Bloody battle for Qantas jet


PDA






Drizzt
May 29, 2003, 06:38 PM
Bloody battle for Qantas jet

By Philip Cornford, Malcolm Brown and Tom Allard
May 30 2003

For 45 desperate seconds, crew and passengers on QF1737 fought for their lives yesterday, overpowering an armed man who police said tried to hijack and crash the aircraft with 53 people on board.

Brandishing two 15cm sharpened wooden stakes as knives, the 40-year-old assailant stabbed two flight attendants who stopped him forcing his way into the cockpit of the Boeing 717 - 20 minutes after take-off from Melbourne's Tullamarine Airport. Five passengers came to their assistance, forcing the man to the floor and disarming him.

Police recovered an aerosol can and a cigarette lighter. They suspect the assailant intended to use them as a flame-thrower to disable the pilots once he got into the cockpit.

A major review of airport security began immediately and the Deputy Prime Minister, John Anderson - who said it was "an attempt to crash the plane" - demanded officials find out how the man smuggled the weapons through airport checks before boarding the plane, which was bound for Launceston.

Government sources said the assailant called out about "God's will or Armageddon when he was interrogated by federal police after the plane returned to Melbourne. He had been quiet but one source said that, during the attack and after he had been detained, he began talking about "God and the end of the world", saying that "God had spoken to him".


Mr Anderson said the metal detectors at the airport would not have picked up the man's wooden stakes.

Witnesses who saw the man after he was arrested, his hands bloodied and in handcuffs, described him as "just a normal looking Australian". It was believed he recently had resigned or been sacked from a job. Federal police said he would be charged under the Federal Aviation Act.

"We believe he was trying to take over the plane," said Federal Police agent Stephen Cato.

Qantas chief executive Geoff Dixon said: "We do not believe at this stage that this is terrorist-related in any way."

He said the aircraft did not have one of the new "enhanced" security doors which are being installed on all Qantas planes but the cockpit door was locked.

Passengers said the hero of QF1737, which took off at 2.50pm, was the purser, Greg Khan, 38, who for 10 dangerous seconds stood between the cockpit door and the man's frenzied assault.

He was stabbed in the head and face as he fought the assailant back down the aisle, where five passengers helped subdue the man. A 25-year-old female flight attendant was also stabbed in the cheek. Keith Charlton, 59, one of the passengers who disarmed the man, said the desperate fight lasted no more than 45 seconds.

"I didn't hear him utter one word," Mr Charlton said.

"If there ever was a hero, it was Greg," said Mr Charlton. "He saved the aircraft."

Mr Charlton, from Rosebud, Victoria, was sitting in row three when he "heard a commotion behind me. I turned and this guy came rushing past, waving what looked like a wooden dagger high in the air. He charged onto the purser and began stabbing him."

But Mr Khan did not go down. Instead, with blood pouring from his wounds, he buried his head into the assailant's chest and forced him back down the aisle.

"The guy was stabbing him, there was blood going everywhere, but the purser wouldn't let go, he kept fighting him back," Mr Charlton said.

The passengers and a female flight attendant came to his assistance, overpowering the man and forcing him to the floor. "The first to help him was a passenger sitting in the front row," Mr Charlton said. "I learned later it was his brother-in-law. We got the guy down, we took the wooden stakes from him. We stood on him."

Mr Charlton said the crew got plastic restraints. They bound the assailant's legs and hands. "We picked him up and threw him on the floor between two rows of seats," he said. "Someone sat on the seat with his feet on him. I was leaning over the back of the seat in front, watching him."

One passenger injured his arm in the melee, but Mr Charlton said no one had time to feel fear. "It happened so quickly, we had to subdue him, there was no thought of anything else. But later we got very angry at what he'd tried to do."

Mr Anderson said that while Australia had "world's best practice" in airport security, "it may well be that there are lessons to be learn out of this".

http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/05/29/1054177673643.html

If you enjoyed reading about "Bloody battle for Qantas jet" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
El Tejon
May 29, 2003, 08:21 PM
Talk about "Unintended Consequences". I kept thinking of Cindy Caswell when I saw this at the gym tonight:D

Jim March
May 29, 2003, 08:37 PM
I still say he's a disgruntled "Buffy" fan.

:evil:

El Tejon
May 29, 2003, 08:45 PM
Buffy? Mmmm, Kristi Swanson OR Sarah Michelle!:)

Standing Wolf
May 29, 2003, 09:18 PM
Watch Australia ban wood next.

Coronach
May 29, 2003, 10:34 PM
I was about to say...we're now talking about how to ban pointy sticks.

I mean, regardless of your views on airport security, we've reached a level of absurdity that is truly sublime.

Mike

CZ-75
May 29, 2003, 11:28 PM
A major review of airport security began immediately and the Deputy Prime Minister, John Anderson - who said it was "an attempt to crash the plane" - demanded officials find out how the man smuggled the weapons through airport checks before boarding the plane, which was bound for Launceston.


How could something like this happen? I mean, they are banning guns. That should stop all violence. :rolleyes:

El Tejon
May 30, 2003, 07:54 AM
Maybe the Ozzies should just ban hands?

:D

Deadman
May 30, 2003, 10:17 AM
Mr Anderson said the metal detectors at the airport would not have picked up the man's wooden stakes.

http://phatcat.animedominion.com/emoticon/rflmao.gif

Well I should surely hope not, otherwise those metal detectors are in need of a drastic service. How an adult can utter such a sentence is baffling.


Mr Anderson said that while Australia had "world's best practice" in airport security, "it may well be that there are lessons to be learn out of this".

Best.... o....k....
Passengers running around with wooden stakes, passengers wandering into secured areas....sure best....

Battler
May 30, 2003, 10:35 AM
With the environmentalist policies against cutting down trees, Australia HAS banned wood; but the existing wood was grandfathered. . .

Baba Louie
May 30, 2003, 11:12 AM
Ban pencils, pens and other implements of mass destruction whilst traveling via commercial aircraft.

Pretty soon, I reckon, the various gov'ts will have everyone strip and put on airline/gov't pre-approved loincloths only, no carry on anything allowed, waist, wrist and ankle restraints in every seat... its for your own safety.

If it only saves one life.

What was the reaction time of the passengers? Quick, but not fast enough it appears. And the flight crew? Self defense (hand to hand in close quarters) training must become mandatory.

sigh

Adios

pittspilot
May 30, 2003, 03:59 PM
To me this indicates a very simple truth

There will be no more hijacking of airliners. The passengers will not allow it. It does not matter if you have a gun, bomb, axe, pool cue, or in this case, sharpened stick. I don't know how long this will last, but for the foreseeable future this is the way it is.

TarpleyG
May 30, 2003, 05:40 PM
"We do not believe at this stage that this is terrorist-related in any way."
You know, terrorism is not exclusively performed by middle-easterners. Terror is terror whether it is some crazed nut on Jihad or a crazed Christian fanatic screaming about how God told him to. Can't these people realize this?

GT

jmbg29
May 30, 2003, 11:38 PM
It would probably be best if the Aussies didn't fly around anyway. Whatever is wrong with them might be communicable. :scrutiny: :uhoh: :banghead:

Don Gwinn
June 1, 2003, 10:44 AM
A lot of what's wrong with "them" is wrong with "us" too, Mr. 29.


Pittspilot spoke my thoughts. We can wrangle over guns in the cockpit (and it's still not going to do any harm) but the bottom line is, the thing that REALLY allowed 9/11 to happen was that everyone was trained to be passive. The hijackers identified our pattern and exploited it.

A pattern is more dangerous than a lack of weapons, especially if you have not considered the weaknesses inherent in your particular pattern.

Now that it is being demonstrated that the pattern has changed, we should not assume they'll do the same thing again.

hipower22
June 3, 2003, 06:30 AM
So what is this, kick an Aussie day?

We have our fair share of fools out here, but we also have many good people who do not deserve to be characterised the way they are by some posters on this forum.

Battler: For an expatriate, you seem to have a deep and abiding contempt for your former country and it's people that mystifies me. I wonder how many Americans would rubbish their country the same way?

Sergeant Bob
June 3, 2003, 06:35 AM
I wonder how many Americans would rubbish their country the same way?

Unfortunately, most of the Americans who would rubbish our country are still here!:fire:

Tamara
June 3, 2003, 06:52 AM
I wonder how many Americans would rubbish their country the same way?

Only when it does something monumentally stupid. (Meaning roughly every other day. ;) )

Don Gwinn
June 3, 2003, 04:00 PM
Actually, HiPower, I've talked to a lot of "expat" Americans who now live in places like Britain or France and have nothing good to say about the U.S.
That's why they moved to Britain in the first place, after all.

Esky
June 4, 2003, 02:38 AM
Yesterday on Australian TV news (wasn't really watching at the time, only heard a news teaser about it)-

I heard that the Gov't is considering that each air passenger be strip-searched.

No, seriously. Can you believe it?

Just what we need to really kill the airlines.

I was talking with a friend here (in W. Aust) and said that I believed that passengers should be allowed to be armed. His reply was that "Even one bullethole in the skin of the aircraft could kill everyone by explosive decompression."

Is he right?

I'm sure I've seen discussions about this, but not recently, and haven't found any references- can anybody point me in the right direction?

Also, I agree with Don Gwinn--
the thing that REALLY allowed 9/11 to happen was that everyone was trained to be passive.

That was back when everyone thought that when someone hijacked a plane, it was because they wanted something-- money, freed political prisoners, publicity, whatever. Now we know that a plane can be hijacked out of pure hate and the desire to kill, so the old passivity doesn't go over too well anymore.

The passengers who helped out didn't get much play in the media, but did get a few mentions... not taking away from the heroic actions of the purser, but let's face it, he didn't have many options- couldn't exactly run away outside, now could he?

But the passengers DID have options, to be sheeple or to get up & risk doing something, and thank God some of them made that choice right. They should be proud, and I hope if the time ever comes that I'll make that choice right too.

I give them the "Let's Roll" award, and my hat's off to them.

Esky

Cal4D4
June 4, 2003, 02:48 AM
Point of curiousity... what if the first dozen rows or maybe all rows faced towards the tail? Acceleration is not that great that it would be very uncomfortable (I think) and anyone heading forward would be seen by many immediately.

Esky
June 4, 2003, 02:58 AM
Don Gwinn said--
I've talked to a lot of "expat" Americans who now live in places like Britain or France and have nothing good to say about the U.S.

In my case, Australia. Which is a lovely country, and I like it a lot in many ways... and I'll not knock it, and have never knocked America either, though neither country is quite like I'd like them to be.

Australia is... well, tempting... it's a long way from anywhere, there are no dangerous animals like lions, tigers or bears, there's socialized medicine & "the dole" if you can't make it in society, it feels really safe, warm, & fuzzy.

Unless you get mugged, raped, beaten, robbed... or try to fight back against someone doing those things, and then find out that you're the victim twice over, as in the UK. Still, it hasn't happened to me (YET.)

But I got my wakeup call on 9/11, and I'm coming home.

Esky

hipower22
June 4, 2003, 07:17 AM
I was talking with a friend here (in W. Aust) and said that I believed that passengers should be allowed to be armed. His reply was that "Even one bullethole in the skin of the aircraft could kill everyone by explosive decompression."

I don't think so. Sounds like an urban myth

As I understand it, decompression would be so slow as to not cause a problem. There would be plenty of time for passengers and crew to don oxygen masks. Aircraft much more robust than this.

After all, sky marshals are armed are they not?

Thank you Esky. I will criticise my country when it deserves it (which is often) but never rubbish it. As for the US, I will not knock it, even though it too is far from perfect. Its' achievements speak for themselves.

M1911
June 4, 2003, 08:28 AM
I wonder how many Americans would rubbish their country the same way?I regularly criticize the US. There's many, many things I dislike about our country, particularly the politically correct, namby-pamby, affirmative-action, baloney that we have in the US (particularly here in Massachusetts).

I do criticize the US, but I still love it.

Don Gwinn
June 4, 2003, 10:03 AM
The decompression thing is a myth. Modern airliners can lose several windows at once before the cabin actually depressurizes, and all it would be is a strong wind rushing out. It would still be very dangerous unless the pilot descended to an altitude where oxygen is plentiful enough, but all the stuff about people being sucked out through windows, explosive decompression--that's all myth. If you shot several .45 caliber holes through the skin of a 747 with its pressurization system working properly, there would be no appreciable drop in cabin pressure.

Now, if you blew out an emergency door or blasted a large hole in the fuselage, I don't know. But shooting a hole in the fuselage or shooting out a window is not going to harm the rest of the plane. Certainly it's not going to make a hijacking any worse!

M1911
June 4, 2003, 03:05 PM
Now, if you blew out an emergency door or blasted a large hole in the fuselage, I don't know.That sort of failure has caused disastrous damage in the past. Failures of the cargo door caused at least one crash and one near crash. Turkish Air Flt 981, a DC-10, crashed on climbout from Paris when the cargo door failed -- everyone on board was killed.

http://aviation-safety.net/database/1974/740303-1.htm

United Flight 811, a 747, out of Hawaii lost a cargo door. This caused extensive damage to the floor and fuselage and resulted in 9 passengers being ejected from the plane.

http://aviation-safety.net/database/1989/890224-0.htm

But I definitely agree that a few bullet holes in the fuselage are not going to cause this sort of damage.

AZ Jeff
June 4, 2003, 04:10 PM
I think the reason everyone automatically assumes that bullet holes in the cabin of commercial aircraft are catastrophic is because we all remember the scene in the James Bond move "Goldfinger", wherein an errant bullet puts out a window in a Lockheed Jetstar, and the next thing you know, the evil villan is being sucked out the window in explosive decompression.

There is a word for that--BS.

At altitude, commercial aircraft are pressurized to the approx. equivalent of 8000 ft above sea level. That's equivalent to about 5 pounds per sq. in. of atmospheric pressure. (Standard sea level is about 14.7 PSI).

An aircraft at 30,000 ft. has an atmospheric pressure OUTSIDE the cabin of about 0.2 PSI, but the INSIDE pressure is about 5 PSI. This makes for a pressure differential of about 4.8 PSI.

A hole 0.5 inches in diameter (OK, it's a big bullet!) would have air exiting the cabin thru a pressure differential of 4.8 PSI. That's trivial, and certainly NOT going to cause structural failure of the aircraft.

Too bad the media never attempts to explain this to the public during all the furor about arming aircrews, allowing passengers to carry, hiring skymarshalls, etc.

If you enjoyed reading about "Bloody battle for Qantas jet" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!