We need to choose are battles carefully...

"me" wrote in message ...

Think of that part of the airspace as a dead end canyon. The canyon is
made up by the class B airspace
in the form of a rectangular cut out. In the past you could fly up into
the cut out but when you get to the dead end you had to do something.
Either make the very tight U turn staying in the tight canyon or if you
wanted to keep going you needed to contact ATC for clearance into
LaGuardia airspace all this needed to be done in a very short period of
time when you are already occupied with many other tasks like watching for
heavy traffic and staying inside the exclusion. In 25 years of flying in
this airspace I have never once had the need nor felt desire to go up the
East river exclusion without already being in contact with ATC.
The reason it is there is to let the helicopters and seaplanes operate in
this small cut out without the need to contact ATC unless they wanted to.
I hope this helps get a picture of this..


That doesn't answer my question. What is the purpose of the new requirement
to communicate with ATC when operating in that part of the Class B
exclusion?

A practical purpose doesn't exist. It's only a feel good compromise to
settle the uninformed but very vocal critics while stopping short of closing
the VFR corridors or banning flying under Class B shelves. I am repeatedly
amazed at the ignorance of the uninformed aviation critics when it comes to
the words "controlled" and "ATC". I am equally amazed when, after forcing a
change in the name of safety, that these same people seem satisfied whether
the change actually contributes to an increase in safety or not. They
simply want their voices heard, their names in print, and their faces on
TV... it makes them feel important and that they have accomplished
something. They care little about the effectiveness or appropriateness of
the change.

Jim Burns wrote:
They
simply want their voices heard, their names in print, and their faces on
TV... it makes them feel important and that they have accomplished
something. They care little about the effectiveness or appropriateness of
the change.


That pretty much describes the Motis Operandi of New York politicians....
Clinton, Schumer, Rangel et.al. Heck, for that matter *most* politicians.

On Sat, 14 Oct 2006 19:39:51 GMT, kontiki wrote:

That pretty much describes the Motis Operandi of New York politicians....
Clinton, Schumer, Rangel et.al. Heck, for that matter *most* politicians.

*ouch* 'modus operandi', please. :-)

#m
--
Arabic T-shirt sparks airport row
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/5297822.stm

I Am Not A Terrorist http://itsnotallbad.com/iamnotaterrorist/

Martin Hotze wrote:

On Sat, 14 Oct 2006 19:39:51 GMT, kontiki wrote:


That pretty much describes the Motis Operandi of New York politicians....
Clinton, Schumer, Rangel et.al. Heck, for that matter *most* politicians.


*ouch* 'modus operandi', please. :-)

#m

Touche. I never took Latin in college. But I believe my point was well made.

kontiki wrote:

Martin Hotze wrote:

On Sat, 14 Oct 2006 19:39:51 GMT, kontiki wrote:


That pretty much describes the Motis Operandi of New York
politicians....
Clinton, Schumer, Rangel et.al. Heck, for that matter *most*
politicians.



*ouch* 'modus operandi', please. :-)

#m


Touche. I never took Latin in college. But I believe my point was well
made.


Your point was understood, but certainly not made well. :-)

Matt

On Sat, 14 Oct 2006 20:42:22 GMT, kontiki wrote:

That pretty much describes the Motis Operandi of New York politicians....
Clinton, Schumer, Rangel et.al. Heck, for that matter *most* politicians.


*ouch* 'modus operandi', please. :-)

#m

Touche.


missing the accent akut (en: the acute accent) he touché

I never took Latin in college.

I had both Latin and French :-)

But I believe my point was well made.

I've never been to NY, so I can't argue here.

#m
--
Arabic T-shirt sparks airport row
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/5297822.stm

I Am Not A Terrorist http://itsnotallbad.com/iamnotaterrorist/

Martin Hotze wrote:

I had both Latin and French :-)

Very sorry to hear that.

Matt

Jim Burns wrote:
the VFR corridors or banning flying under Class B shelves. I am repeatedly
amazed at the ignorance of the uninformed aviation critics when it comes to
the words "controlled" and "ATC".

Frankly a lot of private pilots don't fully understand the difference
between talking to ATC and ATC providing traffic advisories and ATC
providing separation services.

I am equally amazed when, after forcing a
change in the name of safety, that these same people seem satisfied whether
the change actually contributes to an increase in safety or not.

Well, if the first change doesn't do anything, then they'll just ask
for more rules, regulations, and restrictions. They'll rarely admit
that their original impulse was wrong-headed. The key is to get these
people involved in their local church, library, or art museum so they
channel their I-wanna-rule-the-world urges into something innocuous.

wrote:

Frankly a lot of private pilots don't fully understand the difference
between talking to ATC and ATC providing traffic advisories and ATC
providing separation services.

Well, technically, you're talking to ATC both when they're providing
traffic advisories and when they're providing separation services.
Also, separation services are only for other IFR traffic so when you're
IFR, they're also giving traffic advisories on VFR traffic. But I see
how many private pilots may not realize that.

Well, if the first change doesn't do anything, then they'll just ask
for more rules, regulations, and restrictions. They'll rarely admit
that their original impulse was wrong-headed. The key is to get these
people involved in their local church, library, or art museum so they
channel their I-wanna-rule-the-world urges into something innocuous.

Are you talking about the general public or the politician that
Konitiki mentioned? The general public don't usually convert their
anti-aviation opinions to actions unless it affects them directly (like
the ones who live around airports). The ones we need to worry about are
the demagogue politicians. I don't think getting them involved in their
local churches and libraries would work. I WISH it was that easy to
distract Schumer and the other Democrat in New York Dick, I mean Weiner
(but think he's the former).

Marco