More stupidity about nuked-up Cessnas

Andrew Gideon wrote:

Newark would make a great GA airport grin.

It would be condos in no time.

George Patterson
Why do men's hearts beat faster, knees get weak, throats become dry,
and they think irrationally when a woman wears leather clothing?
Because she smells like a new truck.

The article shows that the author did her homework, and reported the AOPA
side of the story fairly accurately. That's proof that it's working, and
we
have to keep hammering away at it.

By including a couple of paragraphs with differing views isn't doing her
home work. Good example right at the top:

"After 9/11, the Federal Aviation Administration closed all small airports
for almost three months while officials contemplated whether to require bag
searches, metal detectors, and other such security measures."

All small airports closed for three months? Excuse me?

Yes the article does wind up presenting both sides of the story, but in a
typical attention grabbing ways, it fosters the perception of small planes =
terrorist threat.

Quoting one professor who says that Al Qaeda wants small planes frames the
story. Even though several unattributed statements are presenting scoffing
at the threats, the author clearly wants the reader to come away thinking
about a vague threat. Fear is a great motivator.

I could imagine what she'd write about the Old World...

"Dateline Spain, 1492AD. Since the first sailors took the water, it's been
assumed that going traveling too far will result in certain death - either
from sea serpents or simply falling off the edge of Earth. Although
astronomers have said for centuries that the world is a sphere, many critics
disagree - citing countless examples of where ships have traveled out of
sight and never returned. Christopher Columbus is on one such journey, to
find a new trading route to India. While Columbus claims confidence in the
'world-is-round' theory, some critics have noted that no word as to his
whereabouts has been forthcoming...."

Meanwhile - the world has changed, and no, it is no longer cool to park an
aiplane in an open access area with the key readily available. Get
real, and get over it.

I disagree that the world changed, but that's another argument.

When was it ever cool to leave a key in a plane? I don't think the rate of
stolen aircraft has changed one way or another after 9/11. There is a much
greater risk to having your plane or radios stolen (with key available or
not) than there is of it being stolen and used in a terrorist operation.

Meanwhile - the world has changed, and no, it is no longer cool to park an
aiplane in an open access area with the key readily available. Get
real, and get over it.

I take it you are referring to the DXR (Danbury CT) drunken joyride to
HPN (Westchester NY). I'm based at DXR, and spoke with the airport
manager, an instructor at the FBO whose plane was stolen, and several
other people who are very close to the incident. The key was not
"readily available", and all keys to the plane were accounted for.
However, it is likely that keys to another plane also happened to work
on this plane, and the person who stole the plane likely had access to
some of these other keys, being as he was a maintenance apprentice of
some sort.

Airplane keys are just not all that secure. They don't have that many
pins, and they are not high quality. (Nor would high quality keys and
locks make much of a difference when clipping the grounding lead and
swinging the prop will get the engine going).

The airplane was not in an "open access" area - Danbury is fenced in all
around. A gate was apparantly broken by the intruder. Granted, it
might not have been a jail-quality gate, but is that the way we really
want to live? Even if it were, good wirecutters would get through a
fence pretty easily.

And if not at Danbury, at any number of tiny strips all over the
country, where people believe in freedom and the integrety of their
fellow citizens.

Jose
--
You may not get what you pay for, but you sure as hell pay for what you get.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

On Thu, 30 Jun 2005 15:35:32 -0400, Jonathan Goodish
wrote in
::

Since most folks drive, there isn't a push or desire to restrict THEIR
freedoms.

Ah, the tyranny of the majority. It'll take real statesmen to save us
from that.

On Thu, 30 Jun 2005 22:22:23 GMT, Jose
wrote in : :

I take it you are referring to the DXR (Danbury CT)

He was probably referring to the 14 year old in Alabama. The keys
were on the clipboard in the C-150's unlocked cockpit.

In article ,
Larry Dighera wrote:
Since most folks drive, there isn't a push or desire to restrict THEIR
freedoms.

Ah, the tyranny of the majority. It'll take real statesmen to save us
from that.


Why do you think it's so easy to get a driver's license? No politician
wants to tell grandma that she can't have a driver's license anymore.



JKG

In article ,
says...


I disagree that the world changed, but that's another argument.

When was it ever cool to leave a key in a plane? I don't think the rate of
stolen aircraft has changed one way or another after 9/11. There is a much
greater risk to having your plane or radios stolen (with key available or
not) than there is of it being stolen and used in a terrorist operation.


I agree with both statements. But public perception has changed (maybe "the
world has changed" is a bit over the top, but that's what I meant). And it's
not completely a bad thing - a little better security isn't going to hurt us
that much. Planes were stolen before 9/11, and though less publicized, that
was equally dangerous.
If, as a pilot community, we do not show some responsiveness to public
concern, however mis-informed we consider some of it to be, we will be taken
to task for that attitude, and the medecine could get very bitter. Politics is
part of life - stubborn failure to recognize this weakens us considerably.

G Faris

In article , Greg Farris
wrote:

a little better security isn't going to hurt us that much.

A little better security might even be a good thing. But but but
what is being pushed on us now isn't "little," "better," or even "security."

--
Bob Noel
no one likes an educated mule

In article ,
lid says...


In article , Greg Farris
wrote:

a little better security isn't going to hurt us that much.

A little better security might even be a good thing. But but but
what is being pushed on us now isn't "little," "better," or even "security."


Well, that's certainly true in a large sense,but asking pilots not to leave
the key in their plane is a "little" thing, I believe it is better, and it is
certainly more secure.

I'm not disagreeing with you, or others here about how bad some recent
proposed measures are, but one of the publicized cases recently apparently did
involve such a stupid security lapse. That type of thing would require very
little effort to reduce or eliminate, and it brings bad press, in big neon
lights to everyone in the nation.

G Faris

Since most folks drive, there isn't a push or desire to restrict THEIR
freedoms.

Ah, the tyranny of the majority. It'll take real statesmen to save us
from that.

Why do you think it's so easy to get a driver's license? No politician
wants to tell grandma that she can't have a driver's license anymore.

I don't think you are, but let us all remember to not confuse a drivers
*license* with a pilots *certificate*. The roads are owned (generally) by
government - the skies are not. I don't want to see politicians think of
airspace in the same way they think of road and rail travel. *shudder*