Dangerous Cessna evacuates govt again

All I know is when I flew my Single-Engine Comanche to Europe in 2003, I
wasn't allowed to fly inside the London TMA 'cos I only had one engine.
Helo's fly over the river and have special clearances with their VFR
routes. It's the 'glide-clear' rule. Also had this :--

"You can fly over London in a Single providing you get clearance to
enter the TMA and are over 1500 feet above the tallest sructure within
1 Nm and you are high enough to land clear of any built-up area if your
engine quits."

Since 9/11, also doubtful but possible I suppose.

Not the Hudson VFR Corridor...

Ray

On Thu, 12 May 2005 08:07:07 +0000, Arketip wrote:

Ray Bengen wrote:

Small SINGLE-ENGINE planes are banned not MULTI's.
Still, it is quite ridicilous. I wonder how many people would be
suprised to know a fully-loaded Cessna 150 would bounce of the side of
the Washington Memorial...
Forget about the Statue of Liberty.
Anyhow, I think it'll be forgotten.
IMO.
On Thu, 12 May 2005 01:57:14 GMT, George Patterson
I don't know if it is a new regulation, but about 10 years ago I
overflew the city at 2400 ft, twice in one weekend, as asked by ATC, and
met plenty of ULM on the way.



--
Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/

On Thu, 12 May 2005 01:57:14 GMT, George Patterson
wrote in _Jyge.1534$R13.625@trndny09::

gatt wrote:

It's really ridiculous. London endured the Blitz. America has got to stop
living in fear.

Not a good example. Small planes have been banned from the airspace over London
for decades.

Thanks for the information.

Be that as it may, the good people of London chose to continue
business as usual in the face of nightly air raids of hundreds of
bombers, unlike those in DC who abandoned their posts in panic at the
approach of a Cessna 152.

In article , Larry Dighera wrote:
On Thu, 12 May 2005 01:57:14 GMT, George Patterson
wrote in _Jyge.1534$R13.625@trndny09::
Not a good example. Small planes have been banned from the airspace over London
for decades.

Thanks for the information.

Pity it's not correct!

--
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"

On Thu, 12 May 2005 02:36:48 GMT, Larry Dighera
wrote:

Be that as it may, the good people of London chose to continue
business as usual in the face of nightly air raids of hundreds of
bombers, unlike those in DC who abandoned their posts in panic at the
approach of a Cessna 152.

Not really Larry. The truth is wartime travel for most Londoners, as
well as residents of other cities, was very difficult if not nearly
impossible due to wartime restrictions to travel. Londoners "took it"
because there was little else they could do.

Photo's of families that moved into the woods outside the cities to
camp in places they felt were safer than living in the subway tunnels
were suppressed by the government, for obvious reasons: It could have
been a propaganda coup for the Nazi's to indicate that the English
were cracking under the pressure.

The parts of London that were most heavily bombed during the blitz
were in the "east end" which happened to be where most of the city's
poor lived. They would happilly have gone elsewhere rather than be
subjected to nightly bombing, but could not due to their lack of
funds.

Corky Scott

In article _Jyge.1534$R13.625@trndny09, George Patterson wrote:
gatt wrote:

It's really ridiculous. London endured the Blitz. America has got to stop
living in fear.

Not a good example. Small planes have been banned from the airspace over London
for decades.

No they haven't, they aren't even prohibited now. You see light planes
at London City which is right in the middle of Canary Wharf.

--
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"

Dylan Smith wrote:
In article _Jyge.1534$R13.625@trndny09, George Patterson wrote:
gatt wrote:

It's really ridiculous. London endured the Blitz. America has got
to stop
living in fear.

Not a good example. Small planes have been banned from the airspace
over London
for decades.

No they haven't, they aren't even prohibited now. You see light
planes
at London City which is right in the middle of Canary Wharf.


Dammit.
Now the posters will know that there's an airport bang in the middle of
the London Docks ROTFL...

Andrew Gideon wrote:
Sport Pilot wrote:


Not when its possible for a C150 to carry a small A bomb in a suitcase.


One can carry much more, without the problem of dodging fighters, in a
minivan.

When DC is closed off to all vehicular traffic, I'll believe that someone is
serious about security and I'll accept what's being done to GA there.
Absent that, this is a joke and we're the butt of that joke.

- Andrew

Yeah, when people ask me what I think of the FRZ (used to be TFR) I
always say if they want to "make the skies safe over DC" they have to
ban ALL AIR TRAFFIC within a reasonable distance, like 200 miles. This
would of course close Dulles, Washington, Baltimore, Richmond,
Philadelphia, etc. Folks always say "They CAN'T do THAT!". To which I
respond that I agree, but putting a silly band-aid, do nothing policy on
small aircraft in the DC area is just as silly.

I'm sure more damage could be inflicted with a rental truck in downtown
DC than with a 172 (or even a Citation)if desired and they aren't going
to close down DC to motor vehicles. People get upset when they do the
truck checks on Capitol Hill!

Margy

On 5/11/05 10:39 AM, in article
, "Sport Pilot"
wrote:

Yes, it's silly for the gov't to scatter like hens when a Cessna
approaches,
but that's not the point.

Not when its possible for a C150 to carry a small A bomb in a suitcase.


I suspect that if the C150 was carrying a small A bomb the government would
have known about it long before the plane got to Washington.

Christopher Campbell wrote:
On 5/11/05 10:39 AM, in article
, "Sport Pilot"
wrote:

Yes, it's silly for the gov't to scatter like hens when a Cessna
approaches,
but that's not the point.

Not when its possible for a C150 to carry a small A bomb in a
suitcase.


I suspect that if the C150 was carrying a small A bomb the government
would
have known about it long before the plane got to Washington.

How? Hard to spot radiation from above. The sun is much higher than
any shielded bomb.

Yes, it's silly for the gov't to scatter like hens when a Cessna
approaches, but that's not the point.

Not when its possible for a C150 to carry a small A bomb in a suitcase.

and how is this different from having the gov't scatter like hens when a
small car approaches? It's not like you have to approach very closely
with an A-bomb.

Jose
--
Money: what you need when you run out of brains.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.