Why does alpa want ffdo
05-28-2013, 02:35 PM
#1
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Dec 2012
Posts: 389
Why does alpa want ffdo
I read that ALPA is fighting for more government funding of FFDO program. This is a waste of limited resources. If you could go back to 9-11 and arm the pilots of the affected aircraft it might have been effective but now it's just most untrained pilots with weapons who will never get a chance to use them. I believe in the program but it should be funded by the pilots otherwise it should go away.
05-28-2013, 02:45 PM
#2
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2012
Posts: 639
Originally Posted by vilcas
I believe in the program but it should be funded by the pilots otherwise it should go away.
05-28-2013, 03:04 PM
#3
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2010
Position: N/A
Posts: 578
Vilcas, I assume this is some sort of joke or something? I can't see how any rational person would say that. One thing you said that I agree with - hopefully no FFDO will ever get the "chance" to use their weapon.
05-28-2013, 04:03 PM
#4
Works harder not smarter
Joined APC: Sep 2008
Position: A320 CA
Posts: 142
Ignorance is bliss, isn't it Vilcas... 
05-28-2013, 07:40 PM
#5
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Dec 2012
Posts: 389
I guess but I was serious I think this program should not be a taxpayer burden. If pilots want to carry weapons then they should foot the bill. There is no need for a weapon in the flight deck. If people tried to take over a airliner today the passengers are more than adequate to take care of the threat. This is like the opposition to the pen knives by the flight attendants, purely emotional.
05-28-2013, 09:29 PM
#6
Nice lookin' tree, there!
Joined APC: Sep 2006
Position: MD-11, old man
Posts: 2,198
Originally Posted by vilcas
I guess but I was serious I think this program should not be a taxpayer burden. If pilots want to carry weapons then they should foot the bill. There is no need for a weapon in the flight deck. If people tried to take over a airliner today the passengers are more than adequate to take care of the threat. This is like the opposition to the pen knives by the flight attendants, purely emotional.
fbh
05-28-2013, 09:36 PM
#7
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2011
Position: Volleyball Player
Posts: 3,982
The pre-911 mindset of "let the hijacker do what he wants and it will all turn out ok" vs. "lets rush this guy and take him out no matter what kind of weapon he has, whether or not it's a real threat" is the biggest difference IMO. Spending millions of dollars to train and equip certain people is throwing crap on the wall and hoping that it meets just the right situation, in terms of having an armed crew + the opportunity to use it + a real threat.
05-29-2013, 12:05 AM
#8
Disinterested Third Party
Joined APC: Jun 2012
Posts: 6,026
I'm very much in favor of the FFDO program. In terms of putting armed personnel on commercial aircraft, it's very cost-effective.
I have, however, shot alongside some FFDO's who couldn't hardly put rounds on paper, let along hit anything, and I found that particularly disturbing.
The notion that untrained passengers can and will subdue a trained and determined attacker is fantasy. Thus far, notable takedowns of disturbed persons on board various flights have occurred, but in most cases, the persons taken down were cartoonish in nature compared to a truly determined and truly trained (and prepared) assailant.
HK works.
I have, however, shot alongside some FFDO's who couldn't hardly put rounds on paper, let along hit anything, and I found that particularly disturbing.
The notion that untrained passengers can and will subdue a trained and determined attacker is fantasy. Thus far, notable takedowns of disturbed persons on board various flights have occurred, but in most cases, the persons taken down were cartoonish in nature compared to a truly determined and truly trained (and prepared) assailant.
HK works.
05-29-2013, 12:13 AM
#9
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jan 2006
Posts: 2,838
Originally Posted by vilcas
I guess but I was serious I think this program should not be a taxpayer burden. If pilots want to carry weapons then they should foot the bill. There is no need for a weapon in the flight deck. If people tried to take over a airliner today the passengers are more than adequate to take care of the threat. This is like the opposition to the pen knives by the flight attendants, purely emotional.
The FFDO program is Cheap compared to other government programs.
05-29-2013, 04:35 AM
#10
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2008
Position: FAA 'Flight Check'
Posts: 13,837
Originally Posted by vilcas
I believe in the program but it should be funded by the pilots otherwise it should go away.
Originally Posted by vilcas
There is no need for a weapon in the flight deck. If people tried to take over a airliner today the passengers are more than adequate to take care of the threat.
How do you relate the two bolded sentences above?
Sort of like - I believe in women having the right to vote, as long as no women are allowed to vote.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
