So the choice is:
1. Open the door and the person uses the plane as a big bomb.
2. Don't open the door and the person uses a smaller bomb.
You die either way. What's the choice here?
1. Open the door and the person uses the plane as a big bomb.
2. Don't open the door and the person uses a smaller bomb.
You die either way. What's the choice here?
What do you mean? Without access to the controls of the plane, they hijackers cannot accomplish their goal of using the plane as a big bomb. They are deterred because it costs a large amount of operational resources to only fail the mission. If they wanted to simply kill people, they have simpler means (much cheaper means) to hit soft targets.
Not only that, the complex, involved missions involve more people which raises the risk of failure, of being caught ahead of time, and of unwinding the clues up the stack. If they are going to take those risks, they want a certain chance of success * size of outcome.
I mean surely you think that flights AA 11, ua 175, and AA 77 were materially different than UA 93. So I really don't get your point.
Like, sure, if that’s success then ok...again I’m just saying i think there are alternative ways to improve security, and while a locking door is one of them, the TSA is probably another great place to look for improvements. It feels like the US airport security situation is stuck in the world of “look busy and sound strict, people will behave and respect the security of planes”, but really it’s just a giant pain in the ass for most people and meanwhile mostly ineffective at stopping actual risks from passing through to the aircraft.
Real question: do you work for the TSA or airport security in some way?
If you want to just kill a lot of people there are far cheaper and more effective ways. Check out the concerts being attacked.
So the door is all you need.