Why GA is Dying

"Kyle Boatright" wrote in message
. ..

"Dudley Henriques" wrote in message
k.net...
This type of post is of course an opinion post and as such should be
respected in that context.
My personal opinion on this is that you are either going to have airport
security or you're not..period!

Bingo. Bothering somone taking pictures doesn't make sense when the field
has minimal, if any security. E.G. my home field. They don't ID pilots
or passengers - even transients. Presumably folks in an airplane are
bigger threats than people taking pictures, so why does the buck stop with
a kid taking pictures?

What I see with most not all of the "security" procedures we face today
is that they inconvenience the innocent folks, but would have no impact on
an actual threat. A great example is the TFR around a sporting event.
Anything with wings could penetrate the TFR. Unless it is the Superbowl
or World Series, there won't be anything in place to stop even a C-150 if
somebody wanted to use one to create mayhem. The TFR is eyewash.

Same thing with getting the ID of a kid taking pictures. It doesn't stop
someone from taking pictures. Nor would it stop him if he was up to
no-good.

That said, the point I was trying to make is that the FBO employee (or his
boss) pulled this "rule" out of his you-know-what. An excellent example
of how to drive off a prospective client. The kind of client who is sorely
needed by GA if it is going to survive another 50 years.

KB

Actually, the real threat to general aviation in the United States has been,
is now, and always will be, the American lawyer :-)
I would agree wholeheartedly that the level of security stinks generally in
aviation, as is the way it's being implemented.
Perhaps this specific instance is a prime example of that, perhaps not.
The main point, and the point that you don't want to lose when you start
dealing in these specific cases, is that airport security is something you
need very much in the United States right now.
I couldn't agree with you more that the entire issue needs complete
overhaul.
Dudley Henriques

Dudley Henriques wrote:


Actually, the real threat to general aviation in the United States has been,
is now, and always will be, the American lawyer :-)
Dudley Henriques



I dont blame the lawyer.. I blame the folks who HIRE the lawyer.

Interesting take on this thread... How many would have thought a more
"friendly" approach would have been to simply go out to the ramp (FBO
employee, or whomever was tasked to be ramp nazi that day) and socialize
with the photographer?

Ask him nicely about what he's doing.. comment on the nice weather...
ask him where he's from.. shake his hand.. get his name.. Ask him if he
wants to get flying lessons, maybe point out a place down the road that
does discovery flights, and offer to forward his name and phone number
to them.. Invite him to come sign a visitor's log in the lobby, which
your FBO keeps there for that purpose.. look at this ID there..

If the "visitor" gets evasive or otherwise suspicious, then play "bad
cop" and switch gears.. until then, with the friendly approach, you have
made the visitor aware that he IS being watched, while at the same time
being accomodating and promoting GA. Remember.. just about all of us
started off by going to the local field and hanging around for a bit
(unless you were born into aviation, or a product of the military).

If we keep turning small airports in to private clubs with barbed wire
and keypad entries, they will soon become OLD FARTS private clubs with
rusting fences and declining membership.

Dave

yep.
"Dave S" wrote in message
nk.net...
| Dudley Henriques wrote:
|
|
| Actually, the real threat to general aviation in the
United States has been,
| is now, and always will be, the American lawyer :-)
| Dudley Henriques
|
|
|
| I dont blame the lawyer.. I blame the folks who HIRE the
lawyer.
|
| Interesting take on this thread... How many would have
thought a more
| "friendly" approach would have been to simply go out to
the ramp (FBO
| employee, or whomever was tasked to be ramp nazi that day)
and socialize
| with the photographer?
|
| Ask him nicely about what he's doing.. comment on the nice
weather...
| ask him where he's from.. shake his hand.. get his name..
Ask him if he
| wants to get flying lessons, maybe point out a place down
the road that
| does discovery flights, and offer to forward his name and
phone number
| to them.. Invite him to come sign a visitor's log in the
lobby, which
| your FBO keeps there for that purpose.. look at this ID
there..
|
| If the "visitor" gets evasive or otherwise suspicious,
then play "bad
| cop" and switch gears.. until then, with the friendly
approach, you have
| made the visitor aware that he IS being watched, while at
the same time
| being accomodating and promoting GA. Remember.. just about
all of us
| started off by going to the local field and hanging around
for a bit
| (unless you were born into aviation, or a product of the
military).
|
| If we keep turning small airports in to private clubs with
barbed wire
| and keypad entries, they will soon become OLD FARTS
private clubs with
| rusting fences and declining membership.
|
| Dave

"Dave S" wrote in message
nk.net...
Dudley Henriques wrote:


Actually, the real threat to general aviation in the United States has
been, is now, and always will be, the American lawyer :-)
Dudley Henriques

I dont blame the lawyer.. I blame the folks who HIRE the lawyer.

Although its true you need a plaintiff to file a lawsuit, before lawyers
were allowed to advertise, that plaintiff had to seek out the lawyer and
initiate the proceedings.
Today, lawyers freely advertise, fishing the population for potential
lawsuits, not in the interest of justice, but completely in the interest of
filling their pockets. People who would never have sued anyone or sued a
major company for something happening that was the result of their own
carelessness and/or bad judgment have been "educated" by lawyers into
believing that there is gold at the end of every rainbow.......as long as
the lawyer gets their commission for showing the way.
Remember, you can have a greedy person wanting a lawsuit and nothing
happens, but put that greedy person in contact with a greedy lawyer, and the
lawsuits begin to flow. In today's legal world, this pairing is usually the
result of the lawyer initiating the contact!
Dudley Henriques

Dudley Henriques wrote:

"Dave S" wrote in message
nk.net...

Dudley Henriques wrote:


Actually, the real threat to general aviation in the United States has
been, is now, and always will be, the American lawyer :-)
Dudley Henriques

I dont blame the lawyer.. I blame the folks who HIRE the lawyer.


Although its true you need a plaintiff to file a lawsuit, before lawyers
were allowed to advertise, that plaintiff had to seek out the lawyer and
initiate the proceedings.
Today, lawyers freely advertise, fishing the population for potential
lawsuits, not in the interest of justice, but completely in the interest of
filling their pockets. People who would never have sued anyone or sued a
major company for something happening that was the result of their own
carelessness and/or bad judgment have been "educated" by lawyers into
believing that there is gold at the end of every rainbow.......as long as
the lawyer gets their commission for showing the way.
Remember, you can have a greedy person wanting a lawsuit and nothing
happens, but put that greedy person in contact with a greedy lawyer, and the
lawsuits begin to flow. In today's legal world, this pairing is usually the
result of the lawyer initiating the contact!

Personally, I have no problem with lawyers advertising, but I think we
also should have a loser pays system like at least parts of Europe
enjoy. The losing lawyer should pay the winning lawyer's fee and the
court costs and the plaintiff should pay the defendant's costs if the
plaintiff loses.

Matt

...plaintiff should pay the defendant's costs if the plaintiff loses.

This gives a huge advantage to the rich and the corporate, who can
afford the risk of losing a suit, especially one of high stakes.

Jose
--
The monkey turns the crank and thinks he's making the music.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

Dave S wrote:

Dudley Henriques wrote:


Actually, the real threat to general aviation in the United States has
been, is now, and always will be, the American lawyer :-)
Dudley Henriques


I dont blame the lawyer.. I blame the folks who HIRE the lawyer.

Interesting take on this thread... How many would have thought a more
"friendly" approach would have been to simply go out to the ramp (FBO
employee, or whomever was tasked to be ramp nazi that day) and socialize
with the photographer?

Ask him nicely about what he's doing.. comment on the nice weather...
ask him where he's from.. shake his hand.. get his name.. Ask him if he
wants to get flying lessons, maybe point out a place down the road that
does discovery flights, and offer to forward his name and phone number
to them.. Invite him to come sign a visitor's log in the lobby, which
your FBO keeps there for that purpose.. look at this ID there..

Yes, a much better approach. Accomplishes the same thing from a
security perspective and maybe even gets a new student if the person
isn't there for nefarious purposes.

Matt

On Sun, 23 Jul 2006 13:49:43 +0000, Matt Whiting wrote:

maybe even gets a new student

Ah ha. *Now* we get to a real problem with GA today: FBOs that do a
lousy job of creating clients.

This photographer wasn't a security problem; he was a sales opportunity.

- Andrew

Andrew Gideon wrote:
On Sun, 23 Jul 2006 13:49:43 +0000, Matt Whiting wrote:


maybe even gets a new student


Ah ha. *Now* we get to a real problem with GA today: FBOs that do a
lousy job of creating clients.

This photographer wasn't a security problem; he was a sales opportunity.

He may well have been either, I have no way to know. However, to
automatically assume he was a security problem was wrong, IMO. I like
the approach that someone suggested (I can't remember who at the moment)
that would have tactfully made this determination and then addressed
appropriately whichever was the case.


Matt

"Dave S" wrote in message
nk.net...
Dudley Henriques wrote:


Interesting take on this thread... How many would have thought a more
"friendly" approach would have been to simply go out to the ramp (FBO
employee, or whomever was tasked to be ramp nazi that day) and socialize
with the photographer?

Ask him nicely about what he's doing.. comment on the nice weather... ask
him where he's from.. shake his hand.. get his name.. Ask him if he wants
to get flying lessons, maybe point out a place down the road that does
discovery flights, and offer to forward his name and phone number to
them.. Invite him to come sign a visitor's log in the lobby, which your
FBO keeps there for that purpose.. look at this ID there..

If the "visitor" gets evasive or otherwise suspicious, then play "bad cop"
and switch gears.. until then, with the friendly approach, you have made
the visitor aware that he IS being watched, while at the same time being
accomodating and promoting GA. Remember.. just about all of us started off
by going to the local field and hanging around for a bit (unless you were
born into aviation, or a product of the military).

Dave

Interesting suggestion Dave, and very valid, but I don't know many security
officers that possess the 'salesman type' persona to be able to carry that
off too well. True, that's a generalisation, but you must admit, a lot of
security guards might struggle with it.
Not saying sec guards are dumb or meat heads or anything, don't get me
wrong, just saying that they are generally or the thought that something is
always not right, and it's their job to make it right. Sort of guilty until
proven innocent.
Crash Lander