Feds warn of small airplane terror threats

Sorry another post. Or should I say, "Post"? Denver Post actually published a real, "Hey where's all this dang DHS money going, anyway?" article today.

Maybe there's hope for the Fourth Estate, yet.

http://www.denverpost.com/news/ci_18804952

$325 million just in Colorado and no one knows what it was all spent on, nor if the taxpayer got any real value.

Let's not get into the "security" money that flowed into Denver for the DNC a few years back. Those lawsuits haven't even started in earnest yet. The money designated to build out Public Safety interoperability on the Communications side of things didn't get used for that. Interop is still done on analog channels that get patched in between agencies on completely disparate digital systems unless they joined the State's 800 MHz P-25 system which generally was a good idea but didn't meet some agency's needs. Denver proper stayed on EDACS analog which is looming as a bigger and bigger problem for them as they spent their interop money adding simulcast and additional voting receiver sites and didn't gain any interop capability from the millions spent.

Denver City and County is prepping for that story to really break with the media and heads will eventually roll. They're playing the "we hope no one cares since so much time has passed" game with that one.
 
Everskyward said:
But saying that GA can't possibly be any kind of threat is like hiding your head in the sand.
Click to expand...

The point is not that GA can't possibly be a threat. The point is that there are other threats that are much more likely to be effective, so measures that are taken must be carefully scrutinized to make sure that they actually accomplish something and are worth the cost in dollars and lost freedoms.
 
Government bureaucracy doesn't see costs in dollars or lost Freedoms as loss. Those are both gains on their books. That's the disconnect here. The bigger their budget each year, the more "protection" they can offer.

"If only we can have a few more billion dollars in taxes, we can make you safe."

They operate as if their resources are scarce and lobby the public for more with fear.

What they won't say is that they couldn't make anyone truly safe at all, barring a few "VIP"s with convoys of bullet-proof vehicles, roving TFRs, fighter aircraft ready to launch at a moment's notice, and a license to shoot anything that comes near with even the slightest hint they have a weapon.

That's "security". The rest of us get to pay for it.
 
Hello, Joe, you're on the air.

"Ya know what, Bob, I'm sick of these furrin turrists coming over here and learning how to fly planes! You'd think by now, they oughtta have a law that the schools gotta get ID from them and check with the guvmint so's we can make sure them moosslims caint learn to fly!"

Well, Joe, they do that kind of check now. Have been for about 9 years.

"See! Dat GEORGE BUSH WUZ SMART!"
 
Last edited:
Everskyward said:
I think the problem with saying, "That's stupid, it could never happen!" is that implausible things have happened in the past and people were blamed for it. Once burned, twice shy.

I think most of the restrictions are ineffective and it would be nice if they went away. But saying that GA can't possibly be any kind of threat is like hiding your head in the sand. It would be better to say, "Yes, bad things can happen, but we are taking X measures to help prevent it. On the other hand you can't protect against everything."
Click to expand...

I must of missed the post, who is claiming that GA can't be any threat?
 
Palmpilot said:
The point is not that GA can't possibly be a threat. The point is that there are other threats that are much more likely to be effective, so measures that are taken must be carefully scrutinized to make sure that they actually accomplish something and are worth the cost in dollars and lost freedoms.
Click to expand...
Now that makes sense and is a good rebuttal unlike tossing out the old, "Cessna 152 can't do any damage" line, which is obvious and not the point.
 
dmccormack said:
First, which "bio/chem" agents would those be?

(Hint, it's not like the movies)

Second, once you've identified those, do you have the expertise to alter the spray mechanism to provide the required pattern for max effect?

Third, you finally make/procure such agents -- you have to transport them to the airport undetected, load the airplane undetected, fly a ag plane over the target area undetected, and commence a-sprayin...

Wouldn't it be easier to just skip the whole airplane part and distribute using the truck you used to transport to the airfield?
Click to expand...
If there was a bio agent stable enough and easy enough to transmit via an aerosol, I wonder why even bother with spraying over a city or any other population center. It would seem far easier to do the deed in an enclosed area where people would then travel away from. A facility where there is a lot of traveling businessmen would be great. So why not distribute the agent at a tradeshow? Those people start to carry the bio agent and symptoms show up after they have gone home. That would scare the bejesus out of a country. One does not even need a small plane for this. A suitcase would be all that is needed. maybe even a tool bag carried by an HVAC repairmen!

One can sit around all day long and think of scary stuff. Hollywood script writers do it for a living. But that does not mean it will happen.
 
ScottM said:
If there was a bio agent stable enough and easy enough to transmit via an aerosol, I wonder why even bother with spraying over a city or any other population center. It would seem far easier to do the deed in an enclosed area where people would then travel away from. A facility where there is a lot of traveling businessmen would be great. So why not distribute the agent at a tradeshow? Those people start to carry the bio agent and symptoms show up after they have gone home. That would scare the bejesus out of a country. One does not even need a small plane for this. A suitcase would be all that is needed. maybe even a tool bag carried by an HVAC repairmen!

One can sit around all day long and think of scary stuff. Hollywood script writers do it for a living. But that does not mean it will happen.
Click to expand...

Ebola Virus cultured from the entrails from a doomed American nun. Aerosol canister released at a shopping mall entrance. Tom Clancy.
 
ScottM said:
If there was a bio agent stable enough and easy enough to transmit via an aerosol, I wonder why even bother with spraying over a city or any other population center. It would seem far easier to do the deed in an enclosed area where people would then travel away from. A facility where there is a lot of traveling businessmen would be great. So why not distribute the agent at a tradeshow? Those people start to carry the bio agent and symptoms show up after they have gone home. That would scare the bejesus out of a country. One does not even need a small plane for this. A suitcase would be all that is needed. maybe even a tool bag carried by an HVAC repairmen!

One can sit around all day long and think of scary stuff. Hollywood script writers do it for a living. But that does not mean it will happen.
Click to expand...

You're proving my point -- stability, application potential, and virulence are typically mutually exclusive.

The Soviets had entire universities and industries dedicated to military pathogens and encountered failure after failure (Read The Dead Hand: The Untold Story of the Cold War Arms Race and its Dangerous Legacy by Hoffman for a fuller account).
 
What about mountain bikes? Someone could put a bomb in a back pack and then ride somewhere on a mountain bike and blow something up. Why aren't they concerned about mountain bikes?
 
Bob Noel said:
Can you please answer the question?

Who is claiming that GA isn't any threat?
Click to expand...
Seems like there are quite a few claiming that the government is inventing threats to scare us and put us under their thumb. The only one that I can remember in this thread who admitted that there could be a threat is JeffDG and people are busy trying to shoot him down.

After reading the thread again, PalmPilot also acknowledged there could be a threat. He said what pretty much what I feel too.

Using ridicule as a defense may make us feel better but it's not going to win anyone over.
 
Last edited:
For the record, I believe GA could be a threat. A wimpy threat.

We've seen the damage our own home-grown sociopath with a Piper loaded with gasoline did.

It wasn't much. It was deadly, but not on a mass scale. And nothing stopped him. He had a key to his highly secured airport and airplane.

What I also contend is that government can't do a damn thing about it. Billions spent, little to show for it.

The cost/benefit analysis doesn't work.
 
denverpilot said:
For the record, I believe GA could be a threat. A wimpy threat.

We've seen the damage our own home-grown sociopath with a Piper loaded with gasoline did.

It wasn't much. It was deadly, but not on a mass scale. And nothing stopped him. He had a key to his highly secured airport and airplane.

What I also contend is that government can't do a damn thing about it. Billions spent, little to show for it.

The cost/benefit analysis doesn't work.
Click to expand...
I pretty much agree with that. I think the biggest risk, though, would be from a psycho who is already a pilot, like that EgyptAir FO. Luckily they crashed in the ocean.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EgyptAir_Flight_990

No airspace restriction is going to stop anything like that.
 
denverpilot said:
For the record, I believe GA could be a threat. A wimpy threat.

We've seen the damage our own home-grown sociopath with a Piper loaded with gasoline did.

It wasn't much. It was deadly, but not on a mass scale. And nothing stopped him. He had a key to his highly secured airport and airplane.

What I also contend is that government can't do a damn thing about it. Billions spent, little to show for it.

The cost/benefit analysis doesn't work.
Click to expand...

What if he hadn't used an airplane? What if he had used a more effective weapon? There are at least a few people alive today because he chose to use an airplane.
 
Everskyward said:
Seems like there are quite a few claiming that the government is inventing threats to scare us and put us under their thumb. The only one that I can remember in this thread who admitted that there could be a threat is JeffDG and people are busy trying to shoot him down.

After reading the thread again, PalmPilot also acknowledged there could be a threat. He said what pretty much what I feel too.

Using ridicule as a defense may make us feel better but it's not going to win anyone over.
Click to expand...

Well, my position is not that there isn't a threat, but that for any attack objective you might choose to use small GA to achieve, I can find a cheaper, faster, easier method that doesn't use GA.

The only exception is if the terrorist wants to create fear of small GA so that everyone will cower at the sight of a cessna flying overhead. Otherwise the terroists would be stupid to try to use a small aircraft in an attack.
 
If some psychopathic, superstition ridden, whack job does use a GA airplane to crash into something, it will turn out that he was TSA vetted, badged, and had the passcode to the gate lock at the airport and had a legal right to use the aircraft...
So, then what will the hysterical, security drones do to "secure" America?

denny-o
remember, stupid goes all the way to the bone
 
There is a threat and risk from everything. That doesn't mean we need to spend the resources in a hopeless attempt to avoid it.

My tub is a very real danger, statistically. That doesn't mean I've put yellow police tape around it, or require extensive security before I get in.
 
Anthony said:
My tub is a very real danger, statistically. That doesn't mean I've put yellow police tape around it, or require extensive security before I get in.
Click to expand...
Unless that is a special tub it's not a moving object and can only hurt you. :D

I'm not saying we should have all these restrictions. I just think most of the arguments we use in defense are meant to ridicule the other side and do not help our cause. It's more fun for us if we can fire each other up.
 
Everskyward said:
I'm not saying we should have all these restrictions. I just think most of the arguments we use in defense are meant to ridicule the other side and do not help our cause. It's more fun for us if we can fire each other up.
Click to expand...

Ridicule is appropriate when reactions are nonsensical, illogical, assinine, and expensive.

Which is why this is funny:

the-french-built-1932-helicron-shows-just-how-long-the-french-have-bee.jpg
 
I see several things wrong with this report. First off, most rated pilots can't just walk into a FBO and rent an aircraft. The method, as we pilots know, generally requires a full review of the pilot log, a Q&A, and a full checkout. The media would have the general public believe it is easier than renting car.
The next thing is I doubt any terrorist would look at your typical small GA aircraft. A 2,500 pound aircraft just isn't going to do significant damage. Its fear factor may be there but that's our media whipping it up and not the reality. In general, people have not become overly fearful of giant commercial aircraft. I could see them going for GA Bizjet but I suspect the vetting process is more strict. Not even Netjets would do a spot call to a near vacant airport.
The last thought is... It is far easier and cheaper to snatch, beg, borrow, or buy a truck, car, or trailer and drive it to anywhere you want. You can also overload it without fear of crashing on takeoff.
Anything can become a weapon and the terrorists have proven this. Prudent steps in security is wise; fear generating is stagnating. Like your house, you can not protect against the willing criminal or terrorist. You can only hope to delay them sufficiently so other assets can capture them before major trouble.
 
silver-eagle said:
Like your house, you can not protect against the willing criminal or terrorist. You can only hope to delay them sufficiently so other assets can capture them before major trouble.
Click to expand...

Wrong -- the only help I'll need if any "willing criminal or terrorist" breaks in to this house is coroner's identification of the body.

:rolleyes:
 
Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe said:
What if he hadn't used an airplane? What if he had used a more effective weapon? There are at least a few people alive today because he chose to use an airplane.
Click to expand...
Let's remember there was more than one sociopath in a small plane. Don't forget the teenager who crashed his flight school's Cessna into an office building. Only one death there, his. But the bad press did far more damage than the actual airplane. The Texas dude did kill an innocent on the ground. he could have done worse. He could have gone on a rampage with guns, cars, mountain bike, etc. Some would have done more harm, some less. The issue is not the instrument that they chose to perform their mayhem in. It is that they chose mayhem in the first place. That is what is forgotten in all of these case. How do you prevent the person from going haywire in the first place. The low value that this country places on mental health treatment is really where the problem is. People cannot get help they need because of several factors.
 
Palmpilot said:
I think the reason bureacrats like to focus on GA is because we're a small minority of the population, so the political consequences of draconian measures are a lot less than they would be if they were applied to automobile drivers, for example.
Click to expand...

That's exactly right, and for a comparison, there are helmet laws for motorcyclists, but not for automobiles. In fact, most automobile accident fatalities are from head injuries, and beaucoup lives could be saved if only there were mandatory helmet wear laws for automobile divers and passengers. Too many politicians are deceitful bastards that have no problem taking liberty from the few so as to continue to reign over the many.
 
I think we should combine the "Alcoholic Truck Driver that Can't Be Fired" thread with this one.

Then you'd have a mentally-ill truck driver, angry for being wrongfully terminated, loading a semi-truck with fertilizer and fuel oil, detonating it as he drove over the Brooklyn Bridge. :rolleyes:

All of these warnings are theater for the sheeple. That way, if something DOES happen, the authorities don't look as dumb as we suspect they are.
 
Jay Honeck said:
I think we should combine the "Alcoholic Truck Driver that Can't Be Fired" thread with this one.

Then you'd have a mentally-ill truck driver, angry for being wrongfully terminated, loading a semi-truck with fertilizer and fuel oil, detonating it as he drove over the Brooklyn Bridge. :rolleyes:

All of these warnings are theater for the sheeple. That way, if something DOES happen, the authorities don't look as dumb as we suspect they are.
Click to expand...


The fertilizer-fuel oil truck will open a hole the size of the truck on the roadway. Most of the blast will dissipate upward and outward. A few support cables will snap. Perhaps 10 people will be wounded, 2 fatally.




Wow. Oh boy. Save me.

:rofl:

Here's the deal -- read bin Laden's own fatwahs (though dead, he proclaimed the core tenants that still motivate jihadists)and recognize that blowing a hole in a bridge isn't really on the table.

to serve the Jews' petty state and divert attention from its occupation of Jerusalem and murder of Muslims there..
Click to expand...

(And so on, for multiple tedious pages...)

The WTC was attacked because it was a "Jewish target" in New York city (according to the conspirators -- see the 9/11 Commission report).

The targets are selected by hateful people with very narrow aims. It's not everything and anything.
 
Last edited:
dmccormack said:
The fertilizer-fuel oil truck will open a hole the size of the truck on the roadway. Most of the blast will dissipate upward and outward. A few support cables will snap. Perhaps 10 people will be wounded, 2 fatally.
Click to expand...

The blast shock wave causes more damage to close in buildings. Federal Building in OKC. An open bridge on a crowded day would do more damage to people than you suspect, but not the ooh and ahh the terrorists want. They want you to be afraid of every large truck or tanker on the road.
 
BillTIZ said:
The blast shock wave causes more damage to close in buildings. Federal Building in OKC. An open bridge on a crowded day would do more damage to people than you suspect, but not the ooh and ahh the terrorists want. They want you to be afraid of every large truck or tanker on the road.
Click to expand...

Brooklyn bridge spans the East river. No buildings there.

BrooklynBridge.jpg
 
Dr. O said:
If some psychopathic, superstition ridden, whack job does use a GA airplane to crash into something, it will turn out that he was TSA vetted, badged, and had the passcode to the gate lock at the airport and had a legal right to use the aircraft...
So, then what will the hysterical, security drones do to "secure" America?
...
Click to expand...

Crush all the small airplanes and make everyone fly naked in a drug-induced coma, of course.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top