Thanks for the Sun 'n fun reports

Tedstriker wrote:

On 17 Apr 2005 20:15:29 -0700, "BobR"
wrote:


There is a need for both Sun-N-Fun and for Oshkosh as well as several
other regional EAA flyins. The one thing that I have failed to
understand is this constant blaming of the safety concerns on the
Sun-N-Fun organization. They don't control the airspace, that is a
function of the FAA Air Traffic Control. If you have complaints about
how the ATC is handling the process, complain to them.



I'll complain to whoever I please thank you. Who asked you anyway?

Go ahead and complain to whomever you want. I suggest complaining to the
correct activity would have better results.

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

Morgans wrote:
"Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired" wrote

NO!! Some of the aircraft they fly have value.

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired


Right. Since this program is my ideea, I get dibs of the first ones!

Borrow the Enterprise's transporter, then set the beam on wide dispersal
pattern? Tractor beam to bring the plane down safely.

Naa, how about the lasers they want to put up around D.C.?

"Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired" wrote

Much better idea, but don't forget to have your transporter drain the
fuel. You don't want to have the aircaft hurt themselves.

Put a dampening field in place. That will stop the engine, for set-down.
Then the evidence could be quickly flown away. ;-)
--
Jim in NC

"Jim Carriere" wrote

Naa, how about the lasers they want to put up around D.C.?

Turning up the juice might vaporize the pilot, but we still want to save the
plane. I think we gotta have the tractor beam! Either that, or the remote
access code, to take over the controls and land the plane.
--
Jim in NC

Jim Carriere wrote:

Morgans wrote:

"Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired" wrote

NO!! Some of the aircraft they fly have value.

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired



Right. Since this program is my ideea, I get dibs of the first ones!

Borrow the Enterprise's transporter, then set the beam on wide dispersal
pattern? Tractor beam to bring the plane down safely.


Naa, how about the lasers they want to put up around D.C.?

We are trying to save the aircraft. If nothing else they could be parted
out.

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

Morgans wrote:

"Jim Carriere" wrote


Naa, how about the lasers they want to put up around D.C.?


Turning up the juice might vaporize the pilot, but we still want to save the
plane. I think we gotta have the tractor beam! Either that, or the remote
access code, to take over the controls and land the plane.

That's a variation of my theory of exporting military aircraft. Each
should have a built in bomb. If the Indians and Pakistanis each have
F-16s, for example, and decide to go to war we push a button. This
accomplishes two things: it stops any bombing/airwar and they will need
to buy new aircraft.

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

I'll complain to whoever I please thank you. Who asked you anyway?

That make a lot of sense... NOT. What are you a 10 year old child? You
are acting like one.

Complaining to the SNF organazation would do more than some might
think. You think they just turn over the ATC part of the takeoff and
landings to ATC and have no say whatsoever? If you think that, you are
10 year old child. ATC is there only because SNF has the fly-in. If
they tell ATC they only want 100 takeoffs or landing in an hour, then
that's what ATC will give them. ect.. I'm not botheing complaining to
that bureaucratic ATC organazation, it would fall on deaf ears. But
the SNF organazation might get something changed, if anyone could.