New Year's Eve / Day TFRs 2003 / 2004

"Guy Elden Jr." wrote:

With the issuance today of a flood of TFRs covering NYC, Las Vegas, and
Southern California, and the resulting response from AOPA's Phil Boyer, I'm
beginning to think that the approach they're taking toward these TFRs is
wrong.

I agree that AOPA's approach is wrong. Instead of whining that the TFRs are
issued with inadequate notice, grousing that they *hope* they are based on real
threats, complaining they're "burdensome", etc., AOPA needs to take off the
frigging gloves, tell the truth, and really fight.

These TFRs do absolutely nothing to make the nation more secure. They surely
would not deter any terrorist (on 9/11 a whole raft of regs were busted - that
didn't seem to have much effect). These measures are fundamentally dishonest.
They are a lie. They hurt aviation. They are anti-American. They are
idiotic. Boyer ought to be saying so without mincing any words.

I fear that Boyer and AOPA simply have become way too cozy with the
inside-the-beltway folks they spend their time lobbying. The emperor has no
clothes, but AOPA is afraid to ruffle any feathers in the TSA. They figure if
they **** off anybody in the TSA by actually speaking the truth, then their
next fawning request for an audience might be turned down, and they would lose
their next photo opp. Personally, I wouldn't see that as any great tragedy:
AOPA constantly tells us how great it is that they have such a positive working
relationship with the security goons, yet here we are into our third year of
"temporary" flight restriction hysteria, with no end in sight. The TSA doesn't
give a rip about GA or anything AOPA says. What's to feel so good about?

I wish there were some more gutsy alternative to AOPA, some group with more of
a spine. Yeah, I do support AOPA and send them money everytime Phil crys out
for more, but if there were some group with a little more fight in them, I'd
leave the timid folks at AOPA behind in a New York TFR minute. Gladly.

His assertion that GA aircraft have never been used in a terrorist attack is
flawed logic. The same could have been said pre-9/11/01 about airliners.

If the logic is flawed, that's only because GA aircraft are no more usable in a
spectacular terrorist attack than your average family car would be. Whatever
else you might say about him, Osama isn't stupid: he looked into using GA
aircraft for attacks but concluded that they just weren't capable of inflicting
much damage. If only the "security experts" running the federal government
were as sharp.

Boyer's next statement, that the "restrictions are an additional burden for
pilots to carry" is, at least for me, wrong. I feel no extra burden having
to talk to ATC to transit a TFR area...

I'm willing to accept the "extra burden" just as soon as all other equivalent
threats are saddled with the same burdens. When every car, truck and bicycle
within 25 NM of NYC is required to have a transponder and must contact Road
Traffic Control to get their squawk code before hitting the highways, then GA
pilots will have no reason to feel like they're being scapegoated. Until then,
the restrictions, and those who impose them on us, are just BS.

David H
Boeing Field (BFI), Seattle, WA
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Visit the Pacific Northwest Flying forum:
http://www.smartgroups.com/groups/pnwflying