4 ms·
I think you are right. Being in a closed cabin at 30,000 feet means that the size of the explosion has to be a lot smaller than on the ground to have the same
by wtvanhest 10y ago
I think you are right.
Being in a closed cabin at 30,000 feet means that the size of the explosion has to be a lot smaller than on the ground to have the same impact. Additionally, guns can lead to lead to 9/11 situations.
More importantly, TSA probably won't defend against a state level threat, but it keeps crazy people from doing ridiculous stuff. Take a look at this pre-security list of incidents: (remember, a lot less people flew back then)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_aircraft_hijackings https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_aircraft_hijackings
There is no way not to have security on flights. The next step is making it much faster and more predictable to reduce overall travel time.
- thomasahle 10y agoAgain, most of these (if not all?) would have been prevented by better cockpit doors and/or air marshal.
- wtvanhest 10y agoHow would a better cockpit door and an air marshal stop a guy with 10 lbs of explosives? All he has to do is show it to everyone and he can direct the pilots to fly anywhere he wants. They may not do a 9/11, but they will all do what he says. Some type of security will always be required at airports and probably eventually on high speed trains as well. Now we just need to figure out how to make it way faster and less invasive.
- LeifCarrotson 10y agoThe locked door and air marshal stop the plane from becoming a jet-fuel missile directed at any point in range and turn it into a bomb plummeting inaccurately somewhere under its flight path.
- thomasahle 10y agoParent was about flight high jacking prior to modern airport security.