|
The terrorists who destroyed the World
Trade Center and part of the Pentagon radically transformed
the concept of the airliner. We now know that a 747 jumbo
jet, three-quarters full of fuel and traveling at 400 miles
per hour, would impart as much explosive energy as a one-kiloton
battlefield nuclear weapon. The only certain way to end
this threat is to make it next to impossible for even determined
suicidal killers to commandeer airliners.
Separating the pilots and passengers
with an unbreachable door, while necessary, is not sufficient
to protect passengers. Nor are sky marshals on only select
flights. Rather, all flights must be protected in an unambiguous
way. As daunting as this task sounds, it is possible for
the airlines themselves to mount such a defense, even without
federal aid. They could even profit by doing so, if only
they are willing to reconceptualize air travel. Airlines
now employ eight to 12 flight attendants in their passenger
cabins. The idea of stewardesses in the early years of aviation
was to ameliorate the public's fear of flying. They now
have multiple jobs: They hand out magazines and ear-phones,
serve food and drink, and dispose of garbage. None of these
functions are necessary for passengers to accomplish their
mission of flying from one place to another.
Passengers could get their information
and instructions about fastening their seatbelts over the
intercom. They could get their food, drink and earphones
in a package before they board, and they could watch their
videos at home. What is necessary now to quiet their fear
of flying is the security of the aircraft. To achieve this
the airlines must stop serving meals and showing videos,
withdraw the eight to 12 stewards, and substitute for them
four uniformed guards armed with Tasers, clubs and special
guns firing bullets that don't damage planes. These guns
also could be "smart" weapons that only fire in the hands
of guards. The guards would sit in the seats previously
occupied by the stewards and their job would be to ensure
that no passenger became unruly. They'd also ensure that
no passenger moved toward the pilot's compartment which,
as an added level of protection, would be sealed off from
the passenger compartment. And the guards could assist passengers
in the event of any other emergency, as stewards now do.
In this reconceptualization of air travel, passengers would
exchange whatever pleasure the drink, food and video service
provided them for the comfort of knowing that once they
were locked into a sealed tube with a planeload of strangers,
armed guards would protect them against suicides, lunatics
and terrorists. Most passengers, I believe, would happily
make this exchange.
Since the airline would have more seats
to sell, and fewer employees in the air, it would not lose
by this exchange (assuming the salary they paid the guards
was the same they paid their stewards). The flight attendants
could be reassigned to ground work, or, if no longer needed,
laid-off with severance compensation. Foreign aircraft would
have to subscribe to the same regime if they entered U.S.
airspace. The new Homeland Security Office could certify
their compliance.
The concept is not very different from
assigning police to New York City subway cars to prevent
muggings. And, once passengers realized that flying is again
safe from terrorism, the airlines would again have a viable
business.
Online version this Article: http://interactive.wsj.com/archive/retrieve.cgi?id
=SB100206345746351096 0.djm
Copyright ~ 2001 Dow Jones & Company,
Inc. All Rights Reserved. Printing, distribution, and use
of this material is governed by your Subscription Agreement
and copyright laws. For information about subscribing, go
to http://wsj.com
[back
to archive]
|
