Globe editorial: Terror from small planes

David writes "The Boston Globe has printed a very anti-GA editorial. [Link missing] You may want to read it and send a response. You can do so on-line."

Wonderful… The conclusion of the editorial? "The Department of Homeland Security and the TSA should take a page from Mayor Daley and, without using bulldozers, explore ways to reduce the threat to this country's population centers and national monuments posed by small private aircraft." Are they going to suggest banning all threats from other modes of transportation? Delivery Trucks, SUVs, Freight Trains…? This indeed needs a careful response.

---

AOPA Response in OpEd

AOPA Online [aopa.org] is reporting that they have written an OpEd piece [aopa.org] for the Boston Globe however I have not seen it show up there yet.

---

EAA Responds as well

The EAA [eaa.org] also has posted a response to the Globe editorial. [eaa.org]. Their story also included the email address [mailto] for responses to the editorial.

---

And a local response

For what it's worth, here's the note I sent to David…

Mr. Reinhart,

Your point about controlling the threat from General Aviation aircraft is valid, however if we accept the concept of addressing the most dangerous threats first, it is almost absurdly naive.

A mainstream GA airplane can carry a pilot and about 500 pounds of additional weight. A suicide pilot could conceivably fly his aircraft almost anywhere, and would probably be successful in spite of Blackhawk or other patrols. This pilot could attack his target with 500 pounds of explosives, about 250 pounds of fuel, and of course the airplane itself.

Compare the GA threat to another possible threat, that of a tractor trailer. A mainstream tractor trailer can carry a driver and at least 50,000 pounds. Without even requiring suicide, a driver could easily detonate a 50,000 pound explosive charge in the middle of downtown Boston. Does the airplane sound scarier than the truck?

Why the emphasis on General Aviation? Even the remote, uncontrolled airports you mentioned are secured to at least a limited extent. There is virtually no security controlling trucks. Even a car could carry the same explosive charge a GA airplane could carry. Should we have the TSA secure our neighbors garages?

Obviously, trucks and cars are isolated examples. The point is that GA aircraft, although scary to some people because they fly around in the sky, are extremely poor terrorist tools when compared to other easily accessible alternatives.

Let's address the most important threats to our national security first and avoid hysterical, unreasoned, panic.

Ken Worcester, MA