Choosing an Aircrew Self-Defense Training Program

 By First Officer Henry Williamson

             Well before September 11, 2001 pilots and flight attendants have needed tools to address violence in flight.  An enraged, intoxicated or mentally unstable passenger can be just as dangerous to the individual crewmember as a terrorist bent on mass destruction if not dealt with correctly.  Only after the events of 9/11 did the industry, unions and government begin to seriously address the need for self-defense training for aircrew.

            In addition to establishing the Federal Flight Deck Officer program, the “Arming Pilots Against Terrorism Act” mandates self-defense training for all crewmembers.  ALPA and other union and industry stakeholders are working with the Transportation Security Administration in developing this program.  The Act specifies that training must include classroom instruction on threat recognition, crisis communications and the psychology of terror along with effective hands-on training.  The final product will be a necessary compromise between quality training, time to train, and cost.

             Whether enough time is allotted to make the hands-on skills truly effective remains to be seen.  Recurrent training is specified by the Act, but what form it will take is not yet known.  Pilots and flight attendants may not want to wait for this training to begin learning how to defend themselves.  Others may be motivated by the mandated training to seek out more advanced training.

In this article I discuss what crewmembers should look for in a self-defense training program.  I also review some of the more popular martial arts styles and programs and their pertinence to flight deck and cabin self-defense.  I acknowledge in advance that this article reflects my own perspective, and is subject to debate.  My conclusions come from my training in various martial arts, law enforcement and aviation security experience, and discussions and workshops with some of the foremost self-defense trainers in private industry and the government.

Several assumptions must be made at the outset.  First, the crewmember has limited time available to train and must use that time to learn cabin/flight deck self-defense as efficiently as possibly.  Time spent practicing esoteric routines, exotic weapons or flashy techniques should be used to learn truly effective self defense instead.   Second, possible benefits such as increased self-confidence, discipline, spiritual well-being or even physical fitness are not the goal here---learning to fight is.  Many people have realized great personal improvement from the study of martial arts but do not have the skills or mindset to defend themselves in a truly violent confrontation.  Conversely, with the right attitude and a good instructor, a student can take valuable skills away from any style or program.

COMPONENTS AND CONSIDERATIONS      

Environment

            Flight decks and cabins are very confined spaces, with numerous obstacles that impede free movement of both potential attackers and defenders.  For this reason, high kicks (anything above the level of the abdomen) and acrobatics (jumping, spinning techniques) do not belong in a crewmember’s in-flight arsenal.  Galleys, lavatories and flight decks are in effect blind spots, which reduce a crewmember’s reaction time to a threat.  Because attacks may come with little or no warning, close-range (less than two feet between opponents) techniques should be emphasized over long-range techniques.

 Striking and Grappling

            An effective self-defense program must address both striking and grappling.  The most obvious form of striking is punching, but training should include elbow and knee strikes, open hand techniques and low kicks.  Grappling can be defined as any situation where one or both opponents grab onto the other.  This usually happens because one opponent is trying to control the other, execute a takedown, or simply avoid the other’s strikes. 

            Forget about the movies and think about any fight that you have ever been in or witnessed.  Most fights end in a matter of seconds due to disengagement by one or both fighters (most people really don’t want to fight) or outside intervention.  There is the rare quick knockout, but the majority of serious fights quickly become grappling encounters. 

             Whether by a fighter’s design or due to a simple loss of balance, grappling encounters frequently end up with one or both opponents on the ground.  Basic ground fighting skills, both offensive and defensive, must be developed by crewmembers that are serious about self-defense.  Ground fighting skills are easily adapted to fighting from the seated position, where crewmembers might find themselves at the beginning of an attack.   

Realism

            It is critical that self-defense training resemble as closely as possible the real life attacks that a crewmember will most likely encounter.  To use a military adage, “train the way you fight”.

         Training should include drills in which students apply as much contact, power and resistance against each other as they can without undue risk of injury.  Takedowns, joint locks, chokes and other grappling techniques can only be validated when the student’s sparring partner is determined to defend against those techniques, just as an actual adversary would be.  A padded mat area and clear rules of engagement are necessary for effective grappling training.  Heavy bags, pads and protective gear allow students to safely practice full power strikes. 

            Programs utilizing highly protective suits such as Redman, FIST, and HighGear are able to add a high degree of realism to their training.  An instructor wearing one of these suits can safely absorb the full impact of a student’s strikes.  This allows for realistic role-playing and scenario based exercises.

            Many traditional Asian martial arts devote time to the study of forms or “kata”.  These are choreographed, dance-like routines that often incorporate stylized strikes or techniques.  Many martial artists find the study of forms or kata rewarding.  Crewmembers, however, should use their limited time learning realistic techniques instead.

 Weapons

             With the exception of Federal Flight Deck Officers, crewmembers do not have access to conventional deadly weapons.  Improvised weapons such as crash axes, fire extinguishers, and wine bottles can be very effective, but crewmembers should not count on those items being available in a time of crisis.   

            Some traditional martial arts focus significant time on exotic weapons training.  These weapons range from broadswords to ancient Asian farm implements.  It is a safe bet that none of these will be available to a crewmember in flight.  Similarly, a hijacker’s weapon of choice would probably not be a six-foot staff or a Samurai sword.

Concealable edged weapons and handguns are the most likely armed threat to a crewmember.  Weapons training should be limited to defenses against opponents wielding those weapons.  

Physical Limitations

             In an ideal world, crewmembers would all be in top physical condition so as to better perform in crisis situations.  We all know that the reality is quite different.  While we are concerned here about self-defense, physical fitness is a critical component in any survival situation. 

             Try to choose a program that will challenge you physically.  To paraphrase another military adage, “the more you sweat in training, the less you bleed in combat”.  Having said that, some crewmembers may have physical conditions that may prevent them from safely participating in some of the more demanding programs.

Instructional Quality and Style

            For long-term training, the individual crewmember will have to find a school or instructor with a personality that he or she is comfortable with.  When shopping for a school or program, be alert for several “red flags” which may indicate sub-par training. 

            Classes should be adults only.  Realistic self-defense training is not a family activity.  The presence of children slows the pace and reduces the intensity of training. 

             Avoid programs that focus excessively on achieving rank or competing in tournaments.  Belts and trophies are not a good indication of an individual’s true fighting abilities.  Martial arts school owners can be very aggressive salesmen.  Be sure you are satisfied with the program before you sign a long-term contract.

            If an instructor talks up his extensive hand-to-hand combat experience, walk away.  Most Americans are able to make it to their middle ages with only a few minor scuffles, if any fights at all.  If this instructor is not lying, he might have questionable judgment or self-control. Either way, he may not be the best choice.  Instructors with law enforcement and, to a lesser extent, military special operations backgrounds may have considerable real-life experience in unarmed self-defense.  You should expect these instructors to be quiet professionals who hold self-aggrandizing words and actions in disdain.

             Any claims of “secret”, “deadly” or “lethal” arts or techniques should be met with great skepticism. With one’s bare hands, a person can only cause another’s death through asphyxiation, strangulation or direct trauma to the brain or upper spinal cord.  It is best to base your self-defense training on science, not on ancient Asian mysticism.

REVIEW OF COMMON STYLES AND PROGRAMS

Asian Martial Arts

             These styles tend to emphasize discipline and self-improvement.  Training is conducted in an atmosphere of formality and regimentation.  For these reasons, children often make up a large percentage of the students at schools teaching these styles.

            Tae Kwon Do: The Korean form of Karate and perhaps the most prevalent martial art in the United States.  Acrobatic, high kicks are emphasized over short-range strikes.  Strong emphasis is placed on forms, light contact  “point sparring” and tournaments.  Pros: Unless you live in a rural area, there is probably a Tae Kwon Do school within minutes of your home. Most schools will accommodate any student regardless of physical condition or limitations.  Cons: Little focus on short range fighting, less on grappling, and none on ground fighting.  Forms and tournament training take time away from self-defense training.  

            Karate and Kung Fu:  These Japanese and Chinese styles usually mix hand strikes and kicks more evenly than Tae Kwon Do.  Some styles emphasize rigid stances while others practice graceful, flowing movement.  Strong emphasis on forms and weapons.  Pros:  Like Tae Kwon Do, very accessible to almost anyone.  More focus on short range striking than Tae Kwon Do.  Cons: Little focus on grappling and no ground fighting.  Forms and weapons training take time away from self-defense training.

             Jiu-Jitsu:  Not to be confused with Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu, classical Jiu Jitsu stays close to it’s ancient Japanese heritage.  Jiu-Jitsu is a grappling art that places a strong emphasis on defenses to knife and stick attacks and common strikes and grabs. Pros: Good emphasis on short-range defense and grappling.  Cons: Limited striking and ground fighting. Some techniques too complex for the cabin/flight deck environment.

             Judo:  Derived from Jiu-Jitsu, Judo emphasizes flipping or throwing ones opponent to the ground and submitting them with chokes and painful joint manipulations (joint locks).  Judo training is mostly found in collegiate clubs or teams.  Training is often based around tournament rules that discourage extended ground fighting.  Physically demanding, with a moderate risk of injury.  Pros: Excellent grappling training.  Cons: No striking training, limited ground fighting.   

            Thai Boxing or Muay Thai:  Thailand’s national sport, Muay Thai emphasizes powerful shin kicks and short range strikes including knees and elbows.  Unlike Western boxers and Karate/Tae Kwon Do competitors, Thai boxers continue to fight after they “clinch” or grab onto each other.  Extensive full power and full contact training.  Physically demanding, with a moderate risk of injury.  Pros: Excellent short range striking, some grappling.  Cons: No ground fighting. 

Philippine and Indonesian Styles (Kali, Arnis, Escrima).  These martial arts focus largely on knife and stick fighting.  Practitioners develop lightning fast attacks from multiple angles and effective counters to those attacks.  Pros: Excellent stick and knife defenses.  Cons: Limited striking and grappling, no ground fighting. 

Western Martial Arts

            Like Westerners in general, practitioners of these arts are less concerned with formality, tradition and ritual than their Eastern counterparts.  Training in street or gym clothes instead of uniforms is common. 

            Fitness Center Kickboxing.  These are fitness programs and have no real application to self-defense.  Aerobics instructors who have taken a short certification course usually teach these classes.  Pros: Nice scenery.  Cons: No self-defense applications.

             Boxing.  A well trained boxer is a formidable opponent.  Boxers develop fast, powerful punches and nimble footwork.  Training is physically demanding with a moderate risk of injury.  Pros:  Powerful, fluid punches.  Cons:  No kicks, open hand, elbow or knee strikes. No grappling or ground fighting.

             Wrestling.  Wrestlers are trained to take their opponents to the ground and immobilize them.  Like a boxer, a proficient wrestler can easily overcome an untrained, unarmed opponent.  Unlike other ground fighters, wrestlers are not trained to submit their opponents through chokes or joint locks and may be vulnerable to those attacks themselves.  Physically demanding training with a moderate risk of injury.  Pros: Excellent grappling and ground fighting skills.  Cons: No striking or submissions.  

            Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu.  Derived from Japanese Jiu-jitsu, this grappling art was developed by the Gracie family in Rio de Janeiro over the last century.  Through countless “no holds barred” tournaments, challenge fights and street altercations they modified classical techniques and created new ones to deal with modern violence.  Practitioners prefer to submit or disable their opponents with chokes and joint locks instead of strikes, thus protecting themselves from injury and blood-borne diseases.  Physically demanding with a moderate risk of injury.  Pros: Arguably the most proven martial arts style in modern times.  Excellent grappling, ground fighting and submissions.  Cons: Very limited striking.  Practitioners may become predisposed to “go to the ground” at inopportune times.  

            Jeet Kune Do.  Developed in the United States by martial arts legend Bruce Lee, Jeet Kune Do takes a modern approach to classical Asian martial arts.  Practitioners are encouraged to take what works for them and discard the rest.  Pros: Excellent close-range striking and grappling.  Cons: Little or no ground fighting. 

            Krav Maga.  Krav Maga was originally the Israeli Defense Forces fighting system and is based on traditional Asian martial arts techniques.  Strong emphasis on knife and gun defense.  Krav Maga may be suffering from it’s own success.  Conceptually a solid program, Krav Maga has been franchised out across the country.  Traditional martial arts instructors can attend a weeklong certification course and begin teaching at their own schools.  Instructors may lack proficiency or understanding of realistic self-defense.  Pros: Good, basic defenses to common attacks.  Cons: Questionable instructor quality control. 

             Defensive Tactics and Close Quarter Combatives.  Primarily offered to law enforcement personnel and military special operators, this type of training emphasizes a mixture of close range striking, grappling and ground fighting along with weapon retention and disarming techniques.  Some commercial organizations are now offering civilian versions of this training in one to five day courses.  Pros: All-encompassing, reality based training.  Cons: Can be expensive, often requiring cross-country travel to the training site.  

            Aircrew Tailored Training.  Several private sector organizations have developed self-defense training programs specifically for pilots and flight attendants.  While some of these groups are highly qualified to teach these programs, others may not be.  Pros: Training is tailored specifically to the in-flight environment and threat.  Cons: Can be expensive and require cross-country travel to attend.

 CONCLUSIONS:

             If you have the time and money, a tailored aircrew self-defense course is a valuable investment in your personal security.  For continuous, local training consider boxing or Muay Thai for striking skills, Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu for grappling and ground fighting, and a Philippine/Indonesian Martial Art for weapons.  There are progressive schools in most large cities that teach a mixture of these styles under the same roof. 

The first place to start your search can be your local Yellow Pages.  Go to the Karate or Martial Arts section.  Read the ads; do they emphasize personal development and kids programs or self-defense?  Images of tigers, dragons and flying kicks in an ad might indicate a schools focus is not entirely realistic.  Make a few calls and ask a lot of questions.  Watch, or better yet, participate in a few classes at several schools before you make any decisions. 

[Defend U. Note:  Many, many thanks to Henry for his excellent article.  Click here for additional information on how to choose a self-defense course or martial arts school or go to the "Links" section to find additional self-defense and training resources.]