. You DID remember the copilot, DIDN'T YOU?!?;

They're both pilots. The preferred terminology is Captain for the pilot-in-charge, and First Officer for the backup airplane driver.

Assuming right-handed flight deck crew- not necessarily a given; about one in 6 is a southpaw- and a conventional aircraft cabin layout where the two are seated side-by-side with the Captain in the portside front seat position, as in most automobiles, it's preferable that the Captain flies the plane and leaves the First Officer to deal with any threat coming from the aisle between an behind them. You can try this yourself from the seated position in your car, first from the driver's seat with your weapon in your right hand, trying to swivel and cover a potential threat from behind your rightside shoulder, or from the First Officer's starboard/ righthand side position in what would be the front passenger seat of an auto, in which the right hand controls the weapon that can then cover a threa in a aisle rearward over the left shoulder of one in that position. That also leaves the leftside *weak hand* for and defensive activity that may be required.

[archy]

In effect, the armed pilots would be functioning as THEIR OWN armed bodyguards for their frequent and necessary air travel. It's just an unimportant side effect that the peons will be protected too. IMO.

The First Officer is the bodyguard for the aircraft's Captain. Likewise, the Captain is the bodyguard for the First Officer. It's simple teamwork and cockpit resource management.

[XHogPilot]

Tcuoohjohn, you said Armed pilots is a dumb idea. I agree, but unfortunately it is far better than any other alternative.

1. Read the clarity of truth encompassed in Freeeee's post #36. US fighters WILL down any hijacked airliner heading toward a likely target. The appearance of an F-15 or F-16 off the wing of your airliner after Joe Sixpack in 32F gets out of hand is DEFINITELY not a good thing. The fighter was not sent to help your pilot find the airport. He's there to kill YOU and your fellow travelers if your pilots lose control of the flight-deck.

2. Air Marshals are a great idea. Unfortunately, nothing short of an army of Marshals is required to provide "round-the-clock" coverage to prevent a well planned repeat of 9-11. Remember, the new enemy aren't hijackers in the old understanding, they are kamikaze, intending to die. If only 1 of of 10 missions succeed, how would Al Queda judge the success? -How would you?

3. My military M-9 (Beretta 92FS) training was better than you describe. My self initiated additional follow-on/continuation training was outstanding. At under ten feet, left or right handed, even twisted in a seat, missing a heart shot is (nearly) impossible with any handgun, all the better with a sweet 92F.

4. A skilled pilot can... Thats me bucko, and it aint goin down like you think. Any pilot attempting to "maneuver a Boeing 757 to 5.5Gs" will find himself flying formation with mass quantities of shredding aluminum, disintegrating luggage, vaporizing fuel and a plethora of distraught flailing passengers. Large transport category aircraft (airliners) are stressed for 2.5Gs to -1G in cruise, 2.0Gs to 0Gs with flaps. Slightly exceeding that limit bends the jet. Exceeding that limit by a factor of 1.5 "voids the engineer's warranty" aka may cause structural failure.

5. You may need to discuss this with a few more "Navy pilots" or freepmail me if you'd like.

P.S. Let pilots do what they do best. Fly.

Please, give me a break. Flying airplanes goes far beyond manipulation of controls. Seems to me providing third eyes to a bunch of Kamikaze Mohammads would be a jolly fun way to break the monotonous repetition.

[Hat-Trick]

Oh, I concur. Let's not kill them. Let's keep them alive so that we can interrogate them, and then rehabilitate them into loving, functioning members of our ultra-polite society.

[dozer7]

"After 15 minutes of zero g parabola's with alternate pos G and neg G maneuvers a would be hijacker would be awash in a sea of puke and would beg to land."

-- and the passengers that are not strapped in?

[Sal]

The First Officer is the bodyguard for the aircraft's Captain. Likewise, the Captain is the bodyguard for the First Officer. It's simple teamwork and cockpit resource management.

That's fine by me and as it should be.

The point I was trying to make was that Feinstein and Boxer regard the armed pilots as their--Feinstein's and Boxer's--own armed bodyguards. I guess I'm guilty of "unclear antecedent" once again. "Their own" definitely was meant for the elitist, hypocritical, self-important senators.

[B4Ranch]

"Does Norm Minetta have his hands in this?"

Minetta was/is against arming the pilots!

[tcuoohjohn]

Stay strapped in. If not strapped then grab ahold of something and hold on real tight, cupcake because you going on mister toads wild aerial ride. You're gonna puke your guts out and piss your pants. Boogers are gonna fly out your nose. Half of the passengers will take a dump in their seats. If you are an athiest your gonna have a religious experience and pray to God it stops.

Hijack scenarios are not about passenger comfort. It is about surviving. At the end the event you'e gonna be a bit nuts for a few days. You will however, be alive. That is the point. You may never get on an airplane again and the mere smell of kerosene or a screaming engine may make you puke. But I guarantee you you will send that pilot a Christmas card and a bottle of his favorite scotch for the rest of your life.

[tcuoohjohn]

A 757 is stressed to 5.5 pos G's provided it isn't a continuous load. We're not talking about doing ACM here. We're talking about loading up to 3 pos g's and then unloading to 1.5 neg g's on heading. 757's have experienced those loads in normal operations in bad weather. Scares the holy hell out of the riders and makes 'em puke and curse the day they ever boarded an aircraft but it doesn't stress the aircaft. You might have to check the cabin wiring harnesses for puke degradation but that is the way it goes.

[KC_for_Freedom]

wasn't tried in any of the four flights.

John, evasive manuevers were not tried because the pilots had their necks slashed in 1-2 seconds after they realized they were under attack. How long would it take to put an airliner into a zero - g manuever? Think how long it takes to spin up a turbine running at low rpm? How long for control surfaces designed for straight and level flight to put the nose over? I mean these planes were not designed to have fast response. Maybe you are thinking of a corporate jet?

No, the doors are stronger, and flight attendants more likely to resist than help a hijacker, but the fact remains that guns in the hands of the pilots givern the short time involved is the way to deter hijackings. We do need security on the ground so they can't bring explosives aboard. I have no problem with doing both. I can't see not taking some options that are available.

Oh, and don't worry about a big airliner being depressurized by a few shots that miss. They will fly just fine.

[ClintonBeGone]

Can't believe Boxer is on this side of the issue at all.

[tcuoohjohn]

about 1 second. You pitch the nose up at full power at 36 degrees and anyone not strapped down ends up in the aft lave with their head up their azz. Then just as you get a stick shaker you pitch the nose down to 50 degrees with 8 degree flaps at 280 knots. Everyone is an angel for 40 seconds. Then if they got roids, life is gonna get crappy cause things are gonna load up real fast. If you didn't puke in simulated 0 G then you surely will when the load comes back on. Particularly with a 1.5 neg g kicker on the end of it. The entire passenger cabin is gonna be a sea of puke.

Pilots who fly zero g parabolas call it " The Three Bagger" for obvious reasons.

[null and void]

This is the only time I've ever agreed with Boxer that I can remember. Will wonders ever cease?

Yeah. The widdle gun grabber frequently has to fly coast to coast...