曝光台 注意防骗
网曝天猫店富美金盛家居专营店坑蒙拐骗欺诈消费者
Since September 11, 2001, policies toward broader GA security issues of protecting aircraft and airports from being exploited in terrorist attacks have focused on providing general guidelines and implementing cooperative arrangements between the GA industry and the TSA for carrying out security enhancements without imposing a rigorous statutory or regulatory framework. The GA industry has argued that inflexible statutory or regulatory measures could impose unnecessary burdens on certain sectors of the GA industry and could be extremely costly to carry out
18 Report of the Aviation Security Advisory Committee Working Group on General Aviation Airport Security. October 1, 2003. Department of Homeland Security, Transportation Security Administration, p. 3.
effectively. Legislative actions addressing GA security have focused primarily on the vetting of foreign flight school applicants, GA pilots, and more recently, prospective charter and lease customers. Regulatory actions have primarily focused on airspace restrictions and protections, mostly around the nation’s capital, in addition to addressing statutory mandates for vetting certain individuals with access to GA airports and aircraft. Physical security of GA airports and aircraft has largely been left to aircraft owners and pilots, airport operators, and local authorities. While aircraft owners and pilots have generally favored this approach to avoid potentially restrictive federal security regulations, it has created a perceived burden on airport operators and local authorities to identify and address security needs at the airport level. The TSA has issued guidelines, largely based on industry recommendations, but the federal involvement in terms of both regulatory activity and funding for GA security initiatives has been relatively limited. This approach has led the media and some policymakers and security experts to voice concerns over what they perceive to be persisting vulnerabilities at some GA airports.
Security Vulnerabilities
Some media reports have raised significant concerns over what has been described as “practically nonexistent” security at many small general aviation (GA) airports.19 GA advocates have countered that small general aviation aircraft do not pose a significant threat and point out that many GA airports have taken reasonable steps, largely on their own initiative, to enhance security.20 However, security concerns remain and a few high-profile incidents pointing to vulnerabilities in GA security have attracted considerable attention and raised concerns among some policymakers and security experts.
In the first of these high-profile incidents following the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, a student pilot intentionally crashed a small single engine airplane into a skyscraper in downtown Tampa, Florida on January 5, 2002. The pilot, described as a troubled youth, reportedly had expressed support for Osama bin Laden and the 9/11 terrorist attacks, but acted alone and had no known ties to any terrorist groups.21 More recently, on July 22, 2005, a small ultralight crashed near the German parliament building and Chancellor’s office in Berlin in what was described by German air traffic control officials as a suspected suicide.22 The crash prompted German officials to establish a no-fly zone over central Berlin and again raised concerns in the United States over protecting key assets from possible attacks using
中国航空网 www.aero.cn
航空翻译 www.aviation.cn
本文链接地址：Securing General Aviation(10)
