New Sectional and....

"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in message
nk.net...
Give me some examples.

Airspace changes around Atlanta for the Olympics would be one.

"Peter Duniho" wrote in message
...

Airspace changes around Atlanta for the Olympics would be one.


Can you post a link to the chart? Is that the only example you have?

"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in message
nk.net...
Can you post a link to the chart? Is that the only example you have?

I don't even need one example. Your statement is without foundation
regardless. You don't really think you could prove that "They wouldn't
print them if they planned to eliminate them", do you?

I offered one example, which is well-enough documented should you really
care to look it up yourself. That's sufficient as counter-proof.

That said, if I still remember when it's time to dig out all my old aviation
charts, I'll be happy to scan and post to the web the chart in question.

Pete

"Peter Duniho" wrote in message
...

I don't even need one example. Your statement is without foundation
regardless. You don't really think you could prove that "They wouldn't
print them if they planned to eliminate them", do you?


What I stated was simple logic. These "temporary" restrictions have been in
place, uncharted, for years. They're being charted because they're being
made permanent.

"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in message
nk.net...
[...]
What I stated was simple logic. These "temporary" restrictions have been
in
place, uncharted, for years. They're being charted because they're being
made permanent.

It appears that your understanding of "simple logic" is flawed.

Where are the verified facts, along with the proveable conclusions? Your
so-called "simple logic" is nothing more than a personal assumption on your
part.

Here are the facts that we know:

* The TFRs have existed for nearly three years
* They have been left uncharted for nearly that whole time
* The latest chart revision includes the TFRs

For "simple logic" to conclude that the TFRs are being made permanent, you'd
have to have some proved theorem that says something like "a TFR that has
been present and left uncharted for an extraordinarily long time, and that
is then charted will be made permanent".

So far, the only source I see for such a "theorem" is your own personal
belief. There's nothing in the FARs or charting policies that would support
it. A "theorem" that is simply based on your own personal belief is not a
theorem, it's a hypothesis. A hypothesis is useless for the purpose of
proving something using "simple logic".

AOPA has been lobbying for a long time now for the airspace to be charted,
as have numerous other folks. The TFRs should always have been charted,
given the long-lasting nature of them, and the fact that they are charting
them now may well reflect nothing more than recognition of that common sense
assertion.

Regardless of why the TFRs are being charted, there's no valid way to come
to a logical conclusion that they are being made permanent. And in fact,
since there's precedent for charting TFRs, and since they could just as
easily have made them permanent and charted them that way, there's reason to
believe that for now, there's no intent to make them permanent.

Pete

"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in message
nk.net...
Can you post a link to the chart? Is that the only example you have?

In a matter of minutes, I found two references to VFR charts published for
the Salt Lake City Olympic Games held in 2002:

http://www.aopa.org/whatsnew/newsite...01-4-199x.html
http://www.eaa72.org/news/2001/dec01news.pdf

I didn't waste my time looking for references to the Atlanta charts that
were similarly published, but they are out there if you ever decide to see
for yourself.

Do you still maintain that TFRs being published implies that there is no
plan to eliminate them?

Pete

"Peter Duniho" wrote in message
...

Do you still maintain that TFRs being published implies that there is no
plan to eliminate them?


Of course.

On Wed, 09 Jun 2004 19:15:45 GMT, "Steven P. McNicoll"
wrote:


"Peter Duniho" wrote in message
...

Do you still maintain that TFRs being published implies that there is no
plan to eliminate them?


Of course.



This doesn't qualify as undisputable truth, but it does have some
bearing on the subject. Some months ago, I attended an FAA sponsored
seminar at Willow Grove Joint Reserve Base. The speaker was a
high-ranking NACO official who was directly in charge of the charting
efforts as well as the A/FD publication. I'm sorry, I do not recall
his name. He discussed, in some length, the charting of the
Washington ADIZ and specifically noted that the fact that it was
charted did not in any way imply permanence. He did note, however,
that they probably would not have charted it if they anticipated a
change in the near future. The primary purpose for the charting was
to help pilots avoid the ADIZ.

Rich Russell

In article , Peter Duniho wrote:
Do you still maintain that TFRs being published implies that there is no
plan to eliminate them?

Personally, I don't know - but I think they should quit pussyfooting
around and either get rid of the TFRs or change them to
restricted/prohibited areas.

--
Dylan Smith, Castletown, Isle of Man
Flying: http://www.dylansmith.net
Frontier Elite Universe: http://www.alioth.net
"Maintain thine airspeed, lest the ground come up and smite thee"

In article ,
says...

In article , Peter Duniho wrote:
Do you still maintain that TFRs being published implies that there is no
plan to eliminate them?

Personally, I don't know - but I think they should quit pussyfooting
around and either get rid of the TFRs or change them to
restricted/prohibited areas.


I disagree. as long as they remain temporary, they can easily (and quietly) be
removed. Some wounds take time to heal. 911 was a big wound to the country,
and authorities have to show they are doing something - even if it's
sometimes more show than substance. If the TFR's can be removed in time, so
much the better. I don't really know what "freedom" we will have gained by
being able to fly over a nuclear power station, but the Presidential TFR
guessing game is tiresome, and the TFR's in general present a regulatory trap
for pilots - so it would be better if they could be lifted in time. So what if
it takes another three years - better than never, don't you agree?

G Faris