This story just came out on Yahoo today:http://news.yahoo.com/feds-warn-small-airplane-terror-threats-003115875.html Need I point out that there has to date been no attack by GA aircraft? There has been a huge one done by truck (okc bombing) -are trucks a concern? Are they banned-worried about worldwide? Need I point out that the amount of devestating payload that a GA aircraft could carry is minimal? Or that Exxon announced today that it will stop production of GA fuel-is this part of a conspiracy to finally placate the airlines and get us pesky GA pilots (who comprise 80% of the daily US airtraffic) out of the way of the autopilot button pushing commercial fleet)? What do we tell the patients for my volunteer organization we fly for to hospitals that they can't afford to go to transportation wise who are counting on us? Do people realize that the cancer patient I flew many times last year to Rochester, Minn. would not be allowed to go on commercial airliners because she need to breath Oz as that is not allowed on a commercial airliner? Or that she was too weak to drive the 15 hour drive roundtrip every two weeks for kemo and therefore my charitable org which got her there in two hours or less is a life saver?

Why is it war? Surely, it's a reasonable precautionary warning? You seem to have forgotten the 2010 Austin suicide attack which occurred on 18 February, 2010, when Andrew Joseph Stack III, flying his Piper Dakota, crashed into Building I of the Echelon office complex in Austin, Texas, United States,killing himself and an Internal Revenue Service manager Vernon Hunter.Thirteen others were injured, two seriously. It doesn't need much payload to cause death and devastation as shown by suicide attacks by individuals with explosive vests/jackets.

This story just came out on Yahoo today:http://news.yahoo.co...-003115875.html Need I point out that there has to date been no attack by GA aircraft? There has been a huge one done by truck (okc bombing) -are trucks a concern? Are they banned-worried about worldwide? Need I point out that the amount of devestating payload that a GA aircraft could carry is minimal? Or that Exxon announced today that it will stop production of GA fuel-is this part of a conspiracy to finally placate the airlines and get us pesky GA pilots (who comprise 80% of the daily US airtraffic) out of the way of the autopilot button pushing commercial fleet)? What do we tell the patients for my volunteer organization we fly for to hospitals that they can't afford to go to transportation wise who are counting on us? Do people realize that the cancer patient I flew many times last year to Rochester, Minn. would not be allowed to go on commercial airliners because she need to breath Oz as that is not allowed on a commercial airliner? Or that she was too weak to drive the 15 hour drive roundtrip every two weeks for kemo and therefore my charitable org which got her there in two hours or less is a life saver?

This 'warning' has been promulgated since the day after 9/11 - DHS routinely runs amok with this sort of thing (they're desperately afraid of attacks by powerboats on airports that border water) and the media grabs it and gives it coverage. We live in the age of fear and the government and media love it and do their best to feed it. Exxon's decision had nothing to do with GA as such, except that Exxon was losing their collective fannies in the marketplace and got tired of it. The few FBO's that were under the Exxon banner have already begun to find new suppliers. DJ

Mgh,DJ-It is a war because for years here in the US: 1) The commercial airliners have been trying to put GA out of business by pushing/transfering fees on GA 2) There is a concerted effort to put the fuel Ga drivers use out of business-both thru restrictions on the fuel we use and now businesses such as Exxon getting out driving the price up to where no one can afford to fly GA (notice the first sentence of the article):http://www.ainonline...business-30889/ 3) As pointed out-there has never been an attack done by GA aircraft.There have well documented attacks done by commercial airliners, trucks, cars, and suicidal people. Why the newspaper headlines on GA, the increased restrictions at GA airports, and yet a GA aircraft has not been used in an attack? Where are the similar knee jerk reactions on trucks, and cars which have been used? Perhaps the US will follow Europe and be a place that is GA unfriendly and perhaps that is why this does not concern you. The only problem I guess is where will be all the Europeans who presently flight train in the US go?

Would you rather wait until until there is an actual attack using GA? Can you image what the response then would be? Far worse than a warning notice. I now nothing about charges in the US but Imagine, as always, there will be two sides to the argument. Who twisted Exxon's arm to force it to stop selling GA fuel? Maybe it decided it could get a better return elsewhere.

Mgh,DJ-It is a war because for years here in the US: 1) The commercial airliners have been trying to put GA out of business by pushing/transfering fees on GA 2) There is a concerted effort to put the fuel Ga drivers use out of business-both thru restrictions on the fuel we use and now businesses such as Exxon getting out driving the price up to where no one can afford to fly GA (notice the first sentence of the article):http://www.ainonline...business-30889/ 3) As pointed out-there has never been an attack done by GA aircraft.There have well documented attacks done by commercial airliners, trucks, cars, and suicidal people. Why the newspaper headlines on GA, the increased restrictions at GA airports, and yet a GA aircraft has not been used in an attack? Where are the similar knee jerk reactions on trucks, and cars which have been used? Perhaps the US will follow Europe and be a place that is GA unfriendly and perhaps that is why this does not concern you. The only problem I guess is where will be all the Europeans who presently flight train in the US go?

I am concerned - I belong to AOPA too. None the less, none of this is new. The reason for all the GA BS is simple - airplanes hit the towers and it's airplanes that get public reaction, not trucks, cars, or suicide bombers. Rational thought has no place in all this - watch the local news channel of your choice and tell me these folks aren't raving. I've read the Exxon article and what I see isn't a plot, but simple big-company economics. DJ

This is nothing new. The day after 9/11 the cost of operating GA went up due to insurance increases and fuel increases. The demand for rentals and school enrolment dropped and prices for training and rentals increased further for operators to try and keep in business. My old flight school went out of business post 9/11 and that is not surprising. Their competitor at that same airport now charges over double the rates compared to when I first started flight school. Less people fly today as a hobby compared to before 9/11 due to increased costs and a poor economy. These warning are cycled a lot in the past 10 years and to be honest if their was going to be an anniversary attack it would most likely be something we were not thinking about....Because on September 10, 2001 no one was making any warnings of a possible attack using commercial airlines. Cheers

I don't think I ever said there is a plot, but I do believe there is an ongoing war as you mentioned that is increasingly being lost on all fronts.

If you want to look at the aeronautical aspect of it...loading a cessna with enough explosives to do any significant damage would result in that airplane not getting airborne to begin with. Our gov is still letting the G-Bush communist style way of reacting run our lives without any facts (as stated in the article) thus letting the terrorists win. This only serves to drive prices up not only on flying but on every aspect of our lives. Now if I only had enough money to buy stock and futures in those areas (like they did), I'd be set. Oh wait the investment companies already beat us to that punch.

I don't think I ever said there is a plot, but I do believe there is an ongoing war as you mentioned that is increasingly being lost on all fronts.

This is a USA mindset... War against Terror, Drugs Obesity, Illiteracy etc etc etc You guys declare war on just about everything.....

Global War On Terror is supposed to be Overseas Contingency Operation now.

Global War On Terror is supposed to be Overseas Contingency Operation now.

Yes because it is playing politics to declare war on something that is not a nation but their is never any real victory to these types of wars...... World War 2 we declared war on Germany, Japan and Italy and their was a tremendous victory. Since then declaring war on Terror will never have a victory, war on drugs will never have a victory. etc 'Mission Accomplished' doesn't work either. So now it is called 'Overseas Contingency Operation'. It is all politics and approval ratings....or BS in my books

If you want to look at the aeronautical aspect of it...loading a cessna with enough explosives to do any significant damage would result in that airplane not getting airborne to begin with.

I estimate that fully fuelled C172 with one pilot would have a payload of over 200lb. Have you any idea how much damage 200+ lb of semtex could cause? Three pounds of Semtex can destroy a two-story building. in 1989 the IRA detonated a 15lb bomb in the barracks of the Royal Marines in Deal killing 15 marines, injuring another 21 and destroyed the building. Is that not signifiant damage?

I estimate that fully fuelled C172 with one pilot would have a payload of over 200lb. Have you any idea how much damage 200+ lb of semtex could cause? Three pounds of Semtex can destroy a two-story building. in 1989 the IRA detonated a 15lb bomb in the barracks of the Royal Marines in Deal killing 15 marines, injuring another 21 and destroyed the building. Is that not signifiant damage?

Ok...so I was being a little sarcastic...the point being is that I think they'd find other ways much easier to do the job. In any case, it should be a covert affair and not a million man army affair. And it definatley should not be a 'raise the prices on everyone' affair; nor should we have to loose all our freedoms. Where does it end?

Ok...so I was being a little sarcastic...the point being is that I think they'd find other ways much easier to do the job. In any case, it should be a covert affair and not a million man army affair. And it definatley should not be a 'raise the prices on everyone' affair; nor should we have to loose all our freedoms. Where does it end?

A freedom I value is continuing to live and not being killed by a terrrroist - if that means sacrificing something so be it. Terrorism exists and can't be ignored so we have to protect ourselves. As I said previously think about the restrictions that would be imposed on GA if it was used for a successful terrorist attack. Surely it's better to be realistic and accept some restrictions now rather than wait for that? Anyway, what actual restrictions does the original link propose?