Should War Birds be Banned?

[FN FAL]

Should Congress, in keeping with protecting Americans from terrorism in the Post 9/11 world, catorgorize certain aircraft as "not being generally recognized as particularly suitable for or readily adaptable to a sporting or transportation purpose" and create legislation that would prohibit possession of "assault airplanes"?

 

[FlyBarneyJets]

Not just NO, but fark NO!

P.S. I don't like having "their" F-Bombs substituted for "my" F-Bombs. Kinda makes the effect go away.

 

[afres bum]

I think this has already occurred. When is the last time you saw a B-36 or B-58 in flying condition? I think intercontinental range coupled with the ability to carry nuclear weapons is a criteria, it may also fall under one of the SALT treaties.

 

[FN FAL]

Not just NO, but Frick NO!

P.S. I don't like having "their" F-Bombs substituted for "my" F-Bombs. Kinda makes the effect go away.

Hahahah...I was looking for where this thread went. It was supposed to go in the "general" aviation board.

Just in case you're wondering, I'm with you Barney, but I thought I would open the discussion in light of all the sensationalism over the L-39 incident up in AK.

Mods, please move to general aviation for me...thanks in advance.

 

[FN FAL]

I think this has already occurred. When is the last time you saw a B-36 or B-58 in flying condition? I think intercontinental range coupled with the ability to carry nuclear weapons is a criteria, it may also fall under one of the SALT treaties.

Yea, that's stretching it a bit. I doubt even John Travolta AND Harrison Ford could keep one of those up in good flying condition.

I'm thinking more of L-39's and MIG's and P-51's. All of which could be rigged with modern nuclear weapons, given that those don't need a B-36 to haul them around.

 

[jetexas]

I think this has already occurred. When is the last time you saw a B-36 or B-58 in flying condition? I think intercontinental range coupled with the ability to carry nuclear weapons is a criteria, it may also fall under one of the SALT treaties.

Whew. Could you imagine the cost to maintain and fly one of those? Sure there are some folks out there who could afford to do it, but the fuel costs? engine overhauls? At least you could stretch your legs in the B-36 by walking out 'in' the wing.

 

[HAL]

I'm thinking more of L-39's and MIG's and P-51's. All of which could be rigged with modern nuclear weapons, given that those don't need a B-36 to haul them around.

Travelling down that road - so could a Cessna Skymaster. Just find a couple of the hardpoints off an old O-2, bolt them onto your C337 and voila - instant death from the skies. That is, if you can keep the frapping thing from falling apart like every other 337 I've seen in recent memory.

HAL

 

[Draginass]

You're assuming that the weapon would be dropped. Typical naive western thinking. A dedicated terrorist would simply load the weapon in a plane, fly it to the location and detonate it. Instant 70 virgins.

 

[pilotyip]

We already went through this two summers ago where all ex-military airplanes were going to be grounded as part of some TSA act. It would have grounded our B-17 and B-25, but someone with some sense explicitly excluded historic airplanes because it was really stupid. You could put more a used DA-20 than you could on a B-25.

 

[FN FAL]

You're assuming that the weapon would be dropped. Typical naive western thinking. A dedicated terrorist would simply load the weapon in a plane, fly it to the location and detonate it. Instant 70 virgins.

Or wear a parachute and get out early...

Maybe they should ban all planes that can't be sealed with security locks by TSA agents before departure. Only TSA agents at the arrival airports would have the security key to un-seal the cabin at landing and maybe supervisors of the fire/rescue personnel.

 

[lowtimedriver]

Nah, all you got to do is make sure no Habibi's buy ex-military aircraft. I can assure you that any arab that attempts to buy an ex-military aircraft will receive a special visit from a special agency.

 

[Draginass]

The real answer is to profile and severely restrict people from places that harbor or sympathize with terrorists. In other words, stop playing the chump.

 

[PBRstreetgang]

Yea, that's stretching it a bit. I doubt even John Travolta AND Harrison Ford could keep one of those up in good flying condition.

I'm thinking more of L-39's and MIG's and P-51's. All of which could be rigged with modern nuclear weapons, given that those don't need a B-36 to haul them around.

Why bother, Zacharias Moussaui is doing life, gonna have to train another pilot, how 'bout just shipping in a container, on a ship to a port run by Dubai?
Bet no one thought of that one!
PBR

 

[Limeyflyer]

I dont think there are 70 (of age) virgins left with all those so called Martyrs. So does that make them all child molestors???

 

[Dizel8]

Ban ALL airplanes and close ALL airports, that show them terrorist that we mean bussiness!

Maybe we can rename warbirds to Attack or Assault aircraft, Jane would have a field day if that happened, maybe John "first I said yes then I said no" Kerry could join in the fray!

Airplanes don't kill people, people kill airplanes

 

[TheBaron]

This is a joke...right?

Is there really some genius in congress that is considering this? It sounds like something from a made for t.v. movie. Why would a terrorist go to the trouble of obtaining and learning to operate some exotic war-bird when he can go rent a truck from Thrifty, load it up, and park it wherever he wants. It worked for Timothy McVeigh. Maybe all trucks over a certain length should be banned? If this is all the better our government can do, I want my damn money back!

 

[GrowASpine]

You can rig a C-152 to drop a bomb just as easily as you could a P-47.
Congress is full of idiots.