Isn't it ironic?
We locked the doors to the cockpit to keep terrorist passengers from gaining access to the flight controls.
Now the latest theory on the missing airliner is that one of the pilots might have been either suicidal or a terrorist and that he might have hijacked or crashed the plane (or both).
Its pure craziness. You can't build enough safeguards to prevent evil from doing its thing. All you can do is be prepared and equipped to fight it.
It would be heartbreaking to learn (and this is a massive what-if) that one of the pilots was fighting to save the plane while the other was fighting to destroy it...and the passengers sitting in the back were unable to help because they couldn't get through the security door.
For a while now I have thought that there is no reason for the cockpit to have any connection with the passenger cabin at all. No door. No communications only via the ground. If you are on a train you can't reach the driver in the locomotive. The door means there is a chance of access, a chance of control. It would put the hijackers on the back foot. Obviously there are flaws with this idea but I think there are some pluses too.
ReplyDeletewell if you want to carry this to its logical end place then we shouldn't have pilots on board airplanes at all. they should be operated like UAVs and either programed to fly from point a to b or controled like a reaper drone.
Deletequite honestly we shouldn't even have flight attendants. passengers should be allowed to carry what ever consumables they need with them on the flight.
Yep. They virtually fly themselves anyway don't they do? I just think it breaks the link between the leverage (the hostages) and the means (the pilots.) Look at how many hi-jacks stumble once the flightdeck team escapes. There is another aspect to this as well. Imagine the hi-jackers demand an aircrew. If a volunteer crew can be found and can be moved into the cockpit without interference then the plane can just keep moving. Think about it. Within the limits the hijack becomes open ended. Yes the hostages will still be suffering. But the hijackers will be suffering too. They won't have, beyond extremes like blowing the plane up, control over the timetable. If they want to fly around let them. I want to be clear this is more psychological than physical. Yes they will still have hostages but muh of their situational control will be removed. One more stage. Keeping flight crew away from cabin crew and there would be a break in the team structure reducing leverage too. Yes the pilot would be concerned about the cabin crew; but the pressure would be reduced if he didn't know who it was back there or indeed completely know the situation back there either.
DeleteUAV commercial airplanes are a bad bad bad idea, look up the crash rates of UAVs sometime, they are actually pretty unreliable compared to manned planes for everything but the X-45s and X-47(both of which share a lot of the same boeing flight software infrastructure). No matter how much you think the planes fly themselves, the pilots actually do have a job that they do. Part of the main reason for manned planes is that pilots can actually think and react to things when things go wrong.
DeleteThe whole unmanned cockpit thing is actually a topic that comes up a couple times a year at airliners.net with lots of good data and reasons why its a bad idea.
DeleteAs some expert at terror said, If this jet is hijacked and taken to a remote area it can become a flying IED, nukes, dirty bombs or just explosives add chemical weapons and you have a wolf in sheeps clothing delivery vehicle for IEWMD that can slip into the landing patterns of regular airliners and then detonate at it's target unsuspected.
ReplyDeleteSay, Tel Aviv Israel, Beijing China or more likely....Damascus Syria.
The fact it's range can carry it to Pakistan to be loaded with a nuke then refueled for where ever is sobering.
Remember guys, all these "theories" about the plane is still crap shooting in the wind. We don't even have the leftovers yet so we can't even say what happens.
ReplyDeleteAs for auto-flying planes/UAVs etc, they have problems. A lot of problems. They crash a lot. When you lose 200 lives a crash, it becomes a "not a good idea" very fast.
Solomon, budget airlines used to do that. Until someone brought a mineral water bottle filled with diesel on board.
Remember Daniel you are talking to others who have been around the block a few times. Neither Sol or I said hauling pilots out of the plane tomorrow. The tone of the discussion was obviously speculative talking about a possible future. And of course it is all theory when it comes to discussing that Malaysian 'plane.
Deletethank you Steve. i'm trying to take the measure of Daniel and a few others that have recently arrived.
Deletethe reason why i haven't gone totally thermo nuclear on their asses is because i'm trying to give the benefit of the doubt. we'll see where this ends up.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteStill doesn't make any sense. Think about it: If this was a hijack or a suicide (or both), what is your motive? Let's say this is hijack, what's the intention? Where's your communique saying "I want a gazillion dollars" or "I want this ... "? One of the passengers? How about what's below? Might be something in the cargo hold worth all this trouble?
ReplyDeleteLet's say this is a suicide, where's your "Goodbye world" letter/email?
Sorry folks, the Malaysian Government has s_crewed up big time. They act like headless chicken. They might as well get their play book from the Archie's comic books because they sure don't understand the concept of "Disaster Management".
And the Malaysian Government don't like to be told what to do. They are one of the only few countries which can tell the US and UK to "f*ck you". This is why US FAA and NTSB representatives are waiting for the Malaysian Government's call of assistance. The Malaysian Government has NEVER had a disaster of this magnitude before and they're proud. They don't want to be seen by their people and their neighbors to be asking for help from the US or UK. Unfortunately, China doesn't look pleased by the way this disaster is being handled. It's a PR nightmare and the Malaysian Government is doing all the things you are NOT suppose to do in a situation like this.
Back to the issue: There's something not adding up. I'm suspecting the plane is already under water. The issue is how did it hit the water. Controlled or uncontrolled water landing. The odds are against controlled water landing (where passengers would have the chance of scurrying off into life vests).
Mark, 2 cases of pilot suicide (Egypt Air and Silk Air) crashes left no suicide note at all, so the last letter is hardly a sure thing.
ReplyDeleteAs for the Malaysians screwing up, well, don't think they could have done any better, the situation was set so that anyone at the receiving end is well and truly f-ed. Social media sure helped that along with all the wild theories making the search areas larger and larger and all the far fetched theories and "they should have done XYZ". You want to compare? Remember it took 2 years to find the AF447. And people wanted to find the plane within 30 min. The time it takes for one CSI episode.
In the end, time will tell. All it needs is enough time.