![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 2 Aug 2006 06:07:11 -0700, "
wrote: 588 wrote: wrote: So the training needs of the military have a higher priority than anything else in the US airspace system? Your interpretation, not mine. But to pursue that idea, the point of having and training the military is in order to continue to have a National Airspace System. Thus the priority. Read the law - specifically Title 49. Number one priority is safety and the main concern after that is commerce. With your logic the military could claim rights over every and anything due to national security concerns overiding all other aspects, i.e. if you don't let us take your airspace/property/anything else we want for training the country will be open to attack and we will founder. The lawmakers were wise enough in 1958 and again in later years to reject this line of thinking. I think the umbrage being taken here is that you've jumped from "user" priority to "objectives" priority. First you wear your prejudice on your sleeve with the somewhat inflammatory remarks about the DOD wanting to take over and run all the airspace coupled with the bit about letting GA stay home and watch "Wings". Then when people point out that the military have a higher priority than GA (and they should), you quickly shift from prioritizing military/commercial/GA to "number one priority is safety." It's apples and oranges. List who gets to use a block of airspace--"Mr Safety" doesn't make the list. Nobody denies that the military services require blocks of airspace for training purposes. That their needs always over-ride the needs of all other airspace users is questionable. So we should allow free range by military aviation and IFR airline traffic (that's big money) but the GA population should stay home and watch "Wings" on TV? Stay on topic, tpn18. Airliners don't fit in this particular discussion. Any type of traffic fits in this discussion. My point is that we shouldn't cede control of airspace to military and purely commercial interests. By far the largest number of aircraft in the U.S. belong to the general aviation fleet. Some people seem to forget that. The system is for everybody. And, everybody has been using the system with a remarkable degree of efficiency for decades. Airlines run schedules and fairly high on-time efficiency rates. GA folks get to do GA things, whether biz-jetting to meetings, dancing the sky on laughter silvered wings, or simply learning to fly at the local pasture. And, the military gets to operate with relatively minimal impact on their requirements and little interference on the other players. The FAA continues to control the airspace where they can do it best. They mesh with military terminal control facilities and they interact with special use airspace schedulers and controllers. No one I've heard of seriously is seeking military takeover of airspace control for the CONUS. Your paranoia seems to be recurring. Ed Rasimus Fighter Pilot (USAF-Ret) "When Thunder Rolled" www.thunderchief.org www.thundertales.blogspot.com |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
UBL wants a truce - he's scared of the CIA UAV | John Doe | Aviation Marketplace | 1 | January 19th 06 08:58 PM |
The kids are scared, was Saddam evacuated | D. Strang | Military Aviation | 0 | April 7th 04 10:36 PM |
Scared and trigger-happy | John Galt | Military Aviation | 5 | January 31st 04 12:11 AM |