Airlines: No more Air Marshals in first class

MikeD

MikeD

Administrator
Staff member
Can Air Marshals Be More Effective in Coach -- or is This Just About Money?

The airlines represented by the ATA (Air Transportation Association) are petitioning the United States Federal Air Marshal Service to stop requesting first class seats for the marshals.

Airlines are typically required to give up a first class passenger seat to a marshal boarding a flight for security purposes. The airline can be restrained from selling the seat in advance, or sometimes a paid passenger may even get bumped to coach at the last minute. The passenger will then be offered flight points or other perks for relinquishing the seat—but they will not be given the reason, as that could risk national security.

According to a report from USA Today, the airlines feel it is too costly and the risk just isn't there. The Marshals' representatives countered the statement by saying that the very act by the airlines of making this issue public could tip off terrorists and raise the security threat.

Is this all about airlines' money, rather than passenger security? Or would the marshals be more effective in coach?
Click to expand...

Stories here:

http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/5915242/airlines_to_us_air_marshals_we_dont.html

http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2010-10-18-air-marshals-first-class_N.htm
 
Turrists in first class? This is just another sign that Al-Q's unions are totally out of control. Maybe institute some form of Virgin-sharing or a COLA, maybe two or three goats a year?
 
Is this all about airlines' money, rather than passenger security? Or would the marshals be more effective in coach?
Click to expand...

I can't see a problem there. They are equally ineffective no matter where they sit.
 
The Marshall's job is to surveil the airplane. How can he do that when he is staring at a bulkhead? From the rear of the plane, he can see the entire cabin.

It is about money, but not just for the airline. I know that I'd be pissed if I paid for first and got bumped back to coach. The passenger at least has the right to know why.
 
O&M said:
The Marshall's job is to surveil the airplane. How can he do that when he is staring at a bulkhead? From the rear of the plane, he can see the entire cabin.

.
Click to expand...

While true, his higher priority is protecting the flight deck / flight deck door as a blocking mechanism; hence why they've been taking seats nearer to the front of the aircraft.
 
MikeD said:
While true, his higher priority is protecting the flight deck / flight deck door as a blocking mechanism; hence why they've been taking seats nearer to the front of the aircraft.
Click to expand...

Serious question, protecting it from what? The bulletproof, locked door isnt enough?
 
BeRich said:
Serious question, protecting it from what? The bulletproof, locked door isnt enough?
Click to expand...
The pilots do come and go out of the cockpit during flight as you know, and the door is opened briefly. They are brought food and drink as well. Yes, someone is stationed there, but so what? The pilots use the forward lav as well. There may be times when they have to go back to the main cabin as well. There are other reasons that don't need to be gone into also, but Mike is correct when he said that their primary objective is to guard the flight deck and the pilots.

Robert MacLean - Former TSA Federal Air Marshal recently wrote:"
1. Install front galley “cable-gates” on all aircraft as used on a scant number of United Airlines aircraft
2. Equip every flight deck with modified shotguns
3. Make air marshal duty a one-year temporary detail available to all federal law enforcement officers
4. Keep a streamlined cadre of permanent Federal Air Marshal teams that can quickly react to specific threats, not blanket deployments
5. Reassign the majority of current Federal Air Marshals (FAMs) to be Special Agent / Criminal Investigators (Occupation Series 1811) to conduct ground-based operations in order to prevent hijackers from boarding aircraft, to prevent IEDs
from exploding in airports, and to prevent IEDs being smuggled into aircraft
6. Equip flight crewmembers with electric Taser devices and other non-lethal tools in order to subdue unruly passengers and defend the flight deck — air marshals should not be dealing with unruly passengers due to the possibility of an organized terrorist ruse
7. Armor flight deck firewalls on all aircraft
8. Require all non-air marshal law enforcement passengers carrying firearms to secure them inside the flight deck during flight
9. Terminate Federal Flight Deck Officer (FFDO) program once all aforementioned physical security measures are put in place
10. Pass and well publicize a law that gives flight crews, Captains, and/or air marshals the authority to deputize general passengers as air marshals
11. Implement biometric systems to positively identify air marshals, non-air marshal law enforcement officers, and pilots; and to free-up more security resources
12. Develop “Doomsday Procedure” in the case a terrorist cell smuggles excessive firepower onto aircraft.

Once you implement most or all of these changes, air marshals can be better deployed in tactical scenarios and not strategic ones.
No one on the aircraft should be formally notified that air marshals are on board until a situation warrants it. Then the pilot in command can communicate with the ground to get verification where the air marshals are seated and who they are.

No matter what scenario you think of, the flight deck is by far the most vulnerable and some attention needs to be focused there."
Sincerely,
Robert MacLean
Former Federal Air Marshal (2001 - 2006)

Interesting that the airlines don't seem to be concerned with revenue loss and the hundreds of thousands of deadheading crew members every year, but Air Marshals concern their pocketbooks suddenly.

How many airlines have reimbursed the government for the money given to them by taxpayers to upgrade the cockpit doors? How many airlines provide paid leave for their pilots to attend TSA federal flight deck officer training? How many airlines provide their crew members with paid time to attend TSA crew member self defense training? Have the airlines done anything to take ownership of their security responsibilities?
 
Air Marshall's need to be given free reign on where they sit on the airplane. Excluding certain classes of seats only give terrorists the advantage. Which is easier for an Air Marshal to do, Defend the flight deck from an advancing attack or try to fight his way to the front...

The FFDO is a good program and only helps the Marshalls and is the last line of defense from a hostel takeover.

There is only so much you can do to an aircraft. Adding more armor and gates up front is only going to potentially cause more problems with money to install them, weight and balance issues, and what if they break now you may have potentially lost 2 or more emergency exits.

If the government was truely serious about protecting the flights and our airports they would sit down with pilots and discuss the issues and take our suggestions. Airport security is still pathetic.
 
Bandit_Driver said:
Air Marshall's need to be given free reign on where they sit on the airplane. Excluding certain classes of seats only give terrorists the advantage. Which is easier for an Air Marshal to do, Defend the flight deck from an advancing attack or try to fight his way to the front...

The FFDO is a good program and only helps the Marshalls and is the last line of defense from a hostel takeover.

There is only so much you can do to an aircraft. Adding more armor and gates up front is only going to potentially cause more problems with money to install them, weight and balance issues, and what if they break now you may have potentially lost 2 or more emergency exits.

If the government was truely serious about protecting the flights and our airports they would sit down with pilots and discuss the issues and take our suggestions. Airport security is still pathetic.
Click to expand...
Bingo!! I would also add the carriers themselves to this equation. When do they ask the crews much of anything? And when have they listened and actually implemented anything of value suggested by their employees?
 
Can somebody explain why, if the marshall's raison d'etre is to provide security, the taxpayer should be paying for this? Let the airline create a new "crew" position that carries a gun and protects the cockpit. Seems like a more cost effective solution. What am I missing?
 
CDNPilotDave said:
Can somebody explain why, if the marshall's raison d'etre is to provide security, the taxpayer should be paying for this? Let the airline create a new "crew" position that carries a gun and protects the cockpit. Seems like a more cost effective solution. What am I missing?
Click to expand...

there are many pilots who do this...
 
CDNPilotDave said:
Can somebody explain why, if the marshall's raison d'etre is to provide security, the taxpayer should be paying for this? Let the airline create a new "crew" position that carries a gun and protects the cockpit. Seems like a more cost effective solution. What am I missing?
Click to expand...

Because the evildoers probably don't plan on flying the fuel-filled missiles into Airline HQs... The government is protecting assets like the Pentagon, The White House, the citizens of this country, and so forth.

Plus, knowing the airlines, they'd supply the "crew security" with the cheapest weapons possible. Maybe a tomahawk or something, because ammunition is expensive.
 
FlyChicaga said:
Because the evildoers probably don't plan on flying the fuel-filled missiles into Airline HQs... The government is protecting assets like the Pentagon, The White House, the citizens of this country, and so forth.

Plus, knowing the airlines, they'd supply the "crew security" with the cheapest weapons possible. Maybe a tomahawk or something, because ammunition is expensive.
Click to expand...

Of course, the Marshalls could never be infiltrated by evildoers. I guess segregation of employers could reduce the probability of a Part 121 guided missile but ... BTW, I'm happy for the Blackhawks last year. Congrats.
 
Just an FYI, Air Marshals are highly trained individuals. They are also expert marksmen. And I mean expert. They are trained not only in firearms but in martial arts and hand to hand combat. They are trained in all aspects of aircraft and airline security. When not flying, for example, they evaluate different airports for security. They are also trained in applied psychology and study the profiles and photographs of known terrorists so they can constantly be alert for suspicious individuals. They are highly skilled observers. They receive practical training in recognizing explosive devices. Air Marshalls are charged with making split-second decisions that could mean the difference between stopping a terrorist and shooting an innocent passenger.

They go through an extensive screening that includes a suitability assessment, qualification screening, a panel review, drug testing, a background investigation and fingerprinting. Prospective Marshals are evaluated by a supervising Air Marshal and given a medical and a fitness evaluation.

Phase I of the Air Marshal training program consists of the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center's Basic Police Training Program. In Phase I, recruits learn the same defense techniques as other federal police officers. The specifics of the training are withheld for security reasons.

Phase II of Air Marshal training focuses on the specifics of the job. These specifics include intensive training in aircraft safety and arrest procedures, mission training, defensive training, aviation medicine, communications and report writing, and international law. During phase II candidates undergo advanced firearm training. Air Marshals are required to achieve a higher pistol qualification score than are law officers in other federal agencies.

Ther have regular and routine follow-up training as well.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top