WASHINGTON, D.C. — When conditions in the Middle East erupted and President Obama unleashed air power on the Islamic State, officials at many general aviation organizations here became jittery over ISIL threats to retaliate on American soil.
If there is retaliation, would aircraft be used? Would the escalation of tensions raise the level of concern to a point that would mean an increase in security at airports? Would it mean limitations on flying?
Would it cause Homeland Security, the Department of Transportation, the FAA, and other government offices to move in ways that would make certain general aviation aircraft cannot be used as terrorist weapons?
Key personnel at the association offices quickly telephoned their contacts at various government offices. Most of the government contacts could not be openly identified, but GA advocates said early responses were favorable. No immediate action was planned. But that does not mean the groups can relax. Washington moves slowly.
Jens Henning of the General Aviation Manufacturers Association (GAMA) says there is, and has been, a series of rules and regulations that have been working well over the years to keep GA activities and the general public secure. Often these issues and standard practices are overlooked.
But when things aren’t standard — such as the threats posed by ISIL — that’s when we see visible reminders of what GA’s representatives in Washington are doing 24-7 — keeping alert to issues concerning general aviation.
Safety concerns over who flies in general aviation aircraft are behind the recent FAA reinterpretation of what remuneration a pilot may receive from passengers. Selling unused seats to individuals wanting to hitch a ride on a flight going to the same destination was opposed by many, while other pilots see it as a way to not only cut costs, but share in the love of flying.
McVeigh blew up the Fed building with a Ryder truck. So the government should have eliminated all rental trucks from the highway? Of course not. Anything can be used as a “terrorist” weapon probably even a dirty gym sock placed in the right place so don’t worry about it. The public has been “scared” of little planes flying over them since the first one flew and those that will take advantage of that fear will always put general aviation at risk of being taken advantage off by unreasonable actions. Go figure……….
“Would it cause Homeland Security, the Department of Transportation, the FAA, and other government offices to move in ways that would make certain general aviation aircraft cannot be used as terrorist weapons?”
Only if you let the terrorists win. Again.
Look, Homeland Security hasn’t raised the threat level and you’re already anticipating more GA restrictions? Again?
Gadzooks! A terrorist masquerading as a ride sharing tourist overpowers me and slams all 2000 pounds of us into, well, what?
Look at the GA airplane that slammed into the White House, it folded like a cheap card table. Look at the kid who committed suicide shortly after 9/11 by flying a 172 into the slide of a building…the post accident photos shoulder the airplane did such little damage it didn’t even disturb what was on a desk.
Private piloted GA aircraft really make poor weapons, and a mere airborne hitchhiker can’t weapon ooze one in flight.
GA is NOT a credible threat.
Sorry…typing too fast and was overcome by spellchecker.
Showed (not shoulder)
Weaponized ( not weapon ooze)