Who's Watching Your Trip?

BJT asked MedAire’s vice president for aviation and maritime security, John Cauthen, to spell out what private aviation travelers need to know to keep safe in a dangerous world, and how the industry could do better.

What steps can passengers take to mitigate risks?

Before the trip, the most valuable step is a structured assessment that extends beyond the flight itself. What are conditions like at the specific airport? Where is the crew staying, and is that the right choice given what’s happening in that city that week? Is there a major event, a summit, or active civil unrest likely to coincide with the stop? Is the last-mile transport arrangement appropriate, and has anyone actually thought about it from a security standpoint? These are the questions that often don’t surface until something goes wrong.

Crew readiness is also more important than it tends to get credit for. A crew that recognizes early warning signs of escalating activity, knows how to disengage calmly if approached by media or demonstrators, and understands exactly who to call if things deteriorate is in a meaningfully better position than a crew getting that guidance for the first time mid-incident.

On the passenger side, basic preparedness is often overlooked: a passport with adequate remaining validity, a sufficient supply of medication to cover unexpected delays, copies of key documents stored separately from the originals, some local currency, and a clear understanding of whom to contact if the situation changes. Operators should be building this into pre-trip passenger briefings for any elevated-risk destination.

What should travelers expect of those who operate the aircraft?

This is worth being direct about because expectations don’t always match reality.

At minimum, passengers should expect that the operator has done some structured thinking about the security environment—not just the airspace, but the ground. A professional operator should be able to explain how security conditions are assessed for a given trip, who is responsible for monitoring changes while the aircraft is at the destination, and what escalation support is available if the situation shifts.

Related Article

Flying Into Risk: Why Private Jet Travelers Need a Backup Plan

When missiles hit the UAE, hundreds of private jets were grounded. Security experts say wealth and a private aircraft are no substitute for an escape plan.

On the ground-handling side, third-party handlers and local agents are essential partners, but their role is typically logistical. Operators should not assume that a standard ground-handling arrangement automatically includes a current security assessment of the airport, the surrounding area, or the crew accommodation.

A useful test for passengers evaluating an operator’s seriousness: ask who is monitoring conditions for the trip; what happens if something changes while you’re on the ground; and whether the crew has been briefed on current conditions at the destination. The quality of the answers will tell you something.

What lessons can be learned from the Middle East conflict?

The speed of escalation compressed decision timelines and exposed gaps in planning, monitoring, and decision authority. From late February into the spring, missile and drone activity, short-notice airspace restrictions, rerouting, and airport-adjacent security concerns affected parts of the region that many operators had previously treated as relatively stable. Operators with alternate routing plans already built and active airspace monitoring in place were better positioned to respond when conditions changed quickly. Where that process was not in place, teams were forced to make high-consequence decisions under significant pressure.

On the ground, movement toward the airport was not automatically the right call. During active hostilities, a congested airport environment can create its own exposure, particularly when large numbers of foreign nationals converge on limited departure options. In some cases, remaining in a secure location with current intelligence and a clear movement plan may be safer than moving before a viable departure route exists.

The right decision depends on a real assessment of airspace status, available lift, airport conditions, and whether a verified departure route actually exists. Evacuation capacity was constrained during this period, and viable lift options were not always available when travelers wanted them. The practical takeaway is: define your decision thresholds before you’re in-country, not once conditions are already deteriorating.

Ceasefires and de-escalation arrangements don’t automatically normalize the aviation environment. The arrangement reached in early April reduced immediate hostilities, but airspace restrictions, global navigation satellite system (GNSS) interference, fuel constraints, and continued military exchanges all persisted in the aftermath. Operators who reduce their monitoring posture in response to a ceasefire announcement may be exposed if conditions change again. The right approach is to treat de-escalation as a direction of travel, not a resolved condition, and to maintain active monitoring until the environment is genuinely stable.

What about the risks from GNSS navigation systems and drone attacks?

GNSS interference through signal spoofing and jamming across the eastern Mediterranean, the Red Sea corridor, and the Strait of Hormuz was significant throughout the conflict and remains unresolved. This isn’t new in the region, but the intensity during the conflict elevated it from a background concern to an active operational factor. Operators transiting affected corridors need procedures to recognize and manage navigation degradation. Practical measures may include cross-checks, crew procedures for recognizing spoofing or jamming, and communication contingencies appropriate to the route. And it’s worth noting that this isn’t a Middle East-only problem. The same pattern—military activity driving GNSS degradation—has been tracked across the Baltic region, Eastern Europe, and parts of Central and South America.

The drone picture is also worth raising, because it extends well beyond active conflict zones. Over the past 18 to 24 months, drone activity targeting or affecting aviation infrastructure has increased in both frequency and sophistication. Systems now range from low-cost commercial quadcopters to more capable loitering munitions. The most exposed areas are airports and their immediate surroundings. And this isn’t limited to conflict regions. Drone incursions and suspected spillover activity have disrupted or threatened aviation operations across parts of Northern, Eastern, and Central Europe. Pre-flight uncrewed aircraft system assessment is no longer a niche consideration. It belongs in standard planning for any elevated-risk destination.