TSA Sabotaging Armed Pilot Program (Part I)

By Karen Di Piazza

Congress amended the Arming Pilots Against Terrorism Act because of increased Al-Qaeda threats to commercial aviation. Cargo pilots are now eligible to volunteer for the FFDO program. However, TSA has failed miserably in its efforts to train the 100,000 commercial and cargo airline pilots combined.

Flight crews that work for TSA’s approved list of 105 passenger commercial carriers, cargo air carriers, and charter operators that undergo TSA screening and meeting their criteria can apply to the FFDO program.

The Airline Pilots Security Alliance and members of Congress say TSA is sabotaging the program.

“TSA has trained, deputized and armed less than one percent of the 100,000 airline pilots who are eligible to volunteer--since training began last April,” said Captain Dave Mackett, president of the Airline Pilots Security Alliance. “Because pilots, Congress, the aviation community and the public are voicing their outrage over this to the media, TSA’s dirty little secret of deliberately sabotaging the FFDO program is out in the open.”

Pilots have received threatening emails from TSA for voicing their complaints about TSA’s weapon-carry protocols, and their redundant, psychological and background checks. These are more than a few complaints--it’s a force of about 35,000 pilots who have decided not to participate in the program now, claiming that TSA has made the FFDO program an abject failure.

Emails obtained state in part, “Recent public disclosure of SSI (security sensitive information) by FFDOs in the media to law enforcement gatherings and congressmen is a most alarming and a serious breach of security…failure to properly protect SSI may lead to removal from the FFDO program and civil fines.”

TSA’s website warns: “FFDOs may be suspended or removed from the program and/or fined civil penalties for program violations. Such penalties are currently up to $10,000 per violation, as appropriate.”

Emails threaten investigations with TSA internal affairs, if SSI is leaked by FFDOs.

When asked about the threatening emails, TSA communications director Mark Hatfield said it was a “misunderstanding.”

“They were sent out, but we discovered it was an error; they weren’t authorized to be sent out,” he said.

Mackett and Rep. Joe Wilson (R-S.C.) don’t buy TSA’s story. They said because TSA was feeling the sting from unrelenting media inquires, TSA sent a follow-up email. This time, it had a different, almost nauseating dripping-honey tone.

The email in part read, “Additional review of prospective emails at a more senior level prior to their transmission will help alleviate this problem from taking place in the future…”

However, the email still emphasized SSI secrecy, which concerns House Aviation Subcommittee Chairman John Mica (R-Fla.), who believes the message went further than simply threatening FFDOs to safeguard SSI from public disclosure. It’s the implication they’re not supposed to talk to Congress.

Mackett described TSA’s actions as “bipolar.”

When Hatfield was questioned about allegations that less than one percent of eligible pilots have been deputized, he reluctantly said it was true.

“I can tell you that about 1,000 pilots have been deputized as FFDOs and are armed today,” he said.

Hatfield admitted the program was “slow to start,” and said that class size has doubled, but declined to verify how many applicants were currently training, or how many applications they currently have.

“At the end of 2004, we should have about two or three thousand pilots who have completed the program,” he said.

Mackett said that wasn’t acceptable because private firearm facilities could train all 100,000 pilots by yearend.

“TSA can only train a couple of thousand pilots by yearend, and most of them won’t apply now,” said Mackett. “Before the law passed, we had tens of thousands of enthusiastic pilots who had wanted to apply to the FFDO program. Once the law passed, we watched TSA try its best to make it a failure.”

The few TSA-approved FFDOs that are flying armed, don’t begin to make a dent in cockpit security, not when 35,000 flights in the U.S. are taking off everyday. If you’re thinking that we don’t need armed pilots because we have air marshals, think again; international flights

sometimes have armed air marshals, but there’s only a few thousand of them at best. TSA won’t confirm how many of them are actually flying at any given time.

Friend or foe

There’s more than one hand in the pie trying to sabotage the arming of pilots.
After TSA got together with the Air Line Pilots Association, a 66,000-member union, they persuaded some members of Congress to introduce a bill that would only train two percent of the pilots; it was presented as a two-year test program, but Congress voted it down.

Although thousands of pilots belong to ALPA, large numbers of them are instead APSA fans; pilots say that ALPA isn’t supporting them in getting airline pilots trained as quickly as possible. Pilots from all of the pilots’ unions have joined APSA, a one-issue, nonunion organization whose only focus is to force TSA to follow what Congress intended when they passed the law.

Captain R. K, an ALPA member, using his initials because he fears retaliation said the union has been working behind pilots’ backs to help TSA thwart the training of the armed pilot program. He said they have two faces; one that on the surface you’d think supported what APSA is about, and the other behind the scenes working against them.

“On a local level I was involved with the union, and ALPA headquarters would send our local union officials emails asking us ‘if’ we recommended the pilots they had listed to attend FFDO training,” he said. “It was self-serving on ALPA’s part to do that.”

When asked about this, ALPA communications director John Mazor said in the beginning, TSA approached them to help with the initial pool of candidates.

“TSA had provided some formulas on how many pilots in total--how many from each airline, etc.,” he said.

Mazor said ALPA wasn’t the only group submitting “approved” applications of pilots to TSA.

“Under another formula, ALPA, the Allied Pilots Association (representing American Airlines pilots) and the Coalition of Airline Pilots Association, of which APA is a member, were each allocated slots in the first class,” he said. “I believe TSA’s formula included a small number of slots that they filled from candidates that weren’t on the union lists.

“Again, the selection was all done by TSA without involvement by any of the unions after the candidates names from each had been submitted.” Although pilots say names TSA received initially, were handed-down by ALPA.

However, Mazor said ALPA doesn’t agree with TSA on its weapon-carry protocol, but instead agrees with APSA on this one issue; FFDOs should be allowed to holster concealed weapons. However, he said ALPA doesn’t agree with APSA that TSA’s psychological evaluations are redundant or that TSA designed them to eliminate pilots.

Mazor said ALPA supports TSA’s background testing methods. He believes that Federal Aviation Administration-approved doctors are “not qualified” to determine if a pilot should attend FFDO training, or if a pilot is of sound mind to carry a weapon responsibly.

Captain L. S., an ALPA-pilot member, using his initials because he fears retaliation said if FAA-approved doctors can judge a pilots physical, mental and psychological status to command widebody aircraft, that same doctor should be able to judge if a pilot is capable mentally of handling a firearm.

“If an FAA-doctor can determine we’re mentally suitable to carrying hundreds of people for eight hours over the ocean, at night, in bad weather, dealing with an infinite array of possible mechanical, passenger or weather problems--without supervision--then, that doctor is capable of determining whether a pilot is capable of handling a firearm responsibly,” he said.

L. S. said any pilot who signed up to become a volunteer FFDO, has searched their soul and knows whether or not he/she can kill someone with a gun; they wouldn’t have signed up in the first place if they believed otherwise.

“The point is moot if a pilot draws his weapon during a cockpit breach and cannot pull the trigger--nothing has changed; the terrorists don’t want the gun--they want the aircraft,” he said. “If the pilot refuses to shoot, the result is the same--as if he weren’t armed. ALPA is saying they would rather their members be condemned to death from the outset, rather than give them the chance to defend themselves and therefore their aircraft, crew and thousands of people on the ground.”

However, Mazor’s not in favor of arming the majority of eligible pilots; he said he’s seen pilots who want to “strap on weapons and go look for bad guys.”

“I’m saying that I’ve seen that attitude with some pilots,” Mazor said. However, he declined from describing any particular incident in which this actually happened.

L. S. said ALPA keeps saying “dumb things” like that in the media.

“If there are pilots with overly aggressive psyches, or other problems, then I ask what ALPA is doing to get those pilots out of the cockpits or rehabilitated,” he said. “Since ALPA isn’t pursuing these remedies, either the problem doesn’t exist or ALPA is negligent.”

When asked about ALPA’s marketing poster that’s on their website “Qualified to Fly--Qualified to Defend,” in reference to ALPA members saying it’s a lie--a front and nothing more than a hoax, Mazor responded.

“As you note, it was a marketing device,” he said. “In the early stages, we had considerable opposition to overcome...”

Mazor explained that by using a marketing device they tried to shut down naysayers to initially get the law passed.

Mazor also said just because pilots may have federal, state or local law enforcement backgrounds that “shouldn’t make a pilot automatically qualified as an FFDO.” When asked if he still stood by that knowing that 70 percent of commercial pilots do have law enforcement or military backgrounds, he said he “hasn’t” changed his mind.

L. S. said he and other pilots strongly disagree with Mazor.

“So, a fully-trained police officer who attended grueling training, who was taught to identify bad guys in a crowd--trained to shoot ‘only’ the bad guys in an infinite number of crowded and dimly lit situations, isn’t qualified to become an FFDO?” he said. “He’s saying he cannot sit in a cockpit behind a locked ‘fortress’ door to make a decision about one person at a time--squeezing through the door at close range!”

Mazor said ALPA’s 66,000-pilot-members agree with ALPA on the FFDO issue, and he “doubts” that APSA has “nearly 40,000 pilots.”

However, on ALPA’s national computer bulletin board, a letter was posted, which sharply criticized ALPA’s president Dwayne Woerth for not supporting the arming of pilots in an efficient way.

The letter obtained, reads in part, “I have been an ALPA member since 1985, and APSA, the organization that you’ve told your security people to ‘not sit at the same table’ with, revealed clearly that you put politics above our security.” “If ALPA is going to approach arming pilots with diluted enthusiasm, be honest enough to admit that to your members who pay your bloated salary and expenses. Lead, follow or get out of the way. You’re the ‘only’ pilot group who’s obstructing what could be a viable layer of security instead of the farce it now is.”

When requesting an interview with Woerth to hear his side of the story, Mazor refused to put the request through.

Transporting weapons

Mackett explained that instead of FFDOs holstering weapons, they have to follow a ludicrous and dangerous weapon-carry protocol.

“They came up with the ‘lockbox’ requirement; no other law enforcement agency in the country has such an unwieldy and flawed procedure,” he says. “Pilots must box their weapon every time they go on or off duty, leave the cockpit, commute to and from work or when flying deadheads in the passenger cabin. Pilots must carry an extra bag at all times, which makes it easy to identify them as an FFDO.”

Mackett said that increases the odds of theft of the weapon, which is exactly what happened recently.

TSA acknowledged that at least one firearm had been permanently lost by a baggage handler, due to its placement in the cargo bin as required by TSA. However, First Officer Dean Roberts suggested hundreds of weapons have gone missing; temporarily missing, or have been misrouted or mishandled, as he reported on Denver’s 9News.com.

“In the last 60 days, we believe 300 weapons have been misplaced,” said Roberts. “Worse, no one knows where the missing weapons have ended up. We’ve been telling TSA from the start their carry protocol is not only dangerous, but will foster theft or misplacement of weapons. We wouldn’t be hearing about this if FFDOs were allowed to holster their weapons.”

Last month, Southwest Airlines lost a pilot’s loaded gun that was in his luggage on his flight from Las Vegas, Nev., to Oakland, Calif. TSA said the missing gun case is being investigated, but wouldn’t verify how many missing guns there were.

“Obviously, something might be wrong with the program,” TSA spokesperson Nico Melendez said. Mackett called that “the understatement of the year.”

Sen. Wayne Allard (R-Colo.) said TSA was asking for trouble.

“When you separate the pilot from his gun, whether you put it in a lockbox or whether you make him put it in some other area, then you lose that security,” said Allard.

Roberts said instead of FFDOs being allowed to pick up their checked guns from the cargo area, as rules require, pilots have found their bags containing their guns “rotating” on baggage carousels among the passengers’ luggage.

“It’s this policy that TSA insists on, that’s keeping most airline pilots from applying to the FFDO program,” he said.

Mackett said he estimates an average pilot will move the weapon back and forth from its lockbox 160 times each month.

“In contrast to holstering it, where you wouldn’t move it,” he explained. “It’s pretty difficult to lose a weapon when it’s holstered.”

Weapon protocol inside the cockpit

TSA’s weapon protocol doesn’t get any better for FFDOs inside the cockpit.

“If a flight attendant needs to come in, when one of the pilots needs to go out to use the lavatory, the weapon, under TSA’s protocol, must be removed from its holster and boxed,” says Mackett. “TSA knows that’s exactly when a terrorist will attack!

“TSA is aware of this, yet they deliberately leave the flight crew defenseless against protecting the lives of airline passengers. It’s unreasonable to think we’d have a chance; the weapon should be holstered and in the control of the FFDO, especially when the cockpit door is opened with permission.”

Mackett said he wonders if TSA paid attention to what happened on 9/11.

“Like it or not, airline pilots are on the front lines of terrorism in this country; you don’t send a soldier to the front lines without a weapon,” he said.

Mackett said the Smithsonian National Zoological Park’s police can carry guns on airliners some 2,000 miles from the zoo; state insurance investigators, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and 130 federal agencies transport their guns concealed on body--on duty or not--in or out of their jurisdictions.

“Try getting TSA to explain why that makes sense, but pilots who are responsible for the lives of literally millions of people are treated with outright hostility,” he said.

When asked about this, Hatfield responded that he and TSA believe they have developed the right polices; they had consulted with senior law enforcement personnel in developing polices that were specifically designed for FFDOs. However, he refused to verify whom TSA consulted with on carry protocols.

Hatfield appeared on MSNBC’s “The Abrams’ Report” and faced off against First Officer Rob Sproc, APSA’s vice president and former Air Force special agent, who flew military cargo aircraft, which transported nuclear weapons.

During the broadcast Hatfield said to Sproc, “The fact is in your world sir, these hero pilots will be stopping armed robberies in 7-Elevens or saving women from street thugs and that’s not what the program is designed for,” referring to pilots holstering weapons like all other law enforcement officers do in the U.S.

When asked why he made this remark, Hatfield said he still “stands” by his statement.

“I’m describing the fantasy that’s in Mr. Sproc’s world,” he quipped. “He sees these federal law enforcement officers, which FFDOs are, as having an area of jurisdiction that’s essentially boundless. The legislation that created the program very specifically lists their area of jurisdiction as the cockpit area of the aircraft.”

Hatfield was asked to respond to APSA’s concern of inaccessibility of the weapon in dangerous situations.

“Dangerous to who?” he quipped. “How? You mean inability to get to it--that’s the crux of the problem. Why do you need to get to it, if you’re not in your jurisdiction? It’s really simple.”

Sproc described Hatfield’s remarks as “unpardonable.”

“Pilots who died on 9/11 are heroes,” he said. “Had they been properly trained and armed with their weapons holstered, equipped to defend themselves against those terrorists in the cockpit, thousands of innocent Americans wouldn’t be dead today.”

Mackett said that in 36 states, civilians have concealed weapon permits and that TSA should make the obvious deduction that thousands of pilots are already armed in 7-Elevens.

“Yet, we don’t seem to have any problems with them trying to stop robberies there,” he said.

Honoring the crews who died on 9/11, APSA members are contributing to the “Silent Wings-A Tribute Flight to Fallen Friends,” initiative in which flight crews are donating part of their pay on designated flights and wearing wristbands with the names of 9/11 victims. However, you don’t have to be a pilot to contribute, anyone can contribute by contacting ASPA.

“It’s a way of remembering why we’re here and the heroes that are no longer with us, and recommitting ourselves to doing whatever it takes to win this fight in making our skies safer for everyone,” said Mackett.

Read part II of TSA Sabotaging Armed Pilot Program (More)

print friendly version

Back to Top