Originally Posted by
cestmoi123
Sadly (and other adjectives not appropriate for a family website), they correctly identify that there was a hole in security, which the hijackers exploited, and then proceed to completely misidentify that hole. The gap was a combination of (a) passenger/flight crew assumption that the safe approach during a hijacking is to cooperate, and (b) an accessible cockpit.
I would argue that it wasn't even a gap in security back then, but was a rational decision. Before 9/11, cooperating with hijackers (to some degree obviously) was probably the right / smart thing to do, and saved lives in that terrible situation. The older-timers in this forum will also remember those tense days with TWA 847, and the Uli Derickson events.
If the passengers led a revolt on previous hijackings, the flight may have ended up like United 93 with everybody dead, instead of almost everybody ALIVE like most resolutions of pre-9/11 hijackings. Nevertheless, by the time of United 93, passenger revolt was the correct gamble to make, and likely will be that way for the foreseeable future.