Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Singapore Airlines Air Marshals

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by SQtraveller View Post
    While I don't agree with the idea that the program is a waste of money, simply using a Ground to Air system such as a Stinger (the US was virtually giving it away to equip the Mujahideen in Afghanistan), Blowpipe and Javelin would be far more effective.
    You would rather have the goverment shoot down a plane loaded with a few hundred passengers?

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by SuperJonJon View Post
      You would rather have the goverment shoot down a plane loaded with a few hundred passengers?
      post deleted
      Last edited by SQtraveller; 20 August 2017, 04:09 AM.

      Comment


      • #18
        deleted
        Last edited by trekkie; 23 September 2010, 11:16 PM.

        Comment


        • #19
          I think Air Marshals are a waste of money.

          If you were on a hijacked plane, would you sit quietly in your seat while the hijackers crash into a building?

          I would jump on the guy(s) and kick the sh*t out of them.

          The passengers will outnumber the hijackers for sure..

          Comment


          • #20
            Incidentally, does anyone know of any Air Marshall that was actually involved in any action on a flight?

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by trekkie View Post

              I would agree it could be a waste of money. Besides the infamous KL hijacking which happened donkey donkey ages ago and unlikely to happen, you have so many inbuilt checks in place. Before 9/11, SQ was considered having zero risk.

              If you do management, you know such measures are only meant to improve a company's safety and reputation.

              I would worry about an engine failure or the pilot forgetting to lower the front landing gear before i worry about a terrorist onboard.
              I am actually worried by that blind optimism in you. Just because it has never happened doesn't mean it will never happen again. Those " many inbuilt checks in place" could easily be overcome by a determined troublemaker. And there's no guarantee of the other stations airport security. Where were this inbuilt checks when a stowaway managed to hitch a ride on a SQ 777 from KUL ? There was also a case of an illegal self loading freight who made himself home on a SQ freighter until one of the crew noticed him on his toilet break and made a landing to offload him. Fact is the air marshal is more of a psychological barrier to these would be terrorists to make them think twice before embarking on any mission on any SQ flight. And they are the last line of defence if any of the " many inbuilt checks " had holes punched through as it had before.

              If you were on a hijacked plane, would you sit quietly in your seat while the hijackers crash into a building?

              I would jump on the guy(s) and kick the sh*t out of them.

              The passengers will outnumber the hijackers for sure..
              Do you think everyone onboard will think like you ? Heck, I don't even see a single pax helping out the stewards in the recent drunken pax fracas. What more a terrorist ! If you made the first move, they are most likely to kill you and make your plight a form of deterrence( psychological barrier) to would be good samaritans. This happened in the Air India hijacking in 1999.

              Comment


              • #22
                deleted
                Last edited by trekkie; 23 September 2010, 11:17 PM.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by trekkie View Post
                  I'm aware that some SQ station managers do read the site and maybe they would pick it up and tell their boss not to spend too much on security and use the money instead on amenities or improving the food.
                  Oh I am certain many, if not all, SQ Station Managers get all their security intelligence advice and ideas from here. It makes you wonder how they coped before we were around.

                  Are you still hearing those voices ?. I'd get some ear plugs if I were you, and don't forget to look behind you.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Its a bit rich to say, do everything possible. Spend the entire SQ budget on security. No matter how much you spend on security, there is still a level of trust that nothing will ever happen. Thats why countries build up good diplomatic rapport. Can you imagine what would happen if a certain country decides to do something to offend its neighbours repeatedly to gain an economic advantage on an extreme scale?

                    Also, At some point, what is being spent on security will outweight any future cost savings from prevention of any future attacks, which for SQ is unlikely to be any major incident. It is much cheaper to try to keep better relations.
                    I don't see how building good diplomatic rapport with countries can prevent a security breach on SQ a/c. Most(99.9%) hijackers are from militant groups with personal vendetta to be fulfilled. They are not sanctioned by any foreign governments to begin with.

                    Air marshals onboard SQ aircraft is not SQ's idea in the first place. It was motioned in the Singapore parliament a few years ago and SQ has no say in it.And as such, air marshals onboard SQ a/c are not paid by SQ. They are from the state police and as such, paid by the taxpayers of Singapore. The only cost to SQ is the price of an economy class seat. That's a small price to pay for a peace of mind.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      deleted
                      Last edited by trekkie; 23 September 2010, 11:17 PM.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        deleted
                        Last edited by trekkie; 23 September 2010, 11:18 PM.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by trekkie View Post
                          sigh....

                          maybe this would be clearer.

                          we all know whether its state police or SQ, the owner is still government right? so in the end, its the same entity that has to pay for the air marshall. At least, they don't reduce my upgrade chances.

                          as for militant groups and whatever. One word... rare. I could be wrong but Normally these groups normally do not attack unless provoked nowadays. I still believe if the diplomacy is nice, its quite likely the foreign government will tell tell or at least try to prevent it on their end.
                          You must be joking, right ? If you think by giving SQ business, you have a right to comment on Singapore governments spendings, why don't you rant about Singapore Navy's and Army's overseas deployment ? Or the Singapore Air Force buying new fighter jets to enhance safety of Singapore air space?

                          And may I know what did Singapore do to have the pakistani terrorists hijack a SQ a/c 19 years ago ?

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            deleted
                            Last edited by trekkie; 23 September 2010, 11:18 PM.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Originally posted by boing View Post
                              You must be joking, right ? If you think by giving SQ business, you have a right to comment on Singapore governments spendings, why don't you rant about Singapore Navy's and Army's overseas deployment ? Or the Singapore Air Force buying new fighter jets to enhance safety of Singapore air space?

                              And may I know what did Singapore do to have the pakistani terrorists hijack a SQ a/c 19 years ago ?
                              Relax. You are talking to someone who has a history of placing his personal interests far higher than any other issue, be it this airline's well-being or the safety and security of this country.

                              Then again, he probably has little reason to. We hold the Singapore NRIC. He don't.
                              Help make this article a better one!

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Originally posted by huaiwei View Post
                                Relax. You are talking to someone who has a history of placing his personal interests far higher than any other issue, be it this airline's well-being or the safety and security of this country.

                                Then again, he probably has little reason to. We hold the Singapore NRIC. He don't.
                                Hear hear!

                                Let us all not waste our time trying to reason with someone who obviously has issues with SIA. Actually I don't even know why he even bothers to post here. So let's not fall into his trap. I believe ignoring a mad man is the best way to make him go away.
                                Have you checked your blind spot lately?

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X