On Jun 17, 9:38*am, "Tomsic" wrote:
wrote in message

...
On Jun 16, 6:53 am, Jim Elbrecht wrote:





micky wrote:

-snip-

**This is not the first bomb threat on a plane where fighters
accompanied the plane. What is the point of that? Do they think the
pilot is going to fly off somewhere else, and do they plan to shoot
the plane down if he does? Or are they just going to follow him? Is
the pilot a suspect?

I hope so--- I would not want to be the military pilot, though from
here it is a cut and dry decision.

***If there really is a bomb, shouldnt' they get the passengers OFF
the plane? They don't have to let them go free, assuming one of them
placed the bomb, but why should all the passengers die when the bomb
goes off?

And if a passenger *is* the bomb, they just offloaded a bomb into an
airport. First locate [or determine that it isn't there] the
threat-- *then* do something.

Jim

Nonsense. * Airports have procedures for dealing with this that
don't involve bringing passengers off a plane with a bomb threat
into the passenger terminal. *They take the plane to a remote
section of the airport grounds. *From there, there is no reason you
can't quickly evacuate the plane, getting people off the plane and
away from it so that if it does blow up, they won't be killed. * And
then you can walk them or bus them in small groups to an
empty hanger or similar until they can be processed and questioned.
Leaving them on a plane like that for several hours is about
as dumb as it gets. *Inconsiderate too.

Maybe.

There shouldn't be a maybe. Any international airport,
like the one in Scotland should have such procedures in
place. And clearly those procedures should not include
leaving people on a plane that might have a bomb for
several hours. If a bomb had gone off an hour after the
plane landed, killing 100 people, what would everyone be
saying then? When there is a bomb threat at a building,
what do they do? Keep everyone inside because that's
where the toilets and water are?




*But many airports don't have a secure area where hundreds of people
can be kept until they're screened and examined and the airports don't have
staff at the ready to do that either.

Give me a break. When one of these jetliners with a bomb
is coming in, you almost always have hundreds of police, feds,
bomb squad, fire rescue responding and waiting for the plane.
I can't think of one where that was not the case. How could they
possibly not be able to get 250 people off a plane and then into a
hanger
or some other area to hold them? They don't need any staff to
screen and examine them right away. Just get them off the plane
that might have a BOMB.


*Keeping everyone on the plane for
four hours where there's likely to be food/water/toilets may also be the
safest thing to do considering the potential risk to others using the
airport.

Safest thing to do when there may be a bomb on a plane
loaded with fuel and you have 250 people in it?
Give me a break. Who says there has to be any risk
to others using the airport? As I said, the procedure they
follow isn't rocket science. The plane is not taken to the
terminal. It's take to a remote area of the airport. From
there you de-plane the passengers and take them somewhere
where they can be kept seperate. You can just move them
a few hundred feet from the plane and leave them standing
there, to start.

The risk as Micky pointed out, is keeping all those
passengers on an airplane for HOURS that might have
a bomb or similar device on it. As for planes sitting on
the ground for 4 hours and how pleasant it is to be on
them with toilets, food, etc you apparently haven't paid
attention to all the horror stories from passengers that
have experienced that. Or of laws Congress has passed,
proposed, etc to deal with the problem. How would you
like to be sitting their on that plane, full of fuel, potentially
a bomb on board, for 3 hours?