Odd TFR

"Peter R." wrote in message
...
blanche cohen wrote:

There's a TFR today over DC for the State of the Union address.
I don't understand why when there's been a massive one in
place for the past 4 years.

My understanding is that even GA aircraft on an IFR flight plan cannot fly
into this TFR, which is obviously different than the long standing
VFR-restrictive TFR in place the past five years or so.

--
Peter

Yes, only airliners weighing hundreds of thousands of pounds are allowed to
fly within a couple miles of the capitol.

"Michael 182" wrote in
message ...
On 01 Feb 2006 01:09:34 GMT, (blanche cohen) wrote:

There's a TFR today over DC for the State of the Union address.
I don't understand why when there's been a massive one in
place for the past 4 years.

Actually, I think the TFR says a bit about the State of the Union...

Amen...

Jay B

Actually, I think the TFR says a bit about the State of the Union...

Word.

"Michael 182" wrote in message
...
Actually, I think the TFR says a bit about the State of the Union...

Yeah, but they are so afraid of getting bad PR, they didn't follow my
suggestion and just nuke the camel ****in' Bedoins to start with...

blanche cohen wrote:
There's a TFR today over DC for the State of the Union address.
I don't understand why when there's been a massive one in
place for the past 4 years.
While I don't agree in the need for the ADIZ, I think in this case it's
more justified then normal. The entire leadership of our country ( Both
sides )is in one building for the sotu and it's a good idea to ratchet
up security for that event. It's only 4 hours and if it were not for
the ADIZ I don't think anyone would complain about it. While the risk
of a light plane actually doing any damage is small, let's face it, you
could load 500 pounds or so of high explosive into a 172 and that would
make a fairly big hole in the capital building. I think that preventing
that kind of attack should start way before the plane gets in the air,
but for a short amount of time closing the airspace does make sense.
The security on commercial aircraft now makes the possibility of another
911 attack remote but that level of screening and airmarshalls just does
not exist for GA. Let's not over react to reasonable measures just
because they are over shadowed by un reasonable ones.

While I don't agree in the need for the ADIZ, I think in this case it's
more justified then normal. The entire leadership of our country ( Both
sides )is in one building for the sotu and it's a good idea to ratchet
up security for that event.

Which doesn't mean anything since we would elect new ones within 30 days.
There is no reason for everyone to gather except for a media event
(marketing by the political parties).
The constitution says something about the president going before
congress, by that can be done electronically, the same as he/she does
when going before the American public.
The State of the Union would possibly be shorter because there would be
no delays for choreographed applause.

John Theune wrote:
blanche cohen wrote:

There's a TFR today over DC for the State of the Union address.
I don't understand why when there's been a massive one in
place for the past 4 years.

While I don't agree in the need for the ADIZ, I think in this case it's
more justified then normal. The entire leadership of our country ( Both
sides )is in one building for the sotu and it's a good idea to ratchet
up security for that event. It's only 4 hours and if it were not for
the ADIZ I don't think anyone would complain about it. While the risk
of a light plane actually doing any damage is small, let's face it, you
could load 500 pounds or so of high explosive into a 172 and that would
make a fairly big hole in the capital building. I think that preventing
that kind of attack should start way before the plane gets in the air,
but for a short amount of time closing the airspace does make sense. The
security on commercial aircraft now makes the possibility of another 911
attack remote but that level of screening and airmarshalls just does not
exist for GA. Let's not over react to reasonable measures just because
they are over shadowed by un reasonable ones.

Sure, a light plane might poke a hole in a builing. Maybe. But as
fuzzy as my memory is, I remember a couple heavy airliners doing a lot
more damage a few years ago. Yet no one is calling for airline traffic
to be disrupted into the area. Why?

"John Theune" wrote in message
news:dy1Ef.17365$K17.121@trnddc03...
blanche cohen wrote:
There's a TFR today over DC for the State of the Union address.
I don't understand why when there's been a massive one in
place for the past 4 years.
While I don't agree in the need for the ADIZ, I think in this case it's
more justified then normal. The entire leadership of our country ( Both
sides )is in one building for the sotu and it's a good idea to ratchet up
security for that event. It's only 4 hours and if it were not for the
ADIZ I don't think anyone would complain about it. While the risk of a
light plane actually doing any damage is small, let's face it, you could
load 500 pounds or so of high explosive into a 172 and that would make a
fairly big hole in the capital building. I think that preventing that
kind of attack should start way before the plane gets in the air, but for
a short amount of time closing the airspace does make sense. The security
on commercial aircraft now makes the possibility of another 911 attack
remote but that level of screening and airmarshalls just does not exist
for GA. Let's not over react to reasonable measures just because they are
over shadowed by un reasonable ones.

Airline security.....you must be living in a dream world. There is no such
thing as airline security. Lotsa window dressing but no real security.

Rachel wrote:
John Theune wrote:

blanche cohen wrote:

There's a TFR today over DC for the State of the Union address.
I don't understand why when there's been a massive one in
place for the past 4 years.


While I don't agree in the need for the ADIZ, I think in this case
it's more justified then normal. The entire leadership of our country
( Both sides )is in one building for the sotu and it's a good idea to
ratchet up security for that event. It's only 4 hours and if it were
not for the ADIZ I don't think anyone would complain about it. While
the risk of a light plane actually doing any damage is small, let's
face it, you could load 500 pounds or so of high explosive into a 172
and that would make a fairly big hole in the capital building. I
think that preventing that kind of attack should start way before the
plane gets in the air, but for a short amount of time closing the
airspace does make sense. The security on commercial aircraft now
makes the possibility of another 911 attack remote but that level of
screening and airmarshalls just does not exist for GA. Let's not over
react to reasonable measures just because they are over shadowed by un
reasonable ones.


Sure, a light plane might poke a hole in a builing. Maybe. But as
fuzzy as my memory is, I remember a couple heavy airliners doing a lot
more damage a few years ago. Yet no one is calling for airline traffic
to be disrupted into the area. Why?
Rachel;
Did you read my post? Let's face it, you can turn a 172 into a cruise
missile like device. It's not very likely and the solution to that
problem should not be to close the airspace all the time, but for a
special occasion like the SOTU where all the leadership of both parties
are in a single building, then it does make sense to try to make it as
secure as possible. GA is never going to convince the rest of the world
that we are being unfairly picked on unless we show that we can live
with reasonable restrictions and I don't think closing the airspace
around DC for 4 HOURs is unreasonable.

john smith wrote:
While I don't agree in the need for the ADIZ, I think in this case it's
more justified then normal. The entire leadership of our country ( Both
sides )is in one building for the sotu and it's a good idea to ratchet
up security for that event.


Which doesn't mean anything since we would elect new ones within 30 days.
There is no reason for everyone to gather except for a media event
(marketing by the political parties).
The constitution says something about the president going before
congress, by that can be done electronically, the same as he/she does
when going before the American public.
The State of the Union would possibly be shorter because there would be
no delays for choreographed applause.
and given the worst case scenario of all the likely candidates dying in
one attack, just where will you find the new leaders?