A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Piloting
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

New security bulletin



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old June 7th 04, 11:28 PM
gatt
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default New security bulletin


Filed an IFR plan yesterday and got the new McMinnville bulletin. Don't
remember it verbatim, but it's in regard to airspace usage during certain
pro and collegiate sporting events, open assemblies of 30,000 people or
more.

Then it said something about monitoring 121.5 and listening to instructions
if you're intercepted or if you see signal flares. The bulletin says that
if you fail to follow instructions, "force" may be applied.

Meanwhile, flying over the Columbia last week I saw a couple more bulk
freighters coming in. All those stacks of virtually-unscreened shipping
containers...
-c


  #2  
Old June 8th 04, 03:26 AM
Chris Ehlbeck
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

I got a briefing yesterday for a VFR cross country and noticed the very same
thing about the flares and the possibility for the use of force for
non-compliance.
--
Chris Ehlbeck, PPASEL
"It's a license to learn."

"gatt" wrote in message
...

Filed an IFR plan yesterday and got the new McMinnville bulletin. Don't
remember it verbatim, but it's in regard to airspace usage during certain
pro and collegiate sporting events, open assemblies of 30,000 people or
more.

Then it said something about monitoring 121.5 and listening to

instructions
if you're intercepted or if you see signal flares. The bulletin says that
if you fail to follow instructions, "force" may be applied.

Meanwhile, flying over the Columbia last week I saw a couple more bulk
freighters coming in. All those stacks of virtually-unscreened shipping
containers...
-c




  #3  
Old June 8th 04, 05:45 AM
Vigo
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

lol can you imagine the public backlash if an f15 blasted someone's c150 out
of the sky. I think this is an election year for you guys, so have no fear I
can't see them shooting anyone down.
"Chris Ehlbeck" wrote in message
.. .
I got a briefing yesterday for a VFR cross country and noticed the very

same
thing about the flares and the possibility for the use of force for
non-compliance.
--
Chris Ehlbeck, PPASEL
"It's a license to learn."

"gatt" wrote in message
...

Filed an IFR plan yesterday and got the new McMinnville bulletin. Don't
remember it verbatim, but it's in regard to airspace usage during

certain
pro and collegiate sporting events, open assemblies of 30,000 people or
more.

Then it said something about monitoring 121.5 and listening to

instructions
if you're intercepted or if you see signal flares. The bulletin says

that
if you fail to follow instructions, "force" may be applied.

Meanwhile, flying over the Columbia last week I saw a couple more bulk
freighters coming in. All those stacks of virtually-unscreened shipping
containers...
-c






  #4  
Old June 8th 04, 07:01 AM
Teacherjh
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


lol can you imagine the public backlash if an f15 blasted someone's c150 out
of the sky.


Yes. I can imagine the newsgroups full of posts complaining about that idiot
pilot and the harm he did to general aviation. I can see the administration
feeding the press the story that this was a huge threat and pumping up what
terrorist damage a small airplane can do, and that there was no time to
consider alternatives (like the cops who shoot somebody who brandishes a toy
gun). I can see this as JUSTIFYING huge TFRs around events, with multple rings
and multple escalations of force for intrusions.

I hope it doesn't come to that, and there is a good chance that it wouldn't.
However, I would not bet on it.

Jose

--
(for Email, make the obvious changes in my address)
  #5  
Old June 8th 04, 10:18 AM
NW_PILOT
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

It would not take long for the fighter's to get there from PDX and to a
fighter a C-150 would be like a target that is standing still.

Hey gatt ever been at the end of runway 28L at PDX near the embassy suites
when a flock or fighters takes off using runway 10R? Talk about going def
every time I see them go I never have my camcorder with me one of these days
ill get video of it.


"Teacherjh" wrote in message
...

lol can you imagine the public backlash if an f15 blasted someone's c150

out
of the sky.


Yes. I can imagine the newsgroups full of posts complaining about that

idiot
pilot and the harm he did to general aviation. I can see the

administration
feeding the press the story that this was a huge threat and pumping up

what
terrorist damage a small airplane can do, and that there was no time to
consider alternatives (like the cops who shoot somebody who brandishes a

toy
gun). I can see this as JUSTIFYING huge TFRs around events, with multple

rings
and multple escalations of force for intrusions.

I hope it doesn't come to that, and there is a good chance that it

wouldn't.
However, I would not bet on it.

Jose

--
(for Email, make the obvious changes in my address)



  #6  
Old June 8th 04, 10:49 AM
Cub Driver
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


(like the cops who shoot somebody who brandishes a toy
gun).


Personally, I am generally willing to give the cop the benefit of the
doubt, and I would probably be even more likely to extend it to the
pilot who shot down a plane that didn't follow instructions.

(Unless it were a Cub, of course. Anybody who shoots down a Cub
deserves Leavenworth or whatever they give to bad troops these days.)

all the best -- Dan Ford
email: (put Cubdriver in subject line)

The Warbird's Forum
www.warbirdforum.com
The Piper Cub Forum www.pipercubforum.com
  #7  
Old June 8th 04, 11:52 AM
Jay Masino
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Vigo wrote:
lol can you imagine the public backlash if an f15 blasted someone's c150 out
of the sky. I think this is an election year for you guys, so have no fear I
can't see them shooting anyone down.


This sounds like every day life in and around the Wasington ADIZ. They
don't blast you out of the sky (ADIZ), but they do force you to land.

--- Jay


--
__!__
Jay and Teresa Masino ___(_)___
http://www2.ari.net/jmasino ! ! !
http://www.oceancityairport.com
http://www.oc-adolfos.com
  #8  
Old June 8th 04, 02:15 PM
John T
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Jay Masino wrote:

This sounds like every day life in and around the Wasington ADIZ.
They don't blast you out of the sky (ADIZ), but they do force you to
land.


Maybe "force" isn't the right word. They don't force pilots to land any
more than a cop forces you to pull over by turning on his lights.

However, the *implied* threat of force makes the non-terrorists follow
instructions.

--
John T
http://tknowlogy.com/TknoFlyer
http://pocketgear.com/products_searc...veloperid=4415
____________________


  #9  
Old June 8th 04, 02:37 PM
Malcolm Teas
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"gatt" wrote in message news: Then it said something about monitoring 121.5 and listening to instructions
if you're intercepted or if you see signal flares. The bulletin says that
if you fail to follow instructions, "force" may be applied.


Yeah? Well, welcome to what we in the Wash DC ADIZ have been dealing
with for over a year now. Note that it's been said that if it
continues here in the DC area, it'll spread. So, enjoy. Just keep up
with the interpretations of how to work in that area.

Meanwhile, flying over the Columbia last week I saw a couple more bulk
freighters coming in. All those stacks of virtually-unscreened shipping
containers...


Yup. The internal consistency of the TSA is staggering. Stop the
little bitty planes that never hurt anyone, permit the commercials who
where used like that, and permit the massive cargo that's a lot more
likely to hurt and is the vehicle of choice for large-scale smuggling.

-Malcolm Teas
  #10  
Old June 8th 04, 02:51 PM
Teacherjh
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

It would not take long for the fighter's to get there from PDX

Yes, but we are talking about what peopl would say, not what is or is not true.


Personally, I am generally willing to give the cop the benefit of the
doubt, and I would probably be even more likely to extend it to the
pilot who shot down a plane that didn't follow instructions.


.... which, while maybe reasonable, makes my scenario more likely to succeed.

Jose
--
(for Email, make the obvious changes in my address)
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
ISRAELI LINK IN US TORTURE TECHNIQUES MORRIS434 Naval Aviation 0 May 12th 04 05:14 AM
ISRAELI LINK IN US TORTURE TECHNIQUES MORRIS434 Military Aviation 0 May 12th 04 05:13 AM
27 Apr 2004 - Today’s Military, Veteran, War and National Security News Otis Willie Naval Aviation 0 April 27th 04 11:54 PM
TSA's General Aviation Airport Security Recommendations Might Become Requirements Larry Dighera Piloting 1 February 25th 04 06:11 PM
another "either you are with us ..." story Jeff Franks Piloting 2 December 31st 03 01:04 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:49 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.