Widow’s Bill Would Add Second Barrier to Airline Cockpits

Discussion in 'Travel Security' started by sobore, Apr 30, 2013.  |  Print Topic

  1. sobore
    Original Member

    sobore Gold Member

    Messages:
    12,421
    Likes Received:
    33,847
    Status Points:
    16,520
    http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-...d-add-second-barrier-to-airline-cockpits.html

    A widow of a pilot who died on one of the jets that crashed into the World Trade Center on Sept. 11, 2001, is gaining congressional support in her campaign to add another barrier to airliner cockpits.

    Ellen Saracini, widow of United Airlines (UAL) Flight 175 Captain Victor Saracini, says a flaw persists with cockpit doors, which have been reinforced since 2001 to prevent another attack. She says they’re opened several times during flights, which could let a terrorist get through and seize control.

    Pilots’ groups also have called for using secondary barriers to prevent the sort of actions that concern Saracini. U.S. Representative Mike Fitzpatrick, a Pennsylvania Republican, says legislation is needed to complete the job started after the terrorist attacks to ensure another airliner can’t be turned into a guided missile.

    “For the minimal cost and the maximum protection provided, this is a no-brainer,” Fitzpatrick said in an interview.

    Saracini wrote to President Barack Obama outlining the need for additional cockpit protections in March, a week after the Transportation Security Administration said it planned to let passengers carry now-banned pocket knives aboard on domestic trips. Flight attendants, air marshals and airport screeners came out against the change, prompting a delay by the agency.

    Read More: http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-...d-add-second-barrier-to-airline-cockpits.html
     
    General_Flyer and uggboy like this.
  2. Captain Oveur
    Original Member

    Captain Oveur Gold Member

    Messages:
    7,243
    Likes Received:
    14,058
    Status Points:
    12,520
    Aren't they opened several times a flight so the crew can eat and pee?

    There becomes a point where people need to understand there is no way we can all be 100% safe.
     
  3. jaw_24
    Original Member

    jaw_24 Silver Member

    Messages:
    244
    Likes Received:
    248
    Status Points:
    420
    Knowing nothing about the bill, I'm assuming it's supposed to mimic a lock system where someone cannot just rush into the cockpit when the doors open. One door would have to be locked before the other opens, maybe?

    Of course, like most well thought out ideas from congress, to do this right would make little sense on most narrow body aircraft, where adding another door could take out 10% of the passenger seating capacity.
     
    General_Flyer and uggboy like this.
  4. paladin87
    Original Member

    paladin87 Silver Member

    Messages:
    532
    Likes Received:
    778
    Status Points:
    770
    No no no...more paranoia is the only way to feel safe. More TSA, more obsession, more stupid rules, more more more! Remember...feeling safe is the same as being safe.
     
  5. dc3
    Original Member

    dc3 Silver Member

    Messages:
    249
    Likes Received:
    302
    Status Points:
    520
    How about just getting handcuffs for the passengers when the cockpit door is opened for the pilot to go an pee. Al lot cheaper than a second barrier and doesn't take up any space. They could even be built into the seat belts. Perhaps we should do this and leave the passengers locked in for the entire flight; like they did after 9/11 for the short flights between NYC and DC.
     
  6. HaveMilesWillTravel
    Original Member

    HaveMilesWillTravel Gold Member

    Messages:
    12,504
    Likes Received:
    20,199
    Status Points:
    16,520
    Welcome to ConAir.

    [​IMG]
     
  7. okrogius

    okrogius Silver Member

    Messages:
    696
    Likes Received:
    853
    Status Points:
    795
    Cumulative weight is probably higher (especially if the second door is something like a fence), so higher net cost.
     
  8. ab3i
    Original Member

    ab3i Silver Member

    Messages:
    408
    Likes Received:
    1,142
    Status Points:
    795
    Dont FA's usually barricade the aisle with a drink cart while the Pilot is answering nature's call?
     
    TravelBear likes this.
  9. HaveMilesWillTravel
    Original Member

    HaveMilesWillTravel Gold Member

    Messages:
    12,504
    Likes Received:
    20,199
    Status Points:
    16,520
    Yes. Or those wire fences.
     
  10. ab3i
    Original Member

    ab3i Silver Member

    Messages:
    408
    Likes Received:
    1,142
    Status Points:
    795
    yep, them too! what do they want now, another door? :)
     
  11. USAF_Pride
    Original Member

    USAF_Pride Gold Member

    Messages:
    2,108
    Likes Received:
    4,015
    Status Points:
    2,545
    Does anyone think that someone would actually make it to the cockpit without getting their arse's handed to them?
     
  12. okrogius

    okrogius Silver Member

    Messages:
    696
    Likes Received:
    853
    Status Points:
    795
    United is explicitly removing those wire fences from 787s since they feel the cart is sufficient instead of the extra fence weight.
     
  13. iterfacio12

    iterfacio12 Silver Member

    Messages:
    239
    Likes Received:
    295
    Status Points:
    460
    I was thinking something similar. There is not a chance in the nine hells that someone, anyone, would try to forcibly take control of an American aircraft with American citizens aboard and the passengers would just blithely sit there. A small legion would get up and physically beat to death the individuals responsible. Wouldn't matter if the person was armed with box cutters or a knife, because we all know what the end state would be if we allowed them to take the aircraft. Our deaths. And worse, the deaths of many others not even aboard, since a passenger aircraft is essentially a fast flying missile that explodes on impact from the extremely flammable jet petroleum. Chalk it up to politicians and the unions on making yet another foolish decision based on emotion, not logic and reason.
     
    USAF_Pride likes this.
  14. Muerl
    Original Member

    Muerl Gold Member

    Messages:
    1,253
    Likes Received:
    2,656
    Status Points:
    1,445
    This right here is the most important Security change since 9/11. Its what stopped the shoe bomber and the underwear bomber. The point that people now realized that THEY needed to act in their own interests to protect themselves, rather than the pre 9/11 view where a Highjacked plan would usually fly somewhere, and they would be traded for fuel or money or the freedom of other terrorists. People learned that sitting around and shutting up was not in there intrest anymore.
     
    USAF_Pride likes this.
  15. Captain Oveur
    Original Member

    Captain Oveur Gold Member

    Messages:
    7,243
    Likes Received:
    14,058
    Status Points:
    12,520
    I agree, but safety isn't the actual point here. Like the TSA, it's just about the feeling of being safe.

    And since having a couple of flight attendants just do extra work (one watches the cart, one goes into the cockpit), there is no cost to the airlines, so they're all for it.
     
    USAF_Pride likes this.

Share This Page