Two Airlines Apply For Cockpit Guns:
Two US airlines, United and Mesa Airlines, have applied to arm their cockpit crews with Taser “stun guns” after the Bush administration agreed to make on-board weapons legal for the pilots of passenger aircraft.
Both carriers have asked permission from the Transport Security Administration under the Homeland Security Act which was signed into law last November.
The makers of the weapons, Taser International, said today it welcomed the approach of the carriers in formally requesting that the TSA approve a less-than-lethal weapons program for their cockpit crews.
“United Airlines and Mesa Airlines have devoted more than a year in developing, preparing and implementing most of the required protocols for this program and are awaiting this authorization,” said the company’s president Tom Smith.
****
link: http://news.airwise.com/display/story.html?name=2003/01/1043174904.html
By: wysiwyg - 24th January 2003 at 20:17
RE: Two Airlines Apply For Cockpit Guns .
[updated:LAST EDITED ON 24-01-03 AT 08:21 PM (GMT)]The law gets really vague when it comes to being onboard an airliner. When the American carriers are in the UK they are sort of catered for by both UK and US law even though they are on UK soil/tarmac. It is very complicated and I don’t fully understand it myself.
To give an example of the complication, there have been situations where a passenger has died on a transatlantic flight and a doctor has been called for (only a doctor can certify death). The doctors may have realised the passenger has died mid-atlantic but may not certify death until landed at the destination to ease the paperwork.
By: mongu - 24th January 2003 at 20:04
RE: Two Airlines Apply For Cockpit Guns .
I believe that United and American already have guns in their cockpits when operating to the UK.
By: KabirT - 24th January 2003 at 13:54
RE: Two Airlines Apply For Cockpit Guns .
>It is inevitable that some kind of defence weapon will be
>applied to aircraft for the crews protection which is all
>well and good in the states under the “Homeland Security
>Act” but what about when they leave US airspace and try to
>enter say UK air space or French and they say no sorry you
>cant land with weapons on board??
Laws on this context in any country are not so rigid. The countries that donot allow this will have to change there act as this is being done for global air security. They will have to exempt these weapons!
>You could use gas to knock the entire cabin out bar the
>flight crew but once its used one, terrorists, hijackers etc
>will just take gas masks with them.
I dont think you should take, at least now the security checks at airport for granted. They wont allow just any person to take gas masks onboard in there hand luggage, and this is being assumed too positivly that hijackers will carry this and that to face any hurdles…..remember thay have to go under-cover, they are not going for a stroll in the park.
>One way is to deny any carry on baggage at all and keep
>everything in the hold, and anyone with metal on they
>persons have to take it off and that is also stowed in the
>cargo area.
This will be absolutely senseless. Anything metal should be in the hold…so people will spend time taking off peoples watches, chains, specs etc. and dump them in the hold??? This is airtravel which is supposed to be luxurious…if things like this happen it will be like traveling in a police vehicle.
By: Nikumba - 24th January 2003 at 11:17
RE: Two Airlines Apply For Cockpit Guns .
It is inevitable that some kind of defence weapon will be applied to aircraft for the crews protection which is all well and good in the states under the “Homeland Security Act” but what about when they leave US airspace and try to enter say UK air space or French and they say no sorry you cant land with weapons on board??
You could use gas to knock the entire cabin out bar the flight crew but once its used one, terrorists, hijackers etc will just take gas masks with them.
One way is to deny any carry on baggage at all and keep everything in the hold, and anyone with metal on they persons have to take it off and that is also stowed in the cargo area.
Nikumba
By: kev35 - 24th January 2003 at 10:28
RE: Two Airlines Apply For Cockpit Guns .
Binx.
If you are referring to the hijacking of the DC-10 by a disgruntled former employee, yes, catastrophe was avoided. But at no little cost to the crew. I believe none of them were able to resume their previous occupations following the incident?
Regards,
kev35
By: kev35 - 24th January 2003 at 10:24
RE: Two Airlines Apply For Cockpit Guns .
Wys.
I was against the idea of weapons in the cockpit, indeed against weapons on an aircraft full stop. However, your excellent explanation of the fail safe systems which could be employed in the cockpit have gone a long way toward changing my mind. The only reservation I have is about the involvement of one of the pilots in any plot and as you say, there is little anyone can do about that.
regards.
kev35
By: EGNM - 24th January 2003 at 10:00
RE: Two Airlines Apply For Cockpit Guns .
Apologies i misread!
By: KabirT - 24th January 2003 at 08:08
RE: Two Airlines Apply For Cockpit Guns .
Yes wys…totally agreed! For a great example of pilot being in he plot read Tintin and Flight 714! :D.
By: wysiwyg - 24th January 2003 at 08:05
RE: Two Airlines Apply For Cockpit Guns .
Yes absolutely. If the pilot is part of the plot you can forget it right from the start. He doesn’t need anyone else in the passenger cabin or even a gun. He can keep everyone else out already because of the new doors and all he has to do is bash the other guy over the bonce with the crash axe. So let’s put this one to bed.
On the subject of pyrotechnics. Andrew, If they can get pyro’s on board they can get their own weapons on board. You would prefer to be on a flight where if they breached the cockpit the flightcrew were unable to resist would you? Reread my earlier post – If the weapon is in the flightdeck at the start it can’t be used to gain entry. Your argument isn’t against a weapon in the flightdeck it’s a statement about locked doors.
By: KabirT - 24th January 2003 at 07:50
RE: Two Airlines Apply For Cockpit Guns .
Yes a stun gun only…you dont expect them to carry AK 47s. Plus if you are getting ideas of the pilot being a part of the plot…than you cant do anything..say bye-bye to yourself.
By: mongu - 24th January 2003 at 00:40
RE: Two Airlines Apply For Cockpit Guns .
Preston, a stun gun is what United and Mesa are proposing.
By: EGNM - 24th January 2003 at 00:26
RE: Two Airlines Apply For Cockpit Guns .
Hows about something more like a stun gun with a short shap high voltage electric shick – enough to main but not kill – i dont know about shotguns on board tho!
By: mongu - 23rd January 2003 at 19:02
RE: Two Airlines Apply For Cockpit Guns .
Not too sure really, but Wysiwyg’s approach is sound.
My one concern is over the reliability and probity of ground staff. A lot of attention has been paid to enhancing in-flight security but we all know how unsuitable ground-based security methodolgies are.
By: T5 - 23rd January 2003 at 18:21
RE: Two Airlines Apply For Cockpit Guns .
And what if the Pilot or Co-Pilot are in on it? They could use the gun and shoot the other person flying the plane and then do something crazy!
By: andrewm - 23rd January 2003 at 17:25
RE: Two Airlines Apply For Cockpit Guns .
one word -:- stupid
I bet any money that this will cause Terrorist to see airliners as a more viable (than other ground based assults) possibily if they have stun guns on board!
I mean I bet if they used pyrotechnics or something to stun the crew when they were coming out of the cockpit (for a leak or delivering meals) then could use perhaps a smoke bomb (can be consealing on themselves passing security) and then stun people coming out then gain enterance and stun the cockpit crew with the gun or threaten them. If it only hurts you then what use is it. If they have them it will be effective enough, as the name suggests, to stun a adult. Therefore cockpit takeover is easy!
By: KabirT - 23rd January 2003 at 15:50
RE: Two Airlines Apply For Cockpit Guns .
Not a bad idea Wys…not bad at all!
By: wysiwyg - 23rd January 2003 at 08:44
RE: Two Airlines Apply For Cockpit Guns .
If the weapon is on the flightdeck and the door is locked how can it be easily accessible to the potential hijacker???
If the hijacker has gained access to the cockpit it is obvious that their intentions are inappropriate so I think common sense says we need some means of being able to defend ourselves.
I believe the weapon whould be kept in a secure container on the glareshield (or similar) with an electronic lock. The lock should be released by pressing 2 buttons marked ‘access’ one located to the left of the captain one to the right of the FO. Operation of both switches unlocks the weapon. Next to each switch should be a button marked ‘deny’. If an intruder breaks in both pilots press access unlocking the weapon for use. If no one breaks in but a pilot is showing signs of instability, when he presses ‘access’ the other pilot does not, keeping the gun stowage locked. The other pilot then presses ‘deny’ locking the stowage permanently until the lock can be reset on the ground by engineers gaining access to the avionics bay.
By: binx - 23rd January 2003 at 01:26
RE: Two Airlines Apply For Cockpit Guns .
I have reservations about weapons being carried in the cockpit. It can be argued that anything a pilot could easily access would be just as easily accessible to a determined hijacker. If that were to be the case the passengers and crew would be even worse off than if there was no weapon on board at all.
A pilot’s best weapons for defense have been and always will be the aircraft itself and the people who are riding in it. The attempted hijacking of the FedEx DC-10 out of Memphis is solid evidence that the a/c can be used effectively to help subdue a hijacker. Assuming, of course, that the hijacker is able to make it past the 250 people in the back who have images of 9/11 in the backs of their minds.
Cheers,
binx
By: KabirT - 22nd January 2003 at 15:32
RE: Two Airlines Apply For Cockpit Guns .
[updated:LAST EDITED ON 22-01-03 AT 03:32 PM (GMT)]At the UAL HQ! :9
I dont know i have mixed feelings about this.
By: wysiwyg - 22nd January 2003 at 12:12
RE: Two Airlines Apply For Cockpit Guns .
But if they are in the locked flightdeck already they can’t be used to gain access. If someone gets past the locked door the flightcrew now have a last line of defence.
I want one, where do I sign up?
Sign In
January 22, 2003 at 9:34 am