TSA & GA (Revised)

TSA is making a move to expand into small general aviation airports in addition to those with airline service.  The justification for this expansion of government is the cover-all excuse of national security due to the 'ever present' terrorist threat.  This justification does not hold up against the reality of the situation specially given the expense.    Before I get into that, let us examine certain measurable facts.

1. In order for an aircraft to be used as a terror weapon it must have sufficient destructive potential to represent a credible threat.  Light aircraft (specified as weighing less than 12,500 pounds) generally do not meet that criteria.  The argument that smaller aircraft laden with explosives represent a potential threat loses credibility when examined closely.

2. The light aircraft and small jets which make up this new found concern can be operated from any open field or piece of straight road.

3. There are simply better and easier ways to carry out an act of terror.

Now let us look at some of the issues in play and try to sort out what the real 'terror landscape' looks like.  No emotion or hyperbole a candid assesment of the issues as I see them.

The Threat

The truck bombing of the Oklahoma City Federal building shows that domestic terrorism is a real threat.  It also points out why small aircraft are not practical.  Their only advantage is the ability to avoid ground obstacles.  Their limited payload (including onboard fuel) would be too small to have carried out such an attack.   This has been proven in numerous aviation mishaps involving light aircraft.

Existing Obstacles to the Threat

Aircraft represent other hurdles for potential terrorists. The need for extensive training, the ability to recruit a suicidal pilot, the ability to obtain commercially made explosives or manufacture their equivalent and the ability to carry the plan out undetected. Let us take a closer look at these.

Training:

Pilot training is an expensive and time consuming effort.  In the wake of 9/11, after learning that the pilots never bothered to learn how to take off or land, flying schools have become much more alert.  They keep a keen eye out for students who have "odd tendencies".  This form of human intelligence is the best first line of defense.

Suicidal pilot recruitment:

This part is an opinion based largely on my personal experiences and on what I have read.  Of the 9/11 terrorists, only the eight central terrorists (the ones actually flying the planes) knew the real plan.  The others did not know they were on a suicide mission.  Had they known they likely would have opted out or stopped it.  This has been pointed in out in numerous articles.  According to an issue of the British newspaper 'The Guardian' dated October of 2001 the following facts are not in question: 

1. FBI investigators officially concluded that 11 of the 19 terrorists who hijacked the aircraft on 11 September did not know they were on a suicide mission.

2. Unlike the eight 'lead' attackers, who were the ones who learned to fly, the other 11 did not leave messages for friends or family indicating they knew their fate. None of them had copies of the prayer and contemplation instructions (for 'opening your chest to God' at the moment of immolation) which FBI agents discovered in the effects of Mohamed Atta (the group's leader and pilot of the first plane).

3. The FBI found evidence suggesting the 11 men expected to take part in 'conventional' hijackings (complete with taking the planes flown to far away airports and ransoming the hostages for political demands: probably the freeing of fellow terrorists such as the ones who committed the first World Trade Center bombing in 1993).

4.  The 11 men's personal effects suggested they had been preparing themselves for incarceration.  These 11 were simply the muscle for the operation

5. Atta's final instructions, with their pleas for divine forgiveness, indicate that even the most fanatical fundamentalist had to make considerable psychological preparations before setting off to die.  Selecting those ready to die on such a mission would not have been easy but keeping the majority of the hijackers in the dark as to the plan greatly reduced the problem.

Flying is not natural to humans and most non-pilots find little joy in it.  It requires the overcoming of innate fears. Even if someone can be recruited, as noted above, it takes extensive conditioning to make then overcome these fears (as well as the fear of death itself) in order to carry out the mission.  Such a person would likely 'set off alarms' as described in training section and if they did receive training would still have considerable mental hurdles to overcome before actually carrying out the act. They would have until just before impact to back out.   The ground or building filling up their windshield would be very likely to induce some serious reconsiderations.  Before anyone mentions the Kamikaze pilots, one must remember that they often had their feet wired to the rudder pedals and their canopies bolted shut.  They had also been conditioned from childhood to be willing to die for the Emperor.  They were not only promised paradise but were told that dying is 'lighter than a feather'.  There was also incredible peer pressure as failing to die was a huge loss of face.  This cannot be overstated in the honor rich Japanese culture and psyche.  Also, last minute "chicken outs" would explain why so many of them missed targets as big as aircraft carriers.  This said, it is by no means impossible to find and train potential suicide pilots but it would be easier to teach them to drive a truck into a building.

Obtaining explosives:

The Oklahoma bombers used a truck because of the payload requirement.  Given that the improvised explosives used exceeded both the volume and weight that a small plane (say a lear jet) could carry, a truck was the only viable option.  I re-iterate, a small plane simply is not able to carry such a payload given it's weight and physical size.  A potent bomb of smaller size could be used but that would require the obtaining of professionally made explosives.  Whereas not impossible, it would immediately complicate matters and raise the risk of detection.  A foreign power could provide them but such direct and likely traceable forgein state support is unlikely as that is an overt act of war. 

Implementation:

Assuming all of the above challenges had been met, the perpetrators would then have to carry out the plan undetected.  This would require the use of an essentially abandoned airport which would in turn mean it is farther from the target.  If it were to be done closer to the target it would require that no one at the airport notice of their activities. Airports, especially small ones, have a strong communal tendency.  That's a nice way of saying nosey neighbors.  Very little goes unnoticed and in the post 9/11 environment suspicions are easily roused. This goes back to the value of human intelligence.

In the event that all of the above were successfully accomplished the likelihood that the presence of card swipes, fences or even the physical presence of TSA personnel would make any difference is reduced to a very low order of probability.

The Economic Impact

General aviation is a small but vibrant part of the national economy.  Aircraft sales, maintenance, instruction, hangar rentals & tie down fees, fueling as well as airport construction and maintenance account for billions of dollars each year.  If TSA becomes a permanent part of the General Aviation picture it will almost assuredly destroy the very social nature of small airports.  Its intrusive ways will dissuade their use and erect yet one more barrier to those who wish to engage in this rich national resource.

This will reduce the revenues generated and cause the failure of many smaller operations while raising costs to an already overburdened federal budget.  The manpower requirements alone for such an overreaching federal plan are enough to bankrupt smaller facilities.  Unfunded mandates to small commercial operators and private owners will only serve to further alienate a traditionally patriotic segment of the population from its government.  In short, many of these small airports will close.  Not only will it have an economic impact, but it will also create a void in security.  The facilities that are not converted to other uses will not likely be guarded or even watched.  That would make them the devil's playground.  In other words, a terrorist could now use an abandoned facility unobserved and unmolested.  You could tear up the very expensive runways and taxiways but they would only relocate to abandoned fields or stretchs of highway.  Simply stated, keep your friends close, and your enemies closer.

Recommendations

In order to help streamline the process and save the government and the flying community from unnecessary conflict over this non-issue I offer the following recommendations.  Any airport that does not have scheduled airline service and meets any of the following criteria should be automatically exempted from consideration for TSA control:

·         The longest runway is less than 4,000 feet.

·         It is more than 50 miles from any major city with a population of over 1,000,000.

·         It is more than 30 miles from the nation's capital.

·         It does not routinely base or handle aircraft over 12,500 pounds gross takeoff weight (does not include transient aircraft).

·         All other airports who do not wish to have TSA may opt to apply for a case by case exemption.

·         Any airport that is required to have TSA security will retain the option to hire private security at TSA expense (up to the cost of TSA).

·         Any airport may voluntarily request TSA.

Conclusion:

If the TSA is successful is obtaining authority at small airports, the subsequent expense and commercial impact will cause the failure of many airports.  The expansion of government into yet another facet of American life (and a true part of traditional Americana) will be yet another victory for those who wish us ill.  The almost maniacal pursuit of potential threats, both real and imaginary, will come at great expense to our economy, our freedoms and our national heritage.

Could a small airport be successfully used as a staging area for an aerial terrorist attack? Yes.  As noted so can any piece of straight road that can be used a runway (as proven by the Swedish Air Force and countless drug traffickers).  So can any truck be used as a bomb carrier, any piece of rail as a train derailment site or any ship as a floating bomb (reference the Texas City explosion on April 16, 1947).  The difference is that small airports and small planes require the most training for the smallest return of any of these ergo the security resources would be better used elsewhere.