What having a sky marshal really means

"Cub Driver" wrote in message
...

If a sky marshal (or pilot, for that matter) really has to get into a
fight
with a terrorist, odds are you are going to lose the airplane. Either the
terrorist will set off a bomb or the aircraft will be so damaged during
the
fight that it will crash.

I don't agree. Who said the terrorist had a bomb, and how did he get
it on the airplane? And haven't we just wasted a lot of cyber-ink
proving that the chances of the odd angry shot downing the airplane
are extremely remote?

He's addresing "worst case scenario"...at which time HOW he got in aboard
doesn't matter. (Inside job, magic...)


What I do agree with is this: the next terrorist incident will be
different than the four hijackings on 9/11. We have spent many
millions ensuring there won't be a repetition of 9/11, when it was
extremely unlikely that Osmaa ever expected there would be a
repetition. (More likely, he expected us to spend many millions of
dollars.)


In security work, the best you can hope for is to stop the easiest and more
direct attacks. This point is something the media consistently misses
(whether through sheer ignorance or willful deliberation is not clear).

"Dave" wrote in message
...
But if there's ever another hijacking, it will end in one of two ways.
If there are FAMs on board, they will subdue the hijackers with deadly
force if necessary. If there are no FAMs on board, the passengers
will subdue them with deadly force whether it's necessary or not.

There is a third way for the incident to end - the hijacker succeeds!
There
is no guarantee that a FAM would do the business.

Dave, I've got news for you: "There are NO guarantee's in life". This is
something that most mature people already realize.


Some of them would be too drunk on the free booze in Business class (They
wont be travelling economy) and not take the job seriously like the drunk
TSA chief at Dulles.

And you know this how?

Good way to build confidence in the security arrangements.

TROLL!!

PLONK

"Tom Sixkiller" wrote in message
...

"Dave" wrote in message
...
But if there's ever another hijacking, it will end in one of two ways.
If there are FAMs on board, they will subdue the hijackers with deadly
force if necessary. If there are no FAMs on board, the passengers
will subdue them with deadly force whether it's necessary or not.

There is a third way for the incident to end - the hijacker succeeds!
There
is no guarantee that a FAM would do the business.

Dave, I've got news for you: "There are NO guarantee's in life". This is
something that most mature people already realize.


Some of them would be too drunk on the free booze in Business class
(They
wont be travelling economy) and not take the job seriously like the
drunk
TSA chief at Dulles.

And you know this how?

If this is how the guys at the top behave what can one expect of the morons
further down?

Half of the hostages died in part because 1) inadequate numbers of
medical personnel were immediately onhand due to poor planning 2) those
that WERE there werent told what was going on or what was used 3)
non-lethal is a misnomer (ANYTHING can be toxic in the wrong amounts,
including water and oxygen, let alone inhaled sedatives/anesthetics)

The decompression scenario may work, but you would have to disarm the
oxygen masks or they would deploy with depressurization. And again,
different people tolerate events differently. An otherwise healthy
person may survive without supplemental oxygen, but a person who is
marginal may not. If the masks deploy, then whats to prevent said bad
guys from commandeering masks to stay with the fight?

Dave

Viperdoc wrote:

I hope your suggestion wasn't serious- remember when terrorists took over a
theater in Russia and the special forces sprayed in a "non-lethal" disabling
agent? Around half of the hostages also died from the effects as well.

What makes you think a significant number of the elderly or less healthy
passengers would also die from hypoxia? How many would suffer permanent
brain damage, or strokes or heart attacks?

I think I would rather take my chances having a trained air marshal on board
even if they had to start shooting Glaser safety slugs around the cabin. If
a terrorist does not control the flight deck they do not control the
airplane, and pilots are trained to keep the door closed and locked under
any and all circumstances.

"Tom Sixkiller" wrote in message
...

"Cub Driver" wrote in message
...


What I do agree with is this: the next terrorist incident will be
different than the four hijackings on 9/11. We have spent many
millions ensuring there won't be a repetition of 9/11, when it was
extremely unlikely that Osmaa ever expected there would be a
repetition. (More likely, he expected us to spend many millions of
dollars.)


In security work, the best you can hope for is to stop the easiest and
more
direct attacks. This point is something the media consistently misses
(whether through sheer ignorance or willful deliberation is not clear).



The Star Trek approach to prevent commandeering of aircraft is a far more
honest approach than air marshals. "This aircraft will self-destruct in 2
minutes."

"Dave S" wrote in message
hlink.net...
|
| The decompression scenario may work, but you would have to disarm the
| oxygen masks or they would deploy with depressurization. And again,
| different people tolerate events differently. An otherwise healthy
| person may survive without supplemental oxygen, but a person who is
| marginal may not. If the masks deploy, then whats to prevent said bad
| guys from commandeering masks to stay with the fight?
|

Well, the bad guys would then be on a very short leash.

"Richard Riley" wrote in message
...
|
| No, actually he expected that we would collapse into chaos and civil
| war. He saw all the press about how everyone was mad at Bush because
| he stole the election, and Bush was an idiot, and for 20 years the US
| hadn't done anything when attacked so we were a weak country ready to
| be pushed over the edge.

It appears from the tapes showing him laughing and watching videos of the
9/11 attacks that he actually thought there were mass conversions to Islam.

Just my opinion, of course, but I think a lot of people don't really
understand how 9-1-1 really changed the playing field, so to speak.

It used to be that if you played nice with a hijacker, he/she would demand
to be flown to some place and that would be that. NOW after 9-1-1,,,
passengers and crew are assuming the worst and won't be threatened by a few
incompetents with box cutters that never were taught to bathe. The people
on those planes in 9-1-1 were assuming the old scenario,,,, play nice and
they'll ask to be flown to Cuba (or whatever) and most of us will be
okay...... NOW we know better,,,, short of (God forbid) one of those
low-lifes using a bomb on an aircraft or a gun,,, the passengers and crew
will take 'em out. 9-1-1,,, at least with a jumbo jet will remain the
singularly unique story from the past. Of course this is not to say that
they won't use trucks, boats, walk into shopping centers with explosives
strapped to their person,, one of those scenarios is sure to happen, next,
unfortunately - but what happened in 9-1-1 won't happen again (i.e. in that
same manner).

Just an aside,,, but if I hear one more reporter writing about how 'clever'
those 9-1-1 terrorists were, I think I'll just toss up my Twinkies. They
were common, slightly less-stupid-than-most thugs ,, who used fear to
control numbers greater than themselves, no different than the nonsense that
takes place on our city buses now and then, when two or three teenagers can
terrorize an entire busload of people.
--
--
=-----
Good Flights!

Cecil
PP-ASEL

Check out my personal flying adventures complete with pictures and text at:
www.bayareapilot.com

"I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things."
- Antoine de Saint-Exupery -

"We who fly, do so for the love of flying. We are alive in the air with
this miracle that lies in our hands and beneath our feet"
- Cecil Day Lewis -

On Fri, 2 Jan 2004 14:36:17 -0800 "C J Campbell" wrote:

All those people who worry about explosive decompression, innocent
bystanders getting shot, etc., are missing the point.


Do the sky marshals guard every emergency exit? What would happen if a
terrorist opened and emergency hatch at 36,000 ft? Can they be opened at all
when the plane is at altitude?

The new backscatter xray machines can see pretty much see everything. So
I'd have to suspend disbelief to think your scenario could play out.

Are you saying that you think a gun and/or bomb could be gotten on board
somehow? You scenario seems to rest on that premise.



R. Hubbell




If a sky marshal (or pilot, for that matter) really has to get into a fight
with a terrorist, odds are you are going to lose the airplane. Either the
terrorist will set off a bomb or the aircraft will be so damaged during the
fight that it will crash.

This is still better odds of survival for the passengers and crew than
simply shooting down the hijacked aircraft, which the military will scramble
to do the moment that somebody tries to take over the airplane. The sky
marshal has only a very limited time to regain control. Otherwise the jet
will be shot down, no questions asked. So whatever the marshal can do, at
whatever cost, is better than the alternative.

Either alternative is better than letting a terrorist take control of an
aircraft and fly it into a crowd of people or some valuable object.

I would think that a pilot on a threatened aircraft would gradually reduce
the cabin pressure enough to cause the passengers to pass out. This could be
done in less time than it would probably take to break through the cockpit
door. The bad guys probably would not even notice and might even experience
a moment of euphoria. Once the passenger cabin is properly subdued the
pilots could make their way back and give oxygen to the sky marshals, disarm
the terrorists, and guarantee that control would be maintained after
everybody wakes up while the airplane is descending to land.

This last alternative would still be very dangerous. The terrorists might
still set off a bomb, either before they pass out or after they wake up. The
oxygen masks dropping in the cabin would might tip them off to what was
happening, although the masks sometimes deploy during a hijacking anyway.

--
Christopher J. Campbell
World Famous Flight Instructor
Port Orchard, WA


If you go around beating the Bush, don't complain if you rile the animals.

In article fIFJb.99695$pY.17255@fed1read04,
R. Hubbell wrote:
On Fri, 2 Jan 2004 14:36:17 -0800 "C J Campbell"
wrote:

All those people who worry about explosive decompression, innocent
bystanders getting shot, etc., are missing the point.


Do the sky marshals guard every emergency exit? What would happen if a
terrorist opened and emergency hatch at 36,000 ft? Can they be opened at all
when the plane is at altitude?

he may kill himself and some unbelted passenger, but the plane would be
pretty much unharmed... I dont really think it would crash unless
other factor help (such as being just taking off or about to land...)





--
Eduardo Kaftanski |
| Freedom's just another word
http://e.nn.cl | for nothing left to loose.
|