Vafi88 From United States of America, joined Apr 2001, 3116 posts, RR: 22 Posted (10 years 8 months 1 week 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 527 times:
In Israel they have a very safe airline...El Al... they are very safe indeed. Their doors to the cockpit are made of thick material and even if the plane de-pressurizes, the cabin would still not feel it because the doors are airtight and there is a security personell on board every international flight. And if that wasn't enough, their every flight attendant goes through a "hijacking lessons" where the flight attendants take a coarse on how to stop a terrorist attack. Israel is willing to pay for extra security, but the FAA has to "see it to believe it" which means if it didn't happen it will not so we're not going to put these certain restrictions on passangers and "waste" money on extra safety percautions. Well now they're all picking up the pieces of what used to be the TWIN TOWERS and the pentagon... not to mencion the one that crashed in Pennsylvania... if the FAA will not think in to the future and figure out what "may" happen and put guidelines, then it is saying " unless we see an accident that resulted from this we will not put guidelines on it.
What I'm trying to say is that the FAA can pay more now but then save more because not as many planes would crash.
What do you think guys?
I'd like to elect a president that has a Higher IQ than a retarted ant.
Lehpron From United States of America, joined Jul 2001, 7028 posts, RR: 25 Reply 1, posted (10 years 8 months 1 week 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 515 times:
I kinda-sorta agree with you on some fronts, personally I blame the airlines -- but right now I'm fizzing and I'll need so time to think straight and reply later...
The meaning of life is curiosity; we were put on this planet to explore opportunities.
Cfalk From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 3, posted (10 years 8 months 1 week 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 506 times:
I heard some FAA person say that having armored doors would be unsafe in the case of an explosive decompression. I can't believe the hogwash!!! I suppose they are simply trying to cover their asses. The FAA set the guidelines for security in U.S. airports, and in all my travells in all the continents of the world (except Antartica), I have never seen worse security. The U.S. is the only country I know which uses rent-a-cops for airport security.
L-188 From United States of America, joined Jul 1999, 28959 posts, RR: 66 Reply 4, posted (10 years 8 months 1 week 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 503 times:
Cfalk....Acutally there is some truth to that. I used to work with a lot of combi aircraft and one of my jobs, especially when I was working for AS was helping to install the bulkhead between the passenger and the freight compartment. On the 727 and the 737 the bulkhead is made up of a lower center and a upper center section.
The upper one is hinged. That way it can act as a smoke barrier in case of a fire in the freight compartment as help snuff out the fire. But because it is hinged so that in case one or the other compartments depressurize it will swing and allow the air to equalize.
The assumption is that you would not be able to design a door that would allow the pressure to equalize. I don't know if that is true or not but it may be a tricky engineering problem, especially if we are talking about retro-fitting existing airframes. Any passage would have to be designed to equalized the pressure between the compartments but not allow any smoke from a fire pass through.
That being said. There is a lot of garbage about the FAA not being proactive enough. Personally I think it is bunk. Just more crap from people like Jim Hall or Scary Mary trying to spread their reputation and sell books.
OBAMA-WORST PRESIDENT EVER....Even SKOORB would be better.
Jwenting From Netherlands, joined Apr 2001, 10213 posts, RR: 24 Reply 5, posted (10 years 8 months 1 week 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 501 times:
If the FAA had been proactive in designing the security rules for US airports, they would have been up to European standards (and enforced! which still seems not to happen everywhere if at all) 20 years ago and not now be scrambling to play catchup.
Turbolet From Cape Verde, joined Nov 2007, 0 posts, RR: 2 Reply 6, posted (10 years 8 months 1 week 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 493 times:
Correct me if I am wrong but until the attack, the FAA allowed knives with blades up to 4" on board. Now that's something noone ever dreamed of here in Europe!
Jwenting From Netherlands, joined Apr 2001, 10213 posts, RR: 24 Reply 7, posted (10 years 8 months 1 week 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 488 times:
yup, and according to the BBC things are still as lax as ever at US airports.
There are more guards around, but they just hang around chatting with eachother.
Might be some airports only of course.
Leftseat86 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 8, posted (10 years 8 months 1 week 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 483 times:
A good example:
LAX(Los Angeles International)
I brought my scanner with me, as usual. I walked all around the airport with it. When I passed one of the security check points, I was asked only to show that the scanner could be turned on, and was not a "dummy". I could have used it through out my UA777 flight to Paris, but with Channel 9, it was rendered useless.
CDG(Charles De Gaulle Int. Paris, France)
I had my scanner in the airport, and sort of hid it in my pocket while walking around, and through the multiple pass-port checkpoints. As soon as I reached the security checkpoint for my next flight to Toulouse, I was immediatly asked to surrender my scanner, as they demmed it, a device that could possibly inturupt A/c ops.
LoneStarMike From United States of America, joined Jul 2000, 3477 posts, RR: 44 Reply 11, posted (10 years 8 months 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 464 times:
Here's another example of lax security, which I mentioned in a trip report I posted last month. This happened at Oakland. I had checked in, gone to the Southwest gate and gotten my boarding pass, then went outside to smoke a cigarrette. I wrote:
"One thing that was very annoying (and it happened last year, too when I was leaving OAK) was that when I came back into the terminal for the last time, there was this announcement being broadcast (loudly) all over the airport. "You have violated airport security boundaries. Close the doors and remain until instructed to leave the area by airport security personnel." Over and over and over again with scarcely a pause in between. I must have heard it 917 times. But looking around, it seemed to be business as usual. No closing of doors, no evacuations, and not a single airport security personnel to be seen anywhere. Go figure."
This happened on August 14. Little did I know what would happen less than a month later. I'll bet that crap wouldn't fly today.
LoneStarMike From United States of America, joined Jul 2000, 3477 posts, RR: 44 Reply 12, posted (10 years 8 months 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 454 times:
I know a lot of you on this forum hate Mike Boyd, but in this particular article, he hits the nail on the head.
Ineptitude at DOT Giving Terrorists Another Big Victory
Sponsor Message: 
From United States of America, joined Apr 2001, 3116 posts, 
From , joined Dec 1969, posts, 
From Netherlands, joined Apr 2001, 10213 posts, 
From Cape Verde, joined Nov 2007, 0 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
