Drunk pilot news video & ATC audio

Its as stupid as the pilot insecurity rules. If they think you are a
terrorist they revoke your certificate. If you area a terrorist you
think (WTF!) and go about your plans. If you are a regular guy you
spend a bunch of money appealing where you can't even see the
evidenance against you. If someone really is a terrorist and they
really do have bad plans, go down and arrest their ass, don't putt
around pulling tickets! In real life you'd probably have to spend
money appealing through the FAA process (and losing of course because
you don't know the evidence against you). Once you've exhausted the
FAA appeals process you can file an injuction in federal court. That
would be a pretty easy one to win because of "due process". Clearly
the FAA hasn't used "due process" by not letting you see the evidence.
The courts have ruled that "due process" applies to all agencies and
all cases (its not just a criminal thing, its used all the time
against the EPA).


-Robert


"C J Campbell" wrote in message ...
So what the heck? He just cuts the lock and flies off to another
state where
he won't be recognized. Maybe Alaska.

In article , G.R. Patterson III
wrote:

Marco Rispoli wrote:

I don't think you can own a plane if you don't have at least a valid student
license and you definetly can't rent one

Well, you *can* own one, but the courts can take steps to prevent you from
usingit if there's good reason to believe that you intend to fly it yourself.
The FAA has in the past obtained court orders to padlock aircraft owned by
people whose certificates were revoked. Care to bet on whether they'll do it
this time or not?

But they help pilot certificates. That is different from not having a
certificate. Rules of evidence apply (as I understand it, based on
stories in the Southern US).

Care to bet on whether a PA judge will take longer than 5 seconds to issue the
order?

Probably easier now under the Patriot Act. They can do anything they
want.

EDR wrote:


Probably easier now under the Patriot Act. They can do anything they
want.

Patriot Act has nothing to do with it. This is a no brainer case.

EDR wrote:

But they help pilot certificates. That is different from not having a
certificate. Rules of evidence apply (as I understand it, based on
stories in the Southern US).

I'm sure there's a typo in there, and I don't understand what you mean, but I can
assure you that, if an FAA inspector appears before a New Jersey judge and states
that he has reason to believe that a person intends to fly his plane on a revoked
certficate, that's all the "evidence" the judge will require. There will be a prop
lock on that plane that day.

George Patterson
Love, n.: A form of temporary insanity afflicting the young. It is curable
either by marriage or by removal of the afflicted from the circumstances
under which he incurred the condition. It is sometimes fatal, but more
often to the physician than to the patient.

"Doug FM" wrote in message
ble.rogers.com...
| Hope ATC never has to describe me as "orbiting like an idiot"!
|
| http://abclocal.go.com/wpvi/news/vid...pilottape.html

It is really too bad that he did not run into the nuclear power plant. It
would have been an interesting experiment to see just how much damage he
would have done to the thing.

On 2004-02-03 22:01:52 -0800, "C J Campbell"
said:

It is really too bad that he did not run into the nuclear power plant. It
would have been an interesting experiment to see just how much damage he
would have done to the thing.

Judging by the amount of damage we've seen a 172 do to steel & glass office
building, I'd have to say that the damage would have been minimal had he
hit the containment building or one of the cooling towers. Had he hit the
power transmission lines coming out of the plant, *that* would have been a
spectacle.

--
Larry Fransson
Seattle, WA
E-mail address changes regularly to thwart spam.

"Larry Fransson" wrote in message
news:2004020406002816807%grewsnoups@larryandjennyn et...
[...] Had he hit the
power transmission lines coming out of the plant, *that* would have been a
spectacle.

Nah...he would've just gotten strung up. Remember the guy who wound up in
the wires over at Boeing Field? And those weren't even high-tension power
lines.

C J Campbell wrote:

"Doug FM" wrote in message
ble.rogers.com...
| Hope ATC never has to describe me as "orbiting like an idiot"!
|
| http://abclocal.go.com/wpvi/news/vid...pilottape.html

It is really too bad that he did not run into the nuclear power plant. It
would have been an interesting experiment to see just how much damage he
would have done to the thing.



Actually the only damage would have been to the painting and the grass.

Nuclear power plant are designed (and tested) so that such accident
would cause any damage. I have seen a video of a plane sent into a
replication of the walls (several feet thick) of a nuclear plant. For
the simulation the plane was not really flying, it was rolling on a
train-like track at a speed similar to a flying (and falling) aircraft,
and it looked like to be a dual-engine way larger than a cessna. Result:
the plane was about 1 inch thick and the wall undamaged.

If a plane happens to crash into a nuclear plant and actually go through
the walls, I sure don't want to be close enough to experiment the result.

On 2004-02-06 00:13:45 -0800, Tom|420 said:

If a plane happens to crash into a nuclear plant and actually go
through the walls, I sure don't want to be close enough to experiment
the result.

Probably not as bad as what you're thinking. Once you get through the
containment building's walls, you have to get through the reactor's
shielding. There are probably two levels of shielding - one well
outside the reactor vessel itself, and another immediately surrounding
the reactor vessel. There will be at least several inches of lead and
steel in that shielding, and quite probably a couple feet of water or
other hydrogenous material. Then you have to break into the reactor
vessel itself, which is also made of some sort of metal a couple of
inches thick.

Anything with enough energy to do all of that will cause a lot of
damage no matter what it hits.

--
Larry Fransson
Seattle, WA
E-mail address changes regularly to thwart spam.

"Tom|420" wrote in message
.. .
|
| It is really too bad that he did not run into the nuclear power plant.
It
| would have been an interesting experiment to see just how much damage he
| would have done to the thing.
|
|
|
| Actually the only damage would have been to the painting and the grass.
|

True, but it would have been fun to watch those who are permanently freaked
out to freak out even more. "He hit the power plant! My God! If he had been
just 15 times the size of a Boeing 747 and going mach 10, he might have
chipped some of the concrete! We need to close all the plants! We need to
close all the airports! We need to bury ourselves in mile-deep bunkers!"