Mirrodie From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 7419 posts, RR: 65 Posted (11 years 8 months 1 week 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 828 times:
We have been overwhelmed with news from the TV, radio and even worse, from our friends and family here in NY.
So here's a great idea: Perhaps we can all stop trying to be the first to post up EXTREMELY REDUNDANT info on this forum. First of all, keep it to aviation.
Secondly, most of these posts are wastes of your typing energy. What are you trying to accomplish each time you post up what I can see on TV? Last time I checked, this was airliners.net, not wannabejournalist.net.
Were these posts really necessary??
"Were Hijacker's Knives 'legal'?//Stop The Violence.//Ground Stops Again//Another Debris Site Found From UA Pittsburgh Crash//CNN: Black Box Found On UA93 Crash Site//Firefighters Were Not Rescued"
Sorry I can be such a sarcastic sonofaB$*%h but most of these posts don't even belong here.
Do me a favor, will you? Before you post something here, thing about if it belongs here. Better yet, each time you think about posting, donate just ONE dollar to the Red Cross or a can of food to the right cause.
One last thought: We have a right to free speech. It's not an obligation, OK?
Forum moderator 2001-2010; He's a pedantic, pontificating, pretentious bastard, a belligerent old fart, a worthless st
Ahlfors From Canada, joined Oct 2000, 1318 posts, RR: 5 Reply 1, posted (11 years 8 months 1 week 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 759 times:
I would argue that legality of weapons on board AIRCRAFT, Ground stops and Black Boxes have everything to do with commercial aviation, which is what this forum is all about, right? Maybe the ones about the firefighters or the violence don't belong in this forum, but those directly realted to commercial aviation do!
Mirrodie From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 7419 posts, RR: 65 Reply 4, posted (11 years 8 months 1 week 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 704 times:
Wholeheartedly agreed. So Beyond my original post, I will turn this into a useful thread...
With our technology, here are a few considerations for the FAA:
-Inability to turn off the transponder and black box
-live video of cockpit via satellite (the technology is there. just look at flight trackers.)
How would you try to make air travel safer?
Forum moderator 2001-2010; He's a pedantic, pontificating, pretentious bastard, a belligerent old fart, a worthless st
Slawko From Canada, joined May 1999, 3799 posts, RR: 10 Reply 5, posted (11 years 8 months 1 week 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 693 times:
Lets start by having the Military, or in my own countries case, the RCMP manning the security checkpoints at airports, not 9 dollar an hour workers, most of whome have not beeen in the country long enough to speak english, never mind having the training and know how to identify possible problem pax comming through their check pints. The fact is that today the airport authorities that run our major aiports are farming out security to the lowest bidding company, and if you do that, then you get what you pay for. I think the federal government should take the blame for this, as they are the ones who kicked off the privatization of airports thing, but now they should be the ones who provide the security people who are fully trained in the field.
"Clive Beddoe says he favours competition, but his actions do not support that idea." Robert Milton - CEO Air Canada
Tguman From Canada, joined Apr 2001, 423 posts, RR: 2 Reply 6, posted (11 years 8 months 1 week 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 680 times:
Mirrodie:
I completely agree with you. We should start to have cameras not only in the cockpit but also in the cabins. The other thing is that the cameras would have to be battery operated and with no turn of switch. That would be the only way. It would have to be hidden cameras all over the place. Just thoughts. TGUMAN.
P.S. wouldnt that over some awesome views during takeoff and landings.
Rotation18L From United States of America, joined Jun 2001, 32 posts, RR: 0 Reply 7, posted (11 years 8 months 1 week 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 675 times:
I know people would absolutely hate this, but how about no more carry-on luggage....period. I would personally be one upset pax if this went into effect. I find it VERY convenient. Nonetheless, while it would still be quite easy to carry potential weapons on your person, requiring pax to check each piece of baggage in all cases would cut down on the required luggage checking by security officers (and naturally cut down possible errors that might occur in overlooking any suspicious items during the baggage-monitoring process).
The mandatory emptying of pockets, and metal detectors that go off, would force pax to show each item, in person, to a security officer, which would obviously make each of those items stand out a bit more.
In the current situation, the carry-on security process likely is very tedious, with each piece of baggage moving on a conveyor belt, and security officers quickly scanning them with their eyes during an 8-hour shift. I'm willing to bet that's a scenario that can potentially contribute to errors.
Plus, how many flights have you been on in which pax get absolutely stressed out about finding a compartment in which to place their baggage, or jump out of their seats and lunge for the compartment to grab their bag and get off the plane? It personally annoys me. I always sit in my seat after an a/c parks at the gate and wait until the passenger cabin is nearly empty so that I don't have to deal with the bedlam.
What do you think? I'd be interested in reading any other comments about this.
RJ_Delta From Chile, joined Oct 2000, 1943 posts, RR: 13 Reply 8, posted (11 years 8 months 1 week 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 677 times:
Hi:
I agree with you, I think that all of us trate to return to our normal daily life, although the WTC incident was terrible for all the world. We must be strong.
Sponsor Message: 
From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 7419 posts, 
From Canada, joined Oct 2000, 1318 posts, 
From Chile, joined Oct 2000, 1943 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
