![]() |
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. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 16 May 2005 13:34:12 -0700, "Jay Honeck"
wrote: I don't have a problem with an ADIZ. The problem I have is that airliners which can carry more explosives than a Ryder truck are allowed to fly in it, but GA planes are not. They have made it inconvenient enough I refuse to fly commercial. The they implement a security system bass ackwards. They have a watch list. They wait for someone on the watch list to try to board a plane. If the terrorist doesn't get on a plane the list does nothing. If the terrorist strikes a non aviation target the list doesn't work. Were it me (and I'm already paying for it) why not investigate the people on the list? Clear the ones proven not to be a threat and go after the ones who are. I'd like to get something for my money. If you read the security journals you see how many things we have implemented from over reaction. Things where the investment far outweighs the return. Here are a couple of links related to security, national id cards better know as the uniform drivers license act, and secure flight. : http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d109:h.r.00418: http://www.schneier.com/crypto-gram-0502.html#1 http://www.schneier.com/crypto-gram-0410.html#3 This guy puts out a pretty good news letter. It's a *lot* of reading, but for those interested in security on multiple levels it should prove interesting. Commercial air carriers have tightened their security to the point where (I suspect) it would be impossible for a 9/11-style attack to succeed again using commercial airliners as weapons. There are those who would share a difference of opinion here. Yes, it would be more difficult. Not to mention the fact that the passengers would immediately and violently resist, as opposed to the pre-9/11 hands-in-your-lap approach to a hijacking. I think you give the average citizen far, far to much credit. It takes some one with a fair amount of aggression, or some one really scared to fight. Now, on a good sized airliner I would assume there would be enough of such individuals to take down one, maybe two individuals even if they are armed with something sharp. One thing most people don't realize is when faced with a fight for your life (guns fight, knife fight, some one trying to hijack the plane you are on.. just pick a situation), your fine motor skills desert you like rats leaving a sinking ship. Not realizing what is happening many people just cease to function at that point. It's not really by choice either. For a person who has never experienced it the first time is much like being in one of those dreams where trying to catch some one or something, or running from some one or some thing and every thing seems to be in slow motion along with a feeling of futility. Not that things happen in slow motion, but it's about the best analogy I can think of at 3:00 AM. Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member) (N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair) www.rogerhalstead.com |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Close call with engine failure in IMC | G. Sylvester | Instrument Flight Rules | 12 | March 16th 05 05:57 AM |
Comming close | Tony | Owning | 17 | May 18th 04 06:22 AM |
RAF Boulmer (England) to close | Peter Ure | Naval Aviation | 0 | April 29th 04 05:02 AM |
D.A.: Pilot flew close to airliner | John R | Piloting | 8 | February 3rd 04 11:03 AM |
Veteran fighter pilots try to help close training gap | Otis Willie | Military Aviation | 0 | December 2nd 03 10:09 PM |