Has airport security worked?
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: us
Posts: 694
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Boofhead, in September 1994, a Cessna hit the first floor of the southwest corner of the White House at about 2 AM in the morning. The pilot was killed. President and Mrs. Clinton were not in the White House at the time.
The plane skidded on the lawn, clipped a magnolia tree, before finally impacting the White House.
The plane skidded on the lawn, clipped a magnolia tree, before finally impacting the White House.
How much of a payload do you need to kill people? You can easily put a few hundred pounds of explosives in the aircraft along with a one way pilot. If a Kamakazi in a single seat fighter could sink a ship, a light plane pilot with similiar intentions could kill many given the right target. Is a lone bomber with a backpack bomb not effective because of a lack of payload? Tell that to the grieving in London. I am heading to an open air concert later this month, a 152 flown into the crowd with or even without explosives would be devastating.
Easy detection? Early detection didn't stop a C172 from violating Soviet airspace and landing in Red Square. As Saturn points out, a Cessna impacted the White House. Does a terrorist attack need to kill a load of people? No, it need only impart a sense of unease on the population along with the media storm that follows.
Easy detection? Early detection didn't stop a C172 from violating Soviet airspace and landing in Red Square. As Saturn points out, a Cessna impacted the White House. Does a terrorist attack need to kill a load of people? No, it need only impart a sense of unease on the population along with the media storm that follows.
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Pacific
Posts: 731
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A truck bomb is easier to make, and easier to get into position. A suicide bomber is more likely to get closer to the target and do more damage. There are many ways to cause mayhem, and using a light airplane is probably the most unlikely. The examples given are all nutters or suicides and none hit any target with explosives or chemicals. None of the persons so far caught by the FBI for flying in a TFR has been a terrorist and I would suggest that none ever will.
If a terrorist was flying over a building in which he knew there was a person who was his target, how does he see, or identify him(her)? And how does he successfully direct his airplane to the right spot? It looks easy on TV or movies but in the real world it is something that might be considered, then rejected in favour of several, much easier, solutions.
If the intent was to just cause fear and confusion, there is really no defence against an airplane. In the hands of a trained terrorist it would be very difficult to bring him down and the collateral damage would be greater than the damage the airplane could cause. Better to prepare for the response than to waste time and effort on trying to stop it, since the attempt would be futile. Look at London, and the response there; they admitted that stopping attacks like they went through are virtually impossible. The place Londoners thought would be their refuge (the Tube) became the killing field. Look at Bahgdad, where thousands of innocents have been killed because the checkpoints are manned by trigger-happy soldiers motivated by fear for their own lives, because of a perception that everyone is against them and every vehicle has a bomb. Do we want that in the middle of the US? Where no-one is safe from our own government? If living in fear underground does not make you safe, what are you going to do? The climate of fear and terror is fueled deliberately in the US by the government and the willing media. I always thought that the British, at least, were more pragmatic and less prone to panic. Was I wrong?
There are thousands of light airplanes flying in the US every day, and none of them is a threat, at least to a ridiculously small chance. There is a far greater chance of earthquake, fire, gas leak or accident. Spending any time being afraid of a small airplane flying overhead, much less planning to shoot one down, is paranoid to the extreme. Using my tax dollars to fuel this fantasy is insulting. That it is supported by anybody at all is frightening.
If a terrorist was flying over a building in which he knew there was a person who was his target, how does he see, or identify him(her)? And how does he successfully direct his airplane to the right spot? It looks easy on TV or movies but in the real world it is something that might be considered, then rejected in favour of several, much easier, solutions.
If the intent was to just cause fear and confusion, there is really no defence against an airplane. In the hands of a trained terrorist it would be very difficult to bring him down and the collateral damage would be greater than the damage the airplane could cause. Better to prepare for the response than to waste time and effort on trying to stop it, since the attempt would be futile. Look at London, and the response there; they admitted that stopping attacks like they went through are virtually impossible. The place Londoners thought would be their refuge (the Tube) became the killing field. Look at Bahgdad, where thousands of innocents have been killed because the checkpoints are manned by trigger-happy soldiers motivated by fear for their own lives, because of a perception that everyone is against them and every vehicle has a bomb. Do we want that in the middle of the US? Where no-one is safe from our own government? If living in fear underground does not make you safe, what are you going to do? The climate of fear and terror is fueled deliberately in the US by the government and the willing media. I always thought that the British, at least, were more pragmatic and less prone to panic. Was I wrong?
There are thousands of light airplanes flying in the US every day, and none of them is a threat, at least to a ridiculously small chance. There is a far greater chance of earthquake, fire, gas leak or accident. Spending any time being afraid of a small airplane flying overhead, much less planning to shoot one down, is paranoid to the extreme. Using my tax dollars to fuel this fantasy is insulting. That it is supported by anybody at all is frightening.
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Brigg
Posts: 280
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What I find interesting in this thread, and generally, is the phlegmatic attitude of the Brit. Bombed, blasted, shot at not only, on the home front by the Nazi but by the IRA as well. Extreme violence was experienced by the UK up until a few years ago..
The news yesterday announced a rail crash in Pakistan in which 150+ were killed. OK, it was not an act of terrorism but it was still the death of 150 human beings with wives, hubands, family, friends all will miss them. The report was the last item in a ten minute bulletin and occupied about 10 seconds.
Sorry but all life is sacred.
The news yesterday announced a rail crash in Pakistan in which 150+ were killed. OK, it was not an act of terrorism but it was still the death of 150 human beings with wives, hubands, family, friends all will miss them. The report was the last item in a ten minute bulletin and occupied about 10 seconds.
Sorry but all life is sacred.
Brunel to Concorde
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Virtute et Industria, et Sumorsaete Ealle
Posts: 2,283
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Over three and a half thousand people are killed on the UK's roads every year, an average of nearly ten each and every day of the year.
That is also sacred life but rarely merits any coverage at all on the news.
As has been said many times, when terrorists are prepared to die themselves in their 'cause', stopping them is all but impossible in so many situations in which they could put themselves, including airport environments.
That said, countries must never relax their grip on the process of trying to thwart such perversions. The best method is by accurate intelligence (a rather grand word for information), and all sections of our community have a potential hand to play in this.
That is also sacred life but rarely merits any coverage at all on the news.
As has been said many times, when terrorists are prepared to die themselves in their 'cause', stopping them is all but impossible in so many situations in which they could put themselves, including airport environments.
That said, countries must never relax their grip on the process of trying to thwart such perversions. The best method is by accurate intelligence (a rather grand word for information), and all sections of our community have a potential hand to play in this.
