Yet another Airbus fatal plane crash
- Thread starter rusvik
- Start date
Awesome. So the impenetrable doors of the post 9/11 world kept the captain from getting back in, even though it sounds like he really tried to smash it down. You'd think that the captain, of all people, would have a fucking key, or that biometrics would be installed. What if, while the captain was taking a piss, the copilot had a health issue, a heart attack or something?
Unreal.
Unreal.
Hmmm, seems there is a touchpad in case of such incidents...
Who, What, Why: How are cockpit doors locked? - BBC News
And other airlines have a rule of two, meaning that if the captain has to leave the cockpit, he is replaced by another staff member, but Lufthansa doesn't have such a policy. I see some major lawsuits coming in their future.
Who, What, Why: How are cockpit doors locked? - BBC News
And other airlines have a rule of two, meaning that if the captain has to leave the cockpit, he is replaced by another staff member, but Lufthansa doesn't have such a policy. I see some major lawsuits coming in their future.
Airlines in Europe are not required to have two people in the cockpit at all times, unlike the standard U.S.
Wow.
Wow.
inb4 MKUltra
It's a pretty odd case though because the copilot must of been passive aggressive as hell. If he really wanted to bring it down I think he could have done it at any time by slitting the pilots throat while he sits in his seat, take off his headset, let him bleed out, then do whatever.
It's a pretty odd case though because the copilot must of been passive aggressive as hell. If he really wanted to bring it down I think he could have done it at any time by slitting the pilots throat while he sits in his seat, take off his headset, let him bleed out, then do whatever.
Except people who commit suicide taking 300 other people with them are fucking pussies. Fucking pussies don't slit throats. They quietly fly planes into mountain ranges when the pilot is taking a piss..... like a fucking pussy.
Sorry, but shouldn't it be clear enough already that he really wanted to bring down the airplane?
Official Airbus video, from one of the Reddit threads, complete with hilarious accents:
[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ixEHV7c3VXs[/ame]
You'd think they'd put a toilet within the locked area, rather than making the pilot have to open the door every time. Seems like a bit of a security risk, besides the above, it gives any attackers more opportunities to force their way into the cabin.
I can't imagine the horror the people sitting in first class went through... in front of you the captain is banging frantically to get back in his cockpit, and out your window you see that you're in rapid descent...
Engineers are going to need to seriously rethink this whole 'Captain can't get back into his own cockpit' thing. The keypad served no purpose since there's apparently an override in the cockpit.
Engineers are going to need to seriously rethink this whole 'Captain can't get back into his own cockpit' thing. The keypad served no purpose since there's apparently an override in the cockpit.
Reinforced cockpit doors are a waste of money. As is most of the other post 9/11 added security.
Post 9/11, the passengers will not let anyone in the cabin take over the aircraft. That only worked because the perception was "oh, this is a hijacking. If I comply, we'll land safely and I'll be released."
That changed, even on the same day. The hijackers on United 93 didn't succeed. In fact, had the passengers known what was going on with the other flights a little earlier, they wouldn't have taken the cockpit.
There have been several incidents since 9/11, all squashed by the passengers. In several of them, the would-be hijackers were even killed by the passengers.
Post 9/11, the passengers will not let anyone in the cabin take over the aircraft. That only worked because the perception was "oh, this is a hijacking. If I comply, we'll land safely and I'll be released."
That changed, even on the same day. The hijackers on United 93 didn't succeed. In fact, had the passengers known what was going on with the other flights a little earlier, they wouldn't have taken the cockpit.
There have been several incidents since 9/11, all squashed by the passengers. In several of them, the would-be hijackers were even killed by the passengers.
O Rly? Several you say? I can find only one post 9/11 instance where passengers, six of whom were police officers, beat two of six suspected hijackers to death. It happened in June 2012 in China. This is the only instance I can find of passengers beating anyone to death post 9/11. There seems to be one other instance in September 2000 on a Vegas to Salt Lake City flight where passenger beat a man to death that had entered the cockpit, almost a full year before 9/11.
There have been three or our other post 9/11 instances where passengers and crew overpowered would-be hijackers where no one died.
There have also been about nine other notable successful hijackings since 9/11 where passengers did nothing to stop the hijackings. This shows that you can't always count on the public to risk their lives, especially when hijackers are armed or threatening to blow up the plane. As such, I hardly think secure cockpit doors are a waste of money.
It has something to do with the Bystander Effect. People tend not to get involved when there are lots of other folks around. If hijackers tried to take over a plane with only 5 or 6 people on it, there's (supposedly) a greater likelihood of passenger intervention.
Having said that, a phenomenon like United 93 - passengers on a crowded flight getting involved - can occur if there are strong personalities willing to lead. That's social proof at work.
But true leaders are rare. Hence, the Bystander Effect.
Southwest Airlines Flight 1763 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Passengers Subdue Unruly Passenger in the Air - ABC News
Unruly Air Passenger Subdued With Duct Tape - ABC News
Man shouting 'jihad' rushes jetliner cockpit; passengers restrain him - Chicago Tribune (10 days ago)
I'm sure there's more. Not all actual hijackings, but most thought to be initially.
The "successful hijackings"...were these cases where they actually intended to down the plane? Perhaps the behavior has a lot to do with what the perceived outcome is.
You've corroborated what I said. You're citing the pre 9/11 2000 Vegas to Salt lake City flight, where the guy stormed the cockpit, and a few where "unruly" passengers were detained, mainly people that drank too much. But you're missing my point. You specifically said,
but that simply hasn't happened. As far as I can tell, there's only been one notable hijacking attempt since 9/11 where some of the would-be hijackers were killed.
And as to your question about the successful hijackings, you said that 9/11 happened because people thought things were gong to be OK since that's what the hijackers wanted them to believe, and no one would let that happen again. Now you're saying people might not do anything, based on what the perceived outcome is. Which is it?
People suffer from indecision. Many won't always act. All kinds of factors come into play, like the number of hijackers, how well armed they are, or if they have a bomb (or even the threat of a bomb), and how many people on the plane are willing to step up to be a hero.
Beyond that, even if people on the plane were willing to enter into hand to hand combat with a hijacker, do you really want that combat taking place in the cockpit? Without a door there's nothing stopping someone from rushing the cockpit faster than anyone can intercept them, and so then to stop them, you're going to have to engage them in a confined space with lots of sensitive controls. It makes no sense not to have a reinforced door to keep people out. Clearly there has to be better systems in place to keep things like this murder/suicide from happening again, but I wouldn't want to be on a plane without a secure cockpit door.
I concede your point, I said "several", and it turned out to be one killed before 9/11, and one after.
However, as an example, since 2010:
These three hijackings were stopped by the passengers:
Like Turkish Airlines Flight 1754, Alitalia Flight 329, Tianjin Airlines Flight GS7554.
These two, the passengers did not stop the hijacking:
Ethiopian Airlines Flight 702. Hijacked by the co-pilot himself, so no real opportunity for the pax to get involved.
Pegasus Airlines Flight 751. The hijacker appeared to be heavily intoxicated, enough so that the crew fooled him into thinking they were taking him to Sochi.
And, of course, the incident earlier this month. I think it's especially true for flights with lots of U.S. passengers, since the details of 9/11 are perhaps more personal, or well known to them.
Well, using the example of a man quietly telling the crew there's a bomb in the cargo hold...the upside of tackling him, since he's not actively grabbing the flight controls is lower. But then, you knew that, right? Just wanting to feel smug.
I stand by the idea that hijackers trying to bust into the cockpit will be mobbed by the pax before they are able to fly into a building.