9/11 changed the way aviation security is approached, not only in the US alone but also across the world. This brought about a paradigm shift in the approach as a more comprehensive set of measures were put in place to prevent these type of attacks at all costs in future. Two of the main measures which formed essential part of the focus were that of hardening the cockpit door to prevent the terrorists taking over the control of flights and of deploying the flight marshals on the aircraft.
The studies of cost-benefit analysis conducted on the effectiveness of these measures points to the fact that these measures have proved to be actually the opposite of one another in terms of cost effectiveness for security, though both of these might be imperative for providing in-flight security. When assessed in terms of their contribution in the number of lives saved per annum and matching it with the annual costs being incurred on these, it has been seen that the fielding of air marshal is the least cost-effective measure where as that of hardened cockpit doors is the most effective of all the measures. This is so because the former is more expensive per life saved on annual basis as compared with the latter.
So, when analyzed in terms pricing of the flight tickets, it can be said that the customers pay far more for the least cost effective measure. So, the cheap air tickets whose prices have increased correspond mainly towards the least cost effective measure. Nevertheless, for the security analysts, these costs have to be borne and the passengers must recognize their social responsibility by not opposing the imposition of these costs.