TSA gets it.

AuntPeggy

AuntPeggy

Final Approach
PoA Supporter
Joined
May 23, 2006
Messages
8,480
Location
Oklahoma
Display Name
Display name:
Namaste
TSA Scraps Plan To Toughen Private Air Travel Rules

February 5, 2010
The Transportation Security Administration is backing off a controversial plan to impose tough new security requirements on private planes and small airports.
<snip>
Now, the TSA is scrapping major portions of that proposal.

TSA general aviation manager Brian Delauter said the agency now plans to collaborate more with the industry on security.

"We're going to be ten times more successful in partnership than ... being combative back and forth to each other," Delauter said.

Delauter told NPR that his agency will substantially increase the size of the airplanes covered by a revised security plan coming out this fall. Regulators had contemplated covering aircraft that weigh only about as much as two SUV's.

Also, the TSA will rely more on pilots to keep their flights secure.

"They wanted the onus on them. So, we're going to put the responsibility on them," he said.
Click to expand...
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=123390163
 
Last edited:
I get the feeling this is only going to be a setup to show that Pilots were "unwilling" to work with the TSA....mark my works. We're being given rope.
 
SkyHog said:
I get the feeling this is only going to be a setup to show that Pilots were "unwilling" to work with the TSA....mark my works. We're being given rope.
Click to expand...
Maybe. We should certainly act carefully, though.
As a former general aviation pilot, the TSA's Delauter understood Mickel's objections. He's also flown jets that require all baggage to be placed in the cabin. "To tell a professional golfer that you're taking to a tournament that they can't bring their golf clubs, from a business standpoint probably doesn't work."
Click to expand...
 
Maybe 'we' shouldn't leave planes sitting in unlocked hangars with the keys on the glareshield either.......

'Working with industry' unfortunately often means that you end paying for private companies to perform 'audits' and the like. So instead of getting your ramp acess card from the airport authority for $15, you'll pay someone $1000 to certify that your cipher lock on the door that leads from the FBO to the ramp is a 'industry accepted standard'.
 
weilke said:
Maybe 'we' shouldn't leave planes sitting in unlocked hangars with the keys on the glareshield either
Click to expand...

Yeah, this hangar is much better:

fort_knox_gold_reserves.jpg
 
Time to buy a bunch of land and put an airstrip on it. 3500 x 50' grass should be sufficient.
 
weilke said:
Maybe 'we' shouldn't leave planes sitting in unlocked hangars with the keys on the glareshield either.......
Click to expand...

What would be nice is if someone could explain what the risks are if we leave planes sitting in unlocked hangars with the keys on the glareshield.

Maybe it's time to bring out the C-150 bumpersticker again.
 
TSA is trying to do the same to "air parks" also. And meeting the same reststance!
 
Bob Noel said:
What would be nice is if someone could explain what the risks are if we leave planes sitting in unlocked hangars with the keys on the glareshield.

Maybe it's time to bring out the C-150 bumpersticker again.
Click to expand...
I understand what you are saying...but does it really hurt anything to at least give the appearance we are doing something? At least hide the keys under a chart on the glare shield so the roving USA Today or Faux News reporter has to work a little harder to scare the sheeple.

Remember when the reporters tried to test GA security? It only made the news when the FBO called the cops and the reporter got thrown in jail (sorry, I don't have a ref available). the ones where the reporters were simply turned away....nothing was heard about those.

I'm sure we can do security theater better than the TSA.
 
I wouldn't say they "get it" at all.

They're punting to get a chance to start over.

Do you really trust government, especially TSA?
 
I'm thinking that the GAO's report on expense and state government's reports on expense opened some eyes. All things in Government simplify to expense and getting re-elected (which is really an expense). Small GA security as proposed was far too expensive to implement.
 
murphey said:
I'm thinking that the GAO's report on expense and state government's reports on expense opened some eyes. All things in Government simplify to expense and getting re-elected (which is really an expense). Small GA security as proposed was far too expensive to implement.
Click to expand...


BE careful with that thinking. DHS is currently reprogramming money from border protection to aviation.... Nappy is coming under fire for that.
 
No, indeedy, nobody should leave his keys on the glareshield.
Make the purported terrorist swipe the pile of keys in any maintenance shack, and try them one by one, until he finds the one that works. That's what I do every time I misplace my own keys. I don't believe Bendix ever made more than six different starter keys, and as for the door key, I've found a bobby pin works nicely.
 
Amelia said:
No, indeedy, nobody should leave his keys on the glareshield.
Make the purported terrorist swipe the pile of keys in any maintenance shack, and try them one by one, until he finds the one that works. That's what I do every time I misplace my own keys. I don't believe Bendix ever made more than six different starter keys, and as for the door key, I've found a bobby pin works nicely.
Click to expand...

Cessna door locks are used on Samsonite luggage
 
Hold on a sec here. On my Aztec, you need the keys to get in the cabin. Once you're in (and this is a pretty simple job to do, with or without the key), it's all switches. If you can figure out how to start the thing, you can steal it. Whether or not I leave the keys on the dash is irrelevant.

I used to tell people if they could hot start it they could have it, but now that hot starts are much easier (new starter cables), I shouldn't say that anymore.

Anyway, I agree people should keep their keys out of sight. Do you leave the keys to your car on the dash? No? Ok, why would you do that with your airplane?
 
Ted DuPuis said:
Anyway, I agree people should keep their keys out of sight. Do you leave the keys to your car on the dash? No? Ok, why would you do that with your airplane?
Click to expand...

If the car is in my garage - yep.
 
Ted DuPuis said:
Do you leave the keys to your car on the dash?
Click to expand...
People apparently do around here. My neighbor across the street got his company truck stolen out of his driveway. He said later maybe he should get out of the habit of leaving the keys in it. Must have been kids because they decided to drive it across the yard and through a ditch than down the driveway. They also didn't take into consideration it had the company name emblazoned on the side and it ran on natural gas. Of course they found it abandoned not too far away.
 
Bob Noel said:
What would be nice is if someone could explain what the risks are if we leave planes sitting in unlocked hangars with the keys on the glareshield.
Click to expand...

As someone at Frederick found out a couple of weeks ago, the risk is that of a homeless guy getting into the plane and trying to fly off with it :yikes:

The risk is that every episode of unauthorized use creates more ammunition for the TSA goons to make their case for GA to be regulated by them. Anyone remember the '172 of mass destruction' that attacked accross the northern border last year ? Objectively, the risk from that plane was nil, that didn't stop the cheeseheads from evacuating their capitol building.

If 'industry', in this case AOPA, NBAA and EAA get on top of this and come up with a solution that at least creates an impression of something being done, it will weaken TSAs case tremendously. As long as people have the attitude towards it expressed in this thread, we don't have to be suprised if the goverment gets its fingers into it.
 
As it stands right now, policing ourselves will not matter. TSA will still come in, say enough is not being done, and then boom - we've shot ourselves in the foot by even working with them in the first place.

We need to keep TSA out of GA by ignoring them at this time.
 
Cap'n Jack said:
I understand what you are saying...but does it really hurt anything to at least give the appearance we are doing something? At least hide the keys under a chart on the glare shield so the roving USA Today or Faux News reporter has to work a little harder to scare the sheeple.

Remember when the reporters tried to test GA security? It only made the news when the FBO called the cops and the reporter got thrown in jail (sorry, I don't have a ref available). the ones where the reporters were simply turned away....nothing was heard about those.

I'm sure we can do security theater better than the TSA.
Click to expand...

Expending any effort to give the appearance of security without actually providing security is wasting resources. Do you really want to advocate for wasting resources?

My request for definition of the risk still stands.
 
Bob Noel said:
Expending any effort to give the appearance of security without actually providing security is wasting resources. Do you really want to advocate for wasting resources?

My request for definition of the risk still stands.
Click to expand...
Jeeze...you can't even just throw a chart over your keys? Ok...put your keys away properly?:rolleyes2:

I think you missed my point about using the appearance to provide a perception...and to the general public, perception is reality.

It looks (slightly) better in the press that the homeless person had to hot-wire the plane to crash it than the person saw the keys sitting inside and decided to take it for a joy ride.

Maybe some of the law-enforcement types on the board can give some stats to back up the next statement.... A burglar tries to open your car doors, finds thay are locked...they try the next car. They can easily use a rock to break the glass- By the thinking you espouse, you may as well leave the car doors unlocked because they don't give security.
 
Bob Noel said:
Expending any effort to give the appearance of security without actually providing security is wasting resources. Do you really want to advocate for wasting resources?
Click to expand...

Yes. If that keeps the goverment out of my business.

In my main line of business, I spend a certain amount of money for a commercial service that makes sure that all my interactions with the goverment entities we contract with are done in a way that conforms to their standards. By avoiding to throw any 'red flags', my odds of getting audited by those goverment entities are very small. Audits are no fun and cost money and productivity. If I can do something proactively to fly under their radar I will do it.


My request for definition of the risk still stands.
Click to expand...

Objectively the risk is that someone :
- steals a 210, flies it down to Mexico, loads it up with Meth and returns to supply a multi-county area for several months
- steals an Aztec, loads it up with 1 ton of commercial explosives and uses it to blow a hole in the dome of the US Capitol building.
 
weilke said:
- steals an Aztec, loads it up with 1 ton of commercial explosives and uses it to blow a hole in the dome of the US Capitol building.
Click to expand...

Just make sure that Congress is in session so we can get rid of all the dead weight and start over with non-career politicians.
 
EdFred said:
Just make sure that Congress is in session so we can get rid of all the dead weight and start over with non-career politicians.
Click to expand...

My concern was about the building, not it's content.

Otoh, a neutron-bomb warhead would leave the building intact. If placed right, it could also eliminate most of the parasites on K-street in the same strike.
 
weilke said:
- steals an Aztec, loads it up with 1 ton of commercial explosives and uses it to blow a hole in the dome of the US Capitol building.
Click to expand...

I know an Aztec will hold 47 dogs and still take off, but can it truely hold a ton of explosives and still take off?
 
Last edited:
Missa said:
I know an Aztec will hold 47 dogs and still take off, but can it hold a ton of explosives and still take off?
Click to expand...

2000 pounds puts it over gross (not even including pilot and fuel) and it would be a violation of federal regulations to fly that way.
 
Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe said:
2000 pounds puts it over gross (not even including pilot and fuel) and it would be a violation of federal regulations to fly that way.
Click to expand...

Unless you got a ferry permit. Ferry permits are commonly issued for over-gross aircraft flying to Europe and back with additional fuel that puts them over gross.
 
Ted DuPuis said:
Unless you got a ferry permit. Ferry permits are commonly issued for over-gross aircraft flying to Europe and back with additional fuel that puts them over gross.
Click to expand...

I don't think the FAA would issue a ferry permit to allow you to load up with explosives and fly it into a building.
 
Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe said:
2000 pounds puts it over gross (not even including pilot and fuel) and it would be a violation of federal regulations to fly that way.
Click to expand...

And we all know that federal regulations will stop a terrywrist. :rolleyes: After all, taking our shoes off at airport security makes us safer. :rolleyes:

*Whew* I feel much better now. :D
 
Ted DuPuis said:
Anyway, I agree people should keep their keys out of sight. Do you leave the keys to your car on the dash? No?
Click to expand...
I leave 'em in the ignition...kinda' tough to keep the heater going when I go into the store if the car isn't running!:yesnod:

wsuffa said:
And we all know that federal regulations will stop a terrywrist. :rolleyes: After all, taking our shoes off at airport security makes us safer. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
...and according to our HR guy, you can even forget that the airplane is accessible to the general public, because all the honest people have signed nondisclosure agreements. (at least, that's what he said about having personal information --SSN's, etc.--in an unlocked cabinet in an office accessible to anyone who happened to walk into it.:mad2::mad2::mad2:)
 
MauleSkinner said:
...and according to our HR guy, you can even forget that the airplane is accessible to the general public, because all the honest people have signed nondisclosure agreements. (at least, that's what he said about having personal information --SSN's, etc.--in an unlocked cabinet in an office accessible to anyone who happened to walk into it.:mad2::mad2::mad2:)
Click to expand...

Might want to consider editing this to remove this information as it is a violation of a recent federal law that requires SSNs to not be accessible beyond the last 4 to anyone but essential personnel.
 
SkyHog said:
Might want to consider editing this to remove this information as it is a violation of a recent federal law that requires SSNs to not be accessible beyond the last 4 to anyone but essential personnel.
Click to expand...
Suffice it to say that I won that "conversation"?
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top