In my opinion, the most important aspect of The Aircraft Operator Standard Security Program is the fact that it is a universal system. AOSSP can be compared to an airport security program (Forest & Price, 2016). ASP is unique for every airport, and therefore it leaves more space for mistakes and breaches in security. AOSSP, on the opposite, is a universal program that every airline in the US is required to follow if it wants to be approved (Forest & Price, 2016). AOSSP requires passenger and luggage screening to be obligatory processes and ensures universal strategies to handle threats, such as bombing, hijacking, and others (Forest & Price, 2016). Some aspects of AOSSP can be improved; for example, CCP screening can be used instead of current interviews (Dango & Ormerod, 2020). However, in general, it is a system that works well due to its’ universality.
While the AOSSP program provides security restrictions, airline operations security coordinators make sure those restrictions are followed. Their roles include taking on many tasks and responsibilities of airline security coordinators but also managing security issues in multiple locations, working with governmental security organizations, and so on (Forest & Price, 2016). However, I believe that the main role of AOSCs is working with TSA to “ensure compliance with the program and the regulations” (Forest & Price, 2016, p. 354). As mentioned above, airports need a universal security system to provide passengers with high levels of security. Therefore, there must be people who ensure those common systems and programs, such as AOSSP, are implemented and followed by the staff. Without airline operations security coordinators, the whole system would have been more disorganized, which could increase the risk of security breaches.
The Federal Flight Deck Officer program allows trained flight attendants to use weapons and fighting skills to prevent or stop dangerous behavior. There is no doubt that this program may save many lives since the qualified personnel are better equipped to handle terrorists and other criminals. However, the FFDO program has weaknesses that may raise some concerns. First of all, the FFDOs only train for one week, which might not be enough time to learn all the skills well enough (Forest & Price, 2016). Another concern is that FFDOs jurisdiction does not spread to the pilot cabin, which may be required in extreme circumstances. For example, the notorious case of Germanwings Flight 9525, when a plane crashed because of a pilot’s supposed suicide attempt (Pasha & Stokes, 2018). Arguably, it may have been prevented had the personnel had been better trained and was allowed to use the skills in the cabin. This is why I believe that the FFDO program is a good invention, and the FFDOs should be armed.
Air rage is a kind of behavior that may threaten the safety of the passengers of a flight and the crew. Air rage may be exhibited both before and during the flight. The reasons it appears include “early or late flight times; pressured security and boarding procedures […] cramped seating; physical discomfort; hypoxia” (McLinton et al., 2020, p. 32), as well as some others. In my opinion, the security procedures that become stricter with time may be the cause of the apparent increase in air rage. More extensive amounts of documentation are required, and the long wait in lines for the flight and multiple checks stress the passengers out. However, this problem is rather difficult to deal with because all the security measures are necessary. Perhaps airport and flight personnel’s kind and welcoming attitude could improve the situation.
References
Dando, C. J., & Ormerod, T. C. (2020). Aviation security by consent using the Controlled Cognitive Engagement (CCE) alternative screening programme. Journal of Air Transport Management, 86, 101824.
Forrest, J., & Price, J. (2016). Practical aviation security: predicting and preventing future threats. Butterworth-Heinemann.
McLinton, S. S., Drury, D., Masocha, S., Savelsberg, H., Martin, L., & Lushington, K. (2020). “Air rage”: A systematic review of research on disruptive airline passenger behaviour 1985-2020. Journal of Airline and Airport Management, 10(1), 31-49.
Pasha, T., & Stokes, P. R. (2018). Reflecting on the Germanwings disaster: A systematic review of depression and suicide in commercial airline pilots. Frontiers in psychiatry, 9, 86.