FAA Requires Secondary Flight Deck Barrier | Hacker News Reader

FAA Requires Secondary Flight Deck Barrier

faa.gov

25 pointsaryann54 comments

Is this supposed to be an actual barrier to handle when the pilot goes to the bathroom?

The current protocol has the flight attendant block off the aisle with the food cart to block someone from rushing the flight deck. Or at least slow them down enough for the co-pilot to lock the door.

That does sound a little janky to be honest, if they think it should be protected may as well do it properly.

It seems to me a second door should render the need of securing the primary door less necessary.

That Germanwings flight haunts me more than any other in-flight scenario. So keep the new door secured like the existing primary. Make the primary unlockable with a key.

We should take away their shoelaces, just in case the pilot tries to garrote his copilot. Velcro shoes work fine, and a minor fashion offense is a small price to pay to prevent this scenario.

It would be cheaper to install a two way drawer on the existing security barrier that would allow flight attendants to pass food and beverage to the cockpit and allow pilots to pass their faeces out.

They could pee in bottles and we'd have pilot bombs instead of trucker bombs. But you can't use the word bombs on airplanes so they'd need to call them something else.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=D0u6Lb6RCz4

Basically they want an air lock? Someone at the FAA has been playing too much Rust and getting door camped

I came here to say this. An airlock is exactly what they need. Although not necessarily literally an airlock in a sense that it needn't be airtight, but just that you can't open both doors simultaneously.

A vestibule. This is common practice in the SCIFs that are used to protect classified data -- makes it harder to gain access, also makes it harder to see in from outside. Makes sense to have it on planes for similar reasons.

Surely, three would be better.

And a crocodiles infested moat.

Final ruling text: https://www.faa.gov/sites/faa.gov/files/ARM-230605-002_-_Sup...

Previous discussion (not a lot of activity on it) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36334796

Maybe this will finally mean a reduction in security theater on the way to the plane. One can hope, anyway.

Probably not. The armoring of cockpit doors already stopped hijackings. I'm a bit baffled as to the benefit of a second one.

the idea is to create an 'air-lock' between openings to prevent a rush towards the cabin opportunistically during an assault when a crew member traverses between the portal.

"physical secondary barrier that protects the flightdeck from unauthorized intrusion when the flightdeck door is opened."

worst case I suppose you could lock a bad-actor into the in-between until landing? not exactly sure how it'll all be implemented really.

Yeah, it’s funny what happens when the pilots need to access the head. The flight attendants move a cart to block the pathway while the cockpit door is open. I tend to agree with FAA that this is an unnecessary vulnerability if we can easily add a secondary secure door between the cabin and the galley.

How many hijackings has this resulted in, though? The existing solution seems to be good enough.

Should we for a hijacking to happen, then implement the solution?

Should we wait to see if a tiger lives under your bed before hiring a poacher to get it out?

Just checked, I don't need a poacher.

That's not exactly a logical comparison. We know the threat vector exists, we are already taking steps to defend against it (moving food cart in the way).

It's just a door, I am pro literal defenses and against security theatre. Maybe if we shore up the cabin we can relax some of the other bullshit theatre going on.

Tiger attacks are far more common than plane hijackings, thousands of people are attacked by tigers every year.

Listen, I know a guy.. he works for free if you let him keep the carcass. You don't want to take risks with tigers.

Well, let me know when a tiger grounds tens of thousands of flights, prompts an invasion and ushers in the post 9/11 security and privacy policies brought in by the war on terror.

The tiger could probably jump over the cart though, maybe we should be worried.

Let me know when lack of double doors does any of that. That sort of issue was resolved more than 20 years ago when passengers learned they need to fight back or die.

The threat no longer exists. You're scared of imaginary tigers.

I'm not scared, I live in a country with some sanity. But jetliners around the world also have flight deck doors. You are being a bit silly, airflight was new, a few pretty serious incidents occured, we put in some doors and the potential for it to happen again goes away.

It's less like an imaginary tiger and more like patching a really obvious risk with a cheap solution. Rather than relying on some wild dramatic movie hero scenario to play out, just close a little door. No big deal.

> But jetliners around the world also have flight deck doors.

That change (arguably itself unnecessary) was made in response an incident that happened shortly before that change was made. This new change is being made in response to... that same incident 20 years ago, which hasn't repeated.

The tiger doesn't exist.

Yes. This is not a useful line of argument since it has no boundaries. So yes, proposals need to be somehow justified.

That is probably an argument to not require a retrofit of existing planes. It still might be a better approach if baked into new plane designs.

Passengers already know to not comply with hijackers. Since 9/11 everyone who has attempted something has gotten a beating and then restrained by passengers until an emergency landing could occur. I can't see an extra door helping much knowing that.

In light in this imho extra cockpit doors makes rogue pilots a much higher risk.

> Since 9/11 everyone who has attempted something has gotten a beating and then restrained by passengers until an emergency landing could occur.

How many is everyone?

I don't have exact numbers, but a Google Image search for 'airline passenger duct taped' returns quite a few results:

https://www.google.com/search?q=airline+passenger+duct+taped...

all of them

Do you know how they have that curtain on some airplanes to separate you from first class? It's kind of like that. It's probably the flight attendants want something they can pull across to keep you from coming up and bothering them.

Block off access from the lavatory forward so at no point in time is there an open door to the cockpit.

Right now, when pilots use the toilet, the cockpit door is wide open.

Indeed, I’m trying to figure out what is the reasoning here? Is it just regulation for regulation sake or what?

Has it? I've only read news stories about passengers jumping anyone that tries any thing.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Germanwings_Flight_9525 provides a grim example of how hard it is to get through these newer doors. If they're locked, no one's getting in if the pilot doesn't want them to.

Not a chance. This is more security theater, meant to remind people to be afraid.

It's such a ridiculous theater. If a terrorist really wanted to bring down an airplane, nothing the TSA or the airports are currently doing will stop them. There's way too many holes.

If you want to bring down the airplane in general, there are multiple things you can do, but if you want to bring it down in a specific location, you either have to somehow hack the control systems, or break into the cockpit. For example if you want to crash the airplane into a skyscraper.

That isn't a thing that happens anymore, because passengers don't tolerate anybody making trouble. This double-doors stuff is alarmist theater for a fabricated threat.

> passengers don't tolerate anybody making trouble

Examples of this? The shoe bomber is one, but the shoe bomber was solo. I don't know what a situation would look like in a 9/11 attack where you have 4-5 attackers. Esp in a widebody jet

Search for "restrained by passengers". Passengers and flight attendants duct-tape idiots to seats all the time.

What is that has you suddenly so afraid of a repeat of a thing that last happened over 20 years ago?

Because the only example we have of passengers fighting back against multiple armed hijackers ended in flight 93. A single passenger is easy, see the shoe bomber. I don’t think everyone will get so righteous if 10 people were threatening a flight.

Armored flight deck doors are the real winner here

The passengers, however, will stop them. It only used to work because the passengers thought it was a hijacking they could maybe survive. Once that hope was gone, it stopped working. Both on 9/11, and several times afterwards.

On current domestic flights the flight door hinges are 2 inches from bathroom hinges. So if there's now the need for two doors (an airlock) will they be lengthening the plane 3 feet to allow for this?

The secondary barrier would have to be between the cabin and the lavatory, so that the pilot can go to from the cockpit to the lavatory on their side of the barrier. So I imagine that whenever the pilot is not about to or actively using the lavatory that barrier would be left open so that passengers can access it.

Some (all?) U.S. domestic airlines currently have this exact system in place, except with a flight attendant standing guard between the first row of seats and the galley/lavatory/cockpit, starting just before the pilot opens the cockpit door. I have no idea if this has been a regulation thing or just a thing I notice the airlines I fly do, but this physical barrier would probably follow the same usage pattern as the current meat-based barrier.

Curtain would be simpler to hide if the door is open. Door movement noise could be faked/randomized with a speaker.

> noise could be faked/randomized with a speaker

That already sounds more complex than a door IMO

My guess is that some kind of retractable grate will be installed between the bathroom and the passenger cabin.

Does it need to be 3 foot multiplied by the width of the plane? Why not a box or cage a bit smaller than a toilet? Hell you could make a retractable person sized cage inside or outside the cockpit.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com