mfirst

when I passed 1MM, they let me sit in the Pilot's seat during boarding for a few minutes - and I live/work in a very technical field in which touching things wrongly can really cause problems - and I was afraid to touch ANYTHING out of fear of shifting the transmission out of park into F or R (yes, I know it doesnt work that way - or does it?)

WineCountryUA

WW there have been nearly 1,000 hijackings in past 50 years and since 9/11 some 70+

https://aviation-safety.net/statistics/period/stats.php

halls120

I was fortunate enough to once sit in the jump seat of a Navy P-3 on final approach to NAS Adak. It was an experience I will never forget. I would never expect or want to repeat this on a commercial airliner.

weero

Yes, even some prominent ones.

I am not sure, how well the policy works, if one manages to get weapons on board. The number - especially the hijacking count relative to the number of flights - has dropped since 2001 though.

WineCountryUA

Zero successful hijackings in USA since 9/11 -- seems to suggest something is working. While 70+ WW.

weero

I am not familiar with the counting methodology in your list.

But of the 23 hijackings Wikipedia lists since 9/11, one was on US soil .... well not soil but airspace.

Then there are the ones by the authorities and those by people claiming to carry bombs. The closed door policy does nothing to mitigate those.

hughw

I've sat in F.O.'s seat numerous times on Cape Air flights BOS-Marthas Vineyard on 9 seat (I think) Cessna 402's....I grab the seat when I can for two reasons: incredible 270 degree view and the thought (probably ill founded) that I might do better landing the plane if pilot had a heart attack than someone else.

enviroian

Likewise--July 2011 RSW-EYW.

WineCountryUA

Breaching flight deck by an unauthorized individual and causing the plane to deviate from its normal operation

Mental health and/or drug issue of an authorized pilot.

Believe the discussion here is security of the flight deck and unauthorized access and in particular in the USA or under US DOT rules. This is the UA forum and we are discussion an violation of the rules on an UA flight..

SPN Lifer

WW = worldwide

weero

Exactly, a case for which the closed door policy does next to nothing.

... and it's efficiency in preventing hijackings.
Limiting the scope the US' sphere of influence still yields the above example of a pilot of unsound mind, the infamous authority orchestrated hijacking of an Aeromexico flight, or merely trying to hold the passengers hostage.

So cockpit breach isn't the sole pathway to hijackings.
Which wasn't an attempt on the integrity and safety of the flight either. So the extrapolation to hijackings is a far stretch to begin with.

bocastephen

I highly doubt the coach of a baseball team on a private charter is a hijack risk or either of these pilots would have allowed a member of the public to do this on a revenue flight. The risk here was the coach touching something accidentally or deliberately or distracting the crew while something was accidentally touched (ie the Eastern Airlines L1011 crash into the Everglades).

Let’s think this through critically - we have two pilots - two unrelated employees who probably never or rarely flew together - both agreeing to let the coach into the flight deck during the flight and then sit in the pilot seat.

Something doesn’t add up. Even if one of them had a sudden inexplicable brain fart, why did the other go along with this dumb scheme? Why didn’t they report it to save their own behind?

So, leveraging my reputation as the Nostradamus of Flyertalk with a fairly decent list of (mostly Omni PR related) forecasts that have come to fruition, here is my take: The charter contract was up for renewal, the request for the coach to have this experience came from the team and was delivered to management with either a veiled or open warning that renewal might hinge on this experience being delivered, and it was pushed down through to the crew that they would be allowing this to happen

- but- no one expected the photos would become public and put United into an embarrassing situation drawing this kind of scrutiny although outside Flyertalk I doubt anyone cares at this point.

So let’s see how this all pans out - two individual pilots both having a major judgement fail at the same time, or two pilots both forewarned this will be allowed and they will need to cooperate to help seal the charter contract (or some other deal like a stadium sponsorship, etc).

mfirst

boca - I like your answer the best... and it is very uncharacteristic of how people see the world.....meaning that there are often sometimes very complex answers to simple problems - even as much as people want to believe in Occam's razor. Unfortunately, the attention span of the internet (including FT) is such that rarely do we get the answers to some of these topics and events. Or, maybe to your point - we will know the answer. If UA publicly terminates both pilots for breaking such an obvious rule (and considering their union contracts, etc) then we know this was 2 having a major judgment fail. However, if we never hear about this again - then your other hypothesis (or something similar) is probably more accurate. Or, it can just be something in the middle - someone wanted an autograph for a kid and, thanks to social media, things got out of hand quickly...... but, to another point of this thread - events like this are where things like safety come into play as a single event like this evolves into another hole in the swiss cheese - heck, just look that the NZ plunge a few weeks ago.... and the impact on Boeing for that one......

-m

zeus2120

I think we can all agree that the hitting coach for the Rockies wasn't going to hijack the plane -- but ultimately some rules are in place for the overall greater good and strictly enforced specifically to take away even thinking about making subjective judgement calls. In this situation a judgement call was made by the pilots to allow the visit, but the rule is so strong that subjectivity shouldn't even be on the table.

elmira56925

Until it happens. That’s A-typical pre 9/11 thinking. It’s because of that reason why we have rules in place