Get ready guys, here it comes. In short, badges for every operator and
badged-carrying escorts for all others on the ramp (i.e. passengers).
Background checks every 2 years on our dime.

About to flip the switch in a few weeks.

Marco

Is Massport taking over FRG?

"Marco Leon" > wrote in message
...
> Get ready guys, here it comes. In short, badges for every operator and
> badged-carrying escorts for all others on the ramp (i.e. passengers).
> Background checks every 2 years on our dime.
>
> About to flip the switch in a few weeks.
>
> Marco
>
>

On 11/8/2007 12:50:32 PM, "Marco Leon" wrote:

> Get ready guys, here it comes. In short, badges for every operator and
> badged-carrying escorts for all others on the ramp (i.e. passengers).
> Background checks every 2 years on our dime.

Who is the group mandating this?

--
Peter

"Yes - I have a name" > wrote in message
news:n8IYi.12775$%n.12670@trndny07...
> Is Massport taking over FRG?

No, but Hanscom was referred to quite a bit. From what I understand, this is
the first large implementation since the handful of airports (i.e. Massport
airports) were done soon after 9-11.

Marco

"Peter R." > wrote in message
...
> On 11/8/2007 12:50:32 PM, "Marco Leon" wrote:
>
>> Get ready guys, here it comes. In short, badges for every operator and
>> badged-carrying escorts for all others on the ramp (i.e. passengers).
>> Background checks every 2 years on our dime.
>
> Who is the group mandating this?

New York State--who referred to FRG as becoming the "crown jewel" of GA
airport security. is Syracuse state-owned?

Marco

On 11/8/2007 1:49:09 PM, "Marco Leon" wrote:

> is Syracuse state-owned?

Syracuse is owned by the city.

Looks like another mere window dressing move to appease the non-flying
masses. Does anyone really think it will prevent a terrorist act? Of course,
coming from the same state where the governor is pushing to issue drivers'
licenses to illegal immigrants, anything is possible.

What is AOPA saying about the new security requirement there?

--
Peter

"Peter R." > wrote in message
...
>
> Syracuse is owned by the city.
>
> Looks like another mere window dressing move to appease the non-flying
> masses. Does anyone really think it will prevent a terrorist act? Of
> course,
> coming from the same state where the governor is pushing to issue drivers'
> licenses to illegal immigrants, anything is possible.
>
> What is AOPA saying about the new security requirement there?

They (Cebula) were in the building but the meeting I went to were only open
to the folks that took the security "training" online and were in line to
get a badge. There was a group of pilots who refused to give their SS# so
AOPA held another meeting for them in another room. They've admitted that
the TSA's items of interest were aircraft over 12,500 lbs. Since there is no
way to segregate those aircraft, they declared an entire perimeter a SIDA
(Secure Identification Display Area).

They were pretty slick. About 4 months ago, they held a meeting to say that
they will badge everyone who has access to an airplane and flat-out deny
vehicle access. The uproar was over the vehicle access so they met with the
pilot groups (one represented by AOPA) and worked out a deal where we pay
$100/year/vehicle to help defray costs of the gate access. No one objected
to the badging in general--no one. This is out of about 200 people who
showed up at that first meeting.

To be honest, as an aircraft owner, I would not want strangers roaming a
ramp with tens of thousands of dollars worth of allen key-secured avionics
in any give aircraft. I think everyone else felt the same way.

In the meeting last night, 5% of the people there (who did not go to the
original meeting months ago) spent 80% of the meeting opposing the badging
in general but by now, there had been millions spent on the system and were
ready to turn it on with the "backing" of the pilot's groups. They were a
day late and a dollar short.

As far as preventing terrorism, they are basing the background checks on the
TSA guidelines of 28 disqualifying factors.

Marco

Marco Leon writes:

> As far as preventing terrorism, they are basing the background checks on the
> TSA guidelines of 28 disqualifying factors.

What are the disqualifying factors?

Mxsmanic > wrote:

> Marco Leon writes:
>
>> As far as preventing terrorism, they are basing the background checks
>> on the TSA guidelines of 28 disqualifying factors.
>
> What are the disqualifying factors?

Probably similar to those applied to commercial truck drivers who want to
haul hazardous materials:

http://www.state.ak.us/local/akpages/ADMIN/dmv/akol/hme.htm

Include things like rape, murder, treason, sedition, firearms or explosives
violations, drug trafficing, immigration violations etc. etc. There is a
waiver process for some crimes that might have happened many years ago.

Mxsmanic > wrote in
:

> Marco Leon writes:
>
>> As far as preventing terrorism, they are basing the background checks
>> on the TSA guidelines of 28 disqualifying factors.
>
> What are the disqualifying factors?
>

What does it matter to you?

You don't fly and you never will.

Bertie

In article >,
"Marco Leon" > wrote:

> "Yes - I have a name" > wrote in message
> news:n8IYi.12775$%n.12670@trndny07...
> > Is Massport taking over FRG?
>
> No, but Hanscom was referred to quite a bit. From what I understand, this is
> the first large implementation since the handful of airports (i.e. Massport
> airports) were done soon after 9-11.

The only reference that should be made to Massport is wrt how not
to do it.

Somehow Massport can't stop losing money when charging hangar rates
almost twice those at other MA airports. This is the organization you want
having any involvement in running an airport?

--
Bob Noel
(goodness, please trim replies!!!)

Marco Leon wrote:

>
>New York State--who referred to FRG as becoming the "crown jewel" of GA
>airport security.

A dubious distinction, to be sure!

That would be like someone naming your restaurant the "crown jewel" of
ptomaine poisoning.

John Galban=====>N4BQ (PA28-180)

--
Message posted via AviationKB.com
http://www.aviationkb.com/Uwe/Forums.aspx/aviation/200711/1

In article >,
"Marco Leon" > wrote:

> They were pretty slick. About 4 months ago, they held a meeting to say that
> they will badge everyone who has access to an airplane and flat-out deny
> vehicle access. The uproar was over the vehicle access so they met with the
> pilot groups (one represented by AOPA) and worked out a deal where we pay
> $100/year/vehicle to help defray costs of the gate access. No one objected
> to the badging in general--no one. This is out of about 200 people who
> showed up at that first meeting.

ask them about bikes and motorcycles. The morons doing security at KBED
think cars are ok but motorcycles, bikes, and even pedestrians are bad.
(yes - there was a gate at KBED that had NO pedestrian access, don't know
if they still have it, I left the massport hangar).

--
Bob Noel
(goodness, please trim replies!!!)

In article >,
"Marco Leon" > wrote:

> Get ready guys, here it comes. In short, badges for every operator and
> badged-carrying escorts for all others on the ramp (i.e. passengers).
> Background checks every 2 years on our dime.
>
> About to flip the switch in a few weeks.
>
> Marco

Do you have the idiotic requirement for a prop lock?

--
Bob Noel
(goodness, please trim replies!!!)

On Thu, 08 Nov 2007 17:28:45 -0500, Bob Noel
> wrote:

>In article >,
> "Marco Leon" > wrote:
>
>> Get ready guys, here it comes. In short, badges for every operator and
>> badged-carrying escorts for all others on the ramp (i.e. passengers).
>> Background checks every 2 years on our dime.
>>
>> About to flip the switch in a few weeks.
>>
>> Marco
>
>Do you have the idiotic requirement for a prop lock?

The FBO at HPN padlocked my tail tiedown when I went there for a
couple of hours a week or two ago. They said it was required by the
state. I expect that or a prop lock would be required. That makes NY
and NJ with massport facilities in MA that I know of that have the
'two lock' rule. Course, door and ignition doesn't seem to count as
two locks, but I digress.

In article >,
Peter Clark > wrote:

> The FBO at HPN padlocked my tail tiedown when I went there for a
> couple of hours a week or two ago.

It's left as an exercise for the student to determine how long it would
take to defeat a padlock on the tail tiedown of the typical small
aircraft.

--
Bob Noel
(goodness, please trim replies!!!)

On Thu, 08 Nov 2007 18:09:49 -0500, Bob Noel
> wrote:

>In article >,
> Peter Clark > wrote:
>
>> The FBO at HPN padlocked my tail tiedown when I went there for a
>> couple of hours a week or two ago.
>
>It's left as an exercise for the student to determine how long it would
>take to defeat a padlock on the tail tiedown of the typical small
>aircraft.

I wasn't commenting on the usefulness of any of the stuff, but someone
asled if extra locks/prop locks were required, I postulate that they
were before the SIDA stuff came in. I know they were at BED if you
weren't in a locked T-hanagar.

No prop locks at FRG but there is a requirement for two locks. They provided
cables and big padlock for all the aircraft (at their cost, which I
acknowledge was nice) right before GW flew into our airport for a 9-11
commemoration a couple years back. If you have a lock on your door, you're
good.

Marco


"Peter Clark" > wrote in message
...
> On Thu, 08 Nov 2007 18:09:49 -0500, Bob Noel
> > wrote:
>
>>In article >,
>> Peter Clark > wrote:
>>
>>> The FBO at HPN padlocked my tail tiedown when I went there for a
>>> couple of hours a week or two ago.
>>
>>It's left as an exercise for the student to determine how long it would
>>take to defeat a padlock on the tail tiedown of the typical small
>>aircraft.
>
> I wasn't commenting on the usefulness of any of the stuff, but someone
> asled if extra locks/prop locks were required, I postulate that they
> were before the SIDA stuff came in. I know they were at BED if you
> weren't in a locked T-hanagar.

Hmm, no one asked about two-wheeled vehicles but someone did ask if they
could park their boat there believe it or not.

Marco
"Bob Noel" > wrote in message
>
> ask them about bikes and motorcycles. The morons doing security at KBED
> think cars are ok but motorcycles, bikes, and even pedestrians are bad.
> (yes - there was a gate at KBED that had NO pedestrian access, don't know
> if they still have it, I left the massport hangar).

"JGalban via AviationKB.com" <u32749@uwe> wrote in message
news:7aed07ffe5bc2@uwe...
> A dubious distinction, to be sure!
>
> That would be like someone naming your restaurant the "crown jewel" of
> ptomaine poisoning.

Well, if ptomaine poisoning somehow made some politician look good, you can
bet that would be popular.

Marco

"Bob Noel" > wrote in message
...
>
> The only reference that should be made to Massport is wrt how not
> to do it.
>
> Somehow Massport can't stop losing money when charging hangar rates
> almost twice those at other MA airports. This is the organization you
> want
> having any involvement in running an airport?

Are you based at BED? Republic airport's mgmt keeps referring to them as the
working model. It would be good to get a point of view by someone with a
view "under the hood" so to speak. FRG is run by the same folks the run
Teterboro so the fear is that small aircraft will be methodically pushed out
in favor of biz jets.

Marco

On Thu, 08 Nov 2007 18:04:56 -0500, Peter Clark wrote:

> That makes NY
> and NJ with massport facilities in MA that I know of that have the 'two
> lock' rule. Course, door and ignition doesn't seem to count as two
> locks, but I digress.

In NJ, at least and at least for the moment, door and ignition does count
as two.

- Andrew

On Thu, 15 Nov 2007 17:26:10 +0000 (UTC), Andrew Gideon
> wrote:

>On Thu, 08 Nov 2007 18:04:56 -0500, Peter Clark wrote:
>
>> That makes NY
>> and NJ with massport facilities in MA that I know of that have the 'two
>> lock' rule. Course, door and ignition doesn't seem to count as two
>> locks, but I digress.
>
>In NJ, at least and at least for the moment, door and ignition does count
>as two.

Interesting. Last time I was at MMU they made me put a prop lock on a
182.

On Nov 8, 10:50 am, "Marco Leon" > wrote:
> Get ready guys, here it comes. In short, badges for every operator and
> badged-carrying escorts for all others on the ramp (i.e. passengers).
> Background checks every 2 years on our dime.
>
> About to flip the switch in a few weeks.
>
> Marco

Another East Coast nervous disorder law... thank god I live in Idaho,
all we have here is a gay old senator with happy feet.

In fact, Larry has a music video out:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ys9xn60IBXA

>
> Another East Coast nervous disorder law... thank god I live in Idaho,
> all we have here is a gay old senator with happy feet.
>
I look around and I do not recognize my country any more... What a
bunch of sheep...
Don't take me wrong, I do not want religious whackos and terrorists to
injure anyone - but I am not willing to surrender my copy of the
Constitution and the Bill of Rights so that the sheeple will feel a
little safer...
They act as though one whacko blowing a bridge, or taking a plane out
of the sky will be the end of the country and of western
civilization..
Look, in the dispute over states rights versus the federal government
we lost 620,000 people... General Hood lost 6,000 men in two hours at
Franklin, Tennessee...
The people of this country today have no guts, period! <and damned few
brains>

denny

Denny wrote:

> Look, in the dispute over states rights versus the federal government
> we lost 620,000 people... General Hood lost 6,000 men in two hours at
> Franklin, Tennessee...
> The people of this country today have no guts, period! <and damned few
> brains>
>
> denny

The problem Denny is the pro states rights side lost that war. It's been
going down hill since.

On Thu, 15 Nov 2007 15:42:46 -0500, Peter Clark wrote:

>>In NJ, at least and at least for the moment, door and ignition does
>>count as two.
>
> Interesting. Last time I was at MMU they made me put a prop lock on a
> 182.

Is it possible that MMU has some extra requirement? Or perhaps "they"
misunderstood (or never asked about) the rule. Certainly, I see no great
number (in fact, none as far as I've noticed at least on the RN ramp) or
prop locks "next door" at CDW.

- Andrew

Marco Leon wrote:
> "Bob Noel" > wrote in message
> ...
>> The only reference that should be made to Massport is wrt how not
>> to do it.
>>
>> Somehow Massport can't stop losing money when charging hangar rates
>> almost twice those at other MA airports. This is the organization you
>> want
>> having any involvement in running an airport?
>
> Are you based at BED? Republic airport's mgmt keeps referring to them as the
> working model. It would be good to get a point of view by someone with a
> view "under the hood" so to speak. FRG is run by the same folks the run
> Teterboro so the fear is that small aircraft will be methodically pushed out
> in favor of biz jets.
>
> Marco


I knew Teterboro is run by the Port Authority of NY/NJ, I was unaware
that the same runs FRG.

Farmingdale is (was) a great field with at least one decent FBO. LG
Hanscom is a great field severely hampered by an overzealous and
incompetent state port authority owner. It would be a terrible shame to
see Farmingdale adopt the stupid (and largely useless) measures that
Hanscom has done. This includes the propeller locks (which do nothing
except risk damage by wind and inexperience pilots), and very expensive
badges (don't have a badge? you can be escorted. Have a badge but it is
somewhere else? you can't be escorted on pain of many $$ thousands of
dollar fines.) It is also amusing that at BOS the same Mass Port
Authority requires GA people to go through metal detectors to get to
their GA plane.

Last time I checked, Massport wanted a substantial fee and your social
security # to get one of their badges. I would never trust my social
security number to those clowns. The port authority is actually a very
large collection of patronage hacks that do not know the difference
between effective measures and pointless burdens on the damned
citizens/taxpayers. I have heard that Mass Port tries to enforce their
rules (as a quasi-state agency, they can make their own legal
regulations) on the military / Air Force ramp via the state police. I
was unaware that any tinhat state agency had jurisdiction on military
property.

This is sad news that anyone would hold Mass Port Authority to be a
"model" for anything, except a case study in incompetence.