Ban privately-owned PLANES

B1ackwater wrote:
(RadicalModerate) wrote:

In misc.survivalism wrote:
He hit an apartment building for the rich - where apartments start
at over $1 million. Maybe because of that, longtime antigun nut Rep.
Carolyn Maloney demanded that flights over densely-populated areas be
banned.

Maloney being a Gun Grabber doesn't invalidate the debate about
general aviation usage over big cities.
I think it would be common sense to disallow inexperienced pilots or
even amateur pilots to overfly major cities.

Perhaps a special license endorsement for "Class B" (big city) airspace
which would require an instrument rating and minimum cume time-in-type
plus minimum time-per-month ( to assure proficiency ) is in order.

Not a terrible idea ...

A plane - even a small one - can do proportionally
more damage if it crashes into a dense urban area.
Requiring some special training - what do do if the
engine quits plus stuff about the weird air currents
around tall buildings - also makes sense. Requiring
at least 1000 hours of experience before getting
said "Class B" certificate would weed out the
seriously inexperienced too.

There are 27 Class B areas, not all of them anywhere close to
major city or dense population areas. There are lots of Class C,D,E
areas that are nestled right in the middle of dense population
areas.

Next question -- define "amateur pilot".

Blanche Cohen wrote:
B1ackwater wrote:
(RadicalModerate) wrote:

In misc.survivalism wrote:
He hit an apartment building for the rich - where apartments start
at over $1 million. Maybe because of that, longtime antigun nut Rep.
Carolyn Maloney demanded that flights over densely-populated areas be
banned.

Maloney being a Gun Grabber doesn't invalidate the debate about
general aviation usage over big cities.
I think it would be common sense to disallow inexperienced pilots or
even amateur pilots to overfly major cities.

Perhaps a special license endorsement for "Class B" (big city) airspace
which would require an instrument rating and minimum cume time-in-type
plus minimum time-per-month ( to assure proficiency ) is in order.

Not a terrible idea ...

A plane - even a small one - can do proportionally
more damage if it crashes into a dense urban area.
Requiring some special training - what do do if the
engine quits plus stuff about the weird air currents
around tall buildings - also makes sense. Requiring
at least 1000 hours of experience before getting
said "Class B" certificate would weed out the
seriously inexperienced too.

There are 27 Class B areas, not all of them anywhere close to
major city or dense population areas. There are lots of Class C,D,E
areas that are nestled right in the middle of dense population
areas.

Next question -- define "amateur pilot".

For legal purposes I think a vfr rating would work to separate planes,
but in reality, some vfr rated pilots are very experienced. We all
know some IFR pilots are amateurs.

"davidlaska" wrote in message
oups.com...
For legal purposes I think a vfr rating would work to separate planes,
but in reality, some vfr rated pilots are very experienced. We all
know some IFR pilots are amateurs.

For legal purposes not flying part 135 air taxi or 121 airline is amateur
flying even if the pilot has a commercial or ATP rating.

"NrDg" wrote in
news

"davidlaska" wrote in message
oups.com...
For legal purposes I think a vfr rating would work to separate
planes, but in reality, some vfr rated pilots are very experienced.
We all know some IFR pilots are amateurs.

For legal purposes not flying part 135 air taxi or 121 airline is
amateur flying even if the pilot has a commercial or ATP rating.




Really. So you think the pilots who fly for the U.S. Air Force or
U.S. Navy flight demonstration teams (The Thunderbirds, The Blue Angels)
are amateurs?

--
Marty Shapiro
Silicon Rallye Inc.

(remove SPAMNOT to email me)

In article ,
"NrDg" wrote:

For legal purposes not flying part 135 air taxi or 121 airline is amateur
flying even if the pilot has a commercial or ATP rating.

That's the single most ridiculous thing I've read this week.

You're telling me that a pilot for, say, Netjets, who flies various
business jets under Part 91 all over the world, is engaging in "amateur
flying" when he goes to work? That's news to the nearly 3,000 pilots
who work there.



I looked up "amateur" in the dictionary, and folks who make their living
as non-121/135 pilots don't fit any definition of "amateur" I've ever
heard of. Here's the definition, in case you're unfamiliar:


amateur

n.

Beavis wrote:
In article ,

3. One lacking the skill of a professional, as in an art.



I try to be professional about my flying. I just don't do it
as a career.

On 12 Oct 2006 16:07:00 GMT, (Blanche Cohen)
wrote:

B1ackwater wrote:
(RadicalModerate) wrote:

In misc.survivalism wrote:
He hit an apartment building for the rich - where apartments start
at over $1 million. Maybe because of that, longtime antigun nut Rep.
Carolyn Maloney demanded that flights over densely-populated areas be
banned.

Maloney being a Gun Grabber doesn't invalidate the debate about
general aviation usage over big cities.
I think it would be common sense to disallow inexperienced pilots or
even amateur pilots to overfly major cities.

Perhaps a special license endorsement for "Class B" (big city) airspace
which would require an instrument rating and minimum cume time-in-type
plus minimum time-per-month ( to assure proficiency ) is in order.

Not a terrible idea ...

A plane - even a small one - can do proportionally
more damage if it crashes into a dense urban area.
Requiring some special training - what do do if the
engine quits plus stuff about the weird air currents
around tall buildings - also makes sense. Requiring
at least 1000 hours of experience before getting
said "Class B" certificate would weed out the
seriously inexperienced too.

There are 27 Class B areas, not all of them anywhere close to
major city or dense population areas. There are lots of Class C,D,E
areas that are nestled right in the middle of dense population
areas.

Next question -- define "amateur pilot".

I think the original poster meant "private pilot" ...
non-commercial / non-governmental. In short he wants
to deny everybody but 'official' people access rights
to 'urban areas'. If he means the FAAs def of a
'congested area' then that blocks off everything but
the cow country.

In short, he's one of those people willing to trade
a LOT of freedom (someone elses freedoms probably
instead of his own) for the illusion of "security".
Franklin had something to say about that ...

As for "class B" ... it was a made-up class - 'B' for
"Big City".

I can see requiring some extra training, maybe some
minor security check, before letting Joe Pilot fly
his Piper through the middle of NYC. While emergency
landings are part of the standard program, what do
you do when everything beneath you is concrete filled
with people ? What about the funky air currents that
tall buildings cause ? What about the thermals from
all that concrete and asphalt ? Flying over a big
city is SPECIAL - and requires a little special
training.

As for the 'security' aspect ... not much, just prove
they are who they say they are and aren't on anyones
lists. US citizens get the easy track, foreigners get
a slightly deeper probing. Of course bona-fide terrorists
aren't gonna wait for PERMISSION to fly into a city ...

B1ackwater wrote:
I can see requiring some extra training, maybe some
minor security check, before letting Joe Pilot fly
his Piper through the middle of NYC.

You mean SPECIAL protection for the rich of Upper Manhattan - while
the rest of us get the fallout (literally) of planes flown by private
pilots who barely can fly? Because that's what you imply! Let any
rich idiot who can afford much more plane than he can handle safely fly
it over the nobodies - as that Kennedy heir did - as long as he doesn't
drop his mishandled boy toy onto those rich people in Manhattan.

No $4 to park! No $6 admission! http://www.INTERNET-GUN-SHOW.com

On 12 Oct 2006 15:29:28 -0700, "
wrote:

B1ackwater wrote:
I can see requiring some extra training, maybe some
minor security check, before letting Joe Pilot fly
his Piper through the middle of NYC.

You mean SPECIAL protection for the rich of Upper Manhattan - while
the rest of us get the fallout (literally) of planes flown by private
pilots who barely can fly?

Actually, I meant the entire NY (Boston/Jersey/Baltimore/DC/
Atlanta/Jacksonville/Orlando/Miami/Tampa/New Orleans/Chigago/
Houston/ Denver/Phoenix/LA/SanFran/Seattle/etc) urban areas ...
not JUST the parts that belong to 'rich people'. If there's
pretty much no place to land that won't put you through
SOMEBODYS roof then I'd advocate special training and
licencing. Doesn't have to be super-severe ... but it needs
to be addressed.

So take your class war crap and shove it where crap belongs.

In article , (B1ackwater)
wrote:

B1ackwater wrote:
I can see requiring some extra training, maybe some
minor security check, before letting Joe Pilot fly
his Piper through the middle of NYC.

You mean SPECIAL protection for the rich of Upper Manhattan - while
the rest of us get the fallout (literally) of planes flown by private
pilots who barely can fly?

Actually, I meant the entire NY (Boston/Jersey/Baltimore/DC/
Atlanta/Jacksonville/Orlando/Miami/Tampa/New Orleans/Chigago/
Houston/ Denver/Phoenix/LA/SanFran/Seattle/etc) urban areas ...
not JUST the parts that belong to 'rich people'. If there's
pretty much no place to land that won't put you through
SOMEBODYS roof then I'd advocate special training and
licencing. Doesn't have to be super-severe ... but it needs
to be addressed.

Training like for part 135? Like the part 135 guy who planted a twin in
Dorchester?

--
Bob Noel
Looking for a sig the
lawyers will hate