21–30 of 56 posts
Maybe this will finally mean a reduction in security theater on the way to the plane. One can hope, anyway.
Probably not. The armoring of cockpit doors already stopped hijackings. I'm a bit baffled as to the benefit of a second one.
Right now, when pilots use the toilet, the cockpit door is wide open.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah, it’s funny what happens when the pilots need to access the head. The flight attendants move a cart to block the pathway while the cockpit door is open. I tend to agree with FAA that this is an unnecessary vulnerability if we can easily add a secondary secure door between the cabin and the galley.
How many hijackings has this resulted in, though? The existing solution seems to be good enough.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah, it’s funny what happens when the pilots need to access the head. The flight attendants move a cart to block the pathway while the cockpit door is open. I tend to agree with FAA that this is an unnecessary vulnerability if we can easily add a secondary secure door between the cabin and the galley.
How many hijackings has this resulted in, though? The existing solution seems to be good enough.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's such a ridiculous theater. If a terrorist really wanted to bring down an airplane, nothing the TSA or the airports are currently doing will stop them. There's way too many holes.
If you want to bring down the airplane in general, there are multiple things you can do, but if you want to bring it down in a specific location, you either have to somehow hack the control systems, or break into the cockpit. For example if you want to crash the airplane into a skyscraper.
Maybe this will finally mean a reduction in security theater on the way to the plane. One can hope, anyway.
Probably not. The armoring of cockpit doors already stopped hijackings. I'm a bit baffled as to the benefit of a second one.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not a chance. This is more security theater, meant to remind people to be afraid.
It's such a ridiculous theater. If a terrorist really wanted to bring down an airplane, nothing the TSA or the airports are currently doing will stop them. There's way too many holes.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Probably not. The armoring of cockpit doors already stopped hijackings. I'm a bit baffled as to the benefit of a second one.
Passengers already know to not comply with hijackers. Since 9/11 everyone who has attempted something has gotten a beating and then restrained by passengers until an emergency landing could occur. I can't see an extra door helping much knowing that.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you want to bring down the airplane in general, there are multiple things you can do, but if you want to bring it down in a specific location, you either have to somehow hack the control systems, or break into the cockpit. For example if you want to crash the airplane into a skyscraper.
That isn't a thing that happens anymore, because passengers don't tolerate anybody making trouble. This double-doors stuff is alarmist theater for a fabricated threat.
Examples of this? The shoe bomber is one, but the shoe bomber was solo. I don't know what a situation would look like in a 9/11 attack where you have 4-5 attackers. Esp in a widebody jet
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How many hijackings has this resulted in, though? The existing solution seems to be good enough.
Should we for a hijacking to happen, then implement the solution?
Maybe this will finally mean a reduction in security theater on the way to the plane. One can hope, anyway.
Probably not. The armoring of cockpit doors already stopped hijackings. I'm a bit baffled as to the benefit of a second one.