[at-l] hiking poles

[RoksnRoots at aol.com (RoksnRoots@xxxxxxx)]

In a message dated 11/8/2003 1:23:37 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
kdpo@pacbell.net writes:


> I agree with Jim on this topic. Nothing will eliminate the threat entirely,
> but we can do something to reduce the threat significantly. And a separate
> compartment may be one step in the reduction.
> 



        ***    This has morphed into airline OT. But, that will probably 
never happen because every last inch and pound of aircraft weight is calculated 
into dollars for the airline. Over the life of these multi million dollar 
aircraft the additional weight and space of the added cockpit airframe and bulkhead, 
and its accompanying decrease in revenue potential of the aircraft design, 
will keep that fix from happening. They figure intense ground screening will 
prevent the need for expensive design changes.

       The cheapest option is the cockpit door bar, but another effective 
method would be to use a strong mesh screen in between the cabin and cockpit 
door. That way any looney rushing the cockpit would have to penetrate the barrier 
net before possibly entering the cockpit. By that time the trained flight 
attendant, hired as security on each flight, -along with angry passengers- would 
have him down and under control. A mesh net would be light and cheap, yet be an 
effective enough barrier to thwart any cockpit invasion. 

            The reason they don't do it is because airline flight operation 
routines depend on the captain having access to his aircraft. The psychological 
effect of a mesh barrier is probably something that would potentially drive 
down revenue -so they don't do it. Ground screeners are far enough away from 
the airplane that the corporate bosses can distance themselves from the 
financial cost of security and pass it off to the taxpayer...

           Maybe we should work on solving the root problems?