Posted on 02/19/2010 7:38:33 PM PST by LouAvul
After 9/11, cockpit doors were sealed, air marshals were added and airport searches became more aggressive, all to make sure an airliner could never again be used as a weapon. Yet little has been done to guard against attacks with smaller planes. That point was driven home with chilling force on Thursday when a Texas man with a grudge against the IRS crashed his single-engine plane into an office building in a fiery suicide attack. One person inside the building was also killed.
"It's a big gap," said R. William Johnstone, an aviation security consultant and former staff member of the commission that investigated the Sept. 11 attacks. "It wouldn't take much, even a minor incident involving two simultaneously attacking planes, to inflict enough damage to set off alarm bells and do some serious harm to the economy and national psyche."
The suburban Georgetown Municipal Airport that pilot Joe Stack entered hours before his airborne attack in nearby Austin had the casual atmosphere of a sleepy parking garage. Pilots were not subject to baggage checks, metal detector scans or pat-downs. And they are usually not required to file flight plans.
"How are they going to stop it? This guy had a hangar, and he had access to the airport," said Beth Ann Jenkins, president of Pilot's Choice, a flight school near where Stack kept his Piper.
Travis McLain, manager of the airport, said: "I don't know of a rule or regulation or safety precaution that could have prevented what happened yesterday."
The easy access and lack of security are the result of years of debate - and stalemate - over how much of a threat small aircraft pose as terror weapons and how they could be regulated without stifling commerce and pilot freedom.
While the airlines quickly accepted tougher security after Sept. 11, the general aviation industry, which includes everything from privately owned propeller-driven planes to large corporate jets, have aggressively fought new measures.
The proposed rules would require that operators of medium and large general-aviation aircraft demonstrate that flight crews have undergone a criminal background check. They would also be required to verify passengers are not on the no-fly lists already used by large airlines.
Private pilots fly approximately 200,000 small and medium-size planes in the U.S., using 19,000 airports, most of them small. The planes' owners insist the aircraft have nothing in common with airliners but the sky.
"I don't see a gaping security hole here," said Tom Walsh, an aviation security consultant. "In terms of aviation security, there are much bigger fish to fry than worrying about small aircraft."
He said most would-be terrorists would draw the same conclusion - that tiny aircraft don't pack a big enough punch.
Planes like Stack's weigh just a few thousands pounds and carry no more than 100 gallons of fuel, he noted. A Boeing 767 weighs 400,000 pounds and carries up to 25,000 gallons of fuel.
Walsh and other general aviation advocates argue that stringent security and bureaucracy would deter recreational fliers and slow down a vibrant, multibillion-dollar general aviation industry, causing economic damage.
"What it comes down to is that the cure could be worse than the disease," he said.
Jeffrey Price, a Denver-based aviation expert, said: "If I own my plane, I can drive to the airport, get in and just take off. Pilots want that sense of freedom. ... Like motorcycle riders."
Every pilot, from the beginner student to the commercial airline pilot, is checked against the government's terror watchlist. Also, under federal rules imposed after Sept. 11, people enrolling in flight schools must show proof of U.S. citizenship or, if they are foreigners, must undergo a background check.
All pilots of every stripe must have with them every time they fly a medical certificate attesting to their health. The certificate is based on a physical exam, but the application form also includes questions about the pilot's mental health. Stack's medical certificate was current, dated May 2009. He was an instrument rated pilot, able to fly single-engine and multiengine airplanes, and no enforcement action had ever been taken against him.
Beyond that, however, most security measures at general aviation airports are voluntary.
The Transportation Department's inspector general, Richard L. Skinner, reviewed security at several general aviation airports last year, including three in the Houston area, and concluded that general aviation "presents only limited and mostly hypothetical threats to security."
Skinner did endorse efforts to lock or disable parked planes to prevent people bent on mayhem from stealing them.
Tougher restrictions were debated after Sept. 11 and after a few incidents in which pilots deliberately crashed small planes into buildings.
In 1994, a Maryland truck driver with a history of instability crashed a plane on the south lawn of the White House. In 2002, a 15-year-old boy stole a plane and crashed it into a downtown skyscraper in Tampa, Fla. Pilots of small planes have also frequently flown into the secure airspace over the key government buildings in Washington.
The general aviation lobby has exerted its considerable clout to fend off new measures. The Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association, or AOPA, National Business Aviation Association, National Air Transportation Association and General Aviation Manufacturers Association spent $6 million lobbying in Washington last year.
"There was no way to impose one overall security structure that would fit every general aviation airport's needs," said AOPA spokesman Chris Dancy. The association has about 400,000 members.
At the Georgetown airport, where 240 small aircraft are based, manager McLain said she hopes Stack's suicidal attack doesn't lead to an overreaction.
"I would hope that common sense and cooler heads would prevail," McLain said.
“I *personally* don’t think the hobby of it is worth the risk.”
What makes you think that flying is a “hobby”? I fly because I can get to Memphis flying at 140 knots, quicker than commercial aviation flying at 430 knots.
You are right...us right winger pilots can douse you with Agent Purple. We will turn you into Bawny Fwanks, da puple dinosa.
A bio WMD if it comes will be by commercial airline from an infected carrier. The spread of the H1N1 virus is a good example.
Chem or Nuclear WMD will due to weight most likely be brought in by commercial carrier (ship/air/truck).
GA will help to meet the needs of the country in times of peril as is currently planned.
What statist tripe!
You said you were against General Avaition because it was only for the bored wealthy.
That is Socialist class warfare right out of Marx and you outed yourself! Go back to DU!
Look at Haiti for the most recent example of the role GA played in supporting emergency relief operations.
Tell me more, as I recall “low and slow” over New Orleans calling in coordinates for Coast Guard helicopters to rescue rooftop survivors from Katrina.
I also kinda doubt that Cessna’s will be doing much good in a major emergency
***************************************************
Why do you make that statement?
The Citation X is the fastest civilian aircraft in the sky, cruising just shy of the sound barrier at Mach .92. To date, Citation Xs have flown the equivalent of four trips to the sun. They’ve taken off and landed approximately 1 million times. And every day, their average duration in the air is the highest in the entire Citation fleet. Clearly, the X has earned its distinction as one of business aviation’s busiest, best and all-time favorite aircraft.
http://www.cessna.com/citation/citation-x.html
It’s beautiful!
Cessa makes many planes, I don’t know why you think they wouldn’t be of any help.
Check out the new Mustang—fairly affordable, too.
http://www.cessna.com/citation/mustang.html
I forgot to say I volunteer with the Air Force Auxiliary, Civil Air Patrol.
There’s no doubt it does a lot of good, but is a potential serious risk as well. Moreso than trucks, guns, and so on. WMD level risks.
I hate flying in general, and prefer people just drive. That’s my personal opinion. The people that died from PSA 182, 9/11 and so on. I just think people shouldn’t be in such a hurry to get around, just drive. GA flying isn’t that safe, and commercial causes a lot of deaths on the ground.
Of course there’s good done, but just IMO, it’s possibly not worth it.
Visit your local airport and ask for a training demonstration flight. They're all great folks and I bet you'd really enjoy it as you obviously like a challenge...
So now we find that you're also a Luddite!
Ten second google found this!
This latest report from Aircraft Crashes Record Office in Geneva, Switzerland tells us that 879 people died from airplane crashes worldwide in 2008.Yet you think cars are safer! Wow!Compare that with World's Health Organization annual report (released recently) - 1.3 million people die from car accidents every year worldwide!
I don’t fly commercial, being over 100 times more dangerous than commercial doesn’t help: in 2005 general aviation in the United States (excluding charter) suffered 1.31 fatal accidents for every 100,000 hours of flying in that country, compared to 0.016 for scheduled airline flights.
If they didn’t land on houses, I wouldn’t mine. I knew people in a house in Hill Top Lakes that was burned down, pilot killed when he tried to land at their small airport.
No thanks, I’m not a base jumper or flier. Again, with one, the public isn’t at risk.
The great thing still about America is the ability to follow the pursuit of happiness what ever that might be. I’m sure you have many...
Reasonable people disagree politely. Fanatics call the other a communist and to be banned. I’m sorry so many others on here went on that bandwagon.
I expressed my true feelings. I’m a conservative anti-flier. I’ve heard that you have to be pro-drug legalization to be conservative, and for them I have the same answer.
Ya knew this was coming...
Oh well, most of America can no longer afford to take lessons and rent planes anyway.
Aviation too!
Honest, wholesome debate built this country and we do all tend to “fly off” the handle of late. Live long, and prosper...
I hope you didn’t take my agreeing to “ignorant” as being meant insultingly.
It was meant as:
ig·no·rant: adjective / due to or showing lack of knowledge or training/ lacking knowledge or information as to a particular subject or fact : ignorant of quantum physics.
I didn’t agree to stupid or any of that, you’re obviously not stupid...you joined Free Republic. heh
Just wanted to let ya know, I didn’t mean ignorant in an insulting way. If you were insulted—I apologize.
I still disagree with you, though! = P
Eh, I don’t take it that hard. It’s a bit of a phobia of mine, and I do think it’s somewhat strange to demand a right to fly. However, I think there’s also some good uses, and great pilots that are incredibly responsible.
I know, in the end, personal flying will probably be banned after it’s used multiple times for WMD attacks. It’s just the way I see things.
Ya, And I suppose we outlaw all tractor trailers after several drive 30k lbs of TNT into the middle of NY/Chacago/DC and sets it off?
Then of course, be ban the internet as this is the way word gets out?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.