In the days following the recent terror arrests in the UK, I quipped about the need to rethink the passenger airline industry. “If luggage is a problem,” I mused, “then don’t put it on the plane.” Instead of adding increasing levels of scrutiny, it’s time to start over from scratch.
So what, now, are the real problems we face? Or at least, what do we worry about?
The first worry is the most dramatic. Terrorists take the controls of a passenger jet and fly it into a building. This may be the least of worries. By securing the cockpits and arming pilots, the access to the controls is greatly limited. Even then, any terrorists will have to overcome the people on the plane who are probably not going to just sit back and wait for impact. This hole was exploited once, and I don’t foresee it happening again. At least not with passenger jets.
The plane-as-missile scenario still has much more terror value than the explode-a-plane-in-flight scenario. It brings fear to the people on the ground with respect to their lives and their livelihoods.
If I were going to aim for buildings, I’d give up on passenger planes and target cargo planes. They still have the high mass, high speed, high fuel combination that makes them great missiles. But to what extent you could sneak into an airport, onto a cargo plane, and into the cockpit I don’t know, but on the surface it sounds easier than getting through security and around a hundred or more people who will actively try to stop you.
Then we have to worry about planes being brought down by bombs, the more traditional if not less terror-inducing method. Four planes went down on 9/11, and the two we remember most were the ones who killed the most people on the ground. Planes crash with regularity. Huge office buildings do not fail with regularity. Let’s face it. We are a bit numb to planes going down. Even most passengers accept the slim possibility that they’ll never reach their destination. So for the terrorists to have effect, they now have to take down a lot of planes. My gut tells me that this is a lot less feasible than we want to fear. Still, this may be the biggest risk, so how do we deal with it?
Getting back to my ideas, I first suggested that major flights should be divided into a passenger and a cargo flight. This doesn’t sound groundbreaking, but it would have a major impact on how flights operate and how airplanes are designed. This means that any bombs brought on board have to be carried on. It also means that if bombs are packed away and exploded, we’re just losing a lot of suitcases and underwear, not a lot of lives.
The second idea, is similar, and a recommendation for travelers. Since people have very little faith in baggage handlers, and items such as laptops may now be destined for checked baggage, why not UPS your own luggage to yourself? My experience says that UPS and FedEx may screw up my shipments, but they can still usually tell me where my things are when they aren’t yet in my hands.
Really these two ideas may combine to form a single one. Let the airlines deal with passengers, and the shippers deal with luggage. Specialization of labor anyone?
Let’s say that the passenger-plane-as-missile and cargo-bomb threats are neutralized. That means that bombs may be smuggled on board by passengers, that they could be hidden on board covertly by non-passengers, and/or that cargo planes can be used as missiles.
In reverse order, let’s consider cargo planes. Honestly I know very little about this. To what extent someone can stowaway on one of these planes and gain access even to the cockpit door is beyond me. Still, it seems the solution is basically the same as solving the problem on civilian flights. Secure the cockpit so that entry by someone not in the flight crew is rendered highly improbable.
Bombs by non-passengers may be an item best defended against by the Feds. This means scrutiny of airline employees, bomb sniffing dogs, and things like that. This also helps to ensure some minimum level of airline safety for all passengers.
Bombs by passengers, however, may be an issue best left to the airlines themselves. This of course a huge trade-off. Some people will glad strip down to help reduce their odds of dying an explosive death. Others surely don’t want to be touched. Instead of subjecting everyone to the same mostly-impotent security checks, let them pay for their level of safety. Let Airline X provide minimum screening, carry-on luggage, and low prices. Let Airline Y charge high prices but provide premium safety. Let Airline Z come up with some other combination. And create some type of independent watchdog group rate the Airlines on their security systems.
It could work.
