Considering the Threat
Georgia Airports Association president comments on GA security
By Lee Remmel, A.A.E., President, Georgia Airports Association
August 2002
As the current President of the Georgia Airports Association (GAA), I would like to take this opportunity to editorialize about my personal and professional concerns for general aviation airport security in light of what has transpired since 9/11.
There is one thing most agree on: there is not much of a terrorist threat posed to the facilities of a GA airport. GA airports simply do not have the large glass enclosures, vehicle parking spaces, roadways, and hundreds of passengers and employees that make a commercial terminal building attractive to the terrorist mind. GA has small fuel farms of highly flammable materials, but compared to the fueling facilities on a commercial airport or commercial fuel storage facilities, GA airport fueling facilities are virtually insignificant.
Genuine Concerns
That being said, what should our concerns
be for GA airport/aviation security? Probably two areas: theft of an aircraft
or hijack of a GA aircraft.
In my opinion, the hijack of a GA aircraft
is highly unlikely. We don't pick up strangers off the street for joyrides
in our aircraft. Flight schools don't take people out on "Be A Pilot"
flights without a particular amount of scrutiny. Is it possible Uncle
Joe could go weird on your sightseeing flight, pull a knife, and demand
you fly this thing into Atlanta's CDC building or Turner Field during
a Braves home game? Yes. Is it likely? No.
Corporate aircraft are obviously much more
inviting targets for theft than a Piper Warrior. Why? Because they make
a bigger, faster bomb. However, the likelihood of one of these aircraft
being hijacked is very remote. Since we began using small aircraft for
business travel, one of the main selling points to the CEO was security
- knowing who gets on the aircraft. No one gets on the corporate airplane
without being thoroughly vetted and approved. Is a corporate hijack possible?
Yes. Is it likely? No.
The greater concern lies with the theft
of an aircraft. It's specifically in this area that I believe airports
and aircraft owners should focus. But, here again, it isn't simple. Unless
you specifically load a light aircraft with explosives to make a flying
bomb or smuggle radioactive material or chemicals aboard that will explode
on impact, just carrying 48 gallons of 80 octane low lead aviation fuel
doesn't make much of a bang or affect many people.
So is it the theft of the larger turboprop
or jet aircraft that should be of greatest concern? Yes, probably. Does
this lead us to some grading or classification of airports based on the
size of the aircraft they can handle? Yes, probably. Does this mean that
if you use a larger GA airport with longer runways that routinely handles
business jets, you should expect - maybe even demand - a higher level
of security? Yes, probably.
Although all GA airports are put into the
same category, we're really not the same. If you're the operator of an
airport in a rural county, you may also sell fuel, conduct flight training,
and operate an ag-flying business. If your County Council argues for increased
airport security and its related costs in fencing and gates, this may
just put out of business the local FBO and flight school. On the other
hand, if you usually see only an occasional King Air and are located some
100 miles from a major metropolitan area, what's the likelihood that you
need anything more that an increased security awareness and a rekeying
of your locks? Arguing that all GA airports need the same security can
only do great harm to the majority of the smaller GA airports.
What to Expect
The federal government through the new
Transportation Security Administration (TSA) will come out with something
about GA security. We can count on that. Some of the airport and aviation
industry alphabet groups have made recommendations to TSA and Congress.
Many of the recommendations are common sense, based on the realistic,
potential threats posed to GA. Other recommendations are overly reactive
and will drive us out of business, because we can't afford the security
that will be mandated or access to the GA system will just be too difficult,
too time-consuming, too invasive, and too expensive for the majority of
users.
GA is business, large and small. We in
the business should be as aware of potential threats posed to GA and all
of the GA businesses as anyone. However, even we sometimes fail to grasp
the big picture. The uncovering of the potential threats posed to GA by
the TSA has not even begun. We can't leave this to the likes of AOPA,
NBAA, ATA, and others on our behalf. We, at the grassroots level, must
become active to support our interests now.
Who would have thought the National Security
Council would be making decisions affecting who would or would not be
granted access in the National Airspace System? Think about that the next
time GA is mentioned in the same breath with the federal government and
TSA.
