Following the alarm this morning in Washington DC caused by a Cessna 150 entering prohibited airspace, we can expect to see yet more alarmist nonsense in the media about air attacks.
Let's put this into perspective. The normal maximum gross weight for a Cessna 150 is 1600-1800 pounds. Even if a pilot took off way over gross, we are dealing with a vehicle whose all-up weight does not even approach that of (say) a Honda Civic. Also, the usable weight of a C-150 is around 400 pounds, after subtracting for necessary fuel. A plane of this size simply cannot carry enough payload to be of any use as a device for delivering a terrorist shock. A road car (like a Honda Civic) could carry 2-3 times the payload weight of a Cessna 150, in a configuration offering a lot more space and packaging options for a terroristic device (believe me, there is not a lot of actual space inside a Cessna 150) and it would be a lot easier to drive into an area where you wanted to perpetrate a terrorist outrage. There are a lot more uncontrolled car movements in Washington than there are aircraft movements in the sky above that city.
This current fear of aerial bombardment is a direct consequence of the visually terrifying images of 9/11. However, like a lot of human fears, it is poorly grounded in reality, especially when considering the extremely limited offensive capabilities of a Cessna 150. A couple of years ago a pilot flew a C-150 into the side of a tall building in Tampa, FL. The impact had no significant structural impact on the building, and overall damage was minor, except for the destruction of the airplane and the death of the pilot.
The sooner that people stop looking up in the air and start considering the very real risk associated with land vehicles and water-borne devices, the sooner we can begin to have a properly informed debate about how to make the US safer from future terrorist outrages.