A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Piloting
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

comments?



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old December 30th 03, 12:46 AM
Rosspilot
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default comments?


http://www.strategypage.com/fyeo/qnd...get=URBANG.HTM

excerpt:

While passenger aircraft are now pretty secure, the same is not the case for
commercial freighters and private aircraft. It is quite possible that a smaller
aircraft, or long range transports from foreign nations, could be used for
suicide attacks. This scenario has terrorists renting a small two engine
aircraft (like the Piper Aztec or Cessna Businessliner) and flying off to any
target within several hundred miles. These aircraft rent for about $250 an hour
(with a 3-4 hour minimum). They have a cargo capacity of about half a ton, and
that could be filled with explosives. This would give the terrorists the
equivalent of an American cruise missile (which has a one ton warhead.) These
aircraft have a maximum take off weight of about three tons and only carry
about 500 pounds of fuel. Probably would not bring down a large skyscraper, but
would do a lot of damage to the White House or most other government buildings
in Washington. You can buy these aircraft second hand for $200-300,000.

I hate stuff like this, but I think it's better to toss it out there and shine
light on it than stick my head in the sand and pretend it isn't there.





www.Rosspilot.com


  #2  
Old December 30th 03, 01:04 AM
C J Campbell
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

You can also drive down a street shooting people at random and there is not
much anybody can do to stop you.

Sure, it is possible to use small aircraft for a terrorist attack. The
question is, what do you do about it? There is really not much of anything
anyone can do to prevent it.

Maybe the asteroid is coming, but I am not going to spend a lot of time
worrying about it.


  #3  
Old December 30th 03, 01:09 AM
Michael 182
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

The truth is using a small aircraft for a terrorist act would be pretty
easy, cheap and effective. The other side of that is, of course, so what? As
we all know, it is easy to rent a truck, strap explosives around one's body,
bring guns into a school, etc. The issue is not the delivery mechanism.

As has been said often, and again recently in this forum, we are becoming a
cowering nation. I have no problem acting upon real and significant threats,
but I hate the insidious use of the "war on terror" to shape public policy
that infringes on rights and diseminates meaningless alerts, leading to
"news " articles about simple acts like busting airspace and fashion changes
to airport friendly shoes...

Sometimes I feel like I must have been born at the luckiest time in US
history. I spent my 20's and 30's after WWII, polio, smallpox, the
depression... before AIDS, overcrowded cities, and now the war on terrorism.

Michael



"Rosspilot" wrote in message
...

http://www.strategypage.com/fyeo/qnd...get=URBANG.HTM

excerpt:

While passenger aircraft are now pretty secure, the same is not the case

for
commercial freighters and private aircraft. It is quite possible that a

smaller
aircraft, or long range transports from foreign nations, could be used for
suicide attacks. This scenario has terrorists renting a small two engine
aircraft (like the Piper Aztec or Cessna Businessliner) and flying off to

any
target within several hundred miles. These aircraft rent for about $250 an

hour
(with a 3-4 hour minimum). They have a cargo capacity of about half a ton,

and
that could be filled with explosives. This would give the terrorists the
equivalent of an American cruise missile (which has a one ton warhead.)

These
aircraft have a maximum take off weight of about three tons and only carry
about 500 pounds of fuel. Probably would not bring down a large

skyscraper, but
would do a lot of damage to the White House or most other government

buildings
in Washington. You can buy these aircraft second hand for $200-300,000.


I hate stuff like this, but I think it's better to toss it out there and

shine
light on it than stick my head in the sand and pretend it isn't there.





www.Rosspilot.com




  #4  
Old December 30th 03, 02:25 AM
S Narayan
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

This would be the typical answer from a GA pilot. For the vast majority of
non-pilots (which is reality), they have NOTHING to lose by shutting down
GA. The benefits for them are clear -- elimination of another threat which
they have no knowledge about. On the other hand, guns or other items which
could be used to kill are owned by a large diverse group of people. Trying
to ban those could be highly detrimental to a politicians career if not
worse. For us, the answer is clear, as you have put it below, try to look at
it from the other side of the chainlink fence. The AOPA and the few in
government interested in aviation are the only people standing between us
and the shutting down of GA as we know it.

"C J Campbell" wrote in message
...
You can also drive down a street shooting people at random and there is

not
much anybody can do to stop you.

Sure, it is possible to use small aircraft for a terrorist attack. The
question is, what do you do about it? There is really not much of anything
anyone can do to prevent it.

Maybe the asteroid is coming, but I am not going to spend a lot of time
worrying about it.




  #5  
Old December 30th 03, 03:02 AM
Harry Gordon
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Why? Why is it necessary to use this forum to discuss alternatives that
terrorist can use to destroy what they will? Doesn't the news folks do a
good enough job of telling these individuals our weaknesses? Aren't there
enough people already making enough suggestions?

I'm sorry. I'm just getting really tired of turning on TV or the radio and
the first item in the news is a story for the terrorist on how they might
consider an attack. And now, "we" are going to take it a step further with
more ideas. Why? I wonder how many terrorist read this and other
"informative" newsgroups and listen to CBS, NBC, ABC, FOX, CNN, etc.....???

Harry
PP-ASEL

"Rosspilot" wrote in message
...

http://www.strategypage.com/fyeo/qnd...get=URBANG.HTM

excerpt:

While passenger aircraft are now pretty secure, the same is not the case

for
commercial freighters and private aircraft. It is quite possible that a

smaller
aircraft, or long range transports from foreign nations, could be used for
suicide attacks. This scenario has terrorists renting a small two engine
aircraft (like the Piper Aztec or Cessna Businessliner) and flying off to

any
target within several hundred miles. These aircraft rent for about $250 an

hour
(with a 3-4 hour minimum). They have a cargo capacity of about half a ton,

and
that could be filled with explosives. This would give the terrorists the
equivalent of an American cruise missile (which has a one ton warhead.)

These
aircraft have a maximum take off weight of about three tons and only carry
about 500 pounds of fuel. Probably would not bring down a large

skyscraper, but
would do a lot of damage to the White House or most other government

buildings
in Washington. You can buy these aircraft second hand for $200-300,000.


I hate stuff like this, but I think it's better to toss it out there and

shine
light on it than stick my head in the sand and pretend it isn't there.





www.Rosspilot.com




  #6  
Old December 30th 03, 03:18 AM
Roger Long
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

I think AOPA has made a major strategic error with their "Small planes
aren't a terrorist hazard." line. If someone pulls off an attack with one,
their whole position will collapse like a balloon pricked with a pin.

The fact is that small planes are an incredible hazard. Face it, there is
almost nothing that could stop a determined and willing to die pilot flying
50 agl unless exactly the right equipment and an AWACS are right on the
spot. We have enough of that to cover about .005% of the potential targets
that would paralyze the country with fear.

The real point is that GA aircraft are just one of about 500 such threats.
If it is justified to shut down GA then it is justified to lock down the
whole society. Destroying people's livelihoods and freedom when it won't
make the country as a whole safer but just move the threat from planes to
trucks, boats, you name it, is a precedent for a future grimmer in many ways
than the one we are in now.

Hell, a determined group could slowly fill an apartment in Manhattan with
rad waste and explosives carried in over a period of weeks in cardboard
boxes. Who pays attention to people moving in and out of cheap apartments
in New York? Shall we outlaw carrying cardboard boxes up stairs?

They have to catch these people where they live or at the borders. Trying
piecemeal to eliminate or control activities that could be part of a
terrorist plot will lead inevitably to a society more restricted and
controlled than even the one radical Islam envisions.

Now they are worried about carrying almanacs! I kid you not. See CNN or my
other post.

--
Roger Long


  #7  
Old December 30th 03, 03:57 AM
Gary Drescher
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Harry Gordon" wrote in message
...
Why is it necessary to use this forum to discuss alternatives that
terrorist can use to destroy what they will? ...
I wonder how many terrorist read this and other
"informative" newsgroups and listen to CBS, NBC, ABC, FOX, CNN,

etc.....???

Don't worry. If we could get Al Qaeda to watch our TV news, their IQs would
so decline that they'd no longer be able to find the US on a map.


  #8  
Old December 30th 03, 04:17 AM
Teacherjh
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


Don't worry. If we could get Al Qaeda to watch our TV news, their IQs would
so decline that they'd no longer be able to find the US on a map.


The US is on a map?

Jose

--
(for Email, make the obvious changes in my address)
  #9  
Old December 30th 03, 04:25 AM
Jim Fisher
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Michael 182" wrote in message

Sometimes I feel like I must have been born at the luckiest time in US
history. I spent my 20's and 30's after WWII, polio, smallpox, the
depression... before AIDS, overcrowded cities, and now the war on

terrorism.

Oh yeah? Well I spent those years on the 70s and 80s. Sex, sex and rock
and roll! Beat THAT!

--
Jim Fisher


  #10  
Old December 30th 03, 05:31 AM
Peter Gottlieb
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Say what you will about these guys, but I would not underestimate them. It
is rather likely they have thought about it a long time ago.


"Harry Gordon" wrote in message
...
Why? Why is it necessary to use this forum to discuss alternatives that
terrorist can use to destroy what they will? Doesn't the news folks do a
good enough job of telling these individuals our weaknesses? Aren't there
enough people already making enough suggestions?

I'm sorry. I'm just getting really tired of turning on TV or the radio and
the first item in the news is a story for the terrorist on how they might
consider an attack. And now, "we" are going to take it a step further

with
more ideas. Why? I wonder how many terrorist read this and other
"informative" newsgroups and listen to CBS, NBC, ABC, FOX, CNN,

etc.....???

Harry
PP-ASEL

"Rosspilot" wrote in message
...

http://www.strategypage.com/fyeo/qnd...get=URBANG.HTM

excerpt:

While passenger aircraft are now pretty secure, the same is not the

case
for
commercial freighters and private aircraft. It is quite possible that a

smaller
aircraft, or long range transports from foreign nations, could be used

for
suicide attacks. This scenario has terrorists renting a small two engine
aircraft (like the Piper Aztec or Cessna Businessliner) and flying off

to
any
target within several hundred miles. These aircraft rent for about $250

an
hour
(with a 3-4 hour minimum). They have a cargo capacity of about half a

ton,
and
that could be filled with explosives. This would give the terrorists the
equivalent of an American cruise missile (which has a one ton warhead.)

These
aircraft have a maximum take off weight of about three tons and only

carry
about 500 pounds of fuel. Probably would not bring down a large

skyscraper, but
would do a lot of damage to the White House or most other government

buildings
in Washington. You can buy these aircraft second hand for $200-300,000.


I hate stuff like this, but I think it's better to toss it out there and

shine
light on it than stick my head in the sand and pretend it isn't there.





www.Rosspilot.com






 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
AIRNAV not publishing fuel prices... Victor Owning 77 February 22nd 04 01:02 AM
ALEXIS PARK INN - comments please. dlevy Owning 15 January 23rd 04 05:54 PM
ALEXIS PARK INN - comments please. plumbus bobbus Home Built 0 January 22nd 04 01:02 AM
ALEXIS PARK INN - comments please. plumbus bobbus Instrument Flight Rules 0 January 22nd 04 01:02 AM
Arming Global Hawk Draws Conflicting Comments From Pentagon Larry Dighera Military Aviation 5 July 14th 03 08:51 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:34 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.