Quantcast
  1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Interesting new terrorism hi-jacking tactic?

Discussion in 'General Gun Discussions' started by Preacherman, Jun 16, 2006.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Preacherman

    Preacherman Member

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2002
    Messages:
    13,309
    Location:
    Louisiana, USA
    The BBC has reported on the trial of seven men accused of planning to hi-jack an airliner.

    What's interesting is their plan to overcome the presence of any air marshals or other armed opposition on the plane (see, it is gun-related! :D ). The news report states the following:

    So . . . to overcome an air marshal, simply recruit more hijackers! Interesting thought. I wonder if the passengers would resist en masse, as some have speculated, or surrender to a massed attack?
     
  2. PlayTheAces

    PlayTheAces Member

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2002
    Messages:
    408
    Location:
    The Silver State
    Interesting, but I don't think overcoming the air marshall in itself would do it. They'd have to gain access to the cockpit, or do enough physical damage to the aircraft to disable it. After 911, I don't think the other passengers would just sit around and watch, either. Be a bloody free for all.

    This brings up a question though - what safeguards are in place to keep a bunch of bozos from taking away the air marshall's weapon? Are they using high tech weapons that require a chip or some type of authentication in order to fire?
     
  3. Biker

    Biker Member

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2005
    Messages:
    6,105
    Location:
    Idaho
    I can't imagine an Air Marshall *not* emptying his weapon against a group of attackers. It's been awhile since I've been on a plane, but how many at a time can come at him?
    When a Tiger is at the hole, he can hold off a 1000 rats.

    In any case, gathering 30 terrorists would be a difficult proposition and I suspect that the passengers would still fight back.
    High risk low return for the Ts.

    Biker
     
  4. Warren

    Warren Member

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2004
    Messages:
    2,454
    Location:
    Northern California
    The passangers would have to resist.

    Maybe you die if the fight, but you will certainly die in the crash.

    I wonder if all the struggling would upset the plane at all. The body weights of 250 or so people all being flung about hither AND yon might cause that sort of thing.
     
  5. Standing Wolf

    Standing Wolf Member in memoriam

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    24,041
    Location:
    Idahohoho, the jolliest state
    More self-inflicted geniuses heard from.
     
  6. MechAg94

    MechAg94 Member

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2005
    Messages:
    4,748
    I doubt shifting weight would make too much difference. Turbulence would bother the pasengers more than people running around would bother the plane.

    The pilots could put on their oxygen and decompress the plane; go in for a landing. They could also do some of their own shifting throwing any fighters all over the place.

    I think they would be better off trying to open the emergency door in flight or something(if that is possible).
     
  7. taliv

    taliv Moderator

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2004
    Messages:
    22,280
    maybe i need to adjust my stereotypes, but "flipping" sure seems like an odd adjective for band of terrorists plotting a suicide attack


    also, the more people they attempt to recruit, the more likely they are to get people on watch lists
     
  8. Atticus

    Atticus Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    2,794
    Location:
    Ohio
     
  9. carpettbaggerr

    carpettbaggerr Member

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2003
    Messages:
    1,676
    You're right, the slang just doesn't sound like it would come from someone named Omar Khyam or Jawad Akbar. But with conversion, and name changes, who knows? I'm pretty sure Kareem Abdul Jabbar, and Muhammad Ali don't speak Arabic either.

    As for the hijacking, I don't think 30 against 300 would have a chance. Even if they were NFL linemen, I believe they'd be beaten to death in short order. And that's if they could get 30 'brothers' who didn't mind committing suicide.
     
  10. taliv

    taliv Moderator

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2004
    Messages:
    22,280
    (for the record, it wasn't so much their names/religion that makes it seem odd. it's the fact that they're talking about trying to kill themselves along with 300 other people by crashing a plane. if it were a bunch of presbyterians from Iowa, the entire recorded conversation would still be... far enough outside my expectations to generate a good deal of skepticism)
     
  11. Parker Dean

    Parker Dean Member

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2003
    Messages:
    468
    Location:
    Corpus Christi, TX
    Oh, really? Verrrry interesting.....
     
  12. Double Naught Spy

    Double Naught Spy Sus Venator

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    9,689
    Location:
    Forestburg, Texas
    Nope, just a variant. In the past, teams of hijackers have worked together on planes. The did not need particularly large numbres to do the job, in part due to the lack of threat to them on planes. Armed guards and aggressive passenger were few and far between. Hijackers took as many accomplices as was needed to get the job done. Now, they perceive needing more.

    I doubt it. Brit. Air passengers, if not American, may react as they would if 9/11 had not happened. Many are afraid to act.

    Shifting passenger weight might affect the plane's flight and handling, but not enough in a manner to crash it.

    Sure they would have a chance. Plus, there is virtually not chance all the passengers will react. Not all did on the plane that crashed in Penn.

    Note, the hijackers don't have to control the plane forever. A team of 30, say 25 working defense, could delay passenger aggression long enough to accomplish the desired goal by the last 5. What if all they wanted to do is to gain access to the wiring or hydraulics running along the fuselage

    Finding 30 brothers would not be a problem. They had that many or more for 9/11, just not all on the same plane.

    So are we. What's the point? Then again, not all may be terribly religious. Some may simply hate Americans or westerners.
     
  13. wheelgunslinger

    wheelgunslinger Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2005
    Messages:
    2,439
    Location:
    0 hours west of NC
    If this were tried, I believe that a lot of panic and disorientation would ensue with the passengers. At the point the Air Marshall emptied his weapon into the faces of the aggressors, passengers would have their lines of battle drawn for them. That is to say, it would become very obvious which side the attackers were on, and passengers would either act or not act.
    Hopefully, in a plane loaded with 300 people, there would be at least 30 men or women of some defensive capability to at least hold the would be hijackers at bay, if not overcome them. In a perfect world, there would be more, but I'm hard pressed to think that out of a random selection of 300 or 270 passengers, more than 10 percent would be fit and skilled enough to go up against 30 men committed, philosophically and physically, to the carefully crafted idea of taking that plane down.

    Of course, keeping the interaction at a level of H2H would be a better idea than shooting or opening the E door, so that you didn't decompress the plane 5 miles up.

    Given the size of the aisles, location of key passengers who had the ability to stem the tide of the assault, location of the Air Marshal, and location of the bg's, it seems like it's a fairly tough scenario to speculate on with any degree of certainty.
    But, the size of the aisles alone may give any willing passengers the same degree of advantage as the aggressors, which could result in a little Thermopylae in the sky that could hold out long enough to land and put thirty more heads on the pikes of CNN and Fox News.
    though it is doubtful that 30 brothers could successfully plan and execute this caper without big brother knowing about it, if they could it'd be a tough one to have dumped in your lap.
    The only thing that is certain is that if your plane is in the process of being hijacked, you must act to prevent it in as intelligent and strategically viable way as possible. And, that's all you can really do.
     
  14. c_yeager

    c_yeager Member

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2003
    Messages:
    5,479
    Location:
    Seattle
    I suspect that any domestic flight that includes 30 middle eastern men, most of them non-citizens, some of which would inevitably be behaving oddly, would probably get assigned more than one air marshal.

    Even if that didnt happen there is still the locked door to deal with, not to mention the other 270 passengers who might be a little miffed at the plan. That would be one messy airliner at the end of the day. No matter how you cut it the situation is essentially 30 self-identified and active terrorists against one armed air marshal and 270 randomly selected Americans, all contained in a small aluminum cylinder. That would be one hell of a pay-per-view event.
     
  15. Justin

    Justin Moderator Emeritus

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2002
    Messages:
    19,285
    Location:
    THE CHAIR IS AGAINST THE WALL
    It's obvious these guys were looking to recruit terrorists with skills. You know, numbchuck skills, bo-staff skills, computer hacking skills...
     
  16. smince

    smince Member.

    Joined:
    May 19, 2005
    Messages:
    1,329
    Location:
    Northeast Alabama
    From John Farnam's site, 13 Jun 06 from a Marshal:

    "We're had bad publicity lately, as you probably know. We FAMs desperately want to remain in deep cover, blending in seamlessly with the general, traveling public. We don't 'activate' except in the event of a skyjacking attempt. Our job is to precipitously shoot to death skyjackers before they can jeopardize the aircraft. Until then, it is critical that we remain invisible. We're not there to make arrests! No one, not even crew-members, know our identity, and that is exactly the way we want it. That is also the way we want to keep it! Unfortunately, our weak-knee 'management,' unwilling to stand up to pressure from airline industry executives and others, is trying to turn us into semi-uniformed, 'courtesy police!'

    Airline executives want us all in coat and tie, even when it causes us to stand out on many flights. They also want us to routinely break cover and get involved with unruly-passenger incidents. They even want to issue us baton s! They call it 'semi-covert,' a ridiculous contradiction of terms on its face.

    AQ's current plan for airline takeover is to first identify FAMs, which will be no problem now. Four terrorists will be assigned to each FAM. Once airborne, they will suddenly and simultaneously rush the FAMs, pin them in their seats, immobilizing arms and legs, take their pistols, shoot them, and then take over the aircraft at their leisure. None of the foregoing is classified. It is all common knowledge, available from dozens of sources.

    We FAMs are concerned with this current, dangerous trend. We want Congress to can our current gaggle of so-called 'managers,' replacing them with people who actually have a clue as to what we're supposed to be doing. Our program, and its mission, are in real trouble!"
     
  17. rudolf

    rudolf Member

    Joined:
    May 28, 2005
    Messages:
    354
    I just hope 30 young muslims boarding an airplane would get the same reaction as 3 old men hanging around a kindergarten and watching the children.
     
  18. Nail Shooter

    Nail Shooter Member

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2005
    Messages:
    225
    Location:
    MI
    Biker
    Senior Member
    *
    "...I can't imagine an Air Marshall *not* emptying his weapon against a group of attackers..."

    True, but my mind is running wild here.

    So the A.M. empties his weapon and gets the now run dry weapon taken away from him. I wonder if the A.M. has any spare mags fully loaded on him that could also be taken away to reload the gun now held by a terrorist. Is the wall and door that separates the cockpit from the passenger compartment bullet proof? Many terrorists on board might be a bad thing even w/ armed protection on board.

    NS
     
  19. meef

    meef Member

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2004
    Messages:
    1,649
    Location:
    Oregon
    rudolf:
    HEY!

    That sounds like racial profiling, and I want it to stop!

    NOW! :mad:









    :D
     
  20. geekWithA.45

    geekWithA.45 Moderator Emeritus

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2003
    Messages:
    9,056
    Location:
    SouthEast PA
    Basically, I've made it a habit to mark the air marshalls, when present.

    Given this and Farnam's post, I've bumped up covering the AM's back in priority.

    At the end of the day, anyone and EVERYONE who flies must be prepared to maximally resist, no matter what.


    Emphasis on PREPARED....which is 90% mental, and 10% selection of various innocuous sharp and pointy objects which are not even concievably on the banned list.

    Even if our enemies should muster 30 on a plane of three hundred, they're still outnumbered 10:1.
     
  21. DBR

    DBR Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2002
    Messages:
    1,071
    Location:
    Vermont
    My thinking "out of the box" solution for hijacking is to allow the pilots to saturate the passenger compartment with an anesthetic and knock everyone out. Yes it may put a few weak passengers at some health risk but it would be much less than risking an F16 shoot down.
     
  22. Jeff

    Jeff Member

    Joined:
    May 28, 2003
    Messages:
    720
    Location:
    Vermont
    In the interest of increasing the signal and reducing the noise, this post has been removed.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Jun 21, 2006
  23. SnakeEater

    SnakeEater Member

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2004
    Messages:
    770
    Location:
    Central Ohio
    How about a A.C.P. (Airline Carry Permit)? Offer a training course, say 40hrs long, that once completed gets you a permit to carry a pistol onboard. I believe a little training on aircraft particulars would be a wise move before allowing just anybody to carry airborne. I'd assume that eventually every flight would have a least a few A.C.P.'s onboard and that would be a serious snag to any terrorist plan.

    Like my acronym? A.C.P.:D
     
  24. Diamondback6

    Diamondback6 Member

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2006
    Messages:
    807
    Location:
    The cesspool of the Upper Left Coast
    I've long argued that the ability to tell a would-be Tango POS "I'll see your boxcutter and raise you a Colt .45 with your name on it..." would be the ultimate in Transportation Security Assurance. I suggested something like the ACP program a while back, here:
    http://www.thehighroad.org/showpost.php?p=2421223&postcount=75

    Good idea then, good idea now. I'd say 20 hours should be adequate, SnakeEater, make it a one-week class and 20 allows half each day for homework and study.

    And already having a CPL should count as some of the range training already done.
     
  25. LAK

    LAK Member

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2004
    Messages:
    2,487
    Biker
    If you believe our gov - finding that many who are willing to die is not that difficult based on the numbers proposed out of 09/11.

    ------------------------------------------

    http://ussliberty.org
    http://ssunitedstates.org
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page