Mexico Border TFR No that bad

John Doe wrote:

THIS TFR is "not that bad". How long before LAPD wants a UAV to loiter over
L.A. ?

Imagine what the presence of a UAV chasing after some car would do to the
television ratings of live car chases.


Anyone know why the TFR is ONLY 300nm long and doesn't stretch the entire
border of Mexico? We're pretty much telling the Mexicans exactly how to
avoid the very UAV that's trying to detect them....

Perhaps they are equipped with the ability to see and detect at a much
larger range than they need to fly?

--
Peter

The most interesting part of this is the cost of the UAV. Many times
that of a C182 with crew. I don't understand why they don't just get a
couple 182 crews with similar equipment installed.

-Robert

"John Doe" wrote in message
news:EtTBf.13656$Dh.4778@dukeread04...

"Gig 601XL Builder" wrDOTgiaconaATcox.net wrote in message
...
Of course the AOPA disagrees and I completely understand the slippery
slope but let's face it the little plane should have no problem flying
under the TFR and the big planes should have no problem flying over or
under it.
Since it looks like we are going to have to deal with UAV in the future
we are going to have to do something and a altitude block tha is
reasonable seems like it might be the best idea.



THIS TFR is "not that bad". How long before LAPD wants a UAV to loiter
over L.A. ?

What could a UAV add that all the news helos don't already provide?

Anyone know why the TFR is ONLY 300nm long and doesn't stretch the entire
border of Mexico? We're pretty much telling the Mexicans exactly how to
avoid the very UAV that's trying to detect them....

Looking at the enclosed area using Golden Eagle Flight Prep, the far western
end of the TFR butts up against the Goldwater Bombing Range (an inhospitable
area to be sure, but only slightly more so than the entire Agua Prieta area
as a whole...) and at the east end, you are beginning to get near the El
Paso, Texas area.

Jay B

On Wed, 25 Jan 2006 18:03:52 -0500, "John Doe"
wrote in EtTBf.13656$Dh.4778@dukeread04::


Anyone know why the TFR is ONLY 300nm long and doesn't stretch the entire
border of Mexico?

As I recall from the RFP, two UAVs were required. Initially the TFR
was about 120 miles, IIRC. I presume, with the TFR now 300 miles
long, the second UAV is on-line.

We're pretty much telling the Mexicans exactly how to
avoid the very UAV that's trying to detect them....

How would they do that? I am confident the UAV will detect human
targets unless they are covered with reflective mylar blankets
perhaps. That leaves the daylight hours which are probably adequately
patrolled from observation satellites overhead?

Or are you referring to the particular stretch of border that is
defined in the TFR? Perhaps the BP has the remainder of the border
adequately patrolled? More than likely, the section of border
selected was a result of the proximity of the existing military
facilities.

Once DHS has had an opportunity to judge the effectiveness of these
first two, I would expect them to be armed with missiles and deployed
along the entire CONUS perimeter and DC and ....

"Robert M. Gary" wrote in message
oups.com...
The most interesting part of this is the cost of the UAV. Many times
that of a C182 with crew. I don't understand why they don't just get a
couple 182 crews with similar equipment installed.

Because the people making the rules don't have any friends in high places
manufacturing 182s and training the crews to fly them.

On Wed, 25 Jan 2006 16:46:26 -0800, "Peter Duniho"
wrote in
::


Because the people making the rules don't have any friends in high places
manufacturing 182s and training the crews to fly them.

Was Jack Abramoff ever employed by General Atomics?

That idea was beaten to death a few days ago. There are a bunch of
challenges like the C182 being able to carry the fuel and sensors
needed. The TFR is night time so the Mark 1 eyeball isn't going to hack
it.

"Robert M. Gary" wrote in message
oups.com...
The most interesting part of this is the cost of the UAV. Many times
that of a C182 with crew. I don't understand why they don't just get a
couple 182 crews with similar equipment installed.

-Robert

I say why not tethered balloons or blimps with asme equipment on board
and dorder patrols with choppers to have closer looksy when conditions
warrant? Too cost effective to work? Not enough lobbyist to make
money off of this idea?

The Monk

I say why not tethered balloons or blimps with same equipment on board
at intervals and dorder patrols with choppers to have closer looksy
when conditions warrant? Too cost effective to work? Not enough
lobbyist to make money off of this idea?

The Monk

John Doe wrote:

Anyone know why the TFR is ONLY 300nm long and doesn't stretch the entire
border of Mexico?

Other portions of the border are already well covered by other means.

George Patterson
Coffee is only a way of stealing time that should by rights belong to
your slightly older self.