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

Pilot runs out of fuel waiting for security clearance



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old July 10th 03, 01:42 PM
Dennis O'Connor
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In the age of video conferencing it is high time that congress be disbursed
back their districts where they HAVE to talk to their constituents - instead
the professional procurers hanging out in the hallways...
Let the terroristas figure out how to have a mass event in hundreds of
individual districts...

Denny


Who, exactly, are they trying to protect? If the only motive is to
protect individual elected officials, then I contend that a Cessna with
500 lbs of explosives is a very BAD weapon. The pilot would have to know
exactly where the official(s) was, and would have to get relatively close
to them (in aeronautical terms). In addition, our Constitution provides
for the replacement of elected officials in an orderly fashion.



  #22  
Old July 10th 03, 05:33 PM
Dennis O'Connor
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

The cynical steak in me says that the real reason for the stadiums/Orlando
TFR is so that the money men don't have to share the advertising to 50,000
people with some two bit, pilot towing an "eat at joe's" sign...

Denny

The stadium
TFRs, however, do nothing to mitigate this security threat or provide
additional safety to the stadium attendees. Absolutely nothing.




  #23  
Old July 10th 03, 06:44 PM
Peter Duniho
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Dennis O'Connor" wrote in message
...
The cynical steak in me says that the real reason for the stadiums/Orlando
TFR is so that the money men don't have to share the advertising to 50,000
people with some two bit, pilot towing an "eat at joe's" sign...


Is that a sirloin or filet?

Seriously though, I don't think you're being all that cynical at all. IMHO,
much of the aftermath of 9/11 has been politically and economically
motivated, with very little concern at all for genuine security issues.
Chalk it up to human nature, or whatever, but plenty of people jumped to
take advantage of the situation.

It's not a stretch at all to think that people with a vested interest in
advertising revenue for sporting events took advantage and lobbied for the
restriction of advertisers that don't cut them in.

Pete


  #24  
Old July 10th 03, 07:58 PM
Paul Baechler
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In article ,
Judah wrote:

A suicide bomber in Jerusalem, with 30 pounds of explosives strapped to
his belt, can murder and injure dozens of innocent people in restaurants,
night clubs, markets, and bus stations. You don't believe that 500 pounds
of explosives in a suicide-bomber's Cessna is a potential security
threat?


500 pounds of explosives in a suicide-bomber's Cessna is a potential
security threat, but so is 30 pounds of explosives strapped to a belt.
Are you advocating we strip-search every person entering a public
building? If not, why single out the Cessna?

--
Paul Baechler


  #25  
Old July 10th 03, 08:08 PM
Jay Masino
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Captain Wubba wrote:
I don't think they will stand the test of time either. But that is
partly a point I was trying to make earlier. It takes time for
'appropriate' meausres to weed themselves out from the bogus ones. But
I disagree that GA is being 'unfairly' singled out. The last
significant attack on the US came from aviation. So it is quite
natural that the government will react *against* aviation. Just like
if the scumbags had destoyed the WTC with a bunch of rented U-Hauls,
we'd be seeing restrictions on renting U-Hauls. snip


There weren't any unusual restrictions against rental trucks imposed after
Oklahoma City.

mistaken as that appearance might be). So, over time, we show how GA
benefits people. We do Angel Flights, and Young Eagle Flights, and
people will see that there isn't a threat from my Cessna 172. And the
reluctance to eliminate silly TFRs will eventually disappear.


Realistically speaking, the average citizen doesn't pay any attention to
Angel Flights or Young Eagle flights. Those sort of things reach out to a
relatively small group (as compared to the population of the country). I
doubt that the "average" person will ever stop think of us as a threat.


But the reality is that planes were used to murder 3000 people. And an
airplane was stolen by a kid and flown into a skycraper. snip


Big ass airliners killed 3000 people, not 2500 lb. Cessnas.

We simply must pick our battles.


I suspect you aren't living in the Washington FRZ/ADIZ or underneath one
of the other TFRs.

-- Jay

__!__
Jay and Teresa Masino ___(_)___
http://www2.ari.net/jmasino/ ! ! !

Checkout http://www.oc-adolfos.com/
for the best Italian food in Ocean City, MD and...
Checkout http://www.brolow.com/ for authentic Blues music on Delmarva

  #26  
Old July 11th 03, 12:35 AM
David Reinhart
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Where I come from we sell that kind of stuff by the truckload for fertilizer.

What types of aircraft were involved in the 9/11 attacks? Airliners. What were the first aircraft back into
the air after 9/11? Airliners. Are there any airports in the U.S. today closed to airline traffic? No, only
GA. Do the presidential TFRs exclude airliners? No, only Part 91 & 135 aircraft. Did GA get any monetary
compensation from the government for losses as a result of post-9/11 restrictions? No, only the airlines.

Anybody who thinks GA hasn't been unfairly hit since 9/11 is living in a fantasy world.

Dave Reinhart


Captain Wubba wrote:

I don't think they will stand the test of time either. But that is
partly a point I was trying to make earlier. It takes time for
'appropriate' meausres to weed themselves out from the bogus ones. But
I disagree that GA is being 'unfairly' singled out. The last
significant attack on the US came from aviation. So it is quite
natural that the government will react *against* aviation. Just like
if the scumbags had destoyed the WTC with a bunch of rented U-Hauls,
we'd be seeing restrictions on renting U-Hauls. You'd go in to rent
one, and you'd need to prove you were an American citizen, provide 3
forms of picture ID, have a background check, etc. You can't protect
against every possible threat. But the natural human reaction is to
protect against *demonstrated* threats. And, like it or not, it has
been very clearly demonstrated that airplanes can be used to do great
harm. So the government over-reacted in certain ways. Over time, we
will get them to loosen those restrictions. But screaming 'That's not
fair! That's not fair! I want to be able to fly over the stadiums
again!' doesn't help our cause. It makes us look like we are more
concerned with our own toys than withe the security of the US (as
mistaken as that appearance might be). So, over time, we show how GA
benefits people. We do Angel Flights, and Young Eagle Flights, and
people will see that there isn't a threat from my Cessna 172. And the
reluctance to eliminate silly TFRs will eventually disappear.

But the reality is that planes were used to murder 3000 people. And an
airplane was stolen by a kid and flown into a skycraper. And people
are afraid. And when people are afraid, their repsentatives do what it
takes to help calm them. And if that somewhat infringes on our
*privilege* (note not 'right', but 'privilege') to fly how we want,
then the best way to fix that is to show over time how mistaken it is.
We simply must pick our battles.

Cap


(John) wrote in message . com...
Judah wrote in message ...
A suicide bomber in Jerusalem, with 30 pounds of explosives strapped to
his belt, can murder and injure dozens of innocent people in restaurants,
night clubs, markets, and bus stations. You don't believe that 500 pounds
of explosives in a suicide-bomber's Cessna is a potential security
threat?



It is a security threat, as you rightly point out. The stadium
TFRs, however, do nothing to mitigate this security threat or provide
additional safety to the stadium attendees. Absolutely nothing.

You might argue that the general public feels "better" and "more
secure" with these restrictions in place. It saves them, for example,
of having to listen to the sound of a small airplane close by and
letting their imaginations take over. i.e. - they can enjoy their
event in peace without being reminded of the terrible possibilities a
crazy person can inflict.

I believe this unfairly singles out GA as a risk factor, as other more
likely ways exist for a terrorist to deliver an explosive device. I
also believe that the government felt they "had to do something" to
protect the population, and "had to be seen" doing something regarding
the perceived aircraft threat - hence, the TFRs. This is a terrible
precedent or reason for a government restriction - an ineffective one
that is in place only because the government felt they had to do
something.

I don't think the stadium TFRs will stand the test of time, or an
objective review. I am just not sure when that review will take
place.


  #27  
Old July 11th 03, 03:23 AM
Sydney Hoeltzli
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Judah wrote:

IMHO the Ryder Truck story ain't it. If you don't believe me, next time you
get pulled over for running a traffic light, call your governor and ask him
to dismiss your case. After all, there is no light at the busy intersection
a few blocks down!


Non sequitor.

That's effectively the same case you are making with the
Ryder Truck


I don't think so.

The point is: in an open society, there is the need to assess risk
accurately, in order to balance freedom and risk. There is also
a need for accountability, to demand that the effort and expense
put into security measures be properly directed to reduce risk
effectively.

IMO, the TFR and the Washington ADIZ fail both tests. That is the
point of bringing up the physical and economic damage a Ryder truck
full of explosives in the right place could do: we know this is a
method these groups might consider, because they've used truck bombs
in the past. Yet we've changed absolutely nothing in the truck
rental process. Driver's license, credit card, here's the keys,
there's the truck.

The "other side of the debate" is the fact that 500 lbs of
explosives in a Cessna is scary to the general public.


And why do you feel is this the case?

Sydney

  #28  
Old July 11th 03, 06:22 AM
Judah
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"John Harlow" wrote in
:


This whole thing is either going to blow over in another year or two,
or it's going to get worse. Do you think that you are going to be able
to do anything about it if the TSA decides to put in Permanent
Restrictions that ARE effective at protecting the country from a GA
Suicide Bomber?


You have totally missed the points.

1 - TSRs _only_ impact law abiding people. Circles on a sectional will
not stop someone out to kill themselves.


True for small TFRs like the stadium TFRs. But not true for the ADIZ and
larger TFRs (like 30NM Presidential ones). If a controller sees a 1200
squawk within 30NM of Washington, DC, what do you think happens next?

2 - GA had *nothing* to do with 9/11, and GA is the *only* group
affected by TSRs.


GA is what the people are afraid of because the TSA has been able to
convince people that waving a metal detector wand in front of all the
passengers on airlines and taking away tweasers is security enough to
cover them, and now they are safe. "But what about those little planes
who don't go through security?" people ask. So the TSA's answer is, "We
put restrictions on them, and now you are safe again."

What "restrictions" could they possibly put in place to effectively
prevent a "GA suicide bomber" anyway? Pull a Daley and bulldoze all
the grass strips and farms in the country?


How about metal detectors and airline-style security systems in all
airports? Or Permanent Flight Restrictions in the areas that are now
Temporary, or more ADIZ Zones preventing GA pilots from flying over
populated areas without discrete transponder codes and two-way
communication with ATC?

  #29  
Old July 11th 03, 06:56 AM
Pete Zaitcev
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Wed, 09 Jul 2003 11:04:33 -0400, John Harlow wrote:

In the US the only real choices at the presidential level are Democrats
and Republicans


Unfortunately, it only seems that way because most people don't think
other parties stand a chance. However, I think as more people get fed up
with personal liberties (and incomes) getting gobbled up by government,
more will seriously consider alternatives.

Check out www.lp.org if you have a few minutes.


Have you ever heard about Harry Browne? The same dick who grabbed
control of Libertarian party and turned it into his pocket toy.
It has nothing to with libertarians now.

The most important thing about alternative parties you should know
is that they are populated with and governed by political rejects who
have a lot of ambition but no ability to make it in life (that is,
in the two majors). This is the reason they keep losing, BTW.

-- Pete

  #30  
Old July 11th 03, 02:39 PM
John Harlow
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

1 - TSRs _only_ impact law abiding people. Circles on a sectional will
not stop someone out to kill themselves.


True for small TFRs like the stadium TFRs. But not true for the ADIZ and
larger TFRs (like 30NM Presidential ones). If a controller sees a 1200
squawk within 30NM of Washington, DC, what do you think happens next?


Well, it has happend many times so far and I've seen no action taken (i.e.
blowing them out of the sky) which would have stopped a suicide bomber. So,
how have TSRs been effective? None whatsoever. They're just a nusiance.

2 - GA had *nothing* to do with 9/11, and GA is the *only* group
affected by TSRs.


GA is what the people are afraid of


Where do you get THIS from?

because the TSA has been able to
convince people that waving a metal detector wand in front of all the
passengers on airlines and taking away tweasers is security enough to
cover them, and now they are safe. "But what about those little planes
who don't go through security?" people ask.


What people? What is your source for such statements?

So the TSA's answer is, "We
put restrictions on them, and now you are safe again."


Take the kid who crashed into the Bank Of America building in florida. No
TSR would have stopped that, BTW. And actually it showed how little
capacity a small plane has for destruction. I believe a person's window and
desk was demolished. Frankly, it was good for GA.

What "restrictions" could they possibly put in place to effectively
prevent a "GA suicide bomber" anyway? Pull a Daley and bulldoze all
the grass strips and farms in the country?


How about metal detectors and airline-style security systems in all
airports? Or Permanent Flight Restrictions in the areas that are now
Temporary, or more ADIZ Zones preventing GA pilots from flying over
populated areas without discrete transponder codes and two-way
communication with ATC?


Yes. This would definitely stop all law abiding suicide bombers.

Bottom line is: the only *real* way to prevent this is to ground all
aircraft and shoot down any which may get in the air.




 




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
AOPA Stall/Spin Study -- Stowell's Review (8,000 words) Rich Stowell Aerobatics 28 January 2nd 09 03:26 PM
Repairing Plastic Instrument Panel Overlay Jeff P Owning 22 January 29th 04 07:42 PM
Fuel dump switch in homebuilt Jay Home Built 36 December 5th 03 03:21 AM
Single-Seat Accident Records (Was BD-5B) Ron Wanttaja Home Built 41 November 20th 03 06:39 AM
Effect of Light Sport on General Aviation Gilan Home Built 17 September 24th 03 06:11 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:17 PM.


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