12 dead this weekend from GA crashes

[Skylune]

6 in South Carolina, 3 in Wisconsin, 3 in Florida (another Cirrus).

A current AOPA focus is to make sure flying remains affordable for owners
of "tired iron."

They awarded a 1974 plane to a lucky winner in Colorado.

On this web page a writer laments that GA planes don't have locking gas
caps.

And the beat goes on..... Who needs The Sopranos for drama when we have
"General Aviation, Entertaining America?"

[Jim Burns]

The 3 in Wisconsin were freight pilots flying Shorts. Mid air between 2 of
the same companies aircraft. Three dead in one aircraft, the other aircraft
landed safely.
http://www.jsonline.com/news/state/feb06/390185.asp

Jim

"Skylune" > wrote in message
lkaboutaviation.com...
> 6 in South Carolina, 3 in Wisconsin, 3 in Florida (another Cirrus).
>
> A current AOPA focus is to make sure flying remains affordable for owners
> of "tired iron."
>
> They awarded a 1974 plane to a lucky winner in Colorado.
>
> On this web page a writer laments that GA planes don't have locking gas
> caps.
>
> And the beat goes on..... Who needs The Sopranos for drama when we have
> "General Aviation, Entertaining America?"
>

[Skylune]

>>by "Jim Burns" > Feb 6, 2006 at 09:04
AM


The 3 in Wisconsin were freight pilots flying Shorts. Mid air between 2
of
the same companies aircraft. Three dead in one aircraft, the other
aircraft
landed safely.
http://www.jsonline.com/news/state/feb06/390185.asp

Jim<<

Standards must be tightened. The weekend before, at least 6 dead. On
Friday night, violation of TFR over Crawford Texas.

I was at FRG two weekends ago, and saw a Cirrus plane. Really cool
looking machine. Weird how many crashes. I'm not sure if I'd be willing
to get into one if I had the opportunity.....

[Dylan Smith]

On 2006-02-06, Skylune > wrote:
> A current AOPA focus is to make sure flying remains affordable for owners
> of "tired iron."
>
> They awarded a 1974 plane to a lucky winner in Colorado.

1974? And considered iron? Sounds brand new to me.

The plane I fly most regularly was built in 1945 and is made of wood!

--
Dylan Smith, Port St Mary, Isle of Man
Flying: http://www.dylansmith.net
Oolite-Linux: an Elite tribute: http://oolite-linux.berlios.de
Frontier Elite Universe: http://www.alioth.net

[Michael 182]

Daily US Death Toll (2001 data from National Center for Health
Statistics)

Heart Disease .........1909 (Let's outlaw fatty foods and mandate
exercise)

Cancer.............1527 (Let's outlaw tobacco, mandate bran, or
whatever is supposed to prevent cancer)

Stroke........446 (More cigarettes anf food laws)

Chronic lower respiratory diseases.......342 (and still more...)

Accidents............292 (Get rid of them damn cars ...except my
convertible mini cooper ...)

Oh, and by the way, when we reduce the death rate by mandating
behavior, we're probably going to have to require contraception to
accompany our immigration laws.

When all of this is done, I'm willing to be next in line for adding
more regulation to general aviation.

[Skylune]

GA's enablers at the FAA want to talk....

>>AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Notice of Public Meeting.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: This notice announces a public meeting on the subject of the
continued airworthiness of the U.S. general aviation fleet of aircraft.
The purpose of the meeting is to gather information and discuss
technical issues related to problems associated with the increasing
average age of the general aviation fleet. Particular emphasis will be
given to actions that have potential to mitigate the inevitable effects
of fatigue, corrosion, and deterioration on aging general aviation
airplanes.

DATES: The public meeting will be held March 22-23, 2006, starting at 8
a.m. each day, in Kansas City, Missouri. Registration will begin at 8
a.m. on the first day of the meeting.

ADDRESSES: The public meeting will be held at the following location:
Doubletree Hotel Overland Park, 10100 College Blvd., Overland Park,
Kansas, United States, 66210.
Persons who are unable to attend the meeting may mail their
comments to: Federal Aviation Administration, (FAA), Central Region,
Small Airplane Directorate, Attention: Mr. Marv Nuss, 901 Locust, Room
301, Kansas City, Missouri 64106. Written comments regarding the
subject of this meeting will receive the same consideration as
statements made at the public meeting.

[Skylune]

>>by Michael 182 > Feb 6, 2006
at 09:13 AM


Daily US Death Toll (2001 data from National Center for Health
Statistics)

Heart Disease .........1909 (Let's outlaw fatty foods and mandate
exercise)

Cancer.............1527 (Let's outlaw tobacco, mandate bran, or
whatever is supposed to prevent cancer)

Stroke........446 (More cigarettes anf food laws)

Chronic lower respiratory diseases.......342 (and still more...)

Accidents............292 (Get rid of them damn cars ...except my
convertible mini cooper ...)

Oh, and by the way, when we reduce the death rate by mandating
behavior, we're probably going to have to require contraception to
accompany our immigration laws.

When all of this is done, I'm willing to be next in line for adding
more regulation to general aviation.<<

Denial. Others agree with me (see AOPA message boards) that standards
for pilot proficiency must be toughened.

Since you are comparing GA death rates to disease death rates: do you
consider GA to be a disease?

[Skylune]

>>by Michael 182 > Feb 6, 2006
at 09:13 AM



When all of this is done, I'm willing to be next in line for adding
more regulation to general aviation.<<

You'd be acting in your own self interest if you do. See below, esp. p. 6
and 8.

http://www.bls.gov/iif/oshwc/cfoi/cfch0001.pdf

[Ron Lee]

Another post noted that 12 people died this past weekend. Do we post
every car accident and death, death from diseases and accidents?

Bottom line is that many accidents/deaths are due to pilot error and
it appears that no one (at least the others who are killed in similar
stupid acts) learns from these accidents.

You can't legislate or mandate by FAR common sense. So people will
continue to die for doing stupid things.

Ron Lee

[Peter R.]

Ron Lee > wrote:

> Another post noted that 12 people died this past weekend.

That particular poster has a reputation of simply stirring the pot and has
posted many anti-GA rants in the past. In my case, I KF'ed him long ago.

> Do we post
> every car accident and death, death from diseases and accidents?

Personally, as an active GA pilot I am interested in reading about aircraft
accidents and do not mind the recent surge of postings.

--
Peter

[Darkwing]

"Skylune" > wrote in message
lkaboutaviation.com...
>6 in South Carolina, 3 in Wisconsin, 3 in Florida (another Cirrus).
>
> A current AOPA focus is to make sure flying remains affordable for owners
> of "tired iron."
>
> They awarded a 1974 plane to a lucky winner in Colorado.
>
> On this web page a writer laments that GA planes don't have locking gas
> caps.
>
> And the beat goes on..... Who needs The Sopranos for drama when we have
> "General Aviation, Entertaining America?"
>

We had two fatal road crashed here this morning during rush hour. Guess it
is time to shut all those dangerous roads down, either that or we are not
adequately training our drivers.

--------------------------------------------------------
DW

[Newps]

Skylune wrote:
> 6 in South Carolina, 3 in Wisconsin, 3 in Florida (another Cirrus).
>
>


So what?

[Steve Foley]

Interesting statistics, but as I'm sure you know, 73.8% of published
statistics are incorrect.

They are talking about pilots and navigators as an occupation. They also
show 90 deaths in 2002 and claim that represents 69.8 deaths per 100,000
employed. That yields 128,940 employed in the field.

Another page from the Bureau of Labor Statistics shows 106,000 employed as
pilots or flight engineers.

Looking through the NTSB site, I only found 48 fatalities in 28 accidents
looking at part 121 (scheduled airlines - 0 fatal) part 135 (non-scheduled
air taxi - 36) part 133 (three fatal) and part 137 (agriculture - 9 fatal).
That only accounts for 48 deaths, not 90. It's still a pretty high number.

The other point is that although on the chart you pointed out Pilots and
Navgators had the highest percentage of fatalaties per 100,000 employed,
they also had the lowest number of deaths.

How much effort should go into saving these 90 people when 2667 people died
in the nine occupations with higher numbers of deaths?


"Skylune" > wrote in message

>
> You'd be acting in your own self interest if you do. See below, esp. p. 6
> and 8.
>
> http://www.bls.gov/iif/oshwc/cfoi/cfch0001.pdf

[Flyingmonk]

STOP IT! STOPT IT! NO MORE! <fingers in both ears.> La La La La La La
La La La La La La La La La La La La La La La La La La La La La La La La
La La La La La La La La La La La La La La La La La La La La La La La La
La La La La La La La La La La La La La La La La La La La La La La La La
La La La La La La La La La La La La ...

The Monk

[Skylune]

>>by "Steve Foley" > Feb 6, 2006 at 07:29 PM


Interesting statistics, but as I'm sure you know, 73.8% of published
statistics are incorrect.

They are talking about pilots and navigators as an occupation. They also
show 90 deaths in 2002 and claim that represents 69.8 deaths per 100,000
employed. That yields 128,940 employed in the field.

Another page from the Bureau of Labor Statistics shows 106,000 employed
as
pilots or flight engineers.

Looking through the NTSB site, I only found 48 fatalities in 28 accidents
looking at part 121 (scheduled airlines - 0 fatal) part 135
(non-scheduled
air taxi - 36) part 133 (three fatal) and part 137 (agriculture - 9
fatal).
That only accounts for 48 deaths, not 90. It's still a pretty high
number.

The other point is that although on the chart you pointed out Pilots and
Navgators had the highest percentage of fatalaties per 100,000 employed,
they also had the lowest number of deaths.

How much effort should go into saving these 90 people when 2667 people
died
in the nine occupations with higher numbers of deaths?<<

Interesting: I don't know where BLS gets its statistics. One would think
directly from employers, but I'm not sure. I'll try to find out.

[Skylune]

>>by Newps > Feb 6, 2006 at 12:17 PM


Skylune wrote:
> 6 in South Carolina, 3 in Wisconsin, 3 in Florida (another Cirrus).
>
>


So what?<<

Excellent question. Personally, I would vote to discontinue NTSB
investigations. If a small plane crashes, I agree, "so what?" Why waste
the money when its almost always pilot error? As long as no one on the
ground is hurt, who cares?

[sfb]

Anybody flying the same equipment would like some assurance it was the
Indian not the arrow.

"Skylune" > wrote in message
>
> Excellent question. Personally, I would vote to discontinue NTSB
> investigations. If a small plane crashes, I agree, "so what?" Why
> waste
> the money when its almost always pilot error? As long as no one on the
> ground is hurt, who cares?
>
>
>

[Tri-Pacer]

"Flyingmonk" > wrote in message ...
> STOP IT! STOPT IT! NO MORE! <fingers in both ears.> La La La La La La
> La La La La La La La La La La La La La La La La La La

The guy has some serious mental issues and is just trolling to cause
trouble.

This is what happens when these people are let out on the street without
supervision. They go off their meds----- and some of them wind up here in
rec. aviation.

Cheers:

Paul
N1431A

[Skylune]

>>by "Tri-Pacer" > Feb 6, 2006 at 01:34 PM

The guy has some serious mental issues and is just trolling to cause
trouble.

This is what happens when these people are let out on the street without
supervision. They go off their meds----- and some of them wind up here in

rec. aviation.

Cheers:

Paul
N1431A<<

Is that your own personal excuse for winding up here? Salut!

[Montblack]

("Flyingmonk" wrote)
> STOP IT! STOPT IT! NO MORE! <fingers in both ears.> La La La La La La La
> La La La La La La La La La La La La La La La La La La La La La La La La La
> La La La La La La La La La La La La La La La La La La La La La La La La La
> La La La La La La La La La La La La La La La La La La La La La La La La La
> La La La La La La La La ...


Na na na nananana, nannana, hey Jude...
Na na na nananana, nannana, hey Jude...
Na na na nananana, nannana, hey Jude...
Na na na nananana, nannana, hey Jude...
Na na na nananana, nannana, hey Jude...
Na na na nananana, nannana, hey Jude...
Na na na nananana, nannana, hey Jude...
Na na na nananana, nannana, hey Jude...
Na na na nananana, nannana, hey Jude...
Na na na nananana, nannana, hey Jude...
Na na na nananana, nannana, hey Jude...
Na na na nananana, nannana, hey Jude...
Na na na nananana, nannana, hey Jude...


Montblack
And anytime you feel the pain, hey Jude, refrain,
Don't carry the world upon your shoulders.

[Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe]

You think that's bad...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/4685576.stm

--
--
Geoff
the sea hawk at wow way d0t com
remove spaces and make the obvious substitutions to reply by mail
Spell checking is left as an excercise for the reader.

[Steve Foley]

The question still stands.

How much effort should be made to prevent these 90 deaths, when the top nine
hazardous occupations account for 2667 deaths?

"Skylune" > wrote in message
lkaboutaviation.com...


> Interesting: I don't know where BLS gets its statistics. One would think
> directly from employers, but I'm not sure. I'll try to find out.

[Ron Lee]

"Peter R." > wrote:
>> Do we post
>> every car accident and death, death from diseases and accidents?
>
>Personally, as an active GA pilot I am interested in reading about aircraft
>accidents and do not mind the recent surge of postings.

This should provide hours of reading:

http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/month.asp

Ron Lee

[kontiki]

-- Deaths of 5 Skiers Stun Mammoth

In the span of a week, three skiing accidents, a heart attack and an avalanche claimed
the lives of four visitors and a ski patrol veteran.

MAMMOTH LAKES — The deaths of five skiers over a recent seven-day period on or near
Mammoth Mountain appear to have been tragic accidents but have shaken this hamlet of
outdoor enthusiasts.

One victim was a Los Angeles dentist and avid outdoorsman, another a retired water
deliveryman from Garden Grove, the third a San Diego teenager and the fourth a
marketing representative from Laguna Niguel. The fifth was an accomplished ski patrol
member traversing the Eastern Sierra's breathtaking backcountry.

[Rachel]

Ron Lee wrote:
> "Peter R." > wrote:
>
>>>Do we post
>>>every car accident and death, death from diseases and accidents?
>>
>>Personally, as an active GA pilot I am interested in reading about aircraft
>>accidents and do not mind the recent surge of postings.
>
>
> This should provide hours of reading:
>
> http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/month.asp

I used to read that for hours in college when we had class in the
computer lab. I learned that I'm really not the dumbest person up there
flying.

[[email protected]]

Skybuffoon, what would possess a non-pilot like yourself to inhabit a
forum visited mainly by pilots and spew your incessant anti-GA,
anti-AOPA drivel? Surely there must be other pursuits more worthy of
your time and effort than continuing to post here and amuse the
population with your aviation ignorance? Admittedly your posts are
fairly well-composed, but the spin you put on is laughable at times.
Stick with facts (opinions thinly disguised as facts don't count) and
put up or shadddup...

[Prime]

"Steve Foley" > posted the exciting message
:

> The question still stands.
>
> How much effort should be made to prevent these 90 deaths, when the
> top nine hazardous occupations account for 2667 deaths?
>
> "Skylune" > wrote in message
> lkaboutaviation.com..
> .
>
>
>> Interesting: I don't know where BLS gets its statistics. One would
>> think directly from employers, but I'm not sure. I'll try to find
>> out.
>
>
>
>

Personally, I think there are too many humans on the planet anyway. I'll
just be careful and we'll let Darwin work his magic. Why shouldn't we enjoy
things that may be risky?

[Jay Honeck]

> In the span of a week, three skiing accidents, a heart attack and an
> avalanche claimed the lives of four visitors and a ski patrol veteran.

Well, really, when you get right down to it, downhill skiing is one of the
dumbest, least productive, potentially dangerous activities known to man.

In Skylune's world, it would be banned. Thankfully, we still live in
America.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[kontiki]

Jay Honeck wrote:
>>In the span of a week, three skiing accidents, a heart attack and an
>>avalanche claimed the lives of four visitors and a ski patrol veteran.
>
>
> Well, really, when you get right down to it, downhill skiing is one of the
> dumbest, least productive, potentially dangerous activities known to man.
>
> In Skylune's world, it would be banned. Thankfully, we still live in
> America.

exactly.

[Flyingmonk]

>Well, really, when you get right down to it, downhill skiing is one of the
>dumbest, least productive, potentially dangerous activities known to man.

Hmmmmmm. Wonder why uphill skiiing never caught on. Enquiry minds
want to know. :^)

The Monk

[Skylune]

>>by "Steve Foley" > Feb 7, 2006 at 01:03 AM


The question still stands.<<

Uh, uh, uh.......... I plead the Fifth!

Actually, I think standards should be improved and proficiency better
tested. More than just the semi annuals should be required. Many pilots
agree that there are unsafe fliers. Can they ever be totally eliminated
based on regulations? No. But there can be improvement.

[Skylune]

>>by kontiki > Feb 7, 2006 at 01:47 AM


-- Deaths of 5 Skiers Stun Mammoth

In the span of a week, three skiing accidents, a heart attack and an
avalanche claimed
the lives of four visitors and a ski patrol veteran.

MAMMOTH LAKES — The deaths of five skiers over a recent seven-day period
on or near
Mammoth Mountain appear to have been tragic accidents but have shaken
this
hamlet of
outdoor enthusiasts.

One victim was a Los Angeles dentist and avid outdoorsman, another a
retired water
deliveryman from Garden Grove, the third a San Diego teenager and the
fourth a
marketing representative from Laguna Niguel. The fifth was an
accomplished
ski patrol
member traversing the Eastern Sierra's breathtaking backcountry.<<

Yeah, we lose a few every year here on the east coast too. Usually too
fast, down, and slide into a tree or rock....

I think theres a difference between a sport and a federally and state
funded transportation system.

[alexy]

"Skylune" > wrote:

>>>by "Steve Foley" > Feb 7, 2006 at 01:03 AM
>
>
>The question still stands.<<
>
>Uh, uh, uh.......... I plead the Fifth!
>
>Actually, I think standards should be improved and proficiency better
>tested. More than just the semi annuals should be required.
What semi annuals? Just because lots of people call biennials
"biannuals" doesn't make them so!

--
Alex -- Replace "nospam" with "mail" to reply by email. Checked infrequently.

[Skylune]

>>by "Jay Honeck" > Feb 7, 2006 at 04:52 AM


> In the span of a week, three skiing accidents, a heart attack and an
> avalanche claimed the lives of four visitors and a ski patrol veteran.

Well, really, when you get right down to it, downhill skiing is one of
the

dumbest, least productive, potentially dangerous activities known to man.

In Skylune's world<<

No!!! Don't regulate skiing. Live, ski, or die!

But seriously, skiing, scuba diving, ultimate frisbee, should not come
under FAA jurisdiction. We already pay user fees on 100% of the services
we use. The AIP has no $$ allocated to cut trails or build lifts, and
skiers don't need to talk to ATC. There are no NTSB investigations when a
stupid skier (like that Kennedy that died on Aspen throwing a football
around) gets killed. And skiers accept a certain amount of risk, which
can be controlled. Kind of like rec. GA.

[Ron Lee]

>Many pilots agree that there are unsafe fliers. Can they ever be totally eliminated
>based on regulations? No. But there can be improvement.
>
Until you get those pilots to admit that they are unsafe and take
action to correct their "problems" they will continue to die and kill
others. Personally I don't want shotgun approaches that impact me
that are designed to catch the few.

Ron Lee

[Ron Lee]

Rachel > wrote:
>>
>> This should provide hours of reading:
>>
>> http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/month.asp
>
>I used to read that for hours in college when we had class in the
>computer lab. I learned that I'm really not the dumbest person up there
>flying.

Women usually aren't the problem. Case in point...look at the male to
female ratio in the prison population.

Ron Lee

[Skylune]

>>by alexy > Feb 7, 2006 at 08:34 AM


"Skylune" > wrote:

>>>by "Steve Foley" > Feb 7, 2006 at 01:03 AM
>
>
>The question still stands.<<
>
>Uh, uh, uh.......... I plead the Fifth!
>
>Actually, I think standards should be improved and proficiency better
>tested. More than just the semi annuals should be required.
What semi annuals? Just because lots of people call biennials
"biannuals" doesn't make them so!
<<

;-). ok. biennials. not semi-annuals. I think there should be more
than biennials....
--

[darthpup]

Maybe external air bags on aircraft. Then they cannot crash. Cirrus
already has a parachute.

Can any vehicle really be made idiot proof?

[Skylune]

>>by (Ron Lee) Feb 7, 2006 at 01:47 PM


>Many pilots agree that there are unsafe fliers. Can they ever be
totally
eliminated
>based on regulations? No. But there can be improvement.
>
Until you get those pilots to admit that they are unsafe and take
action to correct their "problems" they will continue to die and kill
others. Personally I don't want shotgun approaches that impact me
that are designed to catch the few.

Ron Lee<<

Isn't this what the biennials are supposed to do? What would be wrong
with making the tests more stringent and more frequent? What would be
wrong with getting the bad apples out of the sky? Wouldn't that benefit
the GA community?

What would be wrong with mandating better security at GA airports?

What would be wrong with enforcing noise abatement?

What would be wrong with charging people for the services they use?

[Flyingmonk]

>What would be wrong with mandating better security at GA airports?
>
>What would be wrong with enforcing noise abatement?
>
>What would be wrong with charging people for the services they use?

Because NONE of the above is a real threat to anyone and THAT money can
be better spent elsewhere. DUMBASS!

The Monk

[[email protected]]

>>>I think theres a difference between a sport and a federally and state
funded transportation system.<<<

Yes there is (it's federally funded BTW) - but your point *whatever it
was* is lost when you start a thread trumpeting the deaths of X people
in small aircraft, and follow that up with non-sequiturs about locking
gas caps & drama etc. For a guy who doesn't fly you sure spend enough
time in here spewing your slanted BS about GA & AOPA as if you have
nothing better to do with your time. You've said before you have a
Mossberg shotgun - do you post similarly ignorant drivel on NRA
websites? You keep posting this crap to essentially the same group of
pilot readers, who by now have all written you off as a wannabe pilot
that couldn't get it done, or worse just another Internet crackpot.

Ugh. <disgusted sigh>

[Skylune]

>>by "Flyingmonk" > Feb 7, 2006 at 06:12 AM


>What would be wrong with mandating better security at GA airports?
>
>What would be wrong with enforcing noise abatement?
>
>What would be wrong with charging people for the services they use?

Because NONE of the above is a real threat to anyone and THAT money can
be better spent elsewhere. DUMBASS!

The Monk<<

I thought you were supposed to be a placid Buddhist type. The "DUMBASS!"
seems to belie that...

Anyway, excessive noise is a large, and growing problem. Millions of
people are directly affected. There are many anti-noise groups throughout
the country, but I choose to work solo, for now...

As far as money being better spent elsewhere, I totally agree: federal
grants (operating and AIP) to GA airports should be eliminated. Zero.
Make the users fully pay.

[Flyingmonk]

Sorry dude, had the attack out the noids. <g>

The Monk

[Flyingmonk]

Had to vent and you looked just as good as any at the moment LOL.

The Monk

[Skylune]

>>by " > Feb 7, 2006 at 06:22 AM


>>>I think theres a difference between a sport and a federally and state
funded transportation system.<<<

Yes there is (it's federally funded BTW) - but your point *whatever it
was* is lost when you start a thread trumpeting the deaths of X people
in small aircraft, and follow that up with non-sequiturs about locking
gas caps & drama etc. For a guy who doesn't fly you sure spend enough
time in here spewing your slanted BS about GA & AOPA as if you have
nothing better to do with your time. You've said before you have a
Mossberg shotgun - do you post similarly ignorant drivel on NRA
websites? You keep posting this crap to essentially the same group of
pilot readers, who by now have all written you off as a wannabe pilot
that couldn't get it done, or worse just another Internet crackpot.

Ugh. <disgusted sigh> <<

I don't post on NRA websites, nor do I belong to that group. I see both
sides of the gun debate. I am not a wannabe pilot. Internet crackpot?
Well, ok. I'll take that handle.

(the comment about locking gas caps was in response to someone elses
lament that planes do not have these...)

As far as the "ugh!":
I'll post less, but still visit the group regularly, as I do receive lots
of good information here.

BTW, I am breaking the news on the FAA budget ahead of the AOPA (see "Bush
Budget"). Just trust me, I know about these things....

I expect a hysterical outcry is being prepared right now by the patriots
at the AOPA. I bet it will be on their web site shortly.

[Skylune]

>>by "Flyingmonk" > Feb 7, 2006 at 06:26 AM


Had to vent and you looked just as good as any at the moment LOL.

The Monk<<

Cool. I understand "venting."

[Newps]

Skylune wrote:
>>>by Newps > Feb 6, 2006 at 12:17 PM
>
>
>
> Skylune wrote:
>
>>6 in South Carolina, 3 in Wisconsin, 3 in Florida (another Cirrus).
>>
>>
>
>
>
> So what?<<
>
> Excellent question.

And yet you still post your drivel.

[Newps]

kontiki wrote:

> -- Deaths of 5 Skiers Stun Mammoth
>
> In the span of a week, three skiing accidents, a heart attack and an
> avalanche claimed the lives of four visitors and a ski patrol veteran.

And just about every time some idiot from Minnesota comes out here to
Montana to go snowmobiling we have to dig his dead ass out of the
avalanche he started.

[Newps]

Skylune wrote:


>
> I think theres a difference between a sport and a federally and state
> funded transportation system.

Think again. Every mountain ski area is federally and state funded.

[Skylune]

>>by Newps > Feb 7, 2006 at 08:42 AM

Think again. Every mountain ski area is federally and state funded.<<

I don't need to think again. You don't know what you're talking about.
Here's SEC filings for american skiing corp, the largest operator of ski
resorts in the USA. Dig deep, and find the federal funding. I'll be
waiting.


http://peaks.shareholder.com/EdgarDetail.cfm?CompanyID=SKI&CIK=1043432&FID=1043432-05-29&SID=05-00

Sure there are some state owned areas (cannon mt. in NH for e.g.), but ski
areas are overwhelmingly privately owned, with absolutely zero state or
federal funding. Where do u come up with this bizarre stuff???? The
AOPA???

[Arketip]

Skylune wrote:
>>>by Newps > Feb 7, 2006 at 08:42 AM
>
>
> Think again. Every mountain ski area is federally and state funded.<<
>
> I don't need to think again. You don't know what you're talking about.
> Here's SEC filings for american skiing corp, the largest operator of ski
> resorts in the USA. Dig deep, and find the federal funding. I'll be
> waiting.
>
>
> http://peaks.shareholder.com/EdgarDetail.cfm?CompanyID=SKI&CIK=1043432&FID=1043432-05-29&SID=05-00
>
> Sure there are some state owned areas (cannon mt. in NH for e.g.), but ski
> areas are overwhelmingly privately owned, with absolutely zero state or
> federal funding. Where do u come up with this bizarre stuff???? The
> AOPA???
>

Are the roads to the ski resorts privately owned/funded or users fees payed?

[Skylune]

>>by Arketip > Feb 7, 2006 at 04:49 PM



Are the roads to the ski resorts privately owned/funded or users fees
payed?<<

LOL. Are you with the AOPA or something?? These roads are financed and
maintained the same way the roads to GA airports are.

[Rolf Blom G (AS/EAB)]

On 2006-02-07 15:02, darthpup wrote:
> Maybe external air bags on aircraft. Then they cannot crash. Cirrus
> already has a parachute.
>
> Can any vehicle really be made idiot proof?
>

Yes, but then nature will evolve a dumber idiot, to match.

/Rolf

[Orval Fairbairn]

In article
utaviation.com>,
"Skylune" > wrote:

> >>by "Jay Honeck" > Feb 7, 2006 at 04:52 AM
>
>
> > In the span of a week, three skiing accidents, a heart attack and an
> > avalanche claimed the lives of four visitors and a ski patrol veteran.
>
> Well, really, when you get right down to it, downhill skiing is one of
> the
>
> dumbest, least productive, potentially dangerous activities known to man.
>
> In Skylune's world<<
>
> No!!! Don't regulate skiing. Live, ski, or die!
>
> But seriously, skiing, scuba diving, ultimate frisbee, should not come
> under FAA jurisdiction. We already pay user fees on 100% of the services
> we use. The AIP has no $$ allocated to cut trails or build lifts, and
> skiers don't need to talk to ATC. There are no NTSB investigations when a
> stupid skier (like that Kennedy that died on Aspen throwing a football
> around) gets killed. And skiers accept a certain amount of risk, which
> can be controlled. Kind of like rec. GA.
>

They get avalanche patrols/protection, emergency medivac, snowplows,
highway patrol -- all at taxpayer expense.

--
Remve "_" from email to reply to me personally.

[Orval Fairbairn]

In article
utaviation.com>,
"Skylune" > wrote:

> >>by "Steve Foley" > Feb 7, 2006 at 01:03 AM
>
>
> The question still stands.<<
>
> Uh, uh, uh.......... I plead the Fifth!
>
> Actually, I think standards should be improved and proficiency better
> tested. More than just the semi annuals should be required. Many pilots
> agree that there are unsafe fliers. Can they ever be totally eliminated
> based on regulations? No. But there can be improvement.

How about unsafe skiers? I have seen plenty of them, too.

--
Remve "_" from email to reply to me personally.

[Orval Fairbairn]

In article
utaviation.com>,
"Skylune" > wrote:

> >>by (Ron Lee) Feb 7, 2006 at 01:47 PM
>
>
> >Many pilots agree that there are unsafe fliers. Can they ever be
> totally
> eliminated
> >based on regulations? No. But there can be improvement.
> >
> Until you get those pilots to admit that they are unsafe and take
> action to correct their "problems" they will continue to die and kill
> others. Personally I don't want shotgun approaches that impact me
> that are designed to catch the few.
>
> Ron Lee<<
>
> Isn't this what the biennials are supposed to do? What would be wrong
> with making the tests more stringent and more frequent? What would be
> wrong with getting the bad apples out of the sky? Wouldn't that benefit
> the GA community?
>
> What would be wrong with mandating better security at GA airports?

Cost/benefit -- there is nothing to show that "increased security" does
anything but make nonparticipants feel good.


> What would be wrong with enforcing noise abatement?

Hassle -- allowing local communities to set their own noise rules would
totally disrupt the utility of GA.

Imagine driving into a town that has its own noise rules for your car or
that sets impossibly low speed limits an then enforces them with "zero
tolerance" and high fines. Does the term "speed trap" mean anything?


> What would be wrong with charging people for the services they use?

As long as everybody else and every other special interest (including
skiers and boaters) pays for THEIR services.

--
Remve "_" from email to reply to me personally.

[Skylune]

>>by Orval Fairbairn > Feb 7, 2006 at 05:48
PM




They get avalanche patrols/protection, emergency medivac, snowplows,
highway patrol -- all at taxpayer expense.<<

The ski patrol are volunteers. No federal funding. In fact, you have to
pay for the first aid training yourself. Avalanche patrols: Not familiar
with how they are funded -- maybe state or local forestry types...

Emergency medivac: Your insurance pays for ambulance services. A ski
patrol will put you in a sled on the lower elevations -- no charge to
uncle sam.

Snowplows and highway patrol: I haven't seen any on the slopes. I'm not
sure what function they would serve.

[Skylune]

by Orval Fairbairn > Feb 7, 2006 at 05:49 PM



How about unsafe skiers? I have seen plenty of them, too.<<

I thought you kill filed me!

But OK. There are lots of a-holes on the mountains (esp. Killington).
Many are skiers but more are snowboarders. Unsafe skiing will get your
ticket clipped by ski patrol. If someone injures you thru their
negligence, you can sue.


(I never thought a simple post would generate so much grief.... I just
thought that 12 deaths in a weekend, including a poor family wiped out,
might be relevant to GA safety.)

[Orval Fairbairn]

In article
utaviation.com>,
"Skylune" > wrote:

> by Orval Fairbairn > Feb 7, 2006 at 05:49 PM
>
>
>
> How about unsafe skiers? I have seen plenty of them, too.<<
>
> I thought you kill filed me!
>
> But OK. There are lots of a-holes on the mountains (esp. Killington).
> Many are skiers but more are snowboarders. Unsafe skiing will get your
> ticket clipped by ski patrol. If someone injures you thru their
> negligence, you can sue.
>
>
> (I never thought a simple post would generate so much grief.... I just
> thought that 12 deaths in a weekend, including a poor family wiped out,
> might be relevant to GA safety.)

Yes -- that is tragic. Problem is -- "Skylune", you have a rep for
waving red flags at bulls who are tired of harassment; so, guess who
gets the flak (and the horns)?

--
Remve "_" from email to reply to me personally.

[Ron Lee]

"Skylune" > wrote:
>
>(I never thought a simple post would generate so much grief.... I just
>thought that 12 deaths in a weekend, including a poor family wiped out,
>might be relevant to GA safety.)

So what happened with the "poor family?" Did the pilot screw up
royally? If so was it something that should never have happened or
normal royal screwups by pilots who are destined to die in a plane
crash?

What about families killed in auto accidents because of driver werror?
It happens. You can't stop it.

Ron Lee

[Steve Foley]

"Skylune" > wrote in message
lkaboutaviation.com...


> What would be wrong with mandating better security at GA airports?

For what purpose?

Last weekend three radios were stolen out of planes at my field. Best
estimate for a fence to completely surround the 2000 foot runway is $ 1/2
million. I can't see spending $1/2 million to safeguard $6000 worth of
radios.

I know of no realistic security threats posed by GA aircraft. The kid in
Florida proved that a Cessna can do just as much damage to a skyscraper as a
baseball. He broke the windows.

> What would be wrong with enforcing noise abatement?

Flew out of Duchess County airport last week. A sign on the taxiway said to
obey noise abatement procedures. Problem is the noise abatement procedures
aren't published.

> What would be wrong with charging people for the services they use?

Flip side of the coin. I pay $0.19 per gallon federal tax, yet my airport
received NO federal funding.

[[email protected]]

>>>BTW, I am breaking the news on the FAA budget ahead of the AOPA (see "Bush
Budget"). Just trust me, I know about these things..<<<

What... you think nobody knows about the FAA's alleged funding crisis?
The OMB says there's no problem and that they're fully funded, but the
FAA says the system is broke and we're almost outta money. Who to
believe? The feds have been careful not to use the term "user fees"
rather "fee-for-service" (you say tomato, I say tomahto)

[Skylune]

by Orval Fairbairn <o_r_fairbairn@[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Feb 7, 2006 at 07:48
PM

Yes -- that is tragic. Problem is -- "Skylune", you have a rep for
waving red flags at bulls who are tired of harassment; so, guess who
gets the flak (and the horns)?<<

I'm not much of a bull fighting fan, but usually in the end, the bull gets
the sword from the guy in the funny outfit. If there's any risk to the
matador, they have the clowns for distraction purposes. GA's version of
the clowns:

http://www.airportbusiness.com/article/article.jsp?siteSection=1&id=2282

[Skylune]

>>by " > Feb 7, 2006 at 01:12 PM

What... you think nobody knows about the FAA's alleged funding crisis?
The OMB says there's no problem and that they're fully funded, but the
FAA says the system is broke and we're almost outta money. Who to
believe? The feds have been careful not to use the term "user fees"
rather "fee-for-service" (you say tomato, I say tomahto)<<

King: You gotta be careful when you believe the AOPA stuff -- very very
slanted. OMB has NOT said there is no funding shortfall. NEVER. Not
once. Show me a single quote directly from OMB (not as "interpreted" by
AOPA spinners) that makes that claim.

AOPA is typically slippery on this point. They only talk about trust
fund
revenue forecasts, which show increased levels of available funds. This
is
what AOPA seizes upon, and then, as diningenously as usual, claims this
proves there is no shortfall. This is, how shall we say, bull****. The
FAA has been very clear that the so-called crisis is due to commitments
which greatly exceed projected growth in the trust fund.

Your question, "Who to believe?" is pretty easy. Listen only to me.

[Morgans]

"Flyingmonk" > wrote\
>
> Hmmmmmm. Wonder why uphill skiiing never caught on. Enquiry minds
> want to know. :^)
\
Oh, but it has. People that enjoy downhill skiing so much, the do it one
time, for every downhill trip.

It is called the chairlift, or at the larger places, the cable car or
helicopter! <g>
--
Jim in NC

[Peter R.]

Ron Lee > wrote:

> This should provide hours of reading:
>
> http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/month.asp

I suspect your suggestion is not really sincere. In response, here is
another useless suggestion: If you don't like the accident posts, use your
newsreader's "Ignore Thread" feature. Or better still, create a filter to
do it for you.

In any event, while I will periodically scan the NTSB reports, I prefer the
analysis-style articles found in /NTSB Reporter/ and /Aviation Safety/.


--
Peter

[Peter R.]

Flyingmonk > wrote:

> Hmmmmmm. Wonder why uphill skiiing never caught on. Enquiry minds
> want to know. :^)

Cross country skiing and telemarking, although since they both require much
more physical exertion, you are correct that they are not nearly as popular
as their downhill relative.

--
Peter

[Kevin]

Rolf Blom G (AS/EAB) wrote:
> On 2006-02-07 15:02, darthpup wrote:
>>
>> Can any vehicle really be made idiot proof?
>>
>
> Yes, but then nature will evolve a dumber idiot, to match.

I know you were being tongue-in-cheek, but this reminded me of a news
report I saw several years ago regarding airbags in cars. A study
had shown that people were driving MORE recklessly, due to more and
more new cars being equipped with airbags. A safety expert said
something to the effect of, "people take more chances when they know
that if they crash, a big pillow will pop out of their steering wheel.
If you want people to slow down, then instead of an airbag, they should
put a big metal spike in the steering wheel."

He was joking, but I found an ironic grain of truth in his comment.

Kevin.

[Ron Lee]

"Peter R." > wrote:

>Ron Lee > wrote:
>
>> This should provide hours of reading:
>>
>> http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/month.asp
>
>I suspect your suggestion is not really sincere. In response, here is
>another useless suggestion: If you don't like the accident posts, use your
>newsreader's "Ignore Thread" feature. Or better still, create a filter to
>do it for you.
>
>In any event, while I will periodically scan the NTSB reports, I prefer the
>analysis-style articles found in /NTSB Reporter/ and /Aviation Safety/.
>
>
>--
>Peter

And you are able to judge sincerity how?

Ron Lee

[Peter R.]

Ron Lee > wrote:

> And you are able to judge sincerity how?

Did you honestly think you were enlightening me with your suggestion and
that I had never heard of the accident report database before?

--
Peter

[Skylune]

by "Peter R." > Feb 7, 2006 at 08:54 PM


Flyingmonk > wrote:

> Hmmmmmm. Wonder why uphill skiiing never caught on. Enquiry minds
> want to know. :^)

Cross country skiing and telemarking, although since they both require
much
more physical exertion, you are correct that they are not nearly as
popular
as their downhill relative.<<

Alpine ("downhill") skiing and Nordic (x-country) are as different as
flying fixed wing vs. helicopters.

[Ron Lee]

"Peter R." > wrote:

>Ron Lee > wrote:
>
>> And you are able to judge sincerity how?
>
>Did you honestly think you were enlightening me with your suggestion and
>that I had never heard of the accident report database before?
>
>--
>Peter

Peter, I have no way to know if you knew of that database or not. I
suspect that many people do not just as there are pilots who will do
stupid things to end up in that database.

Ron Lee

[Ron Lee]

> The FAA has been very clear that the so-called crisis is due to commitments
>which greatly exceed projected growth in the trust fund.
>

I have a serious funding shortfall. I just decided to take expensive
vacations twice a week, buy a dozen residences in popular resorts and
a nice jet to travel there.

I need to have the government steal from others to take care of this
funding crisis.

Ron Lee

[Skylune]

>>by (Ron Lee) Feb 8, 2006 at 07:58 PM



I need to have the government steal from others to take care of this
funding crisis.

Ron Lee<<

Hey Phil, I mean Ron! Thanks for putting it so plainly. I like that much
better than the BS about economic benefits and other gobbly-gook.

[Peter R.]

Ron Lee > wrote:

> Peter, I have no way to know if you knew of that database or not. I
> suspect that many people do not just as there are pilots who will do
> stupid things to end up in that database.

OK, fair enough.

--
Peter

[Jay Honeck]

> Alpine ("downhill") skiing and Nordic (x-country) are as different as
> flying fixed wing vs. helicopters.

Oh, I don't know. I've 'bout killed myself doing both...

;-)
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"