Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Silicon Valley plans to stop skyjackings...all of them.
ZDNET news desk ^ | 9/13.01 | David Coursey

Posted on 09/15/2001 7:11:47 PM PDT by janus

-------------------------------------------------------------- This story was printed from Anchordesk, located at http://www.zdnet.com/anchordesk. -------------------------------------------------------------- Silicon Valley's plan to stop skyjackings--all of them

By David Coursey, AnchorDesk

September 13, 2001 9:00 PM PT

URL: http://www.zdnet.com/anchordesk/stories/story/0,10738,2812283,00.html

How do we prevent airline hijackings? Already we're hearing proposals to put plainclothes sky marshals back on board--presumably to shoot it out with bad guys. After all, the end of skyjackings to Cuba roughly coincided with the arrival of the first generation of sky marshals...or was it Fidel's jailing of a few of these just-arrived

revolutionaries? All I am sure of is gunfire and aircraft are a deadly combination, no matter who fires first.

Improved airport security is another way to make planes safer. But eventually the perceived threat decreases while the impatience of passengers increases. Once these two lines cross we end up back where we were Tuesday morning. And, of course, it's impossible to keep all knives off airplanes unless the meals are changed to Jell-O and PowerBars.

WHAT WE NEED is a way to make planes impossible to hijack. My friend Steve Kirsch thinks he has just such an idea, using mostly proven, off-the-shelf technology. We started trading e-mails about this Wednesday morning and after about three exchanges, I decided this is something I need to share with the AnchorDesk community for your comment.

First, however, an introduction is in order. Steve is best known as the founder of Infoseek, the search engine and Web portal he sold to Disney while the selling was good. Previously, Steve has founded several other companies, including Mouse Systems and Frame Technology--he describes himself as a "serial entrepreneur." His newest company is called Propel and creates software to eliminate database bottlenecks.

Steve and his family also put tremendous energy into do-gooder work. A few years ago, he used a million of his own dollars, got several million of Bill Gates' dollars, and raised other millions in order to save the United Way in San Jose from a huge budget deficit.

ANYWAY, HERE'S STEVE'S IDEA, which is based on the fact that all modern-day planes have global positioning systems (GPS) and are capable of landing on autopilot.

"(Install) 'safe mode' panic buttons that put the plane on forced autopilot that cannot be overridden, except in special circumstances," Steve says. He'd have them mounted in the cockpit, one for each side, with additional optional buttons in crew areas on each side of the plane in both the forward and aft cabins.

Once a plane is in safe mode, suggests Steve, it would randomly select one of the 10 nearest airports capable of accommodating that plane type, and automatically land the aircraft there.

"This technique works because you take both the pilots and the terrorists out of a control situation," he explains. "A terrorist can no longer threaten the pilot to 'Do this or I will kill people' because the terrorist knows that the pilot can't accommodate the demand no matter what."

UNDER STEVE'S PLAN, the terrorist can't get what he wants. His only option then is to kill all the people on the plane, and if his only objective is loss of life, a plane is a mighty tough target when there are easier ones (like buses) available.

Bottom line: there's no more motivation to hijack a plane. All that the hijacker could accomplish is causing the plane to land at a randomly selected airport.

"In fact, it's much worse than hijacking a bus because in the plane case, the hijacker is completely locked up and directly transported to a random jail location that he can't plan for," Steve notes.

Under what circumstances could forced safe mode be overridden? Further details (including more about his idea) are on Steve's Web site at www.skirsch.com, but here are some highlights.

Safe mode disables on touchdown so the pilot can raise flaps, put on the brakes, and reduce the throttle.

Safe mode can be disabled twice per flight if the pilot keys in a 4-digit recall code within 20 seconds of the safe button being pushed. Each pilot has his own 4-digit code that can be used only once per flight. So disabling two false alarms requires the cooperation of both pilots. There are audio warnings in the cockpit as well as lights flashing when someone hits the safe button. If there are further panic button presses after that, the plane will be forced down.

The pilot is allowed to manually vary the altitude of the plane between 15,000 and 40,000 feet above ground level, even when safe mode is engaged, to enable the pilot to maneuver around obstacles and some weather. The pilot can also inform the autopilot of weather areas to avoid.

As soon as a panic button has been pressed, whether accidental or not, ground crews are notified. The big benefit of Steve's proposal is not necessarily that it is ever used, but that just a belief that it exists and works would be enough to prevent skyjackings.

In this way, I see safe-mode jetliners as accomplishing what time-lock safes did for convenience stores and fast-food joints. Sure you can rob them--but only if you are willing to hang around 10 or 20 minutes for the safe to open. Steve's plan likewise takes the incentive out of skyjacking.

Steve is hoping that someone out there in AnchorDesk-land can punch holes in his idea or, alternately, help present it to the FAA, the airlines, aircraft manufacturers, the pilot's union, passenger organizations, and others who might help make our skies safer. Please leave comments on the TalkBack board and we'll see where this goes.

Note to readers: We will be discussing this idea with Steve, as well as talking about some of the privacy issues I raised yesterday, on Friday's R & D Radio Hour show at noon PT. To listen, tune in www.cnetradio.com.

Will Steve's plan eliminate skyjackings? What other ideas do you have? TalkBack to me.


TOPICS: Miscellaneous; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-108 next last
For edification and discussion.
1 posted on 09/15/2001 7:11:47 PM PDT by janus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: janus
Sounds completely reasonable to me.
2 posted on 09/15/2001 7:16:02 PM PDT by anniegetyourgun
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: anniegetyourgun
Sounds reasonable to me, also, HOWEVER, I heard that these terrorists were able to yank out the piece of equipment that allowed the control towers to track them, and I'm wondering if the same could be done with this panic button apparatus, once it's been used?
3 posted on 09/15/2001 7:22:13 PM PDT by goodnesswins
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: janus
No automated system in existence can land a plane without a pilot. Wind speed and direction, other weather condiions, the planed loaded weight etc. make this nearly impossible. No computer program can land a plane there are too many variables that only a skilled pilot can handle. Ask any pilot and he will tell you every take off and landing is unique. One program will never fit all.
4 posted on 09/15/2001 7:25:18 PM PDT by america76
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: janus
This is all great but why can't we just seal the door to the cockpit?
5 posted on 09/15/2001 7:28:38 PM PDT by ConservChristian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: goodnesswins
I heard that these terrorists were able to yank out the piece of equipment that allowed the control towers to track them,

Geesh! They TURNED OFF the transponder for Pete's sake!

You know, with an "ON/OFF button"?

WHY, you ask, have an ON/OFF button?

A transponder isn't needed on the ground (during taxi operations, moving to a hanger for maintenance, etc) - but *is* turned on just prior to take off ...

6 posted on 09/15/2001 7:30:27 PM PDT by _Jim
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: janus
well let's hear something from the airline industry....
7 posted on 09/15/2001 7:31:29 PM PDT by pointsal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: janus
What about hazardous weather? What sort of test would be required of the system before each flight, both aircraft and ground-based facilities? Can no human override the system if the descent and landing is less than perfect? What insurance underwriter is willing to take the risk in case of failure? Gunfire aboard an airplane is not that bad, except for people. So what if a few bullets penetrated the fuselage? All pressurized airplanes leak, some worse than others. Pressurization itself is nothing more than a regulated leak.
8 posted on 09/15/2001 7:31:40 PM PDT by CFIIIMEIATP737
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #9 Removed by Moderator

To: goodnesswins
Probably not on modern airplanes with fly by wire technology. The flight stick is connected to the computer, and makes all these airplanes fly alike. By that, I mean that with fly by wire, a 747 and a 777 "feel" the same when you use the flight stick. Probably some pilots on here can better. Older airplanes like DC-9s would have trouble (hydraulics connections to the rudders, etc.).

This is a really good idea!!!

10 posted on 09/15/2001 7:35:05 PM PDT by Gladwin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: america76
Why can't they tie in the same system used to takeoff, fly and land the various, unmaned spycraft we fly. The "pilots" sit in a van.
11 posted on 09/15/2001 7:35:20 PM PDT by Leisler
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: janus
hmmm interesting idea- and once the panic button is hit an air force fighter jet immediately is sent to take a look-see...
12 posted on 09/15/2001 7:35:49 PM PDT by Mr. K
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ConservChristian
It works for El Al.

I think 90% of todays pilots would quit before flying a plane that was locked on autopilot.

13 posted on 09/15/2001 7:36:55 PM PDT by Servant of the Nine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: janus
Afterthought....what if two planes are on auto to land at nearest airport - that would present a problem. Could be set to autopilot only to intended destination instead.

Of course, all of this wouldn't keep someone bent on targeting (through suicide mission) planes just to take hundreds of civilians out.

14 posted on 09/15/2001 7:38:57 PM PDT by anniegetyourgun
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CFIIIMEIATP737
When the Sky Marshals were first instituted, Glaser Safety slugs were invented. They are increadibly destructive on soft tissue, but break up and will not penetrate an airplane window or fuselage. I use them in my house gun, because they will not penetrate sheetrock walls.

So9

15 posted on 09/15/2001 7:40:29 PM PDT by Servant of the Nine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: janus
All that we need is two or so loaded commercial airliners in "safe-mode" heading for the same airport.
16 posted on 09/15/2001 7:41:39 PM PDT by jackbill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: america76
"One program will never fit all"

Will likely stand next to: "Man will never fly."

Unless I'm mistaken, the Navy has had an auto-landing system for a while now.

17 posted on 09/15/2001 7:43:56 PM PDT by El Sordo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: janus
"...raised other millions in order to save United Way in San Jose.."

He may be technically smart, but he sure isn't wise. He raised millions for United Way's advertising/fund raising buddies and their management's girlfriends and vacations.

United Way is a leftwing joke, and the joke's on the people of this country.

18 posted on 09/15/2001 7:46:25 PM PDT by CWRWinger
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Servant of the Nine
Thank you, Servant. I did not know that. On many internet sights people are talking about the destruction of the aircraft if a bullet penetrates the fuselage and I couldn't take it anymore. Had to put in my two bits. Freepers, don't stay up too late tonight. We all need to be in church in the morning.
19 posted on 09/15/2001 7:47:06 PM PDT by CFIIIMEIATP737
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: america76
Auto-pilots can already land airplanes, and have done so for more than 10 years.
20 posted on 09/15/2001 7:47:43 PM PDT by Gladwin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-108 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson