A friend of mine is writing a book on the airline industry
soon to be published (actually, it may get delayed now).
Although I only briefly spoke with him yesterday, he has written articles about the numerous air rage incidents over the past few years. In one case, one 20 year old overpowered 5-6 grown men to get into a cockpit not once, but twice...there are at least half a dozen incidences of air rage in the past decades, in which the cabin was entered. (Of course, one also has the dozens of hijacking over the years to look at as well) How many incidences would it have taken before something would have been done?
Generally, I agree with what you're saying. But the airlines known that an airplane full of fuel is a flying bomb. They've known that for years. This is, and never was, a case of, if something goes wrong, one person gets killed, and then we work to solve the problem. The scale is obviously so much bigger. Don't we (or whoever is in charge) have an obligation to pre-emptively act when the stakes are so much larger? Especially in the case of something relatively simple to execute?
For the record, more than once, my friend commented that it was only a matter of time before one of the "air rage" crazies was successful in commendeering a plane. Sadly, he underestimated the possibilities.
I suppose, the FAA deserves it share of blame for not pursuing this w/more vigor earlier..
This was a much simple issue than the bubble. It was in everyone's best interest to have the cockpit secure, and prevent an easy take-over. Those who had the means to do it failed us. |
