Vehicular Ramp Access

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

On Mar 20, 3:39 pm, "Marco Leon" wrote:
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


Hanscom Field, MA (KBED) used to have fairly liberal access with
vehicles but that all changed post 9-11. No unescorted access unless
your vehicle has a RAMP sticker and those are only available to
businesses with need of access like FBOs. It is possible to be
allowed access through a company controlled gate provided you are
escorted and monitored while on the ramp. In practice this means that
limos can drive up to the business jets to offload and load
passengers. The most onerous thing is that all recip aircraft are
required to have either a propeller lock or to be chained to a tie
down while on the airport. This includes the Twin Bonanza with half
the tail and one engine missing. Turboprop aircraft do not need a
propeller lock.

John Dupre'

On Mar 20, 1:39 pm, "Marco Leon" wrote:
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

No, in fact I've been happily surprised how many larger (including
airline and military co-use) airports still allow me to drive my
rental car up to the plane. They probably understand that we are not a
threat.
-Robert

"John" wrote in message:
Hanscom Field, MA (KBED) used to have fairly liberal access with
vehicles but that all changed post 9-11. No unescorted access unless
your vehicle has a RAMP sticker and those are only available to
businesses with need of access like FBOs. It is possible to be
allowed access through a company controlled gate provided you are
escorted and monitored while on the ramp. In practice this means that
limos can drive up to the business jets to offload and load
passengers. The most onerous thing is that all recip aircraft are
required to have either a propeller lock or to be chained to a tie
down while on the airport. This includes the Twin Bonanza with half
the tail and one engine missing. Turboprop aircraft do not need a
propeller lock.

Thanks for the info. A few questions if I may John.
1) How do the owners perform preventative maintenance on their aircraft?
Specifically, how do they get tools and supplies to the aircraft?
2) Was there an issue with handicap access?
3) Has there been any pedestrian accidents on the ramp that may have been
prevented if there was vehicular access?
4) Was there a fight before the airport took away access or was it close
enough to 9-11 that there was no pushback?
5) Does Hanscom have a photo badging system (or other security mechanisms)
for pilots/owners or is the removal of vehicular access the main security
measure?

There were other good questions that came up during the meeting but these
were the main ones. I'm curious as to if or how the airport addressed
similar issues.

I appreciate the post.

Marco

No, in fact I've been happily surprised how many larger (including
airline and military co-use) airports still allow me to drive my
rental car up to the plane. They probably understand that we are not a
threat.

Agreed. Best of all, common sense seems to have reared its ugly head
again, nationwide, since 9/11.

Right after the terrortist attacks on New York and Washington, nearly
everyone restricted drive-on traffic at airports. Now, on our recent
trip across the country (WV, NC, SC, AL, TN, MS), we were once again
able to pick up our rental cars right at our airplane at every airport
we visited.

I'm sorry to see Marco's airport going the other way, against the
grain.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

"Jay Honeck" wrote in message

Agreed. Best of all, common sense seems to have reared its ugly head
again, nationwide, since 9/11.

Right after the terrortist attacks on New York and Washington, nearly
everyone restricted drive-on traffic at airports. Now, on our recent
trip across the country (WV, NC, SC, AL, TN, MS), we were once again
able to pick up our rental cars right at our airplane at every airport
we visited.

I'm sorry to see Marco's airport going the other way, against the
grain.

The timing is what makes it all suspect. There hasn't been any significant
events that would prompt such an action. It can be argued that the Cory
Lidle crash was one but that can be argued by both sides quite convincingly.

The Airport Director keeps citing the "security experts" as "they" refuse to
name them but will only divulge that they are on the "state" level. Yeah,
OK..experts.

The max payload that any plane on the ramp can easily be stuffed into a
couple of suitcases (if it's dense enough, only one) that can be rolled
across the ramp with nary a suspicious glance. That goes for bad people as
well. The thing is, I think most if not all of the tenants will be open to a
significant increase in security short of the complete denial of vehicular
access. I even think there will be little pushback if they made us foot the
bill for vehicle passes (they have a gate system already and would just need
new card readers). It seems illogical that they would cause a firestorm of
resentment and probably a host of lawsuits when they could avoid it by
coordinating a common solution that will still maintain virtually the same
target level of security.

Unless, of course, there are other factors at play here...

Marco

These things have a rhythm and cycle.. The Bush administration is now
having the courts finally move against some the the decisions they
made early on, so 6 to 8 years is aobut what it takes for these things
to wind through the judicial system...

What it will take for GA to loosen the shackles of the tyranny of the
Patriot Act is someone with the money and determination to make a
court challenge against an airport authority on either constitutional
grounds or of simply not having the authority to arbitrarily restrict
the access of legitimate users of public spaces when there has not
been a single incident of having vehicle access to the ramp having
caused a terrorist incident...
The plaintiff will lose in the lower courts (they almost always side
with government/city hall) but the superior courts tend to take a
longer view and sooner or later some federal judge will vaguely
remember that powers not specifically allocated to the government are
reserved to the people gosh, what a surprise and that discriminating
against vehicle access by pilots while allowing limo drivers, etc., is
discrimination by class of person, etc...

denny

On Mar 21, 8:47 am, "Denny" wrote:

What it will take for GA to loosen the shackles of the tyranny of the
Patriot Act is someone with the money and determination to make a
court challenge against an airport authority on either constitutional
grounds or of simply not having the authority to arbitrarily restrict
the access of legitimate users of public spaces when there has not
been a single incident of having vehicle access to the ramp having
caused a terrorist incident...

Hmmm, how did you go from GA ramp access to Patriot Act. The ability
to listen to terrorist place calls to Iran has nothing to do with ramp
access. How in the world do you find the Patriot Act affecting ramp
access?

-Robert

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

Jay Honeck wrote:

No, in fact I've been happily surprised how many larger (including
airline and military co-use) airports still allow me to drive my
rental car up to the plane. They probably understand that we are not a
threat.


Agreed. Best of all, common sense seems to have reared its ugly head
again, nationwide, since 9/11.

Right after the terrortist attacks on New York and Washington, nearly
everyone restricted drive-on traffic at airports. Now, on our recent
trip across the country (WV, NC, SC, AL, TN, MS), we were once again
able to pick up our rental cars right at our airplane at every airport
we visited.


Here in Montana we didn't change one iota. If you could drive on the
airport before you still can. No new fences, no new locks, no new rules.