Pilot, possibly intoxicated, flies around Philly for 3 hours

Nice job, CNN.

Hasn't hit Fox yet--they are still riveted to Michael Jackson :-)
www.Rosspilot.com

Nice job, CNN.

Hasn't hit Fox yet--they are still riveted to Michael Jackson :-)


Just hit Fox--they performed true-to-form.

"he even flew next to a nuclear power plant"




www.Rosspilot.com

What else would you expect from "Faux News?"

--
Kevin McCue
KRYN
'47 Luscombe 8E
Rans S-17 (for sale)




-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

In article ,
ospam (Rosspilot) wrote:
Nice job, CNN.

Hasn't hit Fox yet--they are still riveted to Michael Jackson :-)


Just hit Fox--they performed true-to-form.

"he even flew next to a nuclear power plant"


Did he fly next to a nuclear power plant? There's nothing wrong with
reporting the facts even though we may not like to admit that the facts
are the facts.

It sounds like this guy was as dumb as they come, yet the authorities
exercised restraint and didn't blow him out of the sky.

CBS apparently thought he should have been shot down, and then they'd be
running a story about how the government should have exercised restraint
because the guy wasn't a real threat.

As for GA airport security, I must admit that I am disappointed, at
least in some of the airports in my area. Many larger GA fields here
don't even have perimeter fencing, and many of those that do have
operable gates that aren't operating. Some of those airports who have
tried operating the gates have ended up with dead gate motors because
the morons who are using their hangars as personal storage for
everything but an airplane are staking the gates open so that they can
more easily move in and out. The bottom line is that if the small
fields don't get a grip on REASONABLE security, one of these days
something bad is going to hb_men and there is going to be UNREASONABLE
over-reaction.


JKG

"Jonathan Goodish" wrote in message


The bottom line is that if the small
fields don't get a grip on REASONABLE security, one of these days
something bad is going to hb_men and there is going to be UNREASONABLE
over-reaction.

Can you define "reasonable security" for us?

--
John T
http://tknowlogy.com/TknoFlyer
http://www.pocketgear.com/products_s...veloperid=4415
____________________

In article om,
"John T" wrote:

"Jonathan Goodish" wrote in message


The bottom line is that if the small
fields don't get a grip on REASONABLE security, one of these days
something bad is going to hb_men and there is going to be UNREASONABLE
over-reaction.

Can you define "reasonable security" for us?

Reasonable security would include airport ID badges for those who have a
reason to be on the field, perimeter fencing that is tall enough and
sealed well enough to be a deterrent, gates that work, and some type of
continuous airport surveillence. Those are common sense things that, in
most cases, are SUPPOSED to be done anyway at most of these airports,
and actually serve to protect the aircraft owners based at the field
from theft and vandalism (it's happened around here). My home field has
perimeter fencing on only 3 sides and most of the fencing isn't much
more than waist high. Despite that, they put in gates with key-codes
that have been installed for quite a while but have never been
activated. "Reasonable" means that if you're supposed to be on the
field and can prove it then you won't be hassled. "Unreasonable" is
when they start forcing you to go through the "secure" terminal and have
to ride you to your airplane or hangar in an airport vehicle, watch you
extract your airplane and lock the hangar, and depart... and I'm sure
that wouldn't be the worst of it. Bottom line is that if something bad
happens and some news crew goes out to the local airport and finds
missing fence and gates that are wide open, the situation is going to
get overblown.

Oh, yeah, and enforce the terms of the lease that exists, in most cases,
for those who are using an airplane hangar as a U-Store by throwing them
out. One guy around here was actually bold enough to routinely drive an
18 wheeler through the gate, down the taxiways, and up to his T-hangar
so that he could load and unload things. None of those things were ever
aviation-related as far as I could tell, and if he ever had an airplane
in the hangar it certainly wasn't visible to the naked eye.



JKG

"Jonathan Goodish" wrote in message
...
In article om,
"John T" wrote:

"Jonathan Goodish" wrote in message


The bottom line is that if the small
fields don't get a grip on REASONABLE security, one of these days
something bad is going to hb_men and there is going to be UNREASONABLE
over-reaction.

Can you define "reasonable security" for us?

Reasonable security would include airport ID badges for those who have a
reason to be on the field, perimeter fencing that is tall enough and
sealed well enough to be a deterrent, gates that work, and some type of
continuous airport surveillence. Those are common sense things that, in
most cases, are SUPPOSED to be done anyway at most of these airports,
and actually serve to protect the aircraft owners based at the field
from theft and vandalism (it's happened around here). My home field has
perimeter fencing on only 3 sides and most of the fencing isn't much
more than waist high. Despite that, they put in gates with key-codes
that have been installed for quite a while but have never been
activated. "Reasonable" means that if you're supposed to be on the
field and can prove it then you won't be hassled.

Your reasonable is totally UNreasonable in my book. For what reason are you
creating a prison like facility? What actual problems are you trying to
solve? I don't need an ID badge to drive my car why should I need one to
fly my plane? My garage does not have continuous surveillence why should
airports? I don't have a fence around my garage why should GA airports?
Can you provide a reference to support your statement that what you suggest
is SUPPOSED to be done at airports?

In article ,
"Dave Stadt" wrote:
Your reasonable is totally UNreasonable in my book. For what reason are you
creating a prison like facility? What actual problems are you trying to
solve? I don't need an ID badge to drive my car why should I need one to
fly my plane? My garage does not have continuous surveillence why should
airports? I don't have a fence around my garage why should GA airports?
Can you provide a reference to support your statement that what you suggest
is SUPPOSED to be done at airports?


I am not creating a "prison like" facility; quite the contrary, I am
suggesting common sense measures to PREVENT the creation of a "prison
like" facility.

Fact is, you do need an ID badge to drive your car, it's called a
driver's license. How you secure your garage is your problem, but I
suspect that you keep your garage locked and when you're not home
neither is your car. I don't live at the airport, so most of the time
my plane is unattended.

What I'm hearing from you detractors is that you don't believe there
should be ANY security at GA fields beyond, perhaps, local recognition
on those CAVU days. How are you going to prove to law enforcement that
you are supposed to be on the field if there is a problem? How are you
going to defend the airport that has no access control whatever if
someone should use the field as a lauching point for something
disasterous or stupid? I am curious.

Just as with securing your house, nothing you do is going to stop the
determined burglar. What you can do things to make execution of the
crime more difficult and time consuming while still retaining
unrestricted movement in your house. Maybe you can go to sleep at night
with the doors unlocked and the windows open and feel safe; if you can,
good for you. Honestly, I can't, and I don't live in a bad
neighborhood. If my neighbors and I all started leaving our doors
unlocked, though, pretty soon the criminals would find the easy target.



JKG

"Dave Stadt" wrote:

I don't need an ID badge to drive my car why should I need one to
fly my plane?

Uh, what's that state-issued thingy with your picture on it, if not an
ID badge?

Rob

Jonathan Goodish wrote:

Reasonable security would include ....

A whole bunch of things that are wildly UNreasonable, expensive, and useless.

George Patterson
Great discoveries are not announced with "Eureka!". What's usually said is
"Hummmmm... That's interesting...."