8 ms·

You don't search pilots, they're gonna be getting into the cockpit to fly the plane! They are uniformed, they carry clear identification badges that can be veri

You don't search pilots, they're gonna be getting into the cockpit to fly the plane! They are uniformed, they carry clear identification badges that can be verified easily, and they probably know half the people working in the airport. You can't expect them to be groped several times a day for no good reason just to do their jobs.

jgrahamc 16y ago
So what do you do about a deadheading pilot in uniform with ID who's decided to crash the plane? Sorry, you should search everyone (or search totally randomly). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FedEx_Express_Flight_705 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FedEx_Express_Flight_705
- jacquesm 16y ago
  > So what do you do about a deadheading pilot in uniform with ID who's decided to crash the plane. >> Calloway's plan was unsuccessful. The crew was able to fight back despite severe wounds, subdue him, and safely land the aircraft. << Apparently you beat the crap out of him.
  - borism 16y ago
    >>> Severe wounds >>> The crew was left with permanent, disabling injuries and have not flown professionally since.
- wazoox 16y ago
  "Movie plot threat" anyone? Sigh...
  - jgrahamc 16y ago
    That's not a movie plot threat. The FedEx example was a real example of a disgruntled employee trying to crash a plane.
    - jacquesm 16y ago
      Yes, and he was a passenger, not one of the pilots scheduled for the flight.
      - borism 16y ago
        I call out BS. "Prior to the departure of this flight on April 7, 1994, Mr. Calloway presented himself at the plane in full flight gear and with carry-on items. Although he was not a member of the flight crew, he entered the cockpit and began adjusting instruments and controls as if he were." http://bulk.resource.org/courts.gov/c/F3/116/116.F3d.1129.95-6206.html http://bulk.resource.org/courts.gov/c/F3/116/116.F3d.1129.95...
        jacquesm 16y ago
        Yes, he did stuff he was not supposed to do, but on that flight he was a passenger. That he knew his way around the aircraft and that he knew exactly how to misbehave is exactly what I meant when I wrote that you are going to have to put trust in people at some point. Pilots are - for the most part - the most stable people that I have ever met and in general will not get up to stuff like this nearly as often as 'regular' folks do. If they did there would be suicide induced plane crashes every other day with the number of pilots in active service. Incidents will always happen, the question is if you think that it is worth draconian safety measures to get the incident level down an unmeasurable fraction. Again, all it would take for a major accident is for one guy to lift his foot for 2 seconds while taxiing. You could not stop that if you wanted to.
        borism 16y ago
        I don't think you're an idiot, so stop pretending like you don't realize that he used his special privileges as a pilot to get concealed weapons onto the plane. And stop advocating for lifting security requirements off pilots with ridiculous arguments like "pilots are - for the most part - the most stable people that I have ever met" and "he already has full control of the plane, so heck, he should be allowed to bring whatever the fuck he wants onboard anyway".
- bambax 16y ago
  Calloway was not flying the plane! From the Wikipedia article you linked to (twice) but apparently did not care to read: "The scheduled three-man flight crew consisted of 49-year-old Captain David Sanders, 42-year-old First Officer James Tucker, and 39-year-old Flight Engineer Andrew Peterson." "About twenty minutes after takeoff, as the flight crew carried on a casual conversation, Calloway entered the flight deck and commenced his attack." This incident is therefore entirely irrelevant to the conversation. - - - It's interesting, though, to find (articulate) American people who actually approve of the TSA methods, because I thought it was the TSA vs. the rest of the public (cf. "Ask the Pilot" Salon column for instance). It's interesting, but disheartening, because it means the TSA and its gropers and thugs are really here to stay.
  - borism 16y ago
    He used his privileges as a pilot to bring the concealed weapons on board. How the fuck is that not relevant to the discussion?
  - jgrahamc 16y ago
    "but apparently did not care to read" That's where I stopped reading your comment.
    - bambax 16y ago
      No problem. The meat of my comment is in the first sentence: "Calloway was not flying the plane".
  - alan 16y ago
    "Calloway was not flying the plane!" Yes, that's the meaning of the word deadheading. Before you complain someone didn't read an article, you might want to make sure that you understand what they did say.
    - bambax 16y ago
      You're right! I didn't know this word and assumed, wrongly, that it meant something like "deadbeat". I should have checked first; got caught up in the heat of the discussion. However, that makes the reference to this incident even more incomprehensible. Who said anything about off-duty pilots? Being a qualified pilot (or dressed as one) is not the point; the point, as has been stated many times now in this discussion, is that: 1. whoever is flying the plane today does not need to go through security, because they'll end up in the cockpit anyway 2. whatever piece of ID is enough to get someone at the commands of a commercial airliner today should also be enough to get past ordinary security procedures designed for passengers

jgrahamc 16y ago

So what do you do about a deadheading pilot in uniform with ID who's decided to crash the plane? Sorry, you should search everyone (or search totally randomly). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FedEx_Express_Flight_705 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FedEx_Express_Flight_705

jacquesm 16y ago
> So what do you do about a deadheading pilot in uniform with ID who's decided to crash the plane. >> Calloway's plan was unsuccessful. The crew was able to fight back despite severe wounds, subdue him, and safely land the aircraft. << Apparently you beat the crap out of him.
- borism 16y ago
  >>> Severe wounds >>> The crew was left with permanent, disabling injuries and have not flown professionally since.
wazoox 16y ago
"Movie plot threat" anyone? Sigh...
- jgrahamc 16y ago
  That's not a movie plot threat. The FedEx example was a real example of a disgruntled employee trying to crash a plane.
  - jacquesm 16y ago
    Yes, and he was a passenger, not one of the pilots scheduled for the flight.
    - borism 16y ago
      I call out BS. "Prior to the departure of this flight on April 7, 1994, Mr. Calloway presented himself at the plane in full flight gear and with carry-on items. Although he was not a member of the flight crew, he entered the cockpit and began adjusting instruments and controls as if he were." http://bulk.resource.org/courts.gov/c/F3/116/116.F3d.1129.95-6206.html http://bulk.resource.org/courts.gov/c/F3/116/116.F3d.1129.95...
      - jacquesm 16y ago
        Yes, he did stuff he was not supposed to do, but on that flight he was a passenger. That he knew his way around the aircraft and that he knew exactly how to misbehave is exactly what I meant when I wrote that you are going to have to put trust in people at some point. Pilots are - for the most part - the most stable people that I have ever met and in general will not get up to stuff like this nearly as often as 'regular' folks do. If they did there would be suicide induced plane crashes every other day with the number of pilots in active service. Incidents will always happen, the question is if you think that it is worth draconian safety measures to get the incident level down an unmeasurable fraction. Again, all it would take for a major accident is for one guy to lift his foot for 2 seconds while taxiing. You could not stop that if you wanted to.
        borism 16y ago
        I don't think you're an idiot, so stop pretending like you don't realize that he used his special privileges as a pilot to get concealed weapons onto the plane. And stop advocating for lifting security requirements off pilots with ridiculous arguments like "pilots are - for the most part - the most stable people that I have ever met" and "he already has full control of the plane, so heck, he should be allowed to bring whatever the fuck he wants onboard anyway".
bambax 16y ago
Calloway was not flying the plane! From the Wikipedia article you linked to (twice) but apparently did not care to read: "The scheduled three-man flight crew consisted of 49-year-old Captain David Sanders, 42-year-old First Officer James Tucker, and 39-year-old Flight Engineer Andrew Peterson." "About twenty minutes after takeoff, as the flight crew carried on a casual conversation, Calloway entered the flight deck and commenced his attack." This incident is therefore entirely irrelevant to the conversation. - - - It's interesting, though, to find (articulate) American people who actually approve of the TSA methods, because I thought it was the TSA vs. the rest of the public (cf. "Ask the Pilot" Salon column for instance). It's interesting, but disheartening, because it means the TSA and its gropers and thugs are really here to stay.
- borism 16y ago
  He used his privileges as a pilot to bring the concealed weapons on board. How the fuck is that not relevant to the discussion?
- jgrahamc 16y ago
  "but apparently did not care to read" That's where I stopped reading your comment.
  - bambax 16y ago
    No problem. The meat of my comment is in the first sentence: "Calloway was not flying the plane".
- alan 16y ago
  "Calloway was not flying the plane!" Yes, that's the meaning of the word deadheading. Before you complain someone didn't read an article, you might want to make sure that you understand what they did say.
  - bambax 16y ago
    You're right! I didn't know this word and assumed, wrongly, that it meant something like "deadbeat". I should have checked first; got caught up in the heat of the discussion. However, that makes the reference to this incident even more incomprehensible. Who said anything about off-duty pilots? Being a qualified pilot (or dressed as one) is not the point; the point, as has been stated many times now in this discussion, is that: 1. whoever is flying the plane today does not need to go through security, because they'll end up in the cockpit anyway 2. whatever piece of ID is enough to get someone at the commands of a commercial airliner today should also be enough to get past ordinary security procedures designed for passengers