Qwertplop
>And here's something to consider, if you used any of the things you identified in a suspcious manner, in a public place, and were pinged for doing something that might lead to a view that you were up to no good, you'd be stopped and questioned. That's the bigger issue here G-EMMA and that's the issue that should be debated. If you were on the tube and were spotted concealing a battery pack inside a coke can or a bag of crisps, I expect someone would raise the alarm. And rightly so IMO because it's the environment that's the issue in addition to the act itself, the act of doing that in such an environment is open to question. GA is different because of the control one has over where one can be with the minimum of oversight. It strikes me as a bigger issue than the aircraft itself. It's a combination of things.
But then, playing devils advocate, should a photography student standing outside a tube station taking photos be stopped and searched? And so and so forth.>
You can do what you want on the tubes and no body will bother with you.
Please do take a tube ride on something like the Jubilee line in the rush hour.
You will see hundreds of people,pushing, shoving carrying brief cases, pullying along cases on wheels. These people are every race you can imagine.
One tube train will be packed with equal numbers of people in them as a large airliner and they roll into the tube station every couple of minutes.
You talk of potential forget potential here lies a massive risk. No security, no one questions what you hold in those bags and cases then we look at aviation? The whole thing is a farce!!! Why because the government know only too well that even minimal security on the London Tube system would bring the whole system to a halt and in turn would bring London to a chaotic standstill.
So they pretend that these real risk areas do not exist and target a soft option "aviation" Lord Carlisle worries his pretty little head over whether some tiny little wooden bi plane is going to cause a huge security threat.The poor aircraft would dissolve into a thousand splinters if it hit anything larger than a paper bag.
Then we have irresponsible newspapers like the Daily Mail who employ fiction writers to drum up a fantasy over something they know little about.
Every business jet in Europe is known about. Compared to cars the numbers are miniscule. The authorities know which airports they live in. They know who owns them. I fly as a Captain on business jets. When I turn up at the airport even the security men at the gates know me and who I fly for and I am sure the same goes for all the other Euopean business jets. The owners are known, the jets are usually maintained and operated by long established organisations and every IFR flight is traceable by a simple programme on a computer.
The Daily Mail and other thrill seeking tabloids would do a better service by pointing out the real dangers and threats to the safety and well being of our citizens rather than perpetuating the rubbish and scaremongering that churned out by government and the press.
Pace