Proposed Large Aircraft Security Program(LASP)
 

Large Aircraft Security Program (LASP) | NBAA - National Business Aviation Association

Click on NBAA Analysis of the TSA's Plan for a compressed version.

This will cost corporate part 91 operators A LOT of money and headache if it goes through.

Everyones feelings please.

INSANE! Simply insane. Are they going to start telling you that you can't have a bottle of water in your car next?

USMCFLYR

I've heard that their open meetings with the public have basically consisted of pilots laughing at their proposed rules. Hopefully they'll get a clue and rethink things.

The airlines and the general public have to jump through the hoops why shouldn't the CEOs? Its inevitable that GA which face some type of security as of now its non-exisitent. The days of driving up to your GA jet especially at airline airports will come to an end.

Ahhh...so lets all operate like an efficient airline operation.

It's inevitable, stupidty is simply considered normal.

Ahh yes, I'll frisk the CEO the next time he wants to fly his own airplane.

So would you say that GA security is tight and/or acceptable....since security is so "inefficient"? I think we all know the answer to that.

Cgtpilot could you expand on why you think this will help security in an Industry that already watches its back constantly. Do you realy feel safe flying your RJ because all your passengers are screened by a overweight 10 dollar an hour goverment employee that was previously employed by mcdonalds. Or that your passengers only have 3 ounces of liquids onboard. This is not what this vital industry needs right now, more rules that do not help at all and GA is vital to this country, it employs many well paid professionals who will help those evil CEOs start making money for me and you again someday. When these people get on board there jet they can be on their way in 10 minutes instead of the 2 hours it takes to get to your airliner and lately it seems like every time I fly my flight is cancelled and my bag gets lost. I know when my passengers show up what there names are I check their ID to be sure that they are who they say they are. I could go on forever but this rule is RIDICOULUS and will not stop anything. Write your representative and tell them and if they support it vote em out next election.

*sigh*

Airlines and charter operators must abide by strict security (and operational) requirements because they are for-hire, common carriage air carriers. They serve the public, and in the interest of public safety, they are more tightly regulated. This is what you face when your business model is providing airborne transportation for anybody willing to pay for a ticket to ride along.

On the other hand, business aviation is private, non-public, and non-common carriage. There is no need for these part 91 operators to have the same security and operational requirements in the interest of public safety as airlines and charter companies have because, by its nature, bizav is a PRIVATE operation. Nobody gets on the aircraft without the consent of the aircraft owner and the PIC knowing who you are and what your business onboard is - and in reality, that's real security, not running a name through a corruptible database and taking away your toothpaste.

As a former 121 pilot, I can tell you beyond a shadow of a doubt my Citation is FAR more 'secure' than your E190, or any other airliner where passengers and pilots are screened by TSA but anybody with a misdemeanor conviction can get a SIDA badge and access your aircraft without screening.

Wow calm down. Maybe you should change airlines & come fly on us....we won't lose your bags and unlike our competitors we don't fly RJs so you won't feel like a preztel when you get off. Back on topic, what I'm trying to say is the general public & the TSA see a unchecked threat flying around basically when & where they want to. Do you honestly think that in this age we live in that you will be able to continue that? If you are as secure as you say you are then why can't you fly into DCA, TFRs, etc? There's a reason 121 can & GA pounders can't. Its called a security program & maybe, just maybe if the GA alphabet groups would quit crying foul and take a look at what's being proposed maybe they could actually have one (and have a voice in crafting). Then when you have an airport under a slot/TFR/whatever you won't have to hold while we keep driving. By the way, I don't care for the TSA either but they could have just dropped this on your plate WITHOUT any whining & crying so the GA crowd probably better come up with some ideas rather than scream STATUS QUO. I flew pax part 135 for several years so yes I'm also very familiar with 135 "security procedures".