If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Flights cancelled because of BA Pilots
Latest news here is that the flights to DC are being
cancelled because BA pilots won't fly with armed air marshals. Enter the Ninjas or BA might be barred from US. Errol |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Flights cancelled because of BA Pilots
Errol muttered....
Latest news here is that the flights to DC are being cancelled because BA pilots won't fly with armed air marshals. Enter the Ninjas or BA might be barred from US. What's different about AMs on BA? El Al has had armed "air marshalls" aboard international flights for decades (amd high checkin security). Do you suppose that terrorists might avoid BA because the tea is so bad? TMO |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Flights cancelled because of BA Pilots
"Olivers" wrote in message ... Errol muttered.... Latest news here is that the flights to DC are being cancelled because BA pilots won't fly with armed air marshals. Enter the Ninjas or BA might be barred from US. What's different about AMs on BA? El Al has had armed "air marshalls" aboard international flights for decades (amd high checkin security). Do you suppose that terrorists might avoid BA because the tea is so bad? BA doesn't have a history of AMs. The pilots union has made a fuss about it. It's only a report at this stage, doesn't mean it's true. It's reported by the New York Times at: http://www.nytimes.com/2004/01/03/na...rint&position= Errol |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Flights cancelled because of BA Pilots
Olivers writes
Latest news here is that the flights to DC are being cancelled because BA pilots won't fly with armed air marshals. Enter the Ninjas or BA might be barred from US. What's different about AMs on BA? El Al has had armed "air marshalls" aboard international flights for decades (amd high checkin security). Aircraft belonging to UK airlines have been a terrorist target for many decades. The general line in the UK seems to be that security at the originating airport is the most important line of defence. I've read articles by UK aviation security experts who have argued that the presence of armed air marshals actually increases the risk of a hijack being successful. Aircraft belonging to Israeli airlines have been a terrorist target for many decades. El Al uses armed air marshals, so I'd assume that their security experts believe that their presence reduces the risk of a hijack being successful. So who's right? I'm not an expert on aviation security, but it seems possible that both are correct. El Al is a smaller operation than BA, and is also much more culturally monolithic. This has implications on the operational deployment of armed air marshals, their training and quality, and their integration into the rest of the security operation. Do you suppose that terrorists might avoid BA because the tea is so bad? Most terrorists prefer coffee. -- Simon Elliott http://www.ctsn.co.uk/ |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Flights cancelled because of BA Pilots
"Simon Elliott" wrote in message ... Olivers writes Latest news here is that the flights to DC are being cancelled because BA pilots won't fly with armed air marshals. Enter the Ninjas or BA might be barred from US. What's different about AMs on BA? El Al has had armed "air marshalls" aboard international flights for decades (amd high checkin security). Aircraft belonging to UK airlines have been a terrorist target for many decades. The general line in the UK seems to be that security at the originating airport is the most important line of defence. I've read articles by UK aviation security experts who have argued that the presence of armed air marshals actually increases the risk of a hijack being successful. One though is that it might put guns in the hands of terrorists. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Flights cancelled because of BA Pilots
Simon Elliott wrote:
Aircraft belonging to Israeli airlines have been a terrorist target for many decades. El Al uses armed air marshals, so I'd assume that their security experts believe that their presence reduces the risk of a hijack being successful. Israel has been stepping on the hornett's nest for decades, so it normal that it has to expect every hornett to try to sting it. El Al has both extremely strict ground security as well as whatever security they have on board. Their good record with regards to highjackings could be simply due to good ground security. The question to be asked is this: have there been any incidents where El Al armed guards have had to fire on board aircraft ? |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Flights cancelled because of BA Pilots
Simon Elliott wrote in news:KbaHTAAkJv9
: Olivers writes Latest news here is that the flights to DC are being cancelled because BA pilots won't fly with armed air marshals. Enter the Ninjas or BA might be barred from US. What's different about AMs on BA? El Al has had armed "air marshalls" aboard international flights for decades (amd high checkin security). Aircraft belonging to UK airlines have been a terrorist target for many decades. The general line in the UK seems to be that security at the originating airport is the most important line of defence. I've read articles by UK aviation security experts who have argued that the presence of armed air marshals actually increases the risk of a hijack being successful. One of the most fundamental tenets of security is something called "Depth of Defense". There is no one thing that will stop terrorists (or any bad guys whether they be computer hackers or bank robbers). So, you set up a bunch of security parameters in the hopes that, while one security barrier won't stop someone, the whole series of them combined will make it very difficult for a bad guy to carry out his/her evil plan. For example, there was no "one thing" that could keep invading armies out of medieval castles so they set up a bunch of "little" things. A moat by itself was pretty useless, but combining a moat with think walls, boiling oil, archers shooting at you, etc… made taking a castle kind of difficult. While it's important for the UK to have tight security at the originating airport, it certainly can't hurt to have Air Marshals on the planes either. It's just putting the Depth of Defense principal to work. Also, while it's probably better to actually HAVE an Air Marshall on flights, there is probably some good in making people THINK there are there even if one isn't present. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Flights cancelled because of BA Pilots
Charlie C. writes
[note my reordering of your post] One of the most fundamental tenets of security is something called "Depth of Defense". There is no one thing that will stop terrorists (or any bad guys whether they be computer hackers or bank robbers). So, you set up a bunch of security parameters in the hopes that, while one security barrier won't stop someone, the whole series of them combined will make it very difficult for a bad guy to carry out his/her evil plan. Absolutely. While it's important for the UK to have tight security at the originating airport, it certainly can't hurt to have Air Marshals on the planes either. It's just putting the Depth of Defense principal to work. Also, while it's probably better to actually HAVE an Air Marshall on flights, there is probably some good in making people THINK there are there even if one isn't present. Some UK security experts, and also BA and BALPA, are maintaining that air marshals don't add any depth to the defence because they are actually counterproductive. They assert that the presence of air marshals makes a successful hijack more likely. Various scenarios have been put forward, eg terrorists impersonating air marshals at various points in the security system. For example, there was no "one thing" that could keep invading armies out of medieval castles so they set up a bunch of "little" things. A moat by itself was pretty useless, but combining a moat with think walls, boiling oil, archers shooting at you, etc… made taking a castle kind of difficult. If the aforementioned UK security experts are correct, a better analogy would be combining a moat with a series of causeways which make it easier for the attackers to cross it. -- Simon Elliott http://www.ctsn.co.uk/ |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Flights cancelled because of BA Pilots
While it's important for the UK to have tight security at the originating airport, it certainly can't hurt to have Air Marshals on the planes either. It's just putting the Depth of Defense principal to work. Also, while it's probably better to actually HAVE an Air Marshall on flights, there is probably some good in making people THINK there are there even if one isn't present. Then there is the bullets in the fuselage problem and the is that really a sky marshall pulling a gun thus provoking passengers to act in peril of their lives attacking the wrong person. (yeah, I know SMs will be tall blond and blue eyed with I love George and Tony tatooed on their forearms) |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Flights cancelled because of BA Pilots
jcoulter writes
While it's important for the UK to have tight security at the originating airport, it certainly can't hurt to have Air Marshals on the planes either. It's just putting the Depth of Defense principal to work. Also, while it's probably better to actually HAVE an Air Marshall on flights, there is probably some good in making people THINK there are there even if one isn't present. Then there is the bullets in the fuselage problem Air marshals will use low-velocity ammunition which won't penetrate the skin of the aircraft. and the is that really a sky marshall pulling a gun thus provoking passengers to act in peril of their lives attacking the wrong person. That _is_ a danger. If you noticed a passenger in the next seat start to clear a concealed handgun, what would _you_ do? -- Simon Elliott http://www.ctsn.co.uk/ |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Air Marshalls agreed on UK flights but not Swedish | Miss L. Toe | Air travel | 16 | January 7th, 2004 09:40 AM |
3 flights from Paris cancelled at the last moment | Sjoerd | Air travel | 1 | December 24th, 2003 07:18 PM |
757/767 Pilots Needed | Clark Wilhelm Griswold, Jr | Air travel | 9 | November 5th, 2003 10:08 AM |
DELTA Increases International Flights From Cincinnati | None | Air travel | 0 | November 1st, 2003 02:50 AM |
SIA Crew vs Boeing Test Pilots (was SQ222 Diversion) | Vector | Air travel | 13 | September 16th, 2003 09:01 AM |