Flew AA114 on Wednesday and AA119 yesterday (or vice versa)... going LAX-EWR. In both cases, 2 men in their 20s or 30s "pre-boarded" with the crew - they were not wearing any uniforms and they boarded well before the door was opened and first class was invited to board. On the first flight, both sat up front... on the second flight, one sat across from me up front and the other was in coach.

Air marshals? Dead-heading flight attendants? The guy who sat across from me didn't have any particular contact with crew, so I was thinking air marshals. Curious if that was likely - it certainly made me feel safer thinking that might be the case.

Most likely FAMs ... and I'm happy for you that they made you feel safer!

Sure glad you didn't ask them - that could be sticky! Likely they were FAMs - but now that you know they will have to kill you.

They were air marshals.

I'm glad government theft of premium class seats makes you feel safer. However, Xanax is cheaper and doesn't bring guns onto the plane.

Yes, definitely makes me feel safer......

....especially seeing these guys usually either watch DVDs on their lap tops, play video games, or forget their guns in the lavs....

Seriously, I think 7D on the MD and 7C/D on the 737 are the prime seat for these guys, if they even need to be on the plane in the first place.

I once flew RT DFW-CDG-ORD in J and saw the same pair of guys on the same flights......

They were FAMs indeed. The part I still don't understand is why they haven't figured out a way AROUND the early boarding thing. That's so bogus!

When I'm the first paying pax on an originating flight and see a man in 2C and a guy in 7D as I walk on, it's painfully obvious what the score is.

Yes, I know they have "items" to secure and store; however, the preboarding of preboarding component really needs to stop if they are to remain anonymous to anyone who would care. True, grandma and Mrs. Whittle back in 28E don't have a clue, but the FAMs are not there because of them.

As I have previously posted in the Travel Security forum, the FAM are not supposed to be "undercover." If you are paying attention (whether you are a frequent flyer or a terrorist scout) you are *supposed* to know who they are. Just like patroling police officers, their job is *mostly* to be seen by potential criminals, not to actually capture people committing crimes.

It is highly probable that if AA and UA, along with the others, had not been so lax about security on and before 9/11/01, Atta and his band(s) might have never made it past through airport security lines. ("Box cutters" in the carry ons, and no one gave them a second thought?) This "theft" of premium seats is more of a penalty that hits the airlines every day, as partial restitution for their incompetence, when it came to security, in the days/months/years leading up to September 11. They have no one to blame but themselves for the current predicament of the industry.

Give the air marshalls a break. They are just doing their job, and if their presence has helped to avoid one catastrophe, it is a job well done.

Next time you are in coach, and believe that a FAM has stolen your premium perch, just offer it up.

I would agree and disagree. I agree that the FAMs are supposed to be seen, but disagree that they are to be seen by potential criminals. The terrorists could think up a way to counter the FAMs. They are meant to be seen by the normal passengers. Immediately after 9/11, nobody wanted to fly. There was a possibility that all U.S.-based airlines might go belly-up. TSA and the FAMs were meant to make you and me feel that flying is safe, not to actually make it safe. Just remember that the next time you are getting a body-cavity search at security.

Will this takes the cake as we read more and more about the dismal failure of the intelligence agencies in this country over 9/11.

Everyday I read another article about how some agency knew that atta and the boys were about and did nothing. In fact if they had been on the job they never would have gotten to an airport security checkin on that date.

So what we get today is to pay extra for the failure of those same intelligence agencies we had paid for in the past to protect us.

It is stupid to let the passengers know who they are. Then they can then be taken out by suprise instead of random passengers. The FAM would never know what hit them.

On what do you base this statement? Anything official from the fine folks at DHS? And, if that's so, why do those who have blantantly come out and asked their seat mates in 2C and 7D if they are FAMs get quizzical looks and immediate rejections? In some instances, I've read where after those flights, the FAMs aggressively lectured the inquisitive pax after unloading the a/c.

If, indeed, the intent of the whole FAM program is for them to be visible/invisible, I say they have failed us.

I said they were intended to be visible to those who observe, not to everyone. (There are much longer responses in the Travel Security section of FlyerTalk.) But, in brief:

1. They board during a time when, if any other passenger boarded, they would be arrested for inteference with flight crew. That single fact, alone, means that they can't be undercover. They are already sitting in the airplane, generally (always??) in an aisle seat, almost always (always in my personal observation, but there may be exceptions?) in First Class. So, if *anyone* wants to know if there is a FAM on the plane, it is obvious. (There are reasons why they board early - they need to meet the crew, they need to discuss who else will be traveling with a firearm on that flight other than the FAMs, they need to discuss the "alert" words and signals of the day, etc. Changing this procedure would be a *significant* disruption to airline operations which I can detail some other time if anyone cares).

2. They carry special equipment including a PDA that is allowed to communicate during times when other passengers are not. (Has anyone ever noticed, by checking their own device, whether they have active IR in flight?)

3. They don't drink, they don't take window seats, they don't make an ... of themselves. Those factors, alone, will set you out in some First Class cabins.

4. There are other factors which are not fair to list here.

You are still operating under the assumption that the FAMs are there to battle terrorist hijackers. But stop and think about the way that the Air Marshal program was introduced. If the FAMs were supposed to actually defend the aircraft against terrorist hijackings, what purpose would it serve to announce loudly and publicly that FAMs will be operating undercover on flights? Maybe to keep the terrorists' odds of success from being too low for a "sporting fight"?

I still believe that the FAMs are there to make you (and me) feel safer flying. In that case, it would make sense to announce that they will be there (in fact, it wouldn't do anything at all to make us feel safer if we didn't know they were there). It would also make sense to have them be somewhat discreet, but not too discreet. It should be possible for an intelligent observer to spot them.

Had a FAM on a flight out of Regan to STL. This shemale type was wearing a suit a bit too large and boarded with the crew. Suprisingly -- she ended up going into the Lav multiple times during the flight. She was even in the LAV when the FAs went into the cockpit to deliver breakfast. Not sure the purpose she was serving -- made no contact with FA's -- did not talk with fellow passengers -- just sat straight up (no recline on a 6am flight) for 2 hrs. Not that this matters -- she was in the 2nd row of F on the AC side with an aisle seat.