Professors comment on airline
security
By Dave Stephens
Assistant
Campus Editor
The terrorist attacks of Sept. 11 shook the foundations
of New York City and Washington, D.C., and shook the faith of many Americans
in the U.S. airline industry.
On Thursday, President Bush announced new security
measures for all U.S. airports, including added security provided by
the National Guard and the use of 'sky marshals,' undercover federal
marshals specially trained to combat hijackers.
"There was a time in our history when we did have
sky marshals in the air," said Larry Gross, an associate professor of
aviation technology.
Gross said the armed officers were used to combat
the number of planes that were being hijacked during the '70s, but the
practice was later discontinued.
Thomas Eismin, a professor of aviation technology,
said the idea of having marshals on planes is a good one, but that it
might not solve any problems.
"My personal thought is that sky marshals should
be used as a last means of deterrence; once any terrorist is in the
air, it's gone too far," Eismin said.
Eismin said for air travel to be safe, security
measures on the ground should be made a priority.
"I think they need to simply improve some of the
processes by which they scan luggage, by which they check people," said
Eismin.
Other improvements he suggested included having
stricter regulations and background checks on the people working security.
"We are basically paying people minimum wage to
do these jobs, we might want to look into making these jobs a higher
priority," said Eismin.
Gross said one way to provide better ground security
would be to have security handled by private companies and not the airlines.
"That way there is not a conflict of interest with the cost of running
security and the cost of running the airline," he said.
Eismin added that although these security measures
will cost more, most people would be more than willing to pay.
"We spend millions of dollars on all kinds of airline
safety," said Eismin. "People are willing to spend money to feel secure;
I think it would be money well spent."
Other issues that have been suggested to President
Bush include arming pilots with weapons, something Eismin doesn't agree
with.
"I think that it is difficult to make someone a
good pilot and good at the use of firearms," said Eismin. "It would
require extensive training in firearms and there's a question if pilots
would be willing to do that."
Gross said one suggestion he hasn’t heard
being made, but that is common on some private corporate aircraft, is
to mount a camera so that the pilot can see what is happening in the
passenger cabin at all times.
"That way, if something is happening, measures
can be taken to secure the cockpit," said Gross.
Gross said the doors to the flight deck currently
being used most U.S. airlines are capable of being locked, but are flimsy
and easy to breakdown. Part of the proposal made by Bush includes providing
money to airlines to reinforce the doors between the pilots and the
passenger cabin.
"Reinforcing the doors could cause a fairly significant
change in the structure of the aircraft," said Eismin. "But it would
make the plane much more secure."
Eismin said he would like to see the use of surveillance
cameras in the flight area, with monitoring being done by crews on the
ground, who could then notify the military if something went wrong.
"With constant surveillance, there could be a response
almost instantly," said Eismin.
Gross said the reason many of the security measures
now in place were not used in the past is because the idea of using
a plane as a weapon wasn't really considered.
"Every hijacking that has ever taken place before
has been for political reasons," said Gross. "Hostages would be taken,
the plane would land, demands would be made and maybe take off again.
It wasn’t used as a weapon."
|
