Slashdot Mirror
Wireless Devices Could Foil Hijack Attempts
ErikPeterson writes Flight attendants soon may be outfitted with wireless devices that would be used to alert pilots of attempted hijackings or other in-air security threats.
The Federal Aviation Administration said Wednesday that it plans to require that airlines provide a way for the cabin crew to "discreetly notify" pilots "in the event of suspicious activity or security breaches in the cabin."
The proposed regulation, which is not yet final, grew out of an advisory panel that the Transportation Department created after the Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist attacks. That panel recommended that cabin crew have "a method for immediate notification to the flight deck during a suspected threat in the cabin" that would permit pilots to take appropriate action, such as beginning an immediate landing."
Honeywell is developing a device that will take over the controls from the pilot if the plane is heading for a restricted area. If your plane is being hijack, you will not crash into a building for sure. But if the plane is fine and the computer takes over, pray that it won't crash the plane!
You know, if you actively monitor the feeds, you can tell when the signal is being jammed ... they'd have to override the devices completely ...
When hijacked, you're supposed to set the transponder code to 7500. That's one of those ideas left over from the days when hijackers were clueless nuts. It's never been much of a secret. Hijacking procedures are in the Airman's Information Manual, available in any bookstore. One would hope by now that the guys flying the big iron have something better available to them.
the code to signal ground controller that there's a hijack is to set 7500 on your normal transponder(there's no seperate trasponder). after you set it, you probably want to hit ident couple times to make sure people notice it. and They'll confirm with you that you are indeed want to set it at 7500. I've accidentally set it at 75xx a few times by mistake when I want to set 55xx, but those mistake were caught easily and early (duh)
This action assumes that the pilot is still at the control and have access to transponder and radio. (in the event like 9/11, hijackers know how to fly the airplane, thus bypass the security measurement)
Uh, the door is there for a reason. Do you seriously expect that a pilot on a 23 hour flight is just going to sit there? They have to get up to eat, visit the bathroom, change crews, rest, etc. If you deny them that, more planes will crash due to pilot fatigue than terrorist attacks could ever hope to acheive.
Already been done. The Peruvian aviation authority was not amused.
This is just one more paranoial waste of money without increasing security. Lets face it - the real security is the bullet-proof reinforced flight deck door with CCTV surveillance of the entry area.
The problem with a secret alert device is a) secrets don't remain secret if you mandate it for the entire industry and b) what is the pilot supposed to do if he gets alerted of "suspicious activity" (We have often "suspicious activities" aka unruly passengers)
The pilot can not go back to check it out. He can not just dive to the next airport because it might have been a false alarm or the situation can be resolved by the flight attendants. If every alarm would lead to an diversion the system could be easily misused for a DoS attack.
So in the end he would just have to wait until 1) someone shows up at the cockpit door and tries to force entry: Hijack (better: attempted hijack) or 2) noone shows up: Situtation resolved.
This is the same as the usless keypads on the flight deck door mandated by the FAA. Two buttons would have been enough: regular entry and emergency entry.
The security is not that only the flight attendants know the secret keycodes - with a knive to their throat they will type in the correct one anyway. The security is the video surveillance to check the area from the flight deck. (To be fair: the keypads have the advantage that passengers in search for a toilet will not accidentaly press the "emergency door bell" - which would mean immediate landing)
Back to a) Why secrets won't work: Like every equipment on board it has to be approved by the FAA which makes it expensive which results in only very few vendors offering a system. And they will offer it to any airline, including Saudia Airways, Pakistani Airways and Ariana Afghan Airways and many other. It would be naive to think that intelligent terrorists do not have contacts in the airlines and can not get access to the devices.
In the end most airlines will anyway use the loophole of some "secret" intercom procedure which they have to document and distribute to thousands of FAs and Pilots.
This is just another stupid TSA regulation in a long line of stupid TSA regulations - like not being allowed to stand in a line in front of a toilet.
X IMPRIMITE "SALVE TERRA!"
XX ITE AD X
Wireless.... highjacking.....
Dupe-O-Meter rating: 9 of 10
* This story is highly likely to be a Dupe, infact you probably already read it
Officially: "No comments"
Perhaps you might to think for a moment... (I'm sorry, but idiotic statements like yours really annoy me)
They can use their own computerized equipment because it has gone through a lengthy test cycle with that airplane and been proven not to interfere with the *very* sensitive analog instrument landing system equipment still in use at most airports (and which is also often used on takeoff).
There have been reports of interference with ILS recievers from various electronic equipment. When the downside of screwing up is that hundreds of people die and millions of dollars worth of airplane turn into scrap metal, you tend to be a bit conservative in safety issues.
Oh, and when the flight crew tells you to do something, do it. Their instructions have the force of law. Interfereing with the safe completeion of a flight will wind up with your spending some serious time in PMITA federal prison.
(I'm sure your next question is why don't they upgrade their equipment to something less prone to interference -- they are in the process of doing that -- it takes many years of testing to assure safety (see paragraph above concerning downsides of screwups). These very long dev and test cycles assure extremely high prices (cheapest avaition GPS is about 10 times more expensive than a regular civillian one, and that unit is marked "Not for instrument flight", Instrument rated GPS recievers are even more expensive). And these high prices therefore assure very slow adoption of the new technology.)
Ian Ameline
too bad my kids probably wont be able to do anything like that.
Contact your local EAA chapter. Not only will your child be able to talk to the pilot, the pilot will explain how the airplane works and walk the child through a preflight before takeoff. Once in the air, the child MAY be allowed to hold and manipulate the controls. If you live close to the airport (and there aren't to many people waiting) the pilot MAY point out the child's house. Do a web search on 'Young Eagles'.
Aah, change is good. -- Rafiki
Yeah, but it ain't easy. -- Simba
1. Police scanner is going to have Guard traffic with Shoot to Kill orders? I highly doubt it, most likely if this order came down, it would of been on the secure channels. 2. Those phones in the head rests on airliners....yeah...not cell based BTW. Mods...check your ratings, parent is kinda over the top here (Art Belle anybody?)
http://www.freebsd.org