Are U.S. airports prepared for a terrorist attack?
Jim O’Bryon says we have a long way to go.
Jim O’Bryon is a national defense and security consultant in both the private sector and United States government. O’Bryon chaired a National Research Council committee that in February, 2006 released the report, Defending the U.S. Air Transportation System Against Chemical and Biological Threats. He spoke with Earth & Sky’s Marc Airhart in February, 2006 about the vulnerability of U.S. transport systems.
Airhart: Do you think our air transportation system is well prepared for a biological or chemical attack today?
O’Bryon: No, I don’t think we are prepared. We are more prepared than we were a couple of years ago, but I believe we have a long way to go.
Airhart: There are many researchers working hard to develop sensors that might detect chemical or biological agents in the air and then provide a warning. Could these technologies provide some level of protection?
O’Bryon: A defensive strategy that depends exclusively on a detection system alarm before any action is taken has several serious limitations. In an attack, with fast acting agents, for example, the chemicals would reach the victims and begin producing symptoms in approximately the same amount of time it would take these chemicals to reach and produce a response from a technology based detector.
Airhart: Some have suggested using video cameras and special computer algorithms to automatically detect the kinds of behaviors that passengers might display if they were experiencing a biological attack. What do you think of that kind of system?
O’Bryon: Most of the focus on chem–bio survival has been on “detect and react” – you know, detect and then react. But the problem we have here is that with some of these chemical and biological weapons and biotoxins, they don’t show evidence that the person has been exposed to them until maybe hours or days later. And so we feel that the idea of trying to detect and then take action is really not the whole story, it’s something that’s inadequate. We need to take advantage of preemptive measures as well as reactive measures to really get our arms around this problem.
Airhart: What kinds of technologies do you think actually show promise?
O’Bryon: There are a number of things that we can do. One is to redesign some of the air supply systems that we have in our air terminals now so that various wings or waiting areas or control centers, emergency response centers, cockpits – things of that sort – would have their own air supply and or be isolated from the air supply of the rest of the terminal.
You could also have continuous air treatment of the air that’s flowing within the airport terminal to remove toxins or viruses on an ongoing basis. In other words, you might have an attack and not even know it. That’s of course what you’d hope and pray for. But the point is that there are a lot of things that you can do actively that do not require you to wait until you are hit.
Airhart: Why do you think our air transportation system is a desirable target for terrorists?
O’Bryon: I think it’s attractive for a couple of reasons. One, because the air transportation system represents a huge economic chunk of our entire nation’s business. It’s a 100 billion dollar kind of business, if not more. When you look at cargo and passengers, as well as aircraft construction, as well as those that operate such a facility, it’s a huge operation. So, striking a facility like that could be a serious blow to the american economy, as well as a serious blow to those who would be injured or killed or in some way negatively affected.
The second reason, I believe is that given 9/11, with the fact that our aircraft were attacked, I think there is also a latent interest in aircraft and airports because of that. These folks boarded at airports, and so the thought is that they might repeat it again.
I was in the Pentagon on 9/11 when the plane hit. And no one has to convince me that we’re at war. And these folks aren’t going to be happy until they see us lose. And I’m going to do everything in my power to make sure they don’t win. So, that’s why I do it. I know it sounds very altruistic, but that is the truth.
