Milemaster From United States of America, joined Mar 2001, 1009 posts, RR: 2 Posted (11 years 7 months 2 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 2150 times:
Some of you may have heard this as well yesterday(Wednesday) morning on the Howard Stern show. The interview was with Donald Trump about an unrelated subject, but it deviated to the topic of 9/11.
On a phone interview...Mr. Trump suggested all cockpits be installed with a big red button that when pushed, fills the passenger cabin with sleeping gas to take control over a terrorist situation. Yes, it would put everyone to sleep..including all the passengers(the pilots would have gas masks of some sort). The plane would then land at the nearest airport and remove the threat of another impact.
What do you think? I'm in favor of the idea personally...
FSPilot747 From United States of America, joined Oct 1999, 3599 posts, RR: 14 Reply 1, posted (11 years 7 months 2 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 2061 times:
That's actually a genious idea. That's a VERY good idea. And it isn't as dangerous as using guns. I'd go for it.
Jer32382 From United States of America, joined Apr 2003, 34 posts, RR: 0 Reply 3, posted (11 years 7 months 2 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 2040 times:
Let me present this idea to you. Ok, we have this new gasing system installed on the planes. So a terrorist who has connections with the ground service people (i.e. food service, cleaning service, etc.) has one of his contacts tape into the gas supply and place a strain of anthrax for example in the supply. The plane goes up, the terrorist causes a problem, the pilot pushes that big red button and bam. You have a plane full of people infected with anthrax or some other deadly virus. The plane lands, the people come on board to get the unconscious passengers off and then they get infected without even knowing it. It just keeps spreading and we have a nightmare on our hands and a potentially deadly epiodemic. Call me a conspiracy theorist, but I really think that is a legitimet (sp?) cause for concern about this gassing system.
Jer32382 From United States of America, joined Apr 2003, 34 posts, RR: 0 Reply 5, posted (11 years 7 months 2 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 2006 times:
I was just going to add that to my post. Good point
Tripleseven From United States of America, joined Jul 2000, 118 posts, RR: 0 Reply 6, posted (11 years 7 months 2 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 2005 times:
I'd hope a gas mask would be detected before it can find it's way onto a plane.
Then again, you may have a point. Is it illegal to bring one on? It's not a weapon. I suppose if it isn't, it'd have to be in this scenario.
Jer32382 From United States of America, joined Apr 2003, 34 posts, RR: 0 Reply 7, posted (11 years 7 months 2 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 1997 times:
As far as the gasmask goes, a terrorist would be ore apt to use a smokehood. They are cheaper and they are definatly legal to take onto an airplane.
COboeing777 From United States of America, joined Feb 2001, 693 posts, RR: 5 Reply 8, posted (11 years 7 months 2 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 1994 times:
why? they could just tap into the current air supply of an airliner. No need to have to wait for a special gassing system. Let's face it, we can not prepare for EVERY single even that may happen. It's impossible. I hate to say it but there are ways around everything. I'm not going to even stress over possible attacks. If it happens, it happens. Nothing I can do but deal with it if it comes.
Jer32382 From United States of America, joined Apr 2003, 34 posts, RR: 0 Reply 9, posted (11 years 7 months 2 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 1983 times:
SFOintern From United States of America, joined Oct 2001, 770 posts, RR: 5 Reply 12, posted (11 years 7 months 2 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 1967 times:
You'd have to have *A LOT* of sleeping gas tanks... The expense would be astronomical.
I still think the best security starts at the checkpoints.
Milemaster From United States of America, joined Mar 2001, 1009 posts, RR: 2 Reply 13, posted (11 years 7 months 2 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 1956 times:
My further opinion...
As far as an inside job for anthrax (so very remote) being put into an aircraft, it would take a great deal to get access to the ventillation system and rig it up. Also, anthrax can't be distributed in a gas form and would be a visible "powder or dust" that would be obviously out of the norm. Secondly, testing people for anthrax spores is a simple process and can be done very quickly if there is any suspicion. From what I've heard, anthrax cannot be spread from person to person so an epidemic simply wouldn't happen.
It certainly would take a lot of sleeping gas to knock out an entire passenger cabin.. but only if it were even just enough to weaken the threat just enough to get the plane safely on the ground. The cost would be no more astronomical then staffing an air marshall for a year or two.
I would hate to be in any situation where terrorists try to seize control of an aircraft I'm on. But I'm sure all of you would rather be knocked out than crash into a building of some sort at 500+ mph.
Sccutler From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 5091 posts, RR: 28 Reply 14, posted (11 years 7 months 2 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 1934 times:
I have occasionally allowed a bit of gas to slip out while I was sleeping in the cabin...
...oh, never mind.
...three miles from BRONS, clear for the ILS one five approach...
FlyVirgin744 From United States of America, joined Jul 1999, 1313 posts, RR: 1 Reply 15, posted (11 years 7 months 2 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 1929 times:
I think its a great idea even without the whole terrorists situation. Have you ever been a trans-oceanic flight and couldn't fall asleep? Have the Fa's come around, gas people who want it, and bamm. Ofcourse it wouldnt be that simple, but its something to think about.
Sometimes I go about in pity for myself and all the while a great wind carries me across the sky.
777gk From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 1641 posts, RR: 20 Reply 16, posted (11 years 7 months 2 weeks 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 1921 times:
Sleeping Gas?
What a riot...
We are trained, in a hijacking (or similar) situation, to depressurize the cabin of the aircraft to do the same thing as a sleeping gas would. In doing this, it reduces the bloodflow to the brain, which will effectively knock out the pax and allow us to land the plane with minumum hassle. The oxygen mask system is manually overridden, and only the pilots and possibly the flight attendants would be protected against it through the use of oxygen. However, this process could take in excess of 20-25 minutes to have an effect on the passengers, and if by chance during this period a terrorist walks into the cockpit and see the pilots with oxygen masks on, well, if one of the guys doesn't have a quick imagination, then there could be trouble.
This would not kill the passengers, it would simply put them in a "hibernation" mode until normal air pressure can be restored. The downside is that by doing this, you run the risk of having to evacuate a planeload of unconscious passengers in the event of an emergency, which definitely could get hairy.
Ziffle From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 17, posted (11 years 7 months 2 weeks 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 1877 times:
Replace "sleeping gas" with "sarin nerve gas"...
Sounds much more plausible than the anthrax outbreak (which isn't contagious and takes ages to kill someone). The sarin would immediately put everyone who inhaled it to rest.
You now have a terrorist threat on the aeroplane and from memory these fundamentalists don't care if they die or not.
LV From United States of America, joined Jun 2001, 1812 posts, RR: 0 Reply 18, posted (11 years 7 months 2 weeks 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 1870 times:
Im on a prescription medication that can't be mixed with sleeping gas. Whenever I have surgery it has to be IV induced. So you hit the button, I die. Think I'm ever going to buy a ticket again. Heck no
Stratofish From Germany, joined Sep 2001, 1011 posts, RR: 6 Reply 19, posted (11 years 7 months 2 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 1845 times:
Hmmm, good points from everyone but I definetely prefer the sleeping gas option over armed sky marshalls. But whatever is done onboard the planes it must be combined with better security checks on the ground.
JonPaulGeoRngo From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 22, posted (11 years 7 months 2 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 1820 times:
Not mention Greg, its impossible.
Some of you guys need to actually read about jetliners before you write about them. Posts like these would get trashed by the second message.
The reason its impossible is that cockpit and the cabin are pressurized together, hence the pilot can go into the cabin and flight attendents into the cockpit during flight. Its essential for this access...more so than the possibility of a hijacking.
This was all clearly explained recently...in The Wall Street Journal...no less.
Sponsor Message: 
From United States of America, joined Mar 2001, 1009 posts, 
From Portugal, joined Aug 2001, 126 posts, 
From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2001, 23 posts, 
From , joined Dec 1969, posts, 
From , joined Dec 1969, posts, 
From Germany, joined Sep 2001, 1011 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
