Congress introduces (H.R. 911): Install of cockpit secondary barriers on ALL jets
#1
Original Poster
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: Leesburg, Virginia
Programs: http://www.maclean-scotus.info
Posts: 132
Congress introduces (H.R. 911): Install of cockpit secondary barriers on ALL jets
The moderator of this--"Travel Safety/Security > Checkpoints and Borders Policy Debate"--section, "TWA884", has authorized me to open this thread due to this bill being recently introduced. I speak on behalf of many TSA Federal Air Marshals that this is bill will fix a critical threat which caused the 9/11 attacks, and was plotted again in July 2003:
A quote from Sara Nelson's February 13, 2019 testimony in a public congressional hearing about aviation security:
It's notable that numerous non-regional aircraft do not have drink-carts to assist flight attendants with blocking an attack of an unlocked cockpit. Cockpits either have doors that open outwards or dangerously inwards; there's a very good reason why exit hatches open away from the inside of submarines--the force of the water would breach the hatch after submerging.
https://www.theintell.com/opinion/20...faces-barriers
From Reuters News on February 9, 2019:
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-u...-idUSKCN1PX2AZ
A quote from Sara Nelson's February 13, 2019 testimony in a public congressional hearing about aviation security:
During Wednesday's Aviation subcommittee meeting, [Congressman Brian] Fitzpatrick asked Sara Nelson, president of the Association of Flight Attendants International, about [replying on flight attendants and drink-carts to stop someone from rushing an unlocked cockpit door]. Nelson pulled no punches.
"We completely support secondary barriers in all of our aircraft. It's an absurd practice to have flight attendants use their own bodies as the barrier between the cabin and the cockpit."
"We completely support secondary barriers in all of our aircraft. It's an absurd practice to have flight attendants use their own bodies as the barrier between the cabin and the cockpit."
https://www.theintell.com/opinion/20...faces-barriers
From Reuters News on February 9, 2019:
The TSA also oversees the Federal Air Marshal Service, which deploys armed U.S. air marshals on flights across the world. But critics have questioned the effectiveness of passenger screening and the air marshal program.
#2
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: DFW
Posts: 28,010
The moderator of this--"Travel Safety/Security > Checkpoints and Borders Policy Debate"--section, "TWA884", has authorized me to open this thread due to this bill being recently introduced. I speak on behalf of many TSA Federal Air Marshals that this is bill will fix a critical threat which caused the 9/11 attacks, and was plotted again in July 2003:
A quote from Sara Nelson's February 13, 2019 testimony in a public congressional hearing about aviation security:
A quote from Sara Nelson's February 13, 2019 testimony in a public congressional hearing about aviation security:
My understanding is that security policies which did not prohibit sharp cutting tools was in part behind the success of 9/11 as well as policy to cooperate with hijackers at that time. Toss in hardened cockpit doors and it seems that the corrections have already been made.
It's notable that numerous non-regional aircraft do not have drink-carts to assist flight attendants with blocking an attack of an unlocked cockpit. Cockpits either have doors that open outwards or dangerously inwards; there's a very good reason why exit hatches open away from the inside of submarines--the force of the water would breach the hatch after submerging.
https://www.theintell.com/opinion/20...faces-barriers
From Reuters News on February 9, 2019:
https://www.theintell.com/opinion/20...faces-barriers
From Reuters News on February 9, 2019:
I'd like to make some suggestions so that this is a productive topic.
Instead of only asserting that "this is just another big waste of money" and not offering reasons--or better: solutions--please make the argument as to why we should continue to rely on flight attendants and 3 1/2 foot drink-carts, or flight attendants alone, to stop someone from charging an unlocked cockpit.
We now have two U.S. Department of Homeland Security / Office of Inspector General reports asserting that $395 million of the TSA Law Enforcement / Federal Air Marshal Service's annual $803 million budget "can be put to better use."
Instead of only asserting that "this is just another big waste of money" and not offering reasons--or better: solutions--please make the argument as to why we should continue to rely on flight attendants and 3 1/2 foot drink-carts, or flight attendants alone, to stop someone from charging an unlocked cockpit.
We now have two U.S. Department of Homeland Security / Office of Inspector General reports asserting that $395 million of the TSA Law Enforcement / Federal Air Marshal Service's annual $803 million budget "can be put to better use."
#3
Original Poster
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: Leesburg, Virginia
Programs: http://www.maclean-scotus.info
Posts: 132
Page 158 of the 9/11 Commission Report:
Page 245 of the 9/11 Commission Report:
The "hardened cockpit doors" are routinely opened throughout the flight--with only flight attendants and drink-carts or flight attendants alone in front of them--therefore, they are not a "correction. The 2017 U.S. Department of Transportation / Office of Inspector General Audit Report concluded those 2 methods were "ineffective":
http://bit.ly/dotoig20170626
JetBlue Airways has A320s and A321s have cockpit doors that open away from the cabin, and there are no drink-carts. A319s, B767s, and B777s also have cockpit doors that open away from the cabin. All of these aircraft seat more than 75 passengers.
Most experts know that 1-inch box-cutters did not cause 9/11, that's why TSA allows scissors with blades under 4 inches in carry-ons. Scissors can do more damage than 1-inch box-cutters:
https://www.tsa.gov/travel/security-...items/scissors
The box-cutters were to kill the pilots and prevent them from going to the back of the jets to give 33 to 81 passengers the hope to over-power only 2-3 muscle hijackers using fake bombs, box-cutters, and pepper-spray to protect the 2 hijacker-pilots.
No one knows what happened to these perfectly good aircraft in good weather: TWA Flight 800, Air France Flight 447, Helios Airways Flight 522, Egyptair Flights 990 and 804, and Malaysia Airlines Flight 370 . Only conflicting reports by the different agencies who investigated. Technology still cannot definitively tell us what happened. A cockpit rush attack could have prevented pilots to make any emergency transmissions.
While in Karachi, ["9/11 principal architect" Khalid Sheikh Mohammed (KSM)] also discussed how to case flights in Southeast Asia. KSM told them to watch the [cockpit] doors at takeoff and landing, to observe whether the [pilots] went to the lavatory during the flight, and to note whether the flight attendants brought food into the cockpit.
["9/11 key facilitator" Ramzi Binalshibh and American Airlines Flight 11 ring-leader / hijacker Mohamed Atta believed the] best time to storm the cockpit would be about 10-15 minutes after takeoff, when the cockpit doors typically were opened for the first time. Atta did not believe they would need any other weapons. He had no firm contingency plan in case the cockpit door was locked. While he mentioned general ideas such as using a hostage or claiming to have a bomb, he was confident the cockpit doors would be opened and did not consider breaking them down a viable idea.
As an example, the [Radio Technical Commission on Aeronautics DO-329 study] report concluded that some improvised secondary barriers, such as a flight attendant with a galley cart, were ineffective "as tested," and additional enhancements were required to raise the effectiveness of certain barrier methods to an acceptable level.
https://www.tsa.gov/travel/security-...items/scissors
The box-cutters were to kill the pilots and prevent them from going to the back of the jets to give 33 to 81 passengers the hope to over-power only 2-3 muscle hijackers using fake bombs, box-cutters, and pepper-spray to protect the 2 hijacker-pilots.
I believe that these barriers are not needed, evidence, no attempt to force entry into cockpits since 9/11. Not sure what the OIG's reports on poor use of budget dollars have to do with this but I would suggest if cockpit barriers are mandated then there is no use to have an $8,000,000.00 expenditure for FAM's going forward.
Last edited by MacLeanBarrier; Feb 24, 2019 at 3:28 pm
#4
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Under the Cone of Silence
Programs: UA Gold; AA Dirt; HH Diamond; National Emerald; CONTROL SecretAgent Platinum; KAOS EvilFlyer Gold
Posts: 1,497
No one knows what happened to these perfectly good aircraft in good weather: TWA Flight 800, Air France Flight 447, Helios Airways Flight 522, Egyptair Flights 990 and 804, and Malaysia Airlines Flight 370 . Only conflicting reports by the different agencies who investigated. Technology still cannot definitively tell us what happened. A cockpit rush attack could have prevented pilots to make any emergency transmissions.
#5
Original Poster
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: Leesburg, Virginia
Programs: http://www.maclean-scotus.info
Posts: 132
You lose a lot of credibility and respect by citing these tragedies as some sort of justification for a cockpit barrier technology (one of which I believe you are peddling). Other than 370 (for which nobody knows much of anything that happened onboard) I'm not aware that any of these ever had any suggestions that unauthorized cockpit access had anything to do with them. In fact, since most of them have had the CVR's recovered, it is known that there were no "cockpit rush attacks" in them.
Again, I did extensive research and the different agency reports are nuanced and conflicting. Technology still cannot definitively tell us exactly what happened. A cockpit rush attack may not have given any time for the pilots to make any emergency transmissions--they would have been too preoccupied with flying the jet while defending the attacker(s). The "black boxes" have limited information.
As a Border Patrol Agent and a FAM, I've been in a number of situations--physically trying to detain subjects--where I do not stop to call for help on my mobile radio until I have the subject(s) fully detained.
Last edited by TWA884; Feb 24, 2019 at 9:37 pm Reason: Personal exchange
#6
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Northern VA
Posts: 1,007
The Bill:
Here's the bill: https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/115/hr911/text
Seems so broad as to include a service cart with locked wheels.
Seems so broad as to include a service cart with locked wheels.
#7
Original Poster
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: Leesburg, Virginia
Programs: http://www.maclean-scotus.info
Posts: 132
https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/116/hr911/text/ih
#8
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: DFW
Posts: 28,010
Regardless of opinions, pro or con, I don't think the bill will come out of committee. What's then left to discuss? Between "muscle" terrorist and "supervisory" FAM's, who have a mandatory retirement age of 57, just like all federal law enforcement officers (like Bureau of Prisons Correctional Officers) and I think we've met the end of the road until the bill either dies in committee, or is introduced on the floor of the House. Just my 2 cents.
#9
Original Poster
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: Leesburg, Virginia
Programs: http://www.maclean-scotus.info
Posts: 132
Other FAMs are are given numerous annual age waivers like current Orange County/John Wayne Airport (Newport Beach, California) TSA Assistant Federal Security Director for Law Enforcement Frank Donzanti who is 69 years old now:
https://pogoblog.typepad.com/pogo/20...tleblower.html
#10
In memoriam
Join Date: Dec 2001
Programs: DL 2MM, AA MM, DL Sky Club Life, AA Admirals Club Life, Hilton Gold Life
Posts: 1,732
I thought any rules governing in-flight operations were under the juristiction of the FAA and not congressional nice-to-have laws
#11
Original Poster
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: Leesburg, Virginia
Programs: http://www.maclean-scotus.info
Posts: 132
#13
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 7,875
Can you show any time FAM made a difference, or the unopenable doors prevented another attack?
All I can think of is the Germanwings flight where the door basically caused the crash.
Times have changed. Terrorists have moved on. This idea is a few decades late, and relatively useless now.
People are also less passive now. They are less likely to stand by scared of people with boxcutter, as they have already stood up to people with guns (even when they don't have any themselves).
I think you advocate a society in which the government is the sole keeper of peace and security. The government is no longer viewed with the same benevolence as before, especially after Wikileaks and all the other stuff showing how the government spies on its owns. Many people have lost trust in the government, with partisanship becoming more vicious and officials seemingly not caring what happens to the common person, as long as they "win" (whatever they means).
And the government policing itself? I doubt any intelligent American believes that anymore.
All I can think of is the Germanwings flight where the door basically caused the crash.
Times have changed. Terrorists have moved on. This idea is a few decades late, and relatively useless now.
People are also less passive now. They are less likely to stand by scared of people with boxcutter, as they have already stood up to people with guns (even when they don't have any themselves).
I think you advocate a society in which the government is the sole keeper of peace and security. The government is no longer viewed with the same benevolence as before, especially after Wikileaks and all the other stuff showing how the government spies on its owns. Many people have lost trust in the government, with partisanship becoming more vicious and officials seemingly not caring what happens to the common person, as long as they "win" (whatever they means).
And the government policing itself? I doubt any intelligent American believes that anymore.
#14
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 7,875
The most recent news is the Biman Air flight. Was the hijacker prevented from doing anything because the cockpit door was hardened? I don't think so.
#15
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: NYC
Programs: DL PM, Marriott Gold, Hertz PC, National Exec
Posts: 6,736
To ask a question that I asked in the last thread, but to which I never got an answer:
If this is such a significant threat, then why is there zero evidence that anybody has successfully carried out one of these attacks in the past eighteen years?
If this is such a significant threat, then why is there zero evidence that anybody has successfully carried out one of these attacks in the past eighteen years?