New security bulletin

[gatt]

Filed an IFR plan yesterday and got the new McMinnville bulletin. Don't
remember it verbatim, but it's in regard to airspace usage during certain
pro and collegiate sporting events, open assemblies of 30,000 people or
more.

Then it said something about monitoring 121.5 and listening to instructions
if you're intercepted or if you see signal flares. The bulletin says that
if you fail to follow instructions, "force" may be applied.

Meanwhile, flying over the Columbia last week I saw a couple more bulk
freighters coming in. All those stacks of virtually-unscreened shipping
containers...
-c

[Chris Ehlbeck]

I got a briefing yesterday for a VFR cross country and noticed the very same
thing about the flares and the possibility for the use of force for
non-compliance.
--
Chris Ehlbeck, PPASEL
"It's a license to learn."

"gatt" > wrote in message
...
>
> Filed an IFR plan yesterday and got the new McMinnville bulletin. Don't
> remember it verbatim, but it's in regard to airspace usage during certain
> pro and collegiate sporting events, open assemblies of 30,000 people or
> more.
>
> Then it said something about monitoring 121.5 and listening to
instructions
> if you're intercepted or if you see signal flares. The bulletin says that
> if you fail to follow instructions, "force" may be applied.
>
> Meanwhile, flying over the Columbia last week I saw a couple more bulk
> freighters coming in. All those stacks of virtually-unscreened shipping
> containers...
> -c
>
>

[Vigo]

lol can you imagine the public backlash if an f15 blasted someone's c150 out
of the sky. I think this is an election year for you guys, so have no fear I
can't see them shooting anyone down.
"Chris Ehlbeck" > wrote in message
.. .
> I got a briefing yesterday for a VFR cross country and noticed the very
same
> thing about the flares and the possibility for the use of force for
> non-compliance.
> --
> Chris Ehlbeck, PPASEL
> "It's a license to learn."
>
> "gatt" > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> > Filed an IFR plan yesterday and got the new McMinnville bulletin. Don't
> > remember it verbatim, but it's in regard to airspace usage during
certain
> > pro and collegiate sporting events, open assemblies of 30,000 people or
> > more.
> >
> > Then it said something about monitoring 121.5 and listening to
> instructions
> > if you're intercepted or if you see signal flares. The bulletin says
that
> > if you fail to follow instructions, "force" may be applied.
> >
> > Meanwhile, flying over the Columbia last week I saw a couple more bulk
> > freighters coming in. All those stacks of virtually-unscreened shipping
> > containers...
> > -c
> >
> >
>
>

[Teacherjh]

>>
lol can you imagine the public backlash if an f15 blasted someone's c150 out
of the sky.
<<

Yes. I can imagine the newsgroups full of posts complaining about that idiot
pilot and the harm he did to general aviation. I can see the administration
feeding the press the story that this was a huge threat and pumping up what
terrorist damage a small airplane can do, and that there was no time to
consider alternatives (like the cops who shoot somebody who brandishes a toy
gun). I can see this as JUSTIFYING huge TFRs around events, with multple rings
and multple escalations of force for intrusions.

I hope it doesn't come to that, and there is a good chance that it wouldn't.
However, I would not bet on it.

Jose

--
(for Email, make the obvious changes in my address)

[NW_PILOT]

It would not take long for the fighter's to get there from PDX and to a
fighter a C-150 would be like a target that is standing still.

Hey gatt ever been at the end of runway 28L at PDX near the embassy suites
when a flock or fighters takes off using runway 10R? Talk about going def
every time I see them go I never have my camcorder with me one of these days
ill get video of it.


"Teacherjh" > wrote in message
...
> >>
> lol can you imagine the public backlash if an f15 blasted someone's c150
out
> of the sky.
> <<
>
> Yes. I can imagine the newsgroups full of posts complaining about that
idiot
> pilot and the harm he did to general aviation. I can see the
administration
> feeding the press the story that this was a huge threat and pumping up
what
> terrorist damage a small airplane can do, and that there was no time to
> consider alternatives (like the cops who shoot somebody who brandishes a
toy
> gun). I can see this as JUSTIFYING huge TFRs around events, with multple
rings
> and multple escalations of force for intrusions.
>
> I hope it doesn't come to that, and there is a good chance that it
wouldn't.
> However, I would not bet on it.
>
> Jose
>
> --
> (for Email, make the obvious changes in my address)

[Cub Driver]

>(like the cops who shoot somebody who brandishes a toy
>gun).

Personally, I am generally willing to give the cop the benefit of the
doubt, and I would probably be even more likely to extend it to the
pilot who shot down a plane that didn't follow instructions.

(Unless it were a Cub, of course. Anybody who shoots down a Cub
deserves Leavenworth or whatever they give to bad troops these days.)

all the best -- Dan Ford
email: (put Cubdriver in subject line)

The Warbird's Forum www.warbirdforum.com
The Piper Cub Forum www.pipercubforum.com

[Jay Masino]

Vigo > wrote:
> lol can you imagine the public backlash if an f15 blasted someone's c150 out
> of the sky. I think this is an election year for you guys, so have no fear I
> can't see them shooting anyone down.

This sounds like every day life in and around the Wasington ADIZ. They
don't blast you out of the sky (ADIZ), but they do force you to land.

--- Jay


--
__!__
Jay and Teresa Masino ___(_)___
http://www2.ari.net/jmasino ! ! !
http://www.oceancityairport.com
http://www.oc-adolfos.com

[John T]

Jay Masino wrote:
>
> This sounds like every day life in and around the Wasington ADIZ.
> They don't blast you out of the sky (ADIZ), but they do force you to
> land.

Maybe "force" isn't the right word. They don't force pilots to land any
more than a cop forces you to pull over by turning on his lights.

However, the *implied* threat of force makes the non-terrorists follow
instructions. :)

--
John T
http://tknowlogy.com/TknoFlyer
http://pocketgear.com/products_search.asp?developerid=4415
____________________

[Malcolm Teas]

"gatt" > wrote in message news:> Then it said something about monitoring 121.5 and listening to instructions
> if you're intercepted or if you see signal flares. The bulletin says that
> if you fail to follow instructions, "force" may be applied.

Yeah? Well, welcome to what we in the Wash DC ADIZ have been dealing
with for over a year now. Note that it's been said that if it
continues here in the DC area, it'll spread. So, enjoy. Just keep up
with the interpretations of how to work in that area.

> Meanwhile, flying over the Columbia last week I saw a couple more bulk
> freighters coming in. All those stacks of virtually-unscreened shipping
> containers...

Yup. The internal consistency of the TSA is staggering. Stop the
little bitty planes that never hurt anyone, permit the commercials who
where used like that, and permit the massive cargo that's a lot more
likely to hurt and is the vehicle of choice for large-scale smuggling.

-Malcolm Teas

[Teacherjh]

>> It would not take long for the fighter's to get there from PDX

Yes, but we are talking about what peopl would say, not what is or is not true.

>>
Personally, I am generally willing to give the cop the benefit of the
doubt, and I would probably be even more likely to extend it to the
pilot who shot down a plane that didn't follow instructions.
<<

.... which, while maybe reasonable, makes my scenario more likely to succeed.

Jose
--
(for Email, make the obvious changes in my address)

[NW_PILOT]

what if they took a shot and missed what goes up must come down ware is all
that explosive going to go over a populated area how about the shrapnel from
the poor Cessna that get blow to smithereens. but you know all them people
taking them pansy pills probably think it would be fireworks until shrapnel
started killing people. I could see the headline

National Guard Shoots Down Cessna Killing 60 People It Could Have Been Worse

Photo Of Propeller In the Top of a Car

11:00 News :

Engine Cylinder Falls Though Roof Critically Injuring Elderly Person While
Sleeping Was It Terrorism

This Just In It appears that it will be 61 dead as the QB from Oregon State
dies from a pushrod through the heart

Or

National Guard missile go's astray killing 300 at football game.




"Teacherjh" > wrote in message
...
> >>
> lol can you imagine the public backlash if an f15 blasted someone's c150
out
> of the sky.
> <<
>
> Yes. I can imagine the newsgroups full of posts complaining about that
idiot
> pilot and the harm he did to general aviation. I can see the
administration
> feeding the press the story that this was a huge threat and pumping up
what
> terrorist damage a small airplane can do, and that there was no time to
> consider alternatives (like the cops who shoot somebody who brandishes a
toy
> gun). I can see this as JUSTIFYING huge TFRs around events, with multple
rings
> and multple escalations of force for intrusions.
>
> I hope it doesn't come to that, and there is a good chance that it
wouldn't.
> However, I would not bet on it.
>
> Jose
>
> --
> (for Email, make the obvious changes in my address)

[G.R. Patterson III]

Vigo wrote:
>
> lol can you imagine the public backlash if an f15 blasted someone's c150 out
> of the sky. I think this is an election year for you guys, so have no fear I
> can't see them shooting anyone down.

They wouldn't have to shoot it down. Just fly about 100' under it at, say, 400 knots,
hit the burners and head straight up. If the guy doesn't have a heart attack, and if
the wake turbulence doesn't turn the 150 into a collection of parts flying a loose
formation, I'd bet junior birdman there would be willing to do absolutely anything
that fighter pilot wants him to do.

George Patterson
None of us is as dumb as all of us.

[G.R. Patterson III]

Teacherjh wrote:
>
> Yes. I can imagine the newsgroups full of posts complaining about that idiot
> pilot and the harm he did to general aviation. I can see the administration
> feeding the press the story that this was a huge threat and pumping up what
> terrorist damage a small airplane can do, and that there was no time to
> consider alternatives (like the cops who shoot somebody who brandishes a toy
> gun). I can see this as JUSTIFYING huge TFRs around events, with multple rings
> and multple escalations of force for intrusions.

I think you're exactly correct. In fact, I'd bet there are people in the TSA who are
drooling over the opportunity to do exactly that.

George Patterson
None of us is as dumb as all of us.

[G.R. Patterson III]

NW_PILOT wrote:
>
> what if they took a shot and missed what goes up must come down ware is all
> that explosive going to go over a populated area how about the shrapnel from
> the poor Cessna that get blow to smithereens. but you know all them people
> taking them pansy pills probably think it would be fireworks until shrapnel
> started killing people. I could see the headline
>
> National Guard Shoots Down Cessna Killing 60 People It Could Have Been Worse
>
> Photo Of Propeller In the Top of a Car
>
> 11:00 News :
>
> Engine Cylinder Falls Though Roof Critically Injuring Elderly Person While
> Sleeping Was It Terrorism
>
> This Just In It appears that it will be 61 dead as the QB from Oregon State
> dies from a pushrod through the heart
>
> Or
>
> National Guard missile go's astray killing 300 at football game.

And every one of those events would be used as justification to scrap light aircraft.
Obviously we can't be trusted to use them responsibly.

George Patterson
None of us is as dumb as all of us.

[John T]

Malcolm Teas wrote:
>
> Stop the little bitty planes that never hurt anyone...

Yeah? Does Tampa ring a bell???

Oh, wait a minute... How many people were hurt there?

On second thought, maybe it's just that the TSA is staffed with some of
those STN folks.

--
John T
http://tknowlogy.com/TknoFlyer
http://pocketgear.com/products_search.asp?developerid=4415
____________________

[Andrew Gideon]

John T wrote:

> Malcolm Teas wrote:
>>
>> Stop the little bitty planes that never hurt anyone...
>
> Yeah? Does Tampa ring a bell???
>
> Oh, wait a minute... How many people were hurt there?

But think of the glass! Nobody ever stops to consider the damage to
windows!! What's with this country today!?!?

- Andrew

[Vigo]

lol no doubt I like that one.
"G.R. Patterson III" > wrote in message
...
>
>
> Vigo wrote:
> >
> > lol can you imagine the public backlash if an f15 blasted someone's c150
out
> > of the sky. I think this is an election year for you guys, so have no
fear I
> > can't see them shooting anyone down.
>
> They wouldn't have to shoot it down. Just fly about 100' under it at, say,
400 knots,
> hit the burners and head straight up. If the guy doesn't have a heart
attack, and if
> the wake turbulence doesn't turn the 150 into a collection of parts flying
a loose
> formation, I'd bet junior birdman there would be willing to do absolutely
anything
> that fighter pilot wants him to do.
>
> George Patterson
> None of us is as dumb as all of us.

[gatt]

"Teacherjh" > wrote in message

> Yes. I can imagine the newsgroups full of posts complaining about that
idiot
> pilot and the harm he did to general aviation.

Didn't some kid in Florida fly a Cessna into a building awhile back?
That passed and the media flavor was more one of "what a dumbass."

-c

[gatt]

"NW_PILOT" > wrote in message news:M8GdnfCL0cmwGVjdRVn-

> Hey gatt ever been at the end of runway 28L at PDX near the embassy suites
> when a flock or fighters takes off using runway 10R? Talk about going def
> every time I see them go I never have my camcorder with me one of these
days
> ill get video of it.

Aw, yeah! A friend had a sailboat at the end of Tomahawk Island and had a
great view and earsplitting wakeup call when they departed to the west, but
they didn't depart that direction any time I was out there with video so I
missed it.

There were a pair of EA6Bs about a week or two ago, must have been down from
Washington.

-c

[gatt]

"Teacherjh" > wrote in message
...
> >> It would not take long for the fighter's to get there from PDX
>
> Yes, but we are talking about what peopl would say, not what is or is not
true.

Well, guys, during the filming of "The Hunted" the filming crew staged a
battle scene next to the Willamette, near the shipyards, and didn't bother
to tell the appropriate people that there would be explosions. Meanwhile,
some guy with a fabric experimental joked with a fueler in Scappoose several
hours earlier that he was going to go fly into a building. (A joke, like
attacking somebody with the Wright Flyer) and, an hour or so after the last
possible moment of endurance for that airplane, the fueler called the
authorities and fighters were scrambled.

The next day, folks in Portland were howling about fighter planes hotrodding
at low altitude up the Willamette. Turns out they were scrambled to chase
down an ultralight. :>

-c

[gatt]

"G.R. Patterson III" > wrote in message

> They wouldn't have to shoot it down. Just fly about 100' under it at, say,
400 knots,
> hit the burners and head straight up. If the guy doesn't have a heart
attack, and if
> the wake turbulence doesn't turn the 150 into a collection of parts flying
a loose
> formation, I'd bet junior birdman there would be willing to do absolutely
anything
> that fighter pilot wants him to do.

Was a website some years ago by two guys who tried to see how close to Groom
Lake they could get in a Cessna without actually violating airspace. Had
photos. They were buzzed somewhat as you described. :>

The other interesting photo was the transponder bulb. It was pegged solid.
He claims they were lit up so hard that it damaged the xpdr, but I don't see
how that's possible unless the bulb just overheated or something.

-c

[Teacherjh]

>>
There were a pair of EA6Bs about a week or two ago, must have been down from
Washington.
<<

What are those - flying aviation computers?

Jose

--
(for Email, make the obvious changes in my address)

[Dave Stadt]

"G.R. Patterson III" > wrote in message
...
>
>
> Teacherjh wrote:
> >
> > Yes. I can imagine the newsgroups full of posts complaining about that
idiot
> > pilot and the harm he did to general aviation. I can see the
administration
> > feeding the press the story that this was a huge threat and pumping up
what
> > terrorist damage a small airplane can do, and that there was no time to
> > consider alternatives (like the cops who shoot somebody who brandishes a
toy
> > gun). I can see this as JUSTIFYING huge TFRs around events, with
multple rings
> > and multple escalations of force for intrusions.
>
> I think you're exactly correct. In fact, I'd bet there are people in the
TSA who are
> drooling over the opportunity to do exactly that.

There are rumblings in Washington that the TSA is no longer needed and
should be done away with. The thought is to return airport security to the
private sector.

>
> George Patterson
> None of us is as dumb as all of us.

[Tom Sixkiller]

"G.R. Patterson III" > wrote in message
...
>
>
> Vigo wrote:
> >
> > lol can you imagine the public backlash if an f15 blasted someone's c150
out
> > of the sky. I think this is an election year for you guys, so have no
fear I
> > can't see them shooting anyone down.
>
> They wouldn't have to shoot it down. Just fly about 100' under it at, say,
400 knots,
> hit the burners and head straight up. If the guy doesn't have a heart
attack, and if
> the wake turbulence doesn't turn the 150 into a collection of parts flying
a loose
> formation, I'd bet junior birdman there would be willing to do absolutely
anything
> that fighter pilot wants him to do.
>

Yeah...that'd work! Why didn't I think of that? :~)

[G.R. Patterson III]

Dave Stadt wrote:
>
> There are rumblings in Washington that the TSA is no longer needed and
> should be done away with. The thought is to return airport security to the
> private sector.

In that case, I'm *sure* there are people in the TSA trying to create an incident
they can use to stay employed.

George Patterson
None of us is as dumb as all of us.

[Tom Sixkiller]

"G.R. Patterson III" > wrote in message
...
>
>
> Dave Stadt wrote:
> >
> > There are rumblings in Washington that the TSA is no longer needed and
> > should be done away with. The thought is to return airport security to
the
> > private sector.
>
> In that case, I'm *sure* there are people in the TSA trying to create an
incident
> they can use to stay employed.
>

It worked for the BATF in Waco.

[Ryan]

http://www.serve.com/mahood/nellis/flight.htm

"gatt" > wrote in message
...
>
> "G.R. Patterson III" > wrote in message
>
> > They wouldn't have to shoot it down. Just fly about 100' under it at,
say,
> 400 knots,
> > hit the burners and head straight up. If the guy doesn't have a heart
> attack, and if
> > the wake turbulence doesn't turn the 150 into a collection of parts
flying
> a loose
> > formation, I'd bet junior birdman there would be willing to do
absolutely
> anything
> > that fighter pilot wants him to do.
>
> Was a website some years ago by two guys who tried to see how close to
Groom
> Lake they could get in a Cessna without actually violating airspace. Had
> photos. They were buzzed somewhat as you described. :>
>
> The other interesting photo was the transponder bulb. It was pegged
solid.
> He claims they were lit up so hard that it damaged the xpdr, but I don't
see
> how that's possible unless the bulb just overheated or something.
>
> -c
>
>

[Martin Hotze]

On Tue, 8 Jun 2004 08:12:39 -0700, NW_PILOT wrote:

>what if they took a shot and missed what goes up must come down ware is all
>that explosive going to go over a populated area how about the shrapnel from
>the poor Cessna that get blow to smithereens.

collateral damage ...

>but you know all them people
>taking them pansy pills probably think it would be fireworks until shrapnel
>started killing people. I could see the headline


eehhh ... that's ok ... it'S for the fight against terrorism.

don't you agree? you _have_ to agree.
no? are you a terrorist?


#m

--
Martin!!! Maaaaartiiiin!!! Can you please flame this guy for me?
'HECTOP' in rec.aviation.piloting

[gatt]

Excellent, Ryan. That's the one. Haven't read it for awhile.

"Ryan" <f> wrote in message ...
> http://www.serve.com/mahood/nellis/flight.htm
>
> "gatt" > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> > "G.R. Patterson III" > wrote in message
> >
> > > They wouldn't have to shoot it down. Just fly about 100' under it at,
> say,
> > 400 knots,
> > > hit the burners and head straight up. If the guy doesn't have a heart
> > attack, and if
> > > the wake turbulence doesn't turn the 150 into a collection of parts
> flying
> > a loose
> > > formation, I'd bet junior birdman there would be willing to do
> absolutely
> > anything
> > > that fighter pilot wants him to do.
> >
> > Was a website some years ago by two guys who tried to see how close to
> Groom
> > Lake they could get in a Cessna without actually violating airspace.
Had
> > photos. They were buzzed somewhat as you described. :>
> >
> > The other interesting photo was the transponder bulb. It was pegged
> solid.
> > He claims they were lit up so hard that it damaged the xpdr, but I don't
> see
> > how that's possible unless the bulb just overheated or something.
> >
> > -c
> >
> >
>
>