Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

All Pilots Of Small Aircraft Need To Read This!

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • All Pilots Of Small Aircraft Need To Read This!

    Hi, I am posting this here because I know there are several pilots of small aircraft who frequent this board, and I believe it is important that all know of this urgent matter. I'm not a pilot myself, but I have a few close friends who are, one of them brought it to my attention. I hope that the board's administrators and my fellow members do not consider this a spam post, I did not put it here with the intent of generating sales for anybody. The total graphics that I posted are less than half a megabyte, I don't think it will hurt anybody too bad even if they are on dial-up. Please read what I have posted an act on it if you feel appropriate, but if you plan to act, do so quickly as all comments need to be in by November 2. For more information, visit the AOPA web site at http://www.aopa.org












    Ed

  • #2
    I wonder how homeland security would deal with a hot air balloon flying over DC? It would be a good time to whip "it" out and take a piss.

    good luck on stopping paranoid politicians from screwing you guys over.

    Comment


    • #3
      Welcome to what gun owners have been dealing with for 40 years....

      My guns have killed no more people that your airplane... yet I am fingerprinted, background checked, subjected to random searches for having an NRA sticker on my car, and treated like a murderer when I mention my hobby in polite company.

      Next letter to my congress-critter, I'll include a mention of opposition to this bill. Not that he'll listen any better about that than he does to the other stuff I write him about.

      Paul F.

      Comment


      • #4
        I'm not a pilot but I understand the problems GA pilots face with the proposed bill. It would bother me if I had to park my vehicle outside of a city's downtown area/radius because of security. However, with the two recent D.C. scares I see where something needs to be done.

        The GA fields in this area are about as wide open as you can get. No fences, gates or patrols. Claiming that "no private aircraft has been used in a terrorist act" should be followed with the word "yet".

        Something needs to be done. I'm just not sure what... Yet.

        Comment


        • #5
          <font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Paul F:
          Welcome to what gun owners have been dealing with for 40 years....

          My guns have killed no more people that your airplane... yet I am fingerprinted, background checked, subjected to random searches for having an NRA sticker on my car, and treated like a murderer when I mention my hobby in polite company.

          Next letter to my congress-critter, I'll include a mention of opposition to this bill. Not that he'll listen any better about that than he does to the other stuff I write him about.

          Paul F.
          </font>
          I cancled my NRA membership after they kept sending me junk mail and actually called me on the phone several times after I told them to remove my phone number. Does/did anyone else get loads of junk from the NRA?

          -Adrian

          Comment


          • #6
            Sounds like a typical government load of crap..... BUT

            I can think of at least five "easy" ways to use a small aircraft to make a city uninhabitable, probably cause a very significant number of deaths, and, in some scenarios, destroy a significant portion of it. All would result in the need for multi-billion dollar cleanups..... up to millions of people displaced, etc.

            Several could be done on the sly, with results possibly not noticed for days.... the longer the better for the attackers. Others would be *very hard to hide*.....

            And they all could be done to say a dozen cities at once. I expect eventually they WILL be done that way by someone else who thinks of them.

            None "require" an aircraft, but all would benefit from using one.

            And I don't think I need to or ought to describe ANY of them..... I have no wish to spend 10 years in prison waiting for trial on conspiracy charges.

            'nuff said



            [This message has been edited by J Tiers (edited 10-20-2005).]
            1601

            Keep eye on ball.
            Hashim Khan

            Comment


            • #7
              I don't get it. What's the big deal? We have had barbed wire fences, security gates and security checks around general aviation airports for 15 or 20 years here. It hasn't made any difference to anyone's freedom to fly (except maybe someone trying to steal a plane). I presume the regs in the US are the same as here as to filing a flight plan. Here if you are flying more than 25 miles from the airport you must file a flight plan. If you don't follow the flight plan you have some explaining to do.

              There are plenty of zones in the US and Canada that have been off limits to aircraft for as long as there have been aircraft. Try flying over Groom Lake.

              There are speed limits too. Go too fast in the CADIZ or ADIZ and you get to have a up close encounter with an F-16. The ADIZ (Air Defense Identification Zone) isn't some sort of precedent. The ADIZ has been place since WWII.

              BTW, evacuating the capitol because a Cessna 150 is in the area seems to be a serious case of clinical paranoia.

              Oh yeah, I'm a private pilot.

              [This message has been edited by Evan (edited 10-20-2005).]
              Free software for calculating bolt circles and similar: Click Here

              Comment


              • #8
                I don't think conspiracy charges are the problem or likely. Tom Clancy did not get hit with then when he published his "how to books". Thrillers that are believable can often be accurate - aka books and movies. No one wants to give the clueless any good ideas........

                --jr
                dvideo

                Comment


                • #9

                  I certainly support people having the right to fly, but I think the flying world needs to clean its act a bit first. As a non-pilot I get the impression that there are a lot of idiots out there flying around.

                  1) There are gobs of accidents reported (I live near Houston). Almost every week you hear of some guy digging his ultralight or single engine plane into someone's backyard. Not good for Public Relations.

                  2) I think there are bunch of guys who are poor men in a rich man's sport. They're flying around in the cheapest piece of crap they can barely afford - see #1.

                  3) There's a small airport near me - they love to 'buzz' houses and do numerous fly-bys. The nicer the weather, the worse it is. You think they'd have the brains to do that stuff AWAY from their own neighbors. You know, don't crap in your own nest.

                  4) John Travolta - need I say more?

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    frist the gun control started in 1900 in new york city, and moved on from there it really picked up speed 40 years ago.
                    the gun control got started the same way one has stated about planes they are a lot of them not safe. idots are using them.
                    we are all guiltiy because of a few.
                    i am a white male with a carry permit for 30 years never any problems. but when i got to the court house. i am searched and they take my pocket knife and a 1/4-20 bolt i had in my pocket.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      ************************************************** ************************************************** ************************************************** ****************************** ******

                      [This message has been edited by J Tiers (edited 10-20-2005).]
                      1601

                      Keep eye on ball.
                      Hashim Khan

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        <font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by dvideo:
                        I don't think conspiracy charges are the problem or likely. Tom Clancy did not get hit with then when he published his "how to books". Thrillers that are believable can often be accurate - aka books and movies. No one wants to give the clueless any good ideas........

                        --jr
                        </font>
                        When he wrote, we didn't have the Geheim SicherheitsAmt in place in the US. We do now.

                        We weren't holding people for years without trial or charges or access to a lawyer.... we do now.

                        We weren't conducting state-wide searches for the culprit after someone photographs an oil tank farm.... we do now (Illinois).

                        We hadn't had in-border large-scale terrorist attacks... we have now.

                        Don't step outta line, or you gonna get the slammer with no lawyer. Far-fetched? Maybe not.

                        One more bigger in-border attack, and you won't want to even live here.... "papers please!".

                        1601

                        Keep eye on ball.
                        Hashim Khan

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          J Tiers, I'll take that bet. You cannot come up with five *easy* ways to make a city unliveable with a small aircraft. You list your five and we will see if I can shoot them down.

                          The idea that a small aircraft could easily be used to casue mass death and destruction is total BS. Anyone thinks otherwise, consider that there are people who get paid to look into these things. There is a reason terrorist have not used small planes, its just to damn hard to get a decent return on investment.

                          About the only way to do that would be if you had a WMD or some type of biological agent. And guess what, you don't need an airplane to make a small nuke do its job, a minivan will work fine thank you. The problem with Anthrax is nobody has enough of it to cause mass damage from an air drop. Chemical weapons? The reason countries stopped using checmical weapons is not because they are cruel its because THEY DON'T WORK WORTH A DAMN given the costs and complications. Regular ole bombs are much more cost effective.

                          James Kilroy

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Nice piece of AOPA propaganda...
                            The problem is not just alleged "few isolated incidents."

                            Contact the Public Affairs (PA) people that work for FAA, NORAD, NORTHCOM or 1st Air Force for a factual description of the absolute buffoonery of certain General Aviation pilots flying in and around these restricted airspaces.

                            As a pilot myself I'm shocked at the gross stupidity displayed by some of these pilots that end up costing the taxpayers 100s of thousands of dollars. Ask the Air National Guardsmen who intercept these idiots how problematic these ill-informed pilots are.

                            These areas were implemented to protect personnel and facilities seen as vital to National Security. If you don’t like it, call you governmental representatives and complain in a cogent manner and try to effect change.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              <font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by jkilroy:
                              J Tiers, I'll take that bet. You cannot come up with five *easy* ways to make a city unliveable with a small aircraft. You list your five and we will see if I can shoot them down.

                              The idea that a small aircraft could easily be used to casue mass death and destruction is total BS. Anyone thinks otherwise, consider that there are people who get paid to look into these things. There is a reason terrorist have not used small planes, its just to damn hard to get a decent return on investment.

                              </font>
                              OK Mr Ostrich.... I will think about it and see how many are public domain so I can talk about them .....

                              I think you are in denial..... And recall I said an aircraft isn't required.... just maybe more effective in some ways.

                              Heck you actually referred to some of the cruder methods... indirectly.... and yet you STILL deny the possibility....

                              1601

                              Keep eye on ball.
                              Hashim Khan

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X