The same think tank (and I use those two words carefully) in an earlier report warned that utility workers are a source of risk and should be investigated






still waiting!!

I see the recent 'problem' caused more by Bush and Blair, and besides, sns3guppy correctly states that it's not the body count that matters it's the continous threat that the terrorism causes. I grew up watching the news each evening waiting to see another poor family member of a para that had his head blown off while patrolling a street in Northern Ireland. I used to fly with an ex RUC officer, his stories of escaping an IRA death squad were frightning. 40years of that pointless bloodshed, America has had Pearl harbour and 9/11.

Over-reaction only helps the terrorist achieve his aim, by it's very definition. One act of terrorism, many inconveniences and prohibitions result. Job done, if we let it be so. From experience I know what it is to be targeted. It is easy to become a victim, but we shouldn't let it affect our everyday lives to the extent that we cannot function.

Thats a fairly defeatest post from you Guppy :(


I think public perception on how to deal with terrorism may very well be changing to a more considered approch because of one big lesson... IRAQ

Personaly I dont see why aviation has to wear every miss-guided and/or ill-advised polititions ideas about where the next terror threat will come from. It can come from anywhere, and probably be just as dramatic, if not more-so, then anything that can be done with an aircraft.

Remember Anthrax via mail... post 9-elleven, I recall people being far more concerned about what was arriving in their own mail then the posibility that an aircraft will fly into their building - 99.9% of people DONT work in tall buildings.

It is unforetunate that as a pilot I have to piont out alternate possibilities (petrol at the night club scenario) to counter these 'seen to be doing something' reports (or is that 'inflating their own self importance' reports) that focus on aviation as THE threat.

In a land where the Bobby has had the authority and power for years to shout "Halt, or I shall yell 'Halt!' again!", perhaps you do need a little education on dealing with terrorism. Simply because you've been a frequent victim of terrorism doesn't mean you should laugh it off. Nor for one moment imagine that simply because a light airplane can't do a lot of collateral damage, it's not a threat to be taken very seriously. It is a threat, primarily to you, the private pilot, who will be most effected by the fall out of what might occur.

Again, it matters not a whit if ten people or a thousand might be killed by a bomb in a light airplane. A handfull of people, while certainly a tragedy, isn't the goal of the terrorist act in the first place. That no sigificant amount of physical damage might be caused by a cherokee, is of no consequence. It's irrelevant. What is very relevant is the results that will happen politically, financially, and with respect to freedom.

I flew an ambulance flight post 09/11 in which we were unable to leave the airport. It was locked up tight. I was standing inside the fence with a heart team and a pile of equipment and coolers, and no way to get through the airport fence. Security concerns had high barbed wire and concertin wire on fences around the field, the gates chained and padlocked, and no way to get the surgeons to their body. I had to call the fire department to arrange to have someone come unlock the gate. That's more than a mere inconvenience, but for you, the private pilot, the ability to fly at all might be entirely lost should a timed attack take place with several light airplanes.

The damage done is irrelevant. The results afterward are very relevant.

No, the IRA hasn't done that. But they could, as could anyone. If you think a little excitement by Lord Twattle hurts your feelings because it's an anti-aviation sentiment, then wait for the real fall out when it happens.

As for the US supporting the IRA, we're still locking horns with some of their folks, and their trainees, in Colombia, among other places. Neither the IRA nor Sinn Fein has never been a friend to the US. Never the less, you've got your domestic troubles, the US has hers; bigger threats face you than a few peat farmers lighting a fuse after tossing back a pint.

I was in XXX in the UK recently and taking a walk one evening. I had to laugh out loud when a man came charging down a street to catch up with a Bobby who was waiting next to me to cross the road. The man was excited and jibbering about this terrible crime that had befallen him. When he calmed down, he explained that he didn't like the meal he'd been served, and the resteraunt owner wouldn't provide a refund. Oh, the horror. With crime like that and a police force armed with a pen and and a night stick, doubtless you're prepared for a massive enemy invasion. Sleep tight.

That wasn't a terrorist attack. That was a boy, a child who elected to commit suicide with no real forethought or preparation. Change that to six or seven dedicated extremists who coordinate their attacks (real attacks, not just a crashed airplane) at the same time and you'll see aviation come to a standstill not only in Florida but throughout the US.

Attack? Not even close.

No, actually. It's increadibly easy. Much, much more so than you might imagine. And that is a big part of the problem.

Not exactly. What's involved in shipping via an ACMI B747 is a little more involved than simply chartering the airplane and putting on board a bomb. You can't simply lease a 747. You can arrange for the Aircraft, Crew, Maintenance, and Insurance (ACMI) and arrange transportation of your goods, pending approval, but it's an involved process in which security plays a part on many levels.

It's what I do, presently.

Our 'Bobby's' manage just fine without having to be armed with M16's, glocks and MP5's thank you! And the last two invasions that Britain faced, once by a French chap and another time from a mad Austrian, we also saw them off without arming our coppers or from any help from the US, despite what hollywood might tell you!

I actually really like reading your posts sns3, especially on the private forum, one thing i have always admired about american pilots is the vast amount of flying experience that you guys have so please dont take this personally, but when it comes to domestic matters of defence, civil defence and military inteligence my confidence lies very much with our own professionals and experince that we hard earned over many years.

Absolute, complete and utter rubbish.

If they wanted to cause maximum loss of life they would have "smeared" NYC with the aircraft and killed far more people.

It was a symbolic attack, and there were ways to kill far more people.

As for your argument about the IRA, well the Americans decided to fund them for quite some time. I have absolutely no sympathy for the Americans, yes 11/9 was an awful event, but in the greater scale of things it really wasn't that bad.

How many innocent Iraqis have been killed ?

What goes around comes around......

The ironic thing about knee jerk reactions after 911 was that all the aeroplanes involved were in fact on IFR flight plans and talking to ATC, so there is no reason to clamp down on VFR at all.

You could put a reasonable amount of explosive in a light aeroplane but whether you could do much damage with it is another matter. You'd do better to park up at the end of the Heathrow runways and get a stinger AA missile out of the boot and take out a fully loaded 747, or blowing up your truck bomb in the City of London....Oh yea, the IRA already did that one...........

Don't get too carried away. We're the reason you're not speaking German at the moment, actually.

"As for the US supporting the IRA, we're still locking horns with some of their folks, and their trainees, in Colombia, among other places. Neither the IRA nor Sinn Fein has never been a friend to the US."

SNG do you actually mean this? If I correct for the double-negative, this is what you have actually said;

"either the IRA or Sinn Fein has ever been a friend to the US."

As for US support of the IRA, wasn't there a fundrasing outfit called NorAid?

That would be the opposite of what I said. Sinn Fein has never been a friend to the US, and visa versa. The IRA has never been a friend to the US, and visa versa. Can't be more clear than that.

The US has never supported NorAid, and in fact classifies some of it's sympathies as terrorist organizations, along with the UK. NorAid is not and never has been supported by the US government. It does not represent the United States, and is a private organization.

By the time the US entered the war two years in, the Battle of Britain had been won, air authority established and Hitler had abandoned his plan to invade. I suggest that we would not now be speaking German, but the rest of Europe might be, if it wasn't for the invaulable assistance of the USA in joining us in the bid to liberate Europe.

Education is a wonderful thing.

I hate to disagree with you, but if America hadn't joined in (late, as usual) the rest of Europe would now be speaking Russian, comrade.

I spent a lot of time in the US in the early 1980s and encountered an overwhelming sympathy for the IRA coupled with a hostility for the UK position. There were open collections for Noraid on the streets, and I saw many fund-raising events organised in Boston and San Francisco. There may not have been active government support for these activities, but there was widespread tolerance. Terrorist leaders were fêted at the White House, and led St Patrick's Day parades.

Times change and events change attitudes. As I was affected by the carnage in my local pub in Caterham, or by being just around the corner when the Harrods bomb went off, so were Americans that September 11th.

After all, the United States were founded by a terrorist insurrection against the legitimate authority. One man's terrorist is the next man's freedom fighter. Normally, it depends who wins.

By the way, Guppy, the British successfully and definitively fought off invasion in 1940 whilst Ambassador Kennedy was doing his best to destabilise them, and whilst the US government was procrastinating for electoral reasons. The invasion of the European mainland and the ultimate defeat of Hitler was another matter.

You may be right comrade!

Also, some people in the USA obviously regarded the IRA as some kind of Robin Hood organisation. I was reasonably close to two IRA bombs, one at the Old Bailey and the other at Staples Corner. I was beginning to think that they were following me around.

Emmmm - but if you can't fart on a major airfield without someone knowing about it then the option, if aviation is your thing and you are a bad boy, is to move to a small airfield. The argument about cars is a weak argument, all major sites are protected by concrete barriers and, where necessary, an overt law enforcement presence. This is not a secret.

People, from what I've read, seem to be confusing the private guard forces at airports (muppets) with the authorities trying to deal with this problem (generally good guys). The above is obvious and all this rhetoric about the authorities not knowing what they are doing is complete crap, if there is no threat at the moment as has been suggested, it does not mean that there won't be a threat in the future. If drugs and people are being moved in and out of the country, why not this issue?

Prudent command and control strategies dictate that they need to gauge the issue and suggest proactive and reactive counter measures to their operational and political masters. GA would be better off working with them as stakeholders rather than against them IMHO, if GA sets out it stall with deference to this notion, then GA will be all the better equipped to deal with issues as they arise.

All this 'we're self regulating and self policing' thinking is what is going to undo GA. That's the dangerous thinking here IMHO.

:ugh:

Guppy makes a very good point. Terrorism should be taken very seriously indeed.

Considering though that there haven't been any specific proposals yet from the Government on how to make private aviation more secure wouldn't a more constructive discussion to be having be what can be done to make GA more secure?...Or whether we should bother at all?

Also; without making any judgement either way I wonder how many people on here would change their views if there was a terrorist attack using a private plane tomorrow?

I would think the same as I did when two men drove a 4x4 into a Scottish passenger terminal. I didn't go out and sell my 4x4.

Other than grounding all private aircraft how would anyone ever prevent a PA28 crashing into the kop end at Old Trafford at 3.00pm pm one Saturday afternoon while the cameras are rolling?

Sure there is a risk, but the risk / reward ratio is what most people are concerned about. Disproportionate mitigation measures are a bigger risk to our 'way of life' than any terrorist.

Rather than agonising over how we could make private aviation more secure, perhaps we should spend some time considering if we sensibly need to. The reason I used the microlight analogy earlier was to give a clue to the scale of the perceived problem The whole point of microlighting was that anyone with at least part of a brain could do it and it was simple and inexpensive. A microlight can also launch from any flatish, levelish field slightly bigger than a football pitch. How many fields are there like that in these fair Isles? How safe can we sensibly make that without killing it as an activity?

As I also said earlier, these ill thought out and over valued threats are music to the policeman mentality. If we are worried that the general population will be worried and take it seriously, it is perhaps up to us as fellow members of the general population to expose it for what it is. It could so easily be ridiculed in the form of a Goon Show plot.

If the freedoms we have now are further curtailed or rendered tedious through over regulation, the terrs have won yet again.

GBZ - and if you take your microlight analogy a bit further, consider a paramotor...