Experimentals To Be Banned To Rural Airports?

"Bertie the Bunyip" wrote in message
...


Nope. It's you..


Bertie

You and Mikey Mouth make good hat dancing partners.

Have you two been dance partners long?

Did you take lessons together?

Are you two a couple, or just dance partners?

"Bertie the Bunyip" wrote in message
...

What's your point, wannabe boi?


Bertie


You're the one with a point lamer. It's on the top of your empty head.

"Ramsey" @##@.^net wrote in :


"Bertie the Bunyip" wrote in message
...


Nope. It's you..


Bertie

You and Mikey Mouth make good hat dancing partners.

Have you two been dance partners long?

Did you take lessons together?

Are you two a couple, or just dance partners?

Ooow! Gay lames!

You haven't done one of those in ages, Maxie.

Good k00k!


Bertie

On Fri, 29 Aug 2008 17:39:16 -0400, Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe wrote:
Fokken good rant, D00d



'Clark County Aviation Director Randy Walker said he thinks experimental
airplanes should be restricted to airports that are located in less
densely populated areas. "I think the regulatory process on airport
systems need to be revisited in the coming weeks. I am going to ask to
meet with the members of our congressional delegation to see if something
can be done," he said at a news conference. "I do not believe under our
circumstances that experimental and high-risk aircraft operations, such
as training and solo flights, belong in an urban airport," he said.'


Ban homebuilts and Cessna 150's??? What is he thinking? Isn't he concerned
about aviation safety? This makes no sense at all. Did Mr. Walker learn
NOTHING from 9/11? How could he be so unaware? Isn't the danger presented
by large transport aircraft painfully clear? Does he have any concern for
public safety at all?

Yes, small aircraft are sometimes involved in accidents - but what is the
outcome? Beyond the occupants, it exceedingly rare to involve any innocent
bystanders at all. But what happens when one of the flying WMDs comes down
in a populated area? THOUSANDS DEAD!!!
Can you imagine what would happen if a fully loaded 767 were to experience
problems and crash in to a crowded casino - spewing 5,000 gallons of jet
fuel onto thousands of innocent, unsuspecting people? People that he is
supposed to be protecting!

How can he, or any of us, live with ourselves knowing that this kind of
tragedy isn't just possible, but given time, inevitable?

How can he continue to turn a blind eye to this tremendous threat to human
life?

How can we not DEMAND that these large aircraft be banned from flying over
or landing in the vicinity of a populated area? Clearly, at a MINIMUM, any
aircraft with a gross weight over 30,000 pound should absolutely forbidden
to approach within 50 miles of a populated area. And, I suspect, that if
Mr. Walker were to consider this carefully, he would agree that the only
way that we can be safe is if large aircraft are banned from the sky
completely.

We went to war with Iraq over WMDs, why do we ignore the ones flying over
our heads every day?

On Fri, 29 Aug 2008 21:19:04 +0000, Scott wrote:

BT wrote:

Sadly another airplane has crashed in the vicinity of the North Las Vegas
airport.
A Piper Navajo departed VGT and shortly after departure he called the tower
that he was returning with a rough running engine. The pilot was solo, no
pax. Witnesses on the ground reported the aircraft was on fire and fire
crews were responding to meet the aircraft at the airport when it crashed
short of the runway in a local neighborhood. There were no fatalities to
people on the ground.

BT

"T. "Tim" Timothy Haag aka HyoogeUmp56" wrote in
message ...

http://www.avweb.com/eletter/archives/avflash/1199-full.html#198676

Was that an "experimental" Navajo? Didn't think so. Looks like
certified airplanes crash too.

The pilot got out, crawled on top, and was rescued about 20 metres
offshore by 3 drunk carpenters. Who used a mini-surf board. On the way
to shore, the pilot, over 70 said "Man, I think I had a stroke or
something".

So let's outlaw old pilots...in Navahos...near drunk carpenters.

"hummingbird" wrote in message
.. .
On Fri, 29 Aug 2008 17:39:16 -0400, Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe wrote:
Fokken good rant, D00d


Thanks.

--
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.

"Gezellig" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 29 Aug 2008 21:19:04 +0000, Scott wrote:

BT wrote:

Sadly another airplane has crashed in the vicinity of the North Las
Vegas
airport.
A Piper Navajo departed VGT and shortly after departure he called the
tower
that he was returning with a rough running engine. The pilot was solo,
no
pax. Witnesses on the ground reported the aircraft was on fire and fire
crews were responding to meet the aircraft at the airport when it
crashed
short of the runway in a local neighborhood. There were no fatalities to
people on the ground.

BT

"T. "Tim" Timothy Haag aka HyoogeUmp56" wrote in
message ...

http://www.avweb.com/eletter/archives/avflash/1199-full.html#198676

Was that an "experimental" Navajo? Didn't think so. Looks like
certified airplanes crash too.

The pilot got out, crawled on top, and was rescued about 20 metres
offshore by 3 drunk carpenters. Who used a mini-surf board. On the way
to shore, the pilot, over 70 said "Man, I think I had a stroke or
something".

So let's outlaw old pilots...in Navahos...near drunk carpenters.


So I have to ask? How many "strokes" did it take for him to get to shore?
:-)

--
Regards, Bob F.

On Aug 28, 6:27*pm, Mxsmanic wrote:

By definition, experimental aircraft have unknown characteristics. *

Anthony, you are wrong once again.

Tell us all, did you get this information from a reliable source? You
claimed to get your "one must fly by instruments" info from a reliable
source. I asked you several times to give the source information which
you never did do.

Anthony, you are a liar. How about that long-awaited source
information which you so conveniently ignored? Will you ignore even
this request and continue your string of false information?

Ricky

On Aug 29, 8:45*am, "Ramsey" @##@.^net wrote:

Do your own homework piggy. Put up, shut, or you my b**ch.

In other words...you were wrong.

Ricky

On Aug 29, 12:55*pm, Mxsmanic wrote:

My impression is that many aircraft are called experimental in order to get
around certain troublesome regulations.

Your impression is wrong. You were wrong with your first response. Why
don't you respond to that and say something like; "sorry, I was
wrong?"

How many hours had they flown elsewhere before they visited those large
airports?

You were wrong and typed a lie. Now you are hiding behind these new
questions.

Ricky