|
MOBILE Flight Deck Secondary Barrier Galley Cart System
Greetings everyone!
I'm the same person being cited in [Mod edit: the FAM Fired for Revealing Info Deemed “Sensitive” After He Revealed It] thread. I've invented a MOBILE flight deck (cockpit) secondary barrier transforming galley cart system that's significantly more inexpensive and safer than the barrier now being built into already existing aircraft cabins: Twitter: @MacLeanBarrier Facebook: @MacLeanBarrier Sorry, the forum doesn't allow me to post URLs until I've posted four more times. I'd love to get your comments and questions. Appreciatively and respectfully, Robert J. MacLean Leesburg, Virginia (U.S.) |
Originally Posted by MacLeanBarrier
(Post 29016154)
Greetings everyone!
I'm the same person being cited in this thread. I've invented a MOBILE flight deck (cockpit) secondary barrier transforming galley cart system that's significantly more inexpensive and safer than the barrier now being built into already existing aircraft cabins: Twitter: @MacLeanBarrier Facebook: @MacLeanBarrier Sorry, the forum doesn't allow me to post URLs until I've posted four more times. I'd love to get your comments and questions. Appreciatively and respectfully, Robert J. MacLean Leesburg, Virginia (U.S.) |
Originally Posted by Boggie Dog
(Post 29016227)
Haven't you posted in this thread previously under a different name?
Regards, Robert J. MacLean Twitter: @MacLeanBarrier Facebook: @MacLeanBarrier |
What do you think of the barrier Tim?
|
Originally Posted by MacLeanBarrier
(Post 29017717)
What do you think of the barrier Tim?
Very American. Very Paranoid. Very impractical. TSA will love it. |
Originally Posted by JamesBigglesworth
(Post 29018598)
It's a solution in search of a problem.
Very American. Very Paranoid. Very impractical. TSA will love it. |
Originally Posted by MacLeanBarrier
(Post 29018662)
So you're 100% confident that a flight attendant and a 3' galley cart—none of which are on JetBlue Airbuses and Southwest—stopping a suicidal sprint-dive into the flight deck? Do you think all of the solo vehicle-ramming attacks are anomalies?
|
Originally Posted by boggie dog
(Post 29018876)
are you suggesting that cockpit security doors are so flimsy that a person can run, dive and breech the cockpit door? Without injury? Is this what you're defining as a solo vehicle-ramming attack? I've never heard that term used before. What are the alternate systems competing?
sprinting and diving into a flight deck, also know as a “cockpit,” only needs one attacker and one opportunity when a pilot enters the cabin during flight to use the lavatory, obtain sustenance, or crew-rest. inward-opening flight deck doors are exceptionally more vulnerable to an attack because the door swings against a pilot the moment he/she opens it. An attack on an outward-opening door gives a crew member the chance to use his/her backside to close it in which the frame reinforces the door. An attack on an outward-opening doored flight deck requires the attacker to have to wedge himself between the door and the frame if he cannot dive into the flight deck semi-impeded or unimpeded. Only spring-latches protect flight decks with an inward-opening door. There are approximately 1,187 existing aircraft with inward-opening doors. Mostinward-opening flight deck doors are exceptionally more vulnerable to an attack because the door swings against a pilot the moment he/she opens it. An attack on an outward-opening door gives a crew member the chance to use his/her backside to close it in which the frame reinforces the door. An attack on an outward-opening doored flight deck requires the attacker to have to wedge himself between the door and the frame if he cannot dive into the flight deck semi-impeded or unimpeded. Only spring-latches protect flight decks with an inward-opening door. There are approximately 1,187 existing aircraft with inward-opening doors. |
Originally Posted by JamesBigglesworth
(Post 29018598)
It's a solution in search of a problem.
Very American. Very Paranoid. Very impractical. TSA will love it. |
Originally Posted by MacLeanBarrier
(Post 29018906)
page 2:
page 3: |
Originally Posted by Boggie Dog
(Post 29020738)
Seems if any changes are called for it would be to reverse the door swing. The threat of a terrorist trying to breech a cockpit doesn't seem all that great anyhow.
"Based on data collected by the committee, an unimpeded attacker who is within a certain distance (SSI) to the flight deck can reach the flight deck door before the crewmembers can close and secure the door." |
Originally Posted by MacLeanBarrier
(Post 29020862)
PAGE 27 of the $150/view public 2011 "Radio Technical Commission on Aeronautics" (DO-329) study report that was heavily redacted:
|
Moderator's Note: Personal Exchanges
Folks,
I have just had to edit and delete posts containing personal attacks on other FlyerTalk members. Personal attacks are a serious violation of the posting rules: FlyerTalk Rule12.2 The next poster who gets personal with another will be suspended for a minimum of seven days.Avoid Getting Personal If you have a difference of opinion with another member, challenge the idea — NOT the person. Getting personal with another member is not allowed. Personal attacks, insults, baiting and flaming will not be tolerated. <snip> If another member gets personal with you, do not retaliate. Retaliation may well subject you to the same discipline. Instead, please use the 'Alert a moderator to this thread' button in the lower-left-hand-corner of each post, send a note explaining your concern to the moderator team, and leave it to them to handle. Please also see Rule 22 — When you believe someone has violated the rules. Please consider this to be your only warning! TWA884 Travel Safety/Security co-moderator |
Originally Posted by Boggie Dog
(Post 29020937)
No terrorists are trying to breech the door. I even question the need for FAM's. A lot of expense for no return. High pay plus 25% LEAP is just too much. Much like the rest of TSA, not worth the cost.
Page 7 of the RTCA DO-329 that was withheld from the TSA Federal Air Marshal Service's supervisors in charge of training, instructors, and the flying rank-and-file for five years until I spent two months demanding that TSA and FAA Headquarters to provide me an UNREDACTED copy: "Current intelligence indicates that the probability of such an attack is high enough to warrant evaluation of current procedures and equipment designed to thwart such an attack when the flight deck door is opened during normal flight operations, as well as proposed improvements to the same." |
The national security apparatus imagines threats that justify its own continued existence and expansion? Color me shocked.
|
| All times are GMT -6. The time now is 4:30 pm. |
This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.