Vehicular Ramp Access

MHT went through this process starting about 8-9 years ago, basically
coincident with MHT becoming a viable alternative to BOS. We used to have
free access to ramps. Then access was permitted by airport-issued passcard.
Somewhat inconvenient, but given the possibility that someone COULD drive
onto the ramp and then onto an active runway, and there were big aircraft on
said runway, not a big deal. Cars had to meet certain insurance
requirements, and cars had to display airport-issued stickers.

Then 9/11 happened. Current situation is tht I can still get my vehicle on
the field (to plow, do maintenance, or carry luggage) but I must call the
communications center and the gate must be opened for me. My vehicle is
occasionally subject to inspection, and still must meet insurance,
registration, and sticker requirements.

Bottom line - not as nice as it used to be, but not too terrible. Biggest
issue is the occasional need to wait 10-15 minutes for access. Normally not
that long. Give there are probably 100-125 part 135 operations/day, keeping
a craze-o from doing something terrible needs attention.
"Marco Leon" wrote in message
...
In the interest of security, our airport management wants to ban all
automobile access to our aircraft at Republic Airport (KFRG). It was the
hot topic of discussion during our last tenant meeting on 3/14--a meeting
with the largest turnout of pilots since its inception. Interestingly,
other topics on the agenda for discussion that would normally cause
consternation went unopposed (increase of tiedown fees by $35/month, photo
ID badge implementation for all pilots, and various large-aircraft centric
construction projects to name a few). I don't rule out the notion that
this issue was a strategy to get the others pushed through (if it was,
brilliant!)

This is a complicated issue with what seems to be many motives at play.
The general feeling among the small aircraft GA pilots is that management
is looking to turn the airport into a bizjet mecca like Teterboro. This
hardly surprising since they are both run by the same management company.
Many of the tenants also think that the denial of access is just another
ploy to make the airport more attractive to bizjet operators.

AOPA is involved and has sent them a letter outlining reasons why owners
need access to their aircraft and the little (and arguably DECREASED)
security issues it poses. Lots of rational, relevant, and passionate calls
for a cooperative approach to a solution by the pilots and I was
pleasantly surprised by the lack of disrespect during the 2-hour meeting
attended by about 100 interested parties. Kind of reminded me of this
newsgroup--minus the outlying rude ones.

If anyone has experienced a similar situation at their own airport I'd
love to hear what happened. From what AOPA has told us though, this has
some unique (and arguably inevitable) security aspects that may serve as
the precedent for other airports in the US going forward.

Here's a link to the AOPA letter:
http://download.aopa.org/epilot/2007...4ny-letter.pdf

Marco

"pgbnh" wrote in message

Then 9/11 happened. Current situation is tht I can still get my vehicle on
the field (to plow, do maintenance, or carry luggage) but I must call the
communications center and the gate must be opened for me. My vehicle is
occasionally subject to inspection, and still must meet insurance,
registration, and sticker requirements.

Bottom line - not as nice as it used to be, but not too terrible. Biggest
issue is the occasional need to wait 10-15 minutes for access. Normally
not that long. Give there are probably 100-125 part 135 operations/day,
keeping a craze-o from doing something terrible needs attention.

Your situation sounds similar to something I suggested during the meeting.
If they were worried about the people they might be "sneaking" in via the
cars, then make everyone declare their "passengers" either electronically or
verbally upon entry and execute random spot checks on their declarations.
This would also include checks on automobile storage areas. Currently, the
gates close at 7 PM and owners need to go through another camera-equipped
gate and talk to an operations person to gain access. They ask for visual
confirmation of the car pass and can see whoever you bring along. To make us
declare the number of passengers would be a simple next step and they could
have a video recording of them as well. In other words, if they can't
visually count the two guys you claim as passengers, then they don't let you
in.

There's a myriad of possibilities and I hope they cooperate before making a
decision.

Marco

"Marco Leon" wrote in message
...
... Your situation sounds similar to something I suggested during the
meeting. If they were worried about the people they might be "sneaking" in
via the cars, then make everyone declare their "passengers" either
electronically or verbally upon entry and execute random spot checks on
their declarations.
...

They are worried that I might put five people in a Luscombe?

I don't get it.

--
Geoff
The Sea Hawk at Wow Way d0t Com
remove spaces and make the obvious substitutions to reply by mail
When immigration is outlawed, only outlaws will immigrate.