Words in your mouth?
Hell, if I did that it would IMPROVE the intelligence of what you're saying.
Of course, I suppose it easier to just insult me than admit that your "solutions" are exactly what I called them as - kneejerk reactions.
(Something to think about: 747 has 3-4 flight crew. some flights have 2 of them. With 1 set of bunks so they can sleep. Now figure how to rejigger the plane to put that behind your armor. After all, its solutions you're offering, right?)
Its far far far harder than you're saying.
Because what you're saying is *exactly* "Don't have planes, then they can't crash".
So are you driving a car? What kind, who made what tradeoffs with it? What did they tradeoff with your house? Your office? C'mon, you're in for a penny, in for a pound, lets hear your expertise on all these risks, and how to obliviate them..
(The WTC was designed to survive a 707 crash, in theory. Common sense would have said they should have scaled up to planes that didn't exist then)
And while we're at it, let's sue the ass of whoever it was didn't start the ball rolling on this seven to ten years ago.
Lots of solutions Give the cockpit crew their own john in there. Have the backup crew sit in that section too. Just enlarge it a bit.
As for going back and checking on things, let's just do without. Or settle for closed-circuit cameras. It's a tradeoff, and our priorities need to be adjusted now.
Weight considerations? Now there's a false economy.
Sure sounds like you're calling them all idiots, and that its sure easy, to me.
Addison