(c/o WK)

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/afp/20050310/pl_afp/usattacks
air_050310184159

March 11, 2005 

WASHINGTON (AFP) - US air security got barely passing marks from
pilots, who said airlines, airports and governments have barely
improved since the September 11, 2001 attacks.

"It's kind of a poor grade four years after 9/11," said Paul Onorato,
vice president of the Coalition of Airline Pilots Associations.

"There are certain things that are basic to security that aren't
getting done," he told AFP.

The coalition handed out only one "B" -- or "good" -- grade for
strengthened cockpit doors, which might have stopped hijackers from
commandeering four airliners and flying them into the twin World Trade
Center towers and the Pentagon (news - web sites), killing 3,000
people in 2001.

Failing, or "F," grades were handed out for a lack of improvement in
clearing airport employees, cargo screening and self-defense training
for flight crews -- any of which could prevent another disaster,
according to the coalition.

Airports pulled a barely passing "D" grade -- in part, pilots said,
because each airport sets its own rules.

The coalition said passenger screening pulled only a "C" because of
some improvements, but others need to be implemented.

Luggage screening got a "B," because not all scanners detect
explosives.

However, cargo security earned an "F," because passenger planes count
on carrying cargo only from known shippers rather than having to
screen shipments.

"That's great, but it doesn't tell us what's in the box," Onorato
said.

In addition, workers with access to the cockpit are not well screened
or identified, the group said. Flight crews, law enforcement officers
and Federal Aviation Administration (news - web sites) inspectors need
to be screened and need better badges, which earned them an "F" grade.

Now, "they get into the airport and onto a plane without being
screened -- and with a weapon," Onorato said.

The same goes for airline and airport employees, vendors and
contractors, who are not screened, and whose bags do not pass through
scanners, the group said.

While thousands of armed federal air marshals have been placed aboard
commercial flights and are doing a good job, the program got a "C"
because not enough marshals have been hired, the group said.

Flight crews could use a bit of self-defense training, which should be
mandatory, the group said, giving them an "F." Pilots and flight
attendants get academic training on stopping terrorists, but because
the course varies from one airline to another, pilots gave the program
only a "C."

Airlines are still doing a poor job of informing pilots of suspicious
activity, earning them a "D."

For example, American Airlines knew that terrorists might try to bring
explosives on board in their shoes before shoe-bomber Richard Reid
tried to blow up one of the carrier's flights, Onorato said.

Flight attendants wrestled Reid to the floor, and the pilot asked them
to bring the shoes forward. "The shoes ended up in the cockpit,"
Onorato said. American has since been giving information to pilots, he
said.

While surface-to-air and heat-seeking missiles are designed to be used
against aircraft, and while military planes have the technology to
fool the missiles, civilian craft do not, earning the industry an "F."

The last line of defense could be firearms in the cockpit, pilots
said. The program got a "D," however, Onorato said, because
Transportation Security Administration (TSA) regulations dissuaded all
but five percent of pilots from participating.

"They've made it as difficult as possible," Onorato said.

The TSA did not immediately return phone calls. 



You are a subscribed member of the infowarrior list. Visit 
www.infowarrior.org for list information or to unsubscribe. This message 
may be redistributed freely in its entirety. Any and all copyrights 
appearing in list messages are maintained by their respective owners.

Reply via email to