4 ms·

It isn't particularly difficult for a small aircraft, provided airline traffic isn't too busy. NYC ATC is usually pretty accommodating. There are helicopters co

It isn't particularly difficult for a small aircraft, provided airline traffic isn't too busy. NYC ATC is usually pretty accommodating. There are helicopters constantly buzzing the city. Note that the terror threat is very small since the payload of these light aircraft is significantly less than driving a truck full of explosives at street level. Think typically less than 1,000 lbs vs 20,000 lbs.

larrys 12y ago
Good point. Of course if they managed to get a hold of a Chinook they could do much more weight: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_CH-47_Chinook http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_CH-47_Chinook They actually use something like this to hoist HVAC units on roofs (so it's not a total stretch). I was thinking also more in terms of the "terrorism" value of crashing anything of any size into a building in Manhattan vs. the raw damage. Of course airplanes of all sizes are also possible obviously.
- sokoloff 12y ago
  Corey Lidle did it in Manhattan (accidentally), and someone did it intentionally in Austin a few years' back: http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010_Austin_suicide_attack http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010_Austin_suicide_attack It's just not that effective a means, even of terror, IMO. A rented truck, or a stolen delivery truck, would be wildly more effective.
  - larrys 12y ago
    In aviation is there an implied "see something say something"? By that I mean if you thought a pilot was acting strangely when you were in and around the airport how would you or other pilot's handle the situation? (I know it's a total "it depends" obviously.)
    - sokoloff 12y ago
      Yes, that's the catch phrase of AOPA's Airport Watch campaign, in concert with TSA and DHS: http://capnhq.custhelp.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/888/~/aopa-airport-watch-program http://capnhq.custhelp.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/888/~/aop... Honestly, that program is more likely to turn up drug running or theft from airports/aircraft than terrorism. In terms of seeing odd or unsafe behavior, I feel a moral obligation to talk to a pilot I see doing something unsafe. Talk to him/her, not call the Feds. There's a pretty lively debate about talk face-to-face vs call the Feds. While I've had excellent interactions with the FAA at every turn, I've also read absolute horror stories of other interactions, so I'm still inclined to offer a "word to the wise" type conversation rather than dropping a dime on someone. If I feared for my safety or the safety of others, and didn't want to talk directly to the person, there's ready and ample means to get such an inquiry started. And of course, there are codes (that are basically an open secret) for hijack situations and it would not be hard to encode a message to ATC without using the most well-known code. I don't want to link them directly, but google "squawk codes" and it'll come right up. Edit: here's a fascinating account that I have no reason to think is other than truthful: https://groups.google.com/forum/#!msg/rec.aviation.piloting/nJXglYbjOjs/245C3OSJkzEJ https://groups.google.com/forum/#!msg/rec.aviation.piloting/...

larrys 12y ago

Good point. Of course if they managed to get a hold of a Chinook they could do much more weight: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_CH-47_Chinook http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_CH-47_Chinook They actually use something like this to hoist HVAC units on roofs (so it's not a total stretch). I was thinking also more in terms of the "terrorism" value of crashing anything of any size into a building in Manhattan vs. the raw damage. Of course airplanes of all sizes are also possible obviously.

sokoloff 12y ago
Corey Lidle did it in Manhattan (accidentally), and someone did it intentionally in Austin a few years' back: http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010_Austin_suicide_attack http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010_Austin_suicide_attack It's just not that effective a means, even of terror, IMO. A rented truck, or a stolen delivery truck, would be wildly more effective.
- larrys 12y ago
  In aviation is there an implied "see something say something"? By that I mean if you thought a pilot was acting strangely when you were in and around the airport how would you or other pilot's handle the situation? (I know it's a total "it depends" obviously.)
  - sokoloff 12y ago
    Yes, that's the catch phrase of AOPA's Airport Watch campaign, in concert with TSA and DHS: http://capnhq.custhelp.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/888/~/aopa-airport-watch-program http://capnhq.custhelp.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/888/~/aop... Honestly, that program is more likely to turn up drug running or theft from airports/aircraft than terrorism. In terms of seeing odd or unsafe behavior, I feel a moral obligation to talk to a pilot I see doing something unsafe. Talk to him/her, not call the Feds. There's a pretty lively debate about talk face-to-face vs call the Feds. While I've had excellent interactions with the FAA at every turn, I've also read absolute horror stories of other interactions, so I'm still inclined to offer a "word to the wise" type conversation rather than dropping a dime on someone. If I feared for my safety or the safety of others, and didn't want to talk directly to the person, there's ready and ample means to get such an inquiry started. And of course, there are codes (that are basically an open secret) for hijack situations and it would not be hard to encode a message to ATC without using the most well-known code. I don't want to link them directly, but google "squawk codes" and it'll come right up. Edit: here's a fascinating account that I have no reason to think is other than truthful: https://groups.google.com/forum/#!msg/rec.aviation.piloting/nJXglYbjOjs/245C3OSJkzEJ https://groups.google.com/forum/#!msg/rec.aviation.piloting/...