Spiff

As I told you quite clearly, safety-related regulations never demand that the airlines purchase their products from the government. Also, there is no other instance that I can think of where the government wets its beak by appropriating goods and services rather than through the normal taxation channel. Can you?

No, I'm not insane. Perhaps not the air marshals, but someone, backed up with the force of a gun, would prevent that flight from operating. I really doubt that "Pay Fine, Heat Off" is a viable option for an airline not wishing to accommodate air marshals for free.

Spiff

I'm with you 100% on that one.

bocastephen

Pretty condescending statement, there. Firstly, I only select window seats - so I've never been 'bumped' by a FAM, nor am I at risk for being bumped, since it's common knowledge that FAMs only sit in aisle seats, and usually in the middle rows of the cabin.

Second, you don't know anyone's background here or what our expertise is any more than we know if you're actually law enforcement or not. I'm happy to debate aviation security policy and procedures with anyone from the DHS or TSA all day long. One professor in particular (now a globally respected airport consultant) trained me very well on risk management and what should and should not pass the smell test when it comes to security and deriving a quantifiable result from any given policy and he, like most of my professors, was ex-military.

You can dump all the classified threat documents you want on my desk, but unless a policy is going to generate a quantifiable benefit and manage risk intelligently, it's all window dressing and paranoia that at the end of the day, will be much ado about nothing.

bocastephen

Assuming what....that you had a gun or knife? Nothing personal, but it's highly doubtful it's as easy as you make it out to be - just rushing the flight deck and disabling everyone up there, including people who rush to intervene? No one is going to roll over and let you have your way - they will fight back.

It's a highly dramatic characterization - if an inch is so important, why not seat the FAMs at the forward jumpseat? Why not seat them in the first row of FC instead of the second or third?

Another highly dramatic example - and who grabbed the nutty guy first, the FAM or the USAirways employee? If the FAM wasn't there, would everyone just stand around and let him shoot? The FAM made no difference here other than being at the right place and time.

I'm sure you can provide some examples, although I can just ask my source for some - 'probing stuff' is pretty vague. I do know there are plenty of run-through training exercise, which take place in controlled environments with known participants playing rolls - helpful for training, but not necessarily a realistic representation of real life.

If formerly capable people are now DHS bureaucrats and part of the problem, then they need to go.

It has everything to do with comparing risks - the risk of another 9/11 v. the risk of a bomb detonating in cargo. We have two risks, one since mitigated by reinforced and locked flight deck doors and heightened 'screening', the other is a very real risk with multiple examples of fruition which has received just about zip, zero, zilch focus and attention from a risk management standpoint.

So - which risk should be worried about? The one with a single, highly difficult to execute example, already easily mitigated by physical and procedural changes, or another risk which is easy as pie to pull off, has been experienced often and hasn't been mitigated in the slightest?

law dawg

So, if the airlines were forced to carry non-government FAMs, you'd be okay with it?

Civilian FAMs, as it were?

Any time the airline denies boarding the airlines are fined. They don't have a cap busted in 'em.

law dawg

Don't need to, just run up, hit the unobservant FA in the back as she serves the flight deck, shut the door and then the fight is on in the flight deck. Everyone else is locked out. And even if they subdue me in the process, do you think having a fight in the flight deck is healthy?

Give me some approved TSA implements and then my chances go up even more.

They often are.

And, as mentioned, many FAMs have argued for jumpseating. But that leaves the pax kind of on their own, I guess.

That's the majority of LEO work - right person, right place, right time.

Know, I mean crazy things happening on real flights. There have been a number of reports made.

Agreed.

I'd agree with that statement. But if you've been surprised by an attack before you have to guard against it still. I don't think the door is sufficient, based upon my observations and experience.

Yes.

gofast

Wrong, it has happened numerous times. Some airlines have gotten away with it, some airlines/captains have been fined $22k per incident, some employees have been suspended or fired; but not a single one has had a gun pointed at them, let alone been arrested or indicted. Get over yourself.

This whole "seat theft"/1984 notion is baseless and lame. There are plenty of Orwellian/Bush policies that really and truly need to be rolled back. Maybe we should keep our collective eye on the prize, instead of our upgrades.

Djlawman

Except, of course, the goods which drug companies are required to give to the FDA (AT GUNPOINT!!!!!) so that the FDA can conduct testing on the drugs being placed into the stream of commerce; and

Except, of course, the several copies of each car which the automakers are required to provide to the National Highway Transportation Safety Administration so that it can conduct front-end impact, side impact, and now rollover tests on each vehicle (It's Detroit! It must be GUNPOINT!!!); and

Except for the examples of hazardous substances which companies are required to provide for testing to agencies including OSHA; and

Except for the continuous food samples which food processors are required to give to the FDA for testing (i.e., for safety reasons to determine if there is e-coli in your lettuce, or mad cow disease in the beef you are eating); and

.........

Shall I continue?

bocastephen

"yes" to which example?

Spiff

That's really beside the point right now.

Civilian federal? Makes no sense.

Really? So you're saying that the airlines can write the government a check and stop carrying air marshals?

Spiff

So, as I asked another poster, the airline can just pay its way out of carrying air marshals?

It's not just upgrades. Some of us do pay F from time to time.

law dawg

Yes.



Both. Both are concerns.

gofast

So far, AFAIK. It's not a widespread practice by any means.

As for you paying full-fare for your F seat: congratulations, .....you are the 1 in 10,000 who is willing to pay that much for that little.

gofast

As a pragmatist, I would be willing to consider the airline proposals for hiring their own private security. I'm sure some of the Blackwater guys would be willing to help out.

bocastephen

But they are not equivalent risks - if you had to assign resources to both, and could not assign equal resources, which risk should get priority?