[DisgustedofSwieqi]

Martyn

I see your point,but think we just need to accept that arports are inherently ‘leaky’ places and private jets are different.

There are things that concern me more than this one.

Pax on chartered private jets do not pay APD in the UK, even though pax on larger chartered aircraft do, see what I mean?

[RichHI1]

Martyn understand your concerns, general aviation where it shares the same runways normally has separate terminals and the security approach is different.
Ownership or Hire of an aircraft normally allows for the authorities (directly or indirectly) to perform many more checks than is possible on an airline passenger.
The regulation of controlled air space applies to all non government and military aircraft.
Though I can see your concerns, my limited experience with private avaiation in the USA (from commercial airports) would not lead me to think it is insecure. It has a different model. Indeed I got fed up with being asked for my pass as I did not have a shirt pocket to clip it to!

[LuganoPirate]

Martyn, right or wrong she was found not guilty of murder, and then served time for lying to police. She has served her time for what was a non-terrorist offense. She is therefore free to travel when and where she wants by any means.

I think the view was taken that if she flew commercial she would probably be lynched hence the private jet. I personally think the jury got it wrong as they did with the OJ Simpson case but that is just my opinion (and probably millions of others).

The issue of Private Jets is an interesting one and I can understand your concerns, but most terrorist attacks are low cost efforts. To hire a private jet would probably cost at least $100,000, which would have had to be transferred from a bank account or paid for with a credit card, so here are the first layer of checks. People with that sort of money / credentials do not usually blow up planes.

Secondly, terrorist highjacking’s usually require a team of people (other than the shoe bomber) and that would be harder to achieve in a small jet. I think pilot suspicion would also be aroused by a group of people without the normal accoutrements and trappings of wealth attributed to the sort of person who can rent private aircraft.

Third, the high jacking of a small private jet, and the killing of maybe three crew members would not bring the sort of kudos’ they seek by going after a big airliner from a major company with 300+ pax on board. True, they could fly it into a building but a Learjet or Falcon would cause far less damage than a fully fueled 747 for example. Besides, they could just rent an aircraft provided they had the right license and the money, and fly it without the risk of crew fighting back.

I can understand people’s concerns but I don’t think there is really a big risk here. One can never say never, but attacks can come from many other places, such as a hand held missile fired from a high rise (and this is probably a bigger risk) building or a group with bomb vests in a crowded station.

It is an interesting topic and you’re right to bring it up, but I think I can sleep soundly on this one!

[MartynSinclair]

I make no comment about the C A case – my discussion is purely about private jet charter. I have a certain amount of knowledge both as a pilot and operator of corporate aircraft.

I have had concerns for many years about access to the ramps where corporate jets are parked at certain airports in the USA. The US press openly reporting that a jet can depart under visual flight rules (VFR) at night, with no legal requirement for a passenger details to be logged or for the passengers to go through a security checks is a concern.

Its not just about a possible highjack, its also about how to get certain items airside (i.e. ramp side). If a gun or drugs can be loaded, they can be transfered to an airliner at a different airport.

With regards to the cost of jet charter, you can hire a small Citation (6 passenger plus 2 crew for as little as $2500 per hour and a larger sized Gulfstram V for around $15,000 per hour, way short of the mega amounts noted above.

The C A “flight” highlighted the ease at which someone can simply disappear within a matter of less than an hour after being released from jail. High profile or not – it is worrying how an airport, which is meant to be secure, played such a vital part in the dissappearance.

I would hate to think how this could be exploited by a terrorist organization.

[DisgustedofSwieqi]

Martyn

“The C A “flight” highlighted the ease at which someone can simply disappear within a matter of less than an hour after being released from jail. High profile or not – it is worrying how an airport, which is meant to be secure, played such a vital part in the dissappearance.”

Thinking about your comment, I reflect that a private citizen should be able to disappear in a free society. Presumably she may have to meet with or report to certain authorities, from time to time as a condition of her release (I may be wrong), but so long as she does this, she is free to live her life and choose to avoid the media.

One of the downsides of a free society is that the freedoms do create the opportunities for people of evil intent to operate.

Think 7/7 in the UK, the perps of that one used public transport to get to London and attack public transport there.

I’m more concerned as to what may be carried in ‘diplomatic bags’, to be honest.

Also, I’m far from convinced that air cargo is as tight as we’d like it to be.

Both those areas lead to potential scenarios that concern me more than this one, although I understand we all have different risk perceptions.

[craigwatson]

Martyn – can i check something here, are you saying for an example that someone could board a private jet at podunk airport in the middle of night with weapons and/or drugs ( i know this is possible ), but then fly into a commercial airport and transfer to a commercial flight with out having to go through security? As thats what it sounded like you were saying, and if that is the case that is indeed scary. But im sure they would have to go through the normal check in process and check bags and go through security like all the rest, never heard of abn interline agreement between private and commercial operators.

And i have to agree with DoS, that i would rather live in a free society with an inherent risk, rather than a police state. The first may or may not happen, the second will happen every day of your life, so I know which one is the most intrusive on my life.

We have to make sure that in combating terrorism that we dont destroy our civil liberties that have been hard fought for, or attack or not the terrorists have already won

[RichHI1]

Craig, from my personal experience in HI and CA in US and Manchester in UK, transferring from General Aviation to Commercial Aviation involves going through the usual security process as if one had arrived at the field non airside. The only exception to this I have seen is in the case of VIP’s (Politicians, Rock Stars etc and this is normally instigated by the local PD or security agency to minimize other risks. I am sure certain VIP’s have carried weapons and or substances of dubious legality onto private aircraft but I agree with others that air freight and commercial airside access by support services like cleaners is probably a far greater risk to commercial aviation.

[LuganoPirate]

RichHI1, at Manchester (and many other airports) there is a glaring loophole if you know the system. I don’t wish to give details here as this is an open forum but from using and once owning private aircraft I have knowledge of it. I did notify Manchester but never had an acknowledgement so I assume (and hope) they may have tightened things up.

[RichHI1]

I stand corrected.
I must confess to be a non frequent visitor to Manchester Airport or Ringway as I remember it from when i flew there twice weekly…

[MartynSinclair]

DoS – Agreed, a private citizen is entitled to dissappear, but not by using what is meant to be a secure and sterile area. If she had dissappeared through a train station I woul dhave no problem, but through a city centre airport, within 30 minutes of leaving a jail……

craigwatson – YES, but not on international flights. Some US airports the corporates can park next to scheduled enabling pax to enter the terminal at the boarding gate and then straight out again to board (as long as boarding card recieved in advance), no security scan. Will not name them here, but i am sure your ops dept could work that one out.

Like LP, you can only draw this to the attention of the authorities so many times.

[craigwatson]

first to say i havent read the article, so not sure of the circumstances, BUT, I am not sure what the relevance of ” within 30 minutes of leaving a jail” has. So if it was 3 hours after leaving that would be ok?

I see no harm in a private jet not having to file a flight plan, as to whether they should have to disclose passenger manifests, well that irrelevant really, because it will never happen, the types of people and the power that some have will ensure this never becomes reality.

I personally think we have gone over the top with aviation security, but not far enough for rail security. a few targeted events against the railways would paralyse the country far more than a few attacks against airlines

[MartynSinclair]

Personally, I prefer to know who is travelling in metal belonging to my company and where the metal is pointed. Working the flightdeck of an airline is somewhat different than the corporate flight deck as a lot of the security is delegated.

I have no hesitation in stating that the security for GA aircraft, including FBO’;s at major city airports is worrying, hence why we have our own security team.

For someone to be able to dissppear within 30 minutes of leaving a jail, is worrying, when a secure airport is part of the plan.

You make a very strange and worrying comment Craig about aviaiton security, especially as you have been public about being an airline pilot. I would agree that passengers have the rough end, but with gaps all over the show (diplomatic bags for one – as pointed out by DoS), I do not think it has gone far enough.

The biggest problem the authorities have, is who and how the cost of the security is being covered.

I do agree with you about train stations, but that was not part of my original post!

[RichHI1]

I have seen posts with different experience to my own which is limited geographically. Asking for clarification, is the issue with the rules for security for GA or the variability in implmentation between airports / airfields? Or is it a mixture of both?
Coming from the UK originally I was amazed to find mixed aviation Commerical (including Heavies) General (including private cessnas) and government/military (fighters, bombers, DEA etc) in some Hawaiian airports. My primary experience is in this environment and though I have never tried to beat the system I have always thought security worked but maybe I am naive?
In this environment we have many many Tourist Helicopter tours where walk ins get airfield acces with no TSA no searches, no security checks no manifest notification yet luckily so far al qaeda have not attacked Waikiki or the Volcano. I am not being sarcastic, it is possible this is a weakness but unlikely as visiting Hawaii by plane would likely involve TSA. DoHS etc.
I guess my relaxed attitude stems from level fo threat and I see cargo and TSA slip ups (such as the recent debacle at HNL where management are alleged to have prioritized bag throughput over complete scanning) as bigger threats.

[LuganoPirate]

Many people have a misconception when it comes to diplomatic bags. Usually items are sent to embassies by air freight and for the greater part its office equipment, stores, brochures etc. What it means is that it is collected on arrival and local customs have no right to search the incoming bags/boxes.

If using commercial carriers the goods are usually scanned first. I’ve also been given to understand that while technically the goods can be driven to the plane unscanned, no major western carrier would accept it unless it has been scanned. Embassies have the right to refuse this inspection under the Vienna Convention, but the carrier also has the right not to carry it.

Sensitive documents, cash etc are often carried in bags which are chained to a couriers wrist. This is also scanned but again my understanding is that it’s done in a secure area, away from the prying eyes of the general public.

I can’t say nasties are not carried, but they are usually carried on the countries own airline, and these are not those of the major legacy carriers.

I hope this re-assures a little. Onwards and upwards as they say!

[RichHI1]

Assuming Flagship carriers such as BA would not refuse cargo from their own government and one assumes such cargo will most likely not contain terrorist material (hopefully) what is the situation with hazardous materials (thinking of the ValuJet incident) such as Lithium batteries etc.

[Author]

Posts