More information on Beebo Russell, who stole the Q400

Status
Not open for further replies.
I agree with the insinuation of the article that every flight that is unexpected and unexplained should be shot out of the sky immediately.

/sarcasm
 
I didn't read that insinuation. I sort of think *this* flight should have been shot out of the sky once they realized there was a clown at the controls who wasn't exactly in his right mind.

I didn't realize that 121 planes weren't refueled when they were done for the day.

I'm glad they were consistent in referring to him as 'Thief' in the article.

I cringed at his "Naw, I'm a white guy" remark. Ouch.

And the suicide hotline number was a nice little touch at the end.

A light and enjoyable read.
 
It sounds like a case of getting hit in the head repeatedly caused some damage that resulted in personality damage and a lack of what should be normal self restraint. Sad story, glad he wasn't homicidal.
 
It was scary and sad. But The dude really could have landed the thing, done his time in prison and sold the story to Hollywood because they're that thirsty for an original idea
 
That's the problem with an insider threat, eventually you have to trust someone. Even if they installed locks on airliner doors, someone has to have the key. I just don't see any way new rules or regulations would be able to locate someone intending to do something like this, until they actually act.
 
midwestpa24 said:
That's the problem with an insider threat, eventually you have to trust someone. Even if they installed locks on airliner doors, someone has to have the key. I just don't see any way new rules or regulations would be able to locate someone intending to do something like this, until they actually act.
Click to expand...
That's kind of the problem with anything. Ban guns. Great, anyone with a cnc or a 3d printer can make their own. I think the only thing that might have prevented this would have been if he wasnt working alone. But even then, that's no guarantee. If people want to do something crazy, human ingenuity will prevail.
 
Last edited:
Racerx said:
That's kind of the problem with anything. Ban guns. Great, anyone with a cnc or a 3d printer can make their own. I think the only thing that might have prevented this wopuld have been if he wasnt working alone. But even then, that's no guarantee. If people want to do something crazy, human ingenuity will prevail.
Click to expand...

I think the flaw in your argument is you're saying if a security measure is not absolutely 100% perfect, it's fatally flawed. Reasonable gun control measures may not eliminate gun violence but it can do much to limit it. Securing planes parked on the ramp instead of just leaving them accessible to an unauthorized person could have prevented this. Yes, I know that BEBO was technically an authorized person but he should not have been allowed sole access to any aircraft.
 
midwestpa24 said:
That's the problem with an insider threat, eventually you have to trust someone. Even if they installed locks on airliner doors, someone has to have the key. I just don't see any way new rules or regulations would be able to locate someone intending to do something like this, until they actually act.
Click to expand...
I think it's more about making access harder than making it bulletproof. There will always be people with authorized access to the aircraft. I seem to remember a mechanic stealing a Learjet way back in the day. Then there are the pilots. There have been at least a few who have hijacked and crashed the airplane they were assigned to fly.

People install locks on their houses and some have alarm systems. Will that prevent someone from breaking in? No. But it might slow a thief down, or they might pick a more vulnerable target.
 
This was just one dude that stole a plane and killed himself. How many car "accidents" are suicides?
 
I think whatever security you add, such as keyed doors, this guy would have still had enough access to do this.
 
PaulS said:
I think whatever security you add, such as keyed doors, this guy would have still had enough access to do this.
Click to expand...

Yep. Someone will get to do what they want almost regardless of what you do. Alas, even if studies show it's a waaaayyyy edge case the aircraft owner will be (1) tried and found guilty at the hands of modern media no matter what they do (2) A "solution" will be mandated by the feds regardless of the cost/benefit (doesn't cost them anything to do so)
 
Witmo said:
Securing planes parked on the ramp instead of just leaving them accessible to an unauthorized person could have prevented this. Yes, I know that BEBO was technically an authorized person but he should not have been allowed sole access to any aircraft.
Click to expand...

Exactly my point. At some point, someone has to be trusted with access as part of their job. Commercial aircraft are already kept within a secure area with multiple layers to keep out the average Joe. But in order to function, you do ultimately have to allow someone in to operate things. A pilot could just as easily accomplish something like this. I guess we could go to a nuclear silo type system, two keys that have to be turned simultaneously.

In years past most aircraft were sufficiently complicated to prevent the average Joe from accomplishing something like this. The advent of Youtube and realistic home simulators have made it a lot easier to learn the systems and operations of almost any aircraft.
 
There's a joke about mormons who drink all of your beer that addresses this situation perfectly. :)
 
Larry in TN said:
How would you know how much fuel you'll need for the next flight?
Click to expand...

Hmm... I assumed they'd know what was scheduled (route-wise) and forecast (winds-wise) ? Actually, I realize I have zero knowledge about how 121 operates.

Imagine if they topped off the plane and Beebo got to enjoy a 5 hour tour, or whatever a Q400's endurance is. Fun for everyone! :D
 
schmookeeg said:
Hmm... I assumed they'd know what was scheduled (route-wise) and forecast (winds-wise) ? Actually, I realize I have zero knowledge about how 121 operates.
Click to expand...

Based on the number of times I've had flights delayed or cancelled due changes in aircraft, I wouldn't be surprised if half the time an airline doesn't know what plane will be used for a particular flight more than 2 hours before departure. :D
 
schmookeeg said:
Hmm... I assumed they'd know what was scheduled (route-wise) and forecast (winds-wise) ? Actually, I realize I have zero knowledge about how 121 operates.

Imagine if they topped off the plane and Beebo got to enjoy a 5 hour tour, or whatever a Q400's endurance is. Fun for everyone! :D
Click to expand...
You don't top off airliners. It cost a lot of money to carry all that extra fuel around and, when topped off, you're going to be weight restricted on your payload on most flights. The only time in the last six years that I can remember having been topped off was for an ORD-FAI flight which is near the max range of the 737-800. Several seats had to be left empty to accommodate the fuel load and they intentionally limit the number of tickets they'll sell for that reason.

Tail swaps happen all the time, too. Don't want to fuel an airplane for a long trip many hours ahead of time and that need to swap it for a short trip with later.

I had that happen once with a 737 (probably a -900). I was flying MIA to EWR but the airplane had been fueled for MIA to SFO. (The station failed to notice that the two tail numbers had been swapped before they sent the fuel order to the fueling contractor) We took a delay of over two hours to get the airplane de-fueled to the point that we wouldn't have to leave a significant number of passengers behind. I think most of the first hour was just getting the fueling contractor to send their de-fueling truck. (You can't use the de-fueled fuel in another airplane due to the possibility of contamination) Then, the airplane is de-fueled by using the aircraft's fuel pumps to pump the fuel back into the fueling manifold and into the truck. The flow rate is significantly slower than during fueling.
 
steingar said:
IN case no one told you, firearms are freely available outside Chicago and can be easily transported into the city. Obviously you missed that bit.
Click to expand...
That's the point. People will figure out new ways to do bad things regardless of the hurdles you put in front of them. Eventually you have to trust someone.
 
steingar said:
IN case no one told you, firearms are freely available outside Chicago and can be easily transported into the city. Obviously you missed that bit.
Click to expand...
If Chicago suffers so much just be being close to various gun-obsessed suburbs I can only imagine the carnage at the epicenter where you get to freely buy all these guns!
Well , actually , I do live there and there is pretty much zero gun violence at the epicenter…
 
Thread off the rails. Probably should focus on mental illness rather than a debate about firearms. One doesn’t do what this guy did without some mental illness going on. :( I guess if a person was to take his or her own life this isn’t a bad way to go. No direct physical harm to others. A heck of a farewell. He had to enjoy those last minutes. And he chose his spot. Cruising for a while probably would have involved a missile up his six.

I teach high school. There’s a suicide relatively often. Last one jumped in front of a train. Some years ago a student of mine from a previous year hung himself at home. Sorry ... just hits close. :(
 
Larry in TN said:
You don't top off airliners. It cost a lot of money to carry all that extra fuel around and, when topped off, you're going to be weight restricted on your payload on most flights. The only time in the last six years that I can remember having been topped off was for an ORD-FAI flight which is near the max range of the 737-800. Several seats had to be left empty to accommodate the fuel load and they intentionally limit the number of tickets they'll sell for that reason.

Tail swaps happen all the time, too. Don't want to fuel an airplane for a long trip many hours ahead of time and that need to swap it for a short trip with later.

I had that happen once with a 737 (probably a -900). I was flying MIA to EWR but the airplane had been fueled for MIA to SFO. (The station failed to notice that the two tail numbers had been swapped before they sent the fuel order to the fueling contractor) We took a delay of over two hours to get the airplane de-fueled to the point that we wouldn't have to leave a significant number of passengers behind. I think most of the first hour was just getting the fueling contractor to send their de-fueling truck. (You can't use the de-fueled fuel in another airplane due to the possibility of contamination) Then, the airplane is de-fueled by using the aircraft's fuel pumps to pump the fuel back into the fueling manifold and into the truck. The flow rate is significantly slower than during fueling.
Click to expand...

Exactly. I can count on one hand the number of times I've had a CRJ-200 totally topped off on fuel, in almost 6 years of flying them, zero. We can't even top off the wing tanks most of the time, with a full boat of passengers and a flight of less than 90 minutes.
 
schmookeeg said:
I didn't read that insinuation. I sort of think *this* flight should have been shot out of the sky once they realized there was a clown at the controls who wasn't exactly in his right mind.
Click to expand...
Nobody's shooting down anyone. It's just not going to happen. They'd have to know 100% the plane was aiming for a schoolyard full of children.
 
idahoflier said:
I still think this whole event is sad...
Click to expand...
Agreed...
How many thousands more just like him are out there?
People in love with aviation, who want to stay close to it, yet for one reason or another, (money, life intrudes, priorities, etc.) just can't put it together to fly themselves.
( I understand this, I was one of them for a long time)

A very large percentage of the people you see working the gates, ramp, and back offices fit into this category. It isn't just a job, it is something that keeps them close to aviation. There are plenty of other jobs out there that don't require crappy hours day and night, back breaking labor in intense heat, rain, or blowing snow, that pay a lot more money.

And you can bet that it is those very same people that are working right now, doing their part to keep the airline going, while the "it's just a job" crowd are sitting at home collecting government checks.

What this guy did was wrong on so many levels, but there are a LOT of people out there that cheered him on for the stones to do it.
 
donjohnston said:
Based on the number of times I've had flights delayed or cancelled due changes in aircraft, I wouldn't be surprised if half the time an airline doesn't know what plane will be used for a particular flight more than 2 hours before departure. :D
Click to expand...
On some days, you would be right.
 
Lindberg said:
Nobody's shooting down anyone. It's just not going to happen. They'd have to know 100% the plane was aiming for a schoolyard full of children.
Click to expand...

A friend & I spoke at length with NORAD while at SnF this year. I came away with a different perspective especially when I asked directly what they would do in various situations. The answer was, "we'll do what we have to do."
 
Daleandee said:
A friend & I spoke at length with NORAD while at SnF this year. I came away with a different perspective especially when I asked directly what they would do in various situations. The answer was, "we'll do what we have to do."
Click to expand...
Not going to happen. If a plane gets shot down over a populated area, the trigger puller is responsible for the lives of everyone on board plus everyone it lands on. And if it's not over a populated area, there's no reason to shoot it down....

Same reason SWAT doesn't throw hand grenades into bank robberies.
 
Lindberg said:
Not going to happen. If a plane gets shot down over a populated area, the trigger puller is responsible for the lives of everyone on board plus everyone it lands on. And if it's not over a populated area, there's no reason to shoot it down....

Same reason SWAT doesn't throw hand grenades into bank robberies.
Click to expand...
I don’t think that logic works. There’s plenty of collateral damage from law enforcement actions.
 
Tarheelpilot said:
I don’t think that logic works. There’s plenty of collateral damage from law enforcement actions.
Click to expand...

It's a long ways from the well thought out logic of the plan to "warning red weapons free" - It's why the skies around the DC SFRA / FRZ and every TFR isn't raining Cessna branded metal every weekend. The OODA loop is complex and remote before anyone is pulling a trigger. Likely so long that any evil-dooers will do the evil they do before a a decision is made and communicated. Security theatre.
 
The event is sad, and reminds me of the Killdozer (Marvin Heemeyer). Similar story in terms of someone who was viewed as an upstanding citizen on the whole, but for whatever reason something pushed them over the edge. The real difference being that, while Beebo was clearly interested in aviation, he didn't have a manifesto (whereas the intentions of Marvin with the Killdozer was very well known). And yeah, definitely a screw loose and likely hiding some deep-seated depression/unhappiness, whether induced by football brain injuries, other sources, or some combination.

The folk hero status that both people achieved seems counter-intuitive, but I think shows the fact that there are a lot of people disgruntled with how things go for various reasons, and can identify. I seem to recall that after the Killdozer incident, the conclusion was there were no changes to be made, as the probability of that sort of thing happening again was deemed to be extremely low. I think in this situation, it's similar, although I think there were some logical changes to be made.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top