Mexico Border TFR No that bad

"Gig 601XL Builder" wrDOTgiaconaATcox.net wrote in message
...
Of course the AOPA disagrees and I completely understand the slippery
slope but let's face it the little plane should have no problem flying
under the TFR and the big planes should have no problem flying over or
under it.
Since it looks like we are going to have to deal with UAV in the future we
are going to have to do something and a altitude block tha is reasonable
seems like it might be the best idea.


THIS TFR is "not that bad". How long before LAPD wants a UAV to loiter over
L.A. ?



FAA establishes 300 nm-long TFR on southern U.S. border


Anyone know why the TFR is ONLY 300nm long and doesn't stretch the entire
border of Mexico? We're pretty much telling the Mexicans exactly how to
avoid the very UAV that's trying to detect them....

John Doe wrote:

THIS TFR is "not that bad". How long before LAPD wants a UAV to loiter over
L.A. ?

Imagine what the presence of a UAV chasing after some car would do to the
television ratings of live car chases.


Anyone know why the TFR is ONLY 300nm long and doesn't stretch the entire
border of Mexico? We're pretty much telling the Mexicans exactly how to
avoid the very UAV that's trying to detect them....

Perhaps they are equipped with the ability to see and detect at a much
larger range than they need to fly?

--
Peter

"John Doe" wrote in message
news:EtTBf.13656$Dh.4778@dukeread04...

"Gig 601XL Builder" wrDOTgiaconaATcox.net wrote in message
...
Of course the AOPA disagrees and I completely understand the slippery
slope but let's face it the little plane should have no problem flying
under the TFR and the big planes should have no problem flying over or
under it.
Since it looks like we are going to have to deal with UAV in the future
we are going to have to do something and a altitude block tha is
reasonable seems like it might be the best idea.



THIS TFR is "not that bad". How long before LAPD wants a UAV to loiter
over L.A. ?

What could a UAV add that all the news helos don't already provide?

Anyone know why the TFR is ONLY 300nm long and doesn't stretch the entire
border of Mexico? We're pretty much telling the Mexicans exactly how to
avoid the very UAV that's trying to detect them....

Looking at the enclosed area using Golden Eagle Flight Prep, the far western
end of the TFR butts up against the Goldwater Bombing Range (an inhospitable
area to be sure, but only slightly more so than the entire Agua Prieta area
as a whole...) and at the east end, you are beginning to get near the El
Paso, Texas area.

Jay B

On Wed, 25 Jan 2006 18:03:52 -0500, "John Doe"
wrote in EtTBf.13656$Dh.4778@dukeread04::


Anyone know why the TFR is ONLY 300nm long and doesn't stretch the entire
border of Mexico?

As I recall from the RFP, two UAVs were required. Initially the TFR
was about 120 miles, IIRC. I presume, with the TFR now 300 miles
long, the second UAV is on-line.

We're pretty much telling the Mexicans exactly how to
avoid the very UAV that's trying to detect them....

How would they do that? I am confident the UAV will detect human
targets unless they are covered with reflective mylar blankets
perhaps. That leaves the daylight hours which are probably adequately
patrolled from observation satellites overhead?

Or are you referring to the particular stretch of border that is
defined in the TFR? Perhaps the BP has the remainder of the border
adequately patrolled? More than likely, the section of border
selected was a result of the proximity of the existing military
facilities.

Once DHS has had an opportunity to judge the effectiveness of these
first two, I would expect them to be armed with missiles and deployed
along the entire CONUS perimeter and DC and ....

I say why not tethered balloons or blimps with asme equipment on board
and dorder patrols with choppers to have closer looksy when conditions
warrant? Too cost effective to work? Not enough lobbyist to make
money off of this idea?

The Monk

I say why not tethered balloons or blimps with same equipment on board
at intervals and dorder patrols with choppers to have closer looksy
when conditions warrant? Too cost effective to work? Not enough
lobbyist to make money off of this idea?

The Monk

They do have tethered balloons along the border, up to 15,000'. I
believe there is one in NM northwest of El Paso. I saw it when flying to
Tucson a few years back. It is marked on the charts.

Flyingmonk wrote:

I say why not tethered balloons or blimps with same equipment on board
at intervals and dorder patrols with choppers to have closer looksy
when conditions warrant? Too cost effective to work? Not enough
lobbyist to make money off of this idea?

The Monk

"Flyingmonk" wrote in message
ups.com...
I say why not tethered balloons or blimps with same equipment on board
at intervals and dorder patrols with choppers to have closer looksy
when conditions warrant? Too cost effective to work? Not enough
lobbyist to make money off of this idea?

The cable would require a TFR that would run from the surface, all the way
up to the balloon. Hard to see a cable at night.
--
Jim in NC

"Morgans" wrote in message
news

"Flyingmonk" wrote in message
ups.com...
I say why not tethered balloons or blimps with same equipment on board
at intervals and dorder patrols with choppers to have closer looksy
when conditions warrant? Too cost effective to work? Not enough
lobbyist to make money off of this idea?

The cable would require a TFR that would run from the surface, all the way
up to the balloon. Hard to see a cable at night.
--
Jim in NC

The teathered baloons ARE on the border, know of one near big bend area in
TX, and another near Silver City, MN. They don't have TFR's... they have
airspace slightly more restrictive then a TFR... They have plain ole
Restricted Airspace from surface up to fifteen thousand i belive...

I honestly don't see the UAV's doing all that much to help stop immigration,
still gonna take ground troops to intercept the illegals and shipemback.
That said I don't really have a big prob with this particular TFR, the base
is above what most GA traffic will be operating at. It shares a common
border with the ADIZ which involves ATC contact ANYWAY to transit, and with
ATC communicaiton there is the possibility that you can STILL enter and
transit the UAV TFR's. There are very few airports that will be "Under" the
TFR, and even then do you really expect to be reaching 12k feet in 7 miles?

"nooneimportant" wrote in message
news:OAhCf.46194$V.43804@fed1read04...

"Morgans" wrote in message
news

"Flyingmonk" wrote in message
ups.com...
I say why not tethered balloons or blimps with same equipment on board
at intervals and dorder patrols with choppers to have closer looksy
when conditions warrant? Too cost effective to work? Not enough
lobbyist to make money off of this idea?

The cable would require a TFR that would run from the surface, all the
way up to the balloon. Hard to see a cable at night.
--
Jim in NC

The teathered baloons ARE on the border, know of one near big bend area in
TX, and another near Silver City, MN. They don't have TFR's... they have
airspace slightly more restrictive then a TFR... They have plain ole
Restricted Airspace from surface up to fifteen thousand i belive...

I honestly don't see the UAV's doing all that much to help stop
immigration, still gonna take ground troops to intercept the illegals and
shipemback. That said I don't really have a big prob with this particular
TFR, the base is above what most GA traffic will be operating at. It
shares a common border with the ADIZ which involves ATC contact ANYWAY to
transit, and with ATC communicaiton there is the possibility that you can
STILL enter and transit the UAV TFR's. There are very few airports that
will be "Under" the TFR, and even then do you really expect to be reaching
12k feet in 7 miles?

Gotta love transposition errosr. make that Silver City, NM, not MN.....