Presidential TFRs -- AUGH!

[Jay Honeck]

Sure -- the ONE time in my life I want to fly to Superior, WI, in the middle
of absolutely no where Wisconsin, to visit the Bong Museum (BOTH kids are at
camp -- heh, heh) -- and the President of the United States chooses TODAY to
visit Duluth, MN.

Right across the bridge from Superior...

It's a no-fly zone till later tonight...

What perfect timing. I don't think anyone can calculate the odds of this
happening.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[NW_PILOT]

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
news:XIZIc.81886$Oq2.81393@attbi_s52...
> Sure -- the ONE time in my life I want to fly to Superior, WI, in the
middle
> of absolutely no where Wisconsin, to visit the Bong Museum (BOTH kids are
at
> camp -- heh, heh) -- and the President of the United States chooses TODAY
to
> visit Duluth, MN.
>
> Right across the bridge from Superior...
>
> It's a no-fly zone till later tonight...
>
> What perfect timing. I don't think anyone can calculate the odds of this
> happening.
> --
> Jay Honeck
> Iowa City, IA
> Pathfinder N56993
> www.AlexisParkInn.com
> "Your Aviation Destination"
>
>

i'd say it was a 100% chance today that it happned.

[BTIZ]

would filing IFR have helped?

BT

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
news:XIZIc.81886$Oq2.81393@attbi_s52...
> Sure -- the ONE time in my life I want to fly to Superior, WI, in the
middle
> of absolutely no where Wisconsin, to visit the Bong Museum (BOTH kids are
at
> camp -- heh, heh) -- and the President of the United States chooses TODAY
to
> visit Duluth, MN.
>
> Right across the bridge from Superior...
>
> It's a no-fly zone till later tonight...
>
> What perfect timing. I don't think anyone can calculate the odds of this
> happening.
> --
> Jay Honeck
> Iowa City, IA
> Pathfinder N56993
> www.AlexisParkInn.com
> "Your Aviation Destination"
>
>

[Wizard of Draws]

On 7/13/04 6:52 PM, in article XIZIc.81886$Oq2.81393@attbi_s52, "Jay Honeck"
> wrote:

> Sure -- the ONE time in my life I want to fly to Superior, WI, in the middle
> of absolutely no where Wisconsin, to visit the Bong Museum (BOTH kids are at
> camp -- heh, heh) -- and the President of the United States chooses TODAY to
> visit Duluth, MN.
>
> Right across the bridge from Superior...
>
> It's a no-fly zone till later tonight...
>
> What perfect timing. I don't think anyone can calculate the odds of this
> happening.

I feel your pain. I could have squeezed in a retest of the IFR approach I
botched at Knoxville, TN this past Saturday, if it weren't for the Pres-TFR
on Sunday. But now I have to wait two weeks for the examiner to get back
from Maine where he's on vacation.
--
Jeff 'The Wizard of Draws' Bucchino
Cartoons with a Touch of Magic�
www.wizardofdraws.com
www.cartoonclipart.com

[Viperdoc]

Get this: the president is talking at the Waukesha Expo Center tomorrow, and
in addition to the airport being closed to flying due to the TFR, I won't
even be able to get to my hangar, since the Expo is adjacent to the airport
and access to the airport is also being blocked.

I don't care whether it's Bush, Kerry, or the King of Siam, it's still
annoying. I know in the grand scheme of things it's a minor inconvenience,
but still...

[Rip]

It's not a minor inconvenience. It's obscene. These guys are ELECTED
officials. They work for you and me, and we shouldn't have to relinquish
one iota of our rights to travel, trade, or communicate just because
THEY have decided to run for PUBLIC office.

Viperdoc wrote:
> Get this: the president is talking at the Waukesha Expo Center tomorrow, and
> in addition to the airport being closed to flying due to the TFR, I won't
> even be able to get to my hangar, since the Expo is adjacent to the airport
> and access to the airport is also being blocked.
>
> I don't care whether it's Bush, Kerry, or the King of Siam, it's still
> annoying. I know in the grand scheme of things it's a minor inconvenience,
> but still...
>
>

[Jim Herring]

Sheesh, what a bunch of cry babies. Presidential TFR's have been around for
decades. Get over it.

--
Jim

carry on

[John Gaquin]

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message news:XIZIc.81886

> ....the ONE time in my life I want to fly to Superior, WI,.... and the
President...chooses TODAY to visit Duluth.....

I'm guessing he Prez picked today for his trip before you picked today for
your trip.....not that it would matter, I suppose.

:-)

JG

['Vejita' S. Cousin]

In article >, Jim Herring > wrote:
>Sheesh, what a bunch of cry babies. Presidential TFR's have been around for
>decades. Get over it.

Yes but they have not been as large as they currently are. I fly from
KBFI and every time (vice)pres and/or wife came to town they closed the
airport. No problem, normally it was closed for either 45min while around
takeoff/landing, and open inbetween, or closed for 3-5hrs total. Now they
shut everything down, including the roads near the airport. With a
25nm~50nm radius moving TFR. It's not the same thing, and you know it :)

[Gene Seibel]

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message news:<XIZIc.81886$Oq2.81393@attbi_s52>...
> Sure -- the ONE time in my life I want to fly to Superior, WI, in the middle
> of absolutely no where Wisconsin, to visit the Bong Museum (BOTH kids are at
> camp -- heh, heh) -- and the President of the United States chooses TODAY to
> visit Duluth, MN.
>
> Right across the bridge from Superior...
>
> It's a no-fly zone till later tonight...
>
> What perfect timing. I don't think anyone can calculate the odds of this
> happening.

I flew from St Louis to Atlanta on Monday and he was in Knoxville. Not
on my path but close. Checking TFRs is more important than checkng
weather. You can see weather - TFRs come out of nowhere.
--
Gene Seibel
Hangar 131 - http://pad39a.com/gene/plane.html
Because I fly, I envy no one.

[Neil Gould]

Recently, Jay Honeck > posted:

> Sure -- the ONE time in my life I want to fly to Superior, WI, in the
> middle of absolutely no where Wisconsin, to visit the Bong Museum
> (BOTH kids are at camp -- heh, heh) -- and the President of the
> United States chooses TODAY to visit Duluth, MN.
>
> Right across the bridge from Superior...
>
> It's a no-fly zone till later tonight...
>
I really don't understand the presidential TFRs at all. What is the
objective? Of all the presidents that have been assassinated, as well as
all attempted assasinations, none have involved aircraft of any kind.
Indeed, if one wanted to maximize the chances of success, GA is not a very
good option. Is there any logical reason why these TFRs exist?

Neil

[Larry Dighera]

On Wed, 14 Jul 2004 15:08:00 GMT, "Neil Gould"
> wrote:

>Is there any logical reason why these TFRs exist?

They exist to provide the illusion that the SS is able to actually do
something to protect the leader of the free world from harm. It's a
CYA thing, in my opinion.

Of course, the reality is, like many things governmental, largely
ineffective. Over 3,000 square miles of restricted airspace
surrounding the US President is absurd, but then so is the current
office holder...

[John T]

Neil Gould wrote:
>
> I really don't understand the presidential TFRs at all. What is the
> objective?

The logic is something like:
If the only aircraft in this area are those that shouldn't be here, it's
easier for us to identify the "bad guys."

> Of all the presidents that have been assassinated, as well
> as all attempted assasinations, none have involved aircraft of any
> kind. Indeed, if one wanted to maximize the chances of success, GA is
> not a very good option. Is there any logical reason why these TFRs
> exist?

Logic to rational aviation-savvy voters? No. Logic to aviation-ignorant
voters? Absolutely. Just ask a friend of yours whose only concept of
aviation is having to stand in line to empty all metal from pockets and step
through the cattle gates of the commercial airport what they think of the DC
ADIZ and the ability of VFR pilots to fly almost anywhere they want (outside
the ADIZ, that is) without talking to anybody.

Sure, those being protected by these roaming TFRs are elected officials (for
the most part) and nominally work for us (the relative few who actually
bother to vote). Contrary to what some will have you believe, though, the
occupant of the White House has no input into this process. It's the
security bureaucracy that makes this call - and they don't report to the
electorate. See the closing of Pennsylvania Avenue in Washington, DC for a
previous example under a different political party. The security folks take
their job - protecting the *office*, not the person - very seriously.
Unfortunately, we're suffering the side-effects of their vigor.

The fact remains that there is a limit to the amount of security you can
install to protect a place or person. While the flight restricted zone and
ADIZ over Washington greatly restricts the number of planes over the city,
it's still possible for one of those planes or even an intruder to make it
downtown before any response can be mounted (see the recent brouhaha
involving the governor of Kentucky).

And that's just airborne threats. The next time you're in town, pay
attention to all the trucks that are allowed within yards of any number of
government agencies and facilities (including the Capitol, Supreme Court,
Smithsonian museums, and even the White House).

You can't protect against all threats and your job is greatly complicated
when facing somebody willing to die to achieve their goal. However, those
tasked with protecting the President have to "Do Something" to help their
cause - and the roaming TFRs are part of the answer. The cynic in me says
that they're not so much protecting against threats to their charge as much
as protecting their own butts from us in case their charge is successfully
attacked. Congress would mount an investigation and there would be public
calls for heads on pikes for "dereliction of duty."

Keep in contact with your elected officials to remind them how ridiculous
these flight restrictions are. Don't forget to mention that not one
terrorist attack has been mounted or even attempted (as far as I know) with
general aviation aircraft. Try to remind your aviation-ignorant associates
that their SUV, mini-van or even their family sedan can cause more
destruction than a typical GA airplane.

While doing all this, please remember to check for and abide by NOTAMs. :)

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

[Andrew Gideon]

John T wrote:

> Sure, those being protected by these roaming TFRs are elected officials
> (for the most part) and nominally work for us (the relative few who
> actually
> bother to vote). Contrary to what some will have you believe, though, the
> occupant of the White House has no input into this process. It's the
> security bureaucracy that makes this call - and they don't report to the
> electorate. See the closing of Pennsylvania Avenue in Washington, DC for
> a
> previous example under a different political party. The security folks
> take their job - protecting the office, not the person - very seriously.
> Unfortunately, we're suffering the side-effects of their vigor.

I don't actually know anything about how these decisions are made, but I'm
sceptical of your assertion that the person being protected has zero say in
the matter. If security were my job, and I were the absolute arbiter of
how that job were achieved, my first rule would be "no [in-person] public
appearances".

- Andrew

[John T]

Andrew Gideon wrote:
>
> I don't actually know anything about how these decisions are made,
> but I'm sceptical of your assertion that the person being protected
> has zero say in the matter. If security were my job, and I were the
> absolute arbiter of how that job were achieved, my first rule would
> be "no [in-person] public appearances".

Remember my point about not being able to create a perfect security
blanket... :)

Public appearances is a point of discussion - both between the politicians
and the security folks as well as among the security folks themselves. How
do you protect a public personality when they insist on and must be in
public appearances for their job? The protected person may have some input
into where and when they go, but the security of the appearance is something
they rarely (and probably should not) concern themselves with.

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

[Otto Lilienthal]

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message news:<XIZIc.81886$Oq2.81393@attbi_s52>...
> Sure -- the ONE time in my life I want to fly to Superior, WI, in the middle
> of absolutely no where Wisconsin, to visit the Bong Museum

Y'know, not being a big WW-II buff, I read "Bong Museum" and I got to
wondering if it was a good idea for an activist trying to save his
airport to publically admit a fascination with drug paraphernalia...

....then I found http://www.bongheritagecenter.org and any doubts about
Jay's judgement were erased.

Otto

[Jay Masino]

John T > wrote:
> bother to vote). Contrary to what some will have you believe, though, the
> occupant of the White House has no input into this process. It's the
> security bureaucracy that makes this call - and they don't report to the
> electorate. See the closing of Pennsylvania Avenue in Washington, DC for a
> previous example under a different political party. The security folks take
> their job - protecting the *office*, not the person - very seriously.
> Unfortunately, we're suffering the side-effects of their vigor.

I think the President *could* do something. He could go to the head of
the Secret Service and say "lift the ADIZ and reduce the number of TFRs or
you're fired". If that he resists, he fires him, and goes to the next in
the command chain. At some point, the Secret Service "management" would
do it. But that would assume the President had balls.

--- Jay



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

[Bill Denton]

Am I to assume you perform open-heart surgery on yourself instead of
consulting a specialist?

The primary job of the Secret Service is to protect the President and other
officials. And they are pretty well world-renowned for their expertise.
Quite reasonably, the President generally defers to their judgment.

But since 9/11, far too many of us have lined up like sheep behind various
security "experts", forgetting that security experts don't make any money
unless they continually come up with new threats, along with the associated
responses.

But, just like walking safely down the street at midnight, preventing
terrorism first requires an application of common sense. And frequently,
that's all that needs to be applied.

We all like to talk about ADIZ's and TFR's, but they are only the tip of a
very large iceberg. What we need is for all of us to contact our elected
leaders and demand a rational re-evaluation of the security measures now in
place with the primary purpose of eliminating as many of them as possible.
When people have to wait 6 hours in an airport security line in order to
make a 30 minute flight because a rat ran through the terminal, something is
very wrong.

It's time to make some realistic threat assessments and put some realistic
security measures and equipment in place!

And don't even get me started on guns in the cockpit...


"Jay Masino" > wrote in message
...
> John T > wrote:
> > bother to vote). Contrary to what some will have you believe, though,
the
> > occupant of the White House has no input into this process. It's the
> > security bureaucracy that makes this call - and they don't report to the
> > electorate. See the closing of Pennsylvania Avenue in Washington, DC
for a
> > previous example under a different political party. The security folks
take
> > their job - protecting the *office*, not the person - very seriously.
> > Unfortunately, we're suffering the side-effects of their vigor.
>
> I think the President *could* do something. He could go to the head of
> the Secret Service and say "lift the ADIZ and reduce the number of TFRs or
> you're fired". If that he resists, he fires him, and goes to the next in
> the command chain. At some point, the Secret Service "management" would
> do it. But that would assume the President had balls.
>
> --- Jay
>
>
>
> --
> __!__
> Jay and Teresa Masino ___(_)___
> http://www2.ari.net/jmasino ! ! !
> http://www.oceancityairport.com
> http://www.oc-adolfos.com

[CB]

"Larry Dighera" > wrote in message
...
> On Wed, 14 Jul 2004 15:08:00 GMT, "Neil Gould"
> > wrote:
>
> >Is there any logical reason why these TFRs exist?
>
> They exist to provide the illusion that the SS is able to actually do
> something to protect the leader of the free world from harm. It's a
> CYA thing, in my opinion.
>
> Of course, the reality is, like many things governmental, largely
> ineffective. Over 3,000 square miles of restricted airspace
> surrounding the US President is absurd, but then so is the current
> office holder...

Didn't Hitler also have the SS?

[Jim Weir]

The Congressional staffers prefer to excercise playing basketball...
The Congresscritters themselves prefer softball...
The Senators prefer handball...
The President plays golf...

All of which says the higher you get in politics, the smaller your balls are.

{;-)


Jim (stopped at the county level) Weir






(Jay Masino)
shared these priceless pearls of wisdom:

But that would assume the President had balls.
->
->--- Jay

Jim Weir (A&P/IA, CFI, & other good alphabet soup)
VP Eng RST Pres. Cyberchapter EAA Tech. Counselor
http://www.rst-engr.com

[CB]

"Bill Denton" > wrote in message
...
> Am I to assume you perform open-heart surgery on yourself instead of
> consulting a specialist?
>
> The primary job of the Secret Service is to protect the President and
other
> officials. And they are pretty well world-renowned for their expertise.

The other main job of the SS is to protect the currency against
counterfeiting. Strange how it always come back to money!

[Larry Dighera]

On Wed, 14 Jul 2004 23:48:40 +0100, "CB" >
wrote:

>
>"Larry Dighera" > wrote in message
...
>> On Wed, 14 Jul 2004 15:08:00 GMT, "Neil Gould"
>> > wrote:
>>
>> >Is there any logical reason why these TFRs exist?
>>
>> They exist to provide the illusion that the SS is able to actually do
>> something to protect the leader of the free world from harm. It's a
>> CYA thing, in my opinion.
>>
>> Of course, the reality is, like many things governmental, largely
>> ineffective. Over 3,000 square miles of restricted airspace
>> surrounding the US President is absurd, but then so is the current
>> office holder...
>
>Didn't Hitler also have the SS?
>


http://members.tripod.com/~goodwin_2/law.html

[Cub Driver]

> If security were my job, and I were the absolute arbiter of
>how that job were achieved, my first rule would be "no [in-person] public
>appearances".

I agree with that. If a president can't travel without a 50-mile TFR,
he probably shouldn't travel at all.

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
Viva Bush! weblog www.vivabush.org

[dave]

I live just outside Philly. PA is one of the "battleground states" so I
expect we'll have plenty of TFR's. It's a PIA when george is around.
It's much worse for the little FBO's and flight schools that have to
close shop for the day and lose money. He was in York, PA last friday.
The TFR stopped about 2 miles from my home airport. Just to be sure
I didn't cross the line I left for KWWD about an hour before it was
scheduled to begin. Great day for flying but hundreds are grounded for
the day. But that's our president looking out for the little guy.

I call flight service before every flight to check on TFR's.

Dave
68 7ECA

Jay Honeck wrote:
> Sure -- the ONE time in my life I want to fly to Superior, WI, in the middle
> of absolutely no where Wisconsin, to visit the Bong Museum (BOTH kids are at
> camp -- heh, heh) -- and the President of the United States chooses TODAY to
> visit Duluth, MN.
>
> Right across the bridge from Superior...
>
> It's a no-fly zone till later tonight...
>
> What perfect timing. I don't think anyone can calculate the odds of this
> happening.

[Richard Russell]

On Thu, 15 Jul 2004 14:12:35 -0400, dave >
wrote:

>I live just outside Philly. PA is one of the "battleground states" so I
>expect we'll have plenty of TFR's. It's a PIA when george is around.
>It's much worse for the little FBO's and flight schools that have to
>close shop for the day and lose money. He was in York, PA last friday.
> The TFR stopped about 2 miles from my home airport. Just to be sure
>I didn't cross the line I left for KWWD about an hour before it was
>scheduled to begin. Great day for flying but hundreds are grounded for
>the day. But that's our president looking out for the little guy.
>
>I call flight service before every flight to check on TFR's.
>
>Dave
>68 7ECA
>
I'm also just outside of Philly. I'm not looking forward to the
inevitable campaigning that will take place in this state. I live
near KLOM (where I watch) and fly out of N10. Both airports are
affected when the pres comes to Philly. I'm not sure, but after the
nomination, doesn't Kerry get similar treatment?

Seems to me that commercial aviation has a lot more to answer for when
it comes to actual acts by terrorists in airplanes. What are they
accomplishing by grounded us and letting the "guilty" parties fly?
(Rhetorical question-not looking for logic).

Rich Russell

[G.R. Patterson III]

Richard Russell wrote:
>
> I'm also just outside of Philly. I'm not looking forward to the
> inevitable campaigning that will take place in this state. I live
> near KLOM (where I watch) and fly out of N10. Both airports are
> affected when the pres comes to Philly.

According to AOPA, it'll be worse. They're doubling the diameter of the presidential
TFRs.

> I'm not sure, but after the
> nomination, doesn't Kerry get similar treatment?

Same source - Kerry will get TFRs, but security officials opine that it will not be
as large as the ones the prez gets.

George Patterson
In Idaho, tossing a rattlesnake into a crowded room is felony assault.
In Tennessee, it's evangelism.

[Jack]

Larry Dighera wrote:

> Of course, the reality is, like many things governmental, largely
> ineffective. Over 3,000 square miles of restricted airspace
> surrounding the US President is absurd, but then so is the current
> office holder.

I'll vote for Kerry if in the first 90 days he does away with TFRs, and
comes out whole heartedly and irrevocably in favor of a 10% flat tax on
all income corporate and personal, with zero deductions and no such
thing as a joint return.

Until then he'd better not catch fire, 'cause I'm no jaywalker.


--
Jack

"Cave ab homine unius libri"

[Jack]

Jay Masino wrote:

> I think the President *could* do something. He could go to the head of
> the Secret Service and say "lift the ADIZ and reduce the number of TFRs or
> you're fired". If that he resists, he fires him, and goes to the next in
> the command chain. At some point, the Secret Service "management" would
> do it. But that would assume the President had balls.

I doubt it's so much a matter of "balls" as it is the inevitable
concomitant of the Secret Service's dedication to protecting the
"office". Pretty quickly the "office-holder" begins to think the same way.

Whether that's ego, or a something like a sense of noblesse oblige, I
couldn't say.


--
Jack

"Cave ab homine unius libri"

[Jack]

CB wrote:

> The other main job of the SS is to protect the currency against
> counterfeiting. Strange how it always come back to money!

Not so strange at all.

The other option is the Cross, Star of David, Crescent, or what have
you. But fortunately we have a Constitution which limits that sort of
thing. Either way, though, money remains a big factor.


--
Jack

"Cave ab homine unius libri"

[Bob Noel]

In article >, Jack >
wrote:

> I'll vote for Kerry if in the first 90 days he does away with TFRs, and
> comes out whole heartedly and irrevocably in favor of a 10% flat tax on

Kerry to be irrevocably in favor of anything? you have GOT to be
kidding!!

--
Bob Noel

[G. Burkhart]

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
news:XIZIc.81886$Oq2.81393@attbi_s52...
> Sure -- the ONE time in my life I want to fly to Superior, WI, in the
middle
> of absolutely no where Wisconsin, to visit the Bong Museum (BOTH kids are
at
> camp -- heh, heh) -- and the President of the United States chooses TODAY
to
> visit Duluth, MN.
>
> Right across the bridge from Superior...
>
> It's a no-fly zone till later tonight...
>
> What perfect timing. I don't think anyone can calculate the odds of this
> happening.

I see Dubya is possibly coming to YOUR neighborhood next Tuesday. Be
thankful he's not coming on the 25th!

[Jack]

Bob Noel wrote:

> Kerry to be irrevocably in favor of anything? you have GOT to be
> kidding!!

Naturally.


--
Jack

"Cave ab homine unius libri"

[G.R. Patterson III]

Jack wrote:
>
> Whether that's ego, or a something like a sense of noblesse oblige, I
> couldn't say.

Well, since noblesse oblige is an obligation of the nobility to consider the problems
of the less fortunate, it isn't that. Perhaps it's a sense of privilege?

George Patterson
In Idaho, tossing a rattlesnake into a crowded room is felony assault.
In Tennessee, it's evangelism.

[H. Adam Stevens]

pull that off and I'll vote for you........


"Jack" > wrote in message
...
> Larry Dighera wrote:
>
> > Of course, the reality is, like many things governmental, largely
> > ineffective. Over 3,000 square miles of restricted airspace
> > surrounding the US President is absurd, but then so is the current
> > office holder.
>
> I'll vote for Kerry if in the first 90 days he does away with TFRs, and
> comes out whole heartedly and irrevocably in favor of a 10% flat tax on
> all income corporate and personal, with zero deductions and no such
> thing as a joint return.
snip------

[[email protected]]

On Fri, 16 Jul 2004 16:50:35 -0500, Jack > wrote:
>comes out whole heartedly and irrevocably in favor of a 10% flat tax on
>all income corporate and personal, with zero deductions and no such

Corporations pay no taxes. They just collect them from you and me and pass them
along to the government. Corporate taxation is double taxation on the customers
of the corporation. They pass the cost of their taxes on to us in the form of
higer prices. US Corporations should not be taxed AT ALL. And the collary is
that there should be no corporate welfare, subsidies, or bailouts.

D