Excellence in crew security training Scott Graham MEC Security Chairperson Air Line Pilots Association Vicki Jurgens MEC Safety, Health & Security Chairperson Association of Flight Attendants

 The Challenge  The Tools - SIRC  The solution - Flight 291  The end result 2

3 Keeping crew security training interesting and current Assumptions Continuous repetition of mandatory subject leads to low retention rate Sharing real life experiences makes the class more interesting and improves retention rate.

As an Airline manages its day to day affairs its Corporate Security Department needs information in order to effectively manage risk and vulnerability. Information comes from Government agencies Audits Intelligence reports (and most importantly) Employee Reports

SIRC provides a process in which Corporate and Union Security Counterparts work together to provide Prompt responses to the employee Evaluation of the employees concerns or issues Continuous improvement feedback to the operating units.

 Integration of scenarios into training that Emphasizes varying points of view of a single event Allow for variation and escalation of the event to provide multiple teaching scenarios Use real examples, and stories of real crew members to maintain interest and maximize retention 6

We chose Flight 291 7

Flight: 291 Date: 2007 Routing: IAD SMF Aircraft: A320 Pilots 2 F/A’s 3 FAMS: No FFDO’s: No  Level 4  Divert to FAR  Normal landing, within weight constraints for FAR  Authorities boarded aircraft on landing  PAX removed by authorities  Flight safely continued on to SMF

Passenger appeared to be emotionally upset Crew considered his behavior as strange but not threatening, he had flown a segment already. Passengers behavior grew more erratic as the flight progressed. Entered lavatory and partially disrobed Made statements about dying and going to hell Became upset on viewing in-flight movie (Transformers) Flight attendants solicited assistance of able bodied passengers

Passenger suddenly started screaming and rushed the cockpit Flight Attendants actions Flight attendants struggled with passenger Able bodied passengers did not immediately assist Purser moved galley cart in front of cockpit door Galley cart slammed into cockpit door Purser notified Captain of need to get the aircraft on the ground Flight Deck actions Based on presumed intent of passenger and the obvious sounds of the struggle combined with the impact on the door, captain initially believed someone was trying to breach the flight deck

Crew displayed exceptional teamwork. Safety of other passengers was prime consideration while also focusing on the subject who they realized was sick and needed help (as opposed to being a terrorist) Dispatch initiated communication with Domestic Events Network (DEN). DEN tracked flight but based on information provided via UAL dispatch did not launch fighters DEN complemented UAL dispatch for their handling of the matter

Acting in accordance with published policy dispatch sent a request to “confirm ops normal” to the fleet Proper response followed by all aircraft

Passenger response differed from conventional wisdom in the post 9/11 environment Able bodied passengers did not respond as expected Direct instructions shouted by a FA did get a response by some but not all able bodied passengers Passengers allowed children in the aisle to observe the events

Adjustments in crew training Emphasize that passengers may not respond as quickly or in the manner we expect Benefits of communicating escalating events Use of restraints provided in the onboard kits Taped interview with the crew Dispatch communication with DEN played in background AN EXCELLENT PRODUCT

 Scott Graham Vicki Jurgens 16