Pilots Grade U.S. Aviation Security an ‘F’

Woodmonkey · 03-14-2005, 14:42

Quote:

Group cites faults in employee and cargo screening, missile defense

Quote:

A group of airline pilots gave the U.S. government failing grades on Thursday in several areas of aviation security including the screening of employees and cargo, and defending planes from shoulder-fired missiles.

The Coalition of Airline Pilots Association released its Aviation Security Report Card that showed aviation security gets average to failing grades in over a dozen subject areas.

The trade group gave failing “F” grades to the government in five areas -- screening of employees, screening of cargo, high-tech credentialing of crew members, self-defense training for crew and the plan for countering shoulder-fired missiles.

The group gave good grades to the government on improved bag screening and on reinforcing cockpit doors on commercial airplanes.

Jon Safley, president of CAPA, said filling some of the “gaping holes” in aviation security will require major changes in the way the airlines and airports do business, and in the way the government manages airline security.

“The technology exists, or could be updated, to address many of these security problems,” said Safley, whose group represents about 22,000 pilots from American Airlines (AMR.N), United Parcel Service (UPS.N), Southwest Airlines (LUV.N) and AirTran Airways (AAI.N).

“But neither the airlines, the airports nor government officials have given these issues the priority they deserve.”

Studying anti-missile technology
CAPA said that while screening of airline passengers and their bags had improved since the Sept. 11, 2001, hijacked airline attacks, screening of ramp employees and cargo has not improved.

“We should have one level of security to protect the American people,” Safley said. “If we’re screening passengers, we certainly need to screen employees who have access to aircraft and baggage. And not screening cargo on all-cargo carriers invites disaster.”

The Department of Homeland Security is studying how it might be able to adapt anti-missile technology, which is common on military aircraft, for use on U.S. commercial airliners to thwart shoulder-fired rocket attacks by al-Qaida or others.

Concern over the possibility that attackers might use shoulder-fired weapons to down a plane grew after a missile nearly hit an Israeli airliner leaving Kenya in 2002. Cash-strapped airlines are skeptical of the plan for anti-missile systems due to high costs and liability.

CAPA also gave low grades to the government on security of airports, saying that the Transportation Security Administration did not properly or consistently oversee the security.

It also said there was poor sharing of information on potential threats to aircraft, and said airlines did not share the crucial information with their captains.
Copyright 2005 Reuters Limited. All rights reserved. Republication or redistribution of Reuters content is expressly prohibited without the prior written consent of Reuters.

Click here for the source of this story

Snowden · 03-14-2005, 15:58

And it seems that what little real security measures have been taken are limited to air travel. But the pilots, who know what is necessary (and should be armed) come out with these suggestions only to be ignored.

There are other ways to get there, but this is the most popular - especially for going overseas. Still. There are other ways to travel, and I haven't heard diddly about anything being undertaken to check into the security of buses, trains or whatnot.

We have a new government agency for this purpose - but why? It seems to have lots of things to do, none of which seem to be of help to us.

Bluehawk · 03-14-2005, 23:15

My question, for anyone who might actually know the answer, is:

Why is this still the case, if it is the case?

Phoenix56 · 03-14-2005, 23:23

1. Aircraft are more EXPENSIVE !

2. Everyone on a plane is packed into a ' SARDINE CAN '

3. No one likes seeing an Aircraft going down in ' Flames '

4. Once an Aircraft is in the air, the TERROIST have TOTAL CONTROL !

5. Other then having people on board the aircraft, The Plane is a ' BOMB '

Add it all up and what do you get ?

A FLYING NIGHTMARE WAITING TO HAPPEN .

Snowden · 03-15-2005, 00:44

Quote:

Originally Posted by Phoenix56

1. Aircraft are more EXPENSIVE !

2. Everyone on a plane is packed into a ' SARDINE CAN '

3. No one likes seeing an Aircraft going down in ' Flames '

4. Once an Aircraft is in the air, the TERROIST have TOTAL CONTROL !

5. Other then having people on board the aircraft, The Plane is a ' BOMB '

Add it all up and what do you get ?

A FLYING NIGHTMARE WAITING TO HAPPEN .

Again.

Woodmonkey · 03-16-2005, 13:48

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wingwiper

My question, for anyone who might actually know the answer, is:

Why is this still the case, if it is the case?

I don't know the answer and hope that Toome sees this because he is so knowledgeable and articulate.

I think there is no one answer to it, but many things contribute to our possible continuing vulnerability. One of these is the bowing down to some minorities who object to any type of profiling under any circumstance. Profiling is one tool only, but it is still a tool and should be available.