Here we go again

First thing I'd do is I'd jam his unicom... he he he.

Seriously, fine-tooth-comb every thing about the FBO and make it difficult
for him to conduct business. Isn't there a lawyer among you?

Care to give us details for a letter-writing campaign? E-mails, tel no's fax
no's for the city and FBO?



"Roger" wrote in message
...

We have some turf wars going on and it looks like the pilots may be
the losers.

First: we have a small airport with two runways 18/36 at 3000' X 75
and 06/24 at 3800' X 75. No scheduled flights or even charters at
present.

We are finally reaching the point where pilots are congregating around
a couple areas on the field around and in specific hangars, or several
hangars. Up till a couple years ago the place was dead except on week
ends and after work in warm weather. Now we have a lot of activity
most of the day what with the pilots congregating. They've also
restored a couple planes and purchased another.

These are active pilots who fly a lot. The one couple has flown a new
SR-22 nearly 500 hours since last June when they purchased it new.
The guys in the one hangar are flying at least 30 hours a week (maybe
as much as 50 with three small planes (two tail draggers and a 150)
There are a couple instructors in there as well.
After flying they hang around the hangar, have a couple beers and eat
pop corn.

As one of the Airport advisory members told the city, "this is the
kind of activity we should be encouraging".

Basically they know every one on the field.
As the AOPA says, they are our best security as they'd instantly
recognize, or rather not recognize any one not normally there..

The FBO has taken exception to this. He does not like the pilots
parking on the field around the hangers. Actually, he has a feud
going with a couple guys in the one hangar and classes any one else
over there as being with them and against them. The cars do not
impede aircraft movements. No one drinks and flys.

He has bent the city's ear to the point they have a draft of new
regulations, but at least are asking for pilot input.

Did I mention a couple of the guys in there are mechanics? The ones
he's feuding with?

There is another group on the other side of the field but he can't see
them from his hangar and isn't feuding with any of them (at present)

They do not want any cars on the field except when the pilots go to
their specific hangar. Parking will be in designated areas, No
alcohol on the filed (zero tolerance meaning none even in cars or
trucks) Cars will require a permit be displayed in the window at all
times. I have a bad back and need to park right by the hangar.
Your wife and kids, or friends will need to be escorted in to your
hanger, or be escorted out to the plane after you taxi to the ramp.

Landings will be on runways only. No grass and no taxiways. This
kinda puts a crimp in tail draggers on windy days, or practicing
emergency landings, or real soft field landings.

This came about when a tail dragger practicing emergency procedure
landed on a taxiway. (Some of the help doesn't recognize safe and
unsafe operations. If it's different, then it must be unsafe) Good
thing they weren't watching when I did an engine out and over shot the
turn to the runway while still 20 feet in the air.. It was safe, but
would probably have scared the crap out of the one individual.

There's much more, but the changes run about 5 pages not counting
another set for ultra lights and another set for "parachute"
operations.

He's been bending enough ears that the city is doing a lot of this out
of CYA ignorance and trying to pretend they have a big airport.
Once they got the city attorney involved they are trying to cover
every possible legal alternative.

Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com

Boycott the FBO. Buy gas and get maintenance at another field.
Send him an anonymous letter that he's going to be boycotted if
the crap continues.


"Roger" wrote in message
...

We have some turf wars going on and it looks like the pilots may be
the losers.

First: we have a small airport with two runways 18/36 at 3000' X 75
and 06/24 at 3800' X 75. No scheduled flights or even charters at
present.

We are finally reaching the point where pilots are congregating around
a couple areas on the field around and in specific hangars, or several
hangars. Up till a couple years ago the place was dead except on week
ends and after work in warm weather. Now we have a lot of activity
most of the day what with the pilots congregating. They've also
restored a couple planes and purchased another.

These are active pilots who fly a lot. The one couple has flown a new
SR-22 nearly 500 hours since last June when they purchased it new.
The guys in the one hangar are flying at least 30 hours a week (maybe
as much as 50 with three small planes (two tail draggers and a 150)
There are a couple instructors in there as well.
After flying they hang around the hangar, have a couple beers and eat
pop corn.

As one of the Airport advisory members told the city, "this is the
kind of activity we should be encouraging".

Basically they know every one on the field.
As the AOPA says, they are our best security as they'd instantly
recognize, or rather not recognize any one not normally there..

The FBO has taken exception to this. He does not like the pilots
parking on the field around the hangers. Actually, he has a feud
going with a couple guys in the one hangar and classes any one else
over there as being with them and against them. The cars do not
impede aircraft movements. No one drinks and flys.

He has bent the city's ear to the point they have a draft of new
regulations, but at least are asking for pilot input.

Did I mention a couple of the guys in there are mechanics? The ones
he's feuding with?

There is another group on the other side of the field but he can't see
them from his hangar and isn't feuding with any of them (at present)

They do not want any cars on the field except when the pilots go to
their specific hangar. Parking will be in designated areas, No
alcohol on the filed (zero tolerance meaning none even in cars or
trucks) Cars will require a permit be displayed in the window at all
times. I have a bad back and need to park right by the hangar.
Your wife and kids, or friends will need to be escorted in to your
hanger, or be escorted out to the plane after you taxi to the ramp.

Landings will be on runways only. No grass and no taxiways. This
kinda puts a crimp in tail draggers on windy days, or practicing
emergency landings, or real soft field landings.

This came about when a tail dragger practicing emergency procedure
landed on a taxiway. (Some of the help doesn't recognize safe and
unsafe operations. If it's different, then it must be unsafe) Good
thing they weren't watching when I did an engine out and over shot the
turn to the runway while still 20 feet in the air.. It was safe, but
would probably have scared the crap out of the one individual.

There's much more, but the changes run about 5 pages not counting
another set for ultra lights and another set for "parachute"
operations.

He's been bending enough ears that the city is doing a lot of this out
of CYA ignorance and trying to pretend they have a big airport.
Once they got the city attorney involved they are trying to cover
every possible legal alternative.

Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com

No. Anonymous letters are a coward's way of communicating. Please
talk to him face-to-face and give him your card so he knows who is
speaking to him.


OtisWinslow wrote:
Boycott the FBO. Buy gas and get maintenance at another field.
Send him an anonymous letter that he's going to be boycotted if
the crap continues.


"Roger" wrote in message
...

We have some turf wars going on and it looks like the pilots may be
the losers.

First: we have a small airport with two runways 18/36 at 3000' X 75
and 06/24 at 3800' X 75. No scheduled flights or even charters at
present.

We are finally reaching the point where pilots are congregating around
a couple areas on the field around and in specific hangars, or several
hangars. Up till a couple years ago the place was dead except on week
ends and after work in warm weather. Now we have a lot of activity
most of the day what with the pilots congregating. They've also
restored a couple planes and purchased another.

These are active pilots who fly a lot. The one couple has flown a new
SR-22 nearly 500 hours since last June when they purchased it new.
The guys in the one hangar are flying at least 30 hours a week (maybe
as much as 50 with three small planes (two tail draggers and a 150)
There are a couple instructors in there as well.
After flying they hang around the hangar, have a couple beers and eat
pop corn.

As one of the Airport advisory members told the city, "this is the
kind of activity we should be encouraging".

Basically they know every one on the field.
As the AOPA says, they are our best security as they'd instantly
recognize, or rather not recognize any one not normally there..

The FBO has taken exception to this. He does not like the pilots
parking on the field around the hangers. Actually, he has a feud
going with a couple guys in the one hangar and classes any one else
over there as being with them and against them. The cars do not
impede aircraft movements. No one drinks and flys.

He has bent the city's ear to the point they have a draft of new
regulations, but at least are asking for pilot input.

Did I mention a couple of the guys in there are mechanics? The ones
he's feuding with?

There is another group on the other side of the field but he can't see
them from his hangar and isn't feuding with any of them (at present)

They do not want any cars on the field except when the pilots go to
their specific hangar. Parking will be in designated areas, No
alcohol on the filed (zero tolerance meaning none even in cars or
trucks) Cars will require a permit be displayed in the window at all
times. I have a bad back and need to park right by the hangar.
Your wife and kids, or friends will need to be escorted in to your
hanger, or be escorted out to the plane after you taxi to the ramp.

Landings will be on runways only. No grass and no taxiways. This
kinda puts a crimp in tail draggers on windy days, or practicing
emergency landings, or real soft field landings.

This came about when a tail dragger practicing emergency procedure
landed on a taxiway. (Some of the help doesn't recognize safe and
unsafe operations. If it's different, then it must be unsafe) Good
thing they weren't watching when I did an engine out and over shot the
turn to the runway while still 20 feet in the air.. It was safe, but
would probably have scared the crap out of the one individual.

There's much more, but the changes run about 5 pages not counting
another set for ultra lights and another set for "parachute"
operations.

He's been bending enough ears that the city is doing a lot of this out
of CYA ignorance and trying to pretend they have a big airport.
Once they got the city attorney involved they are trying to cover
every possible legal alternative.

Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com

Sometimes.

In this case I'd call it smart. This FBO is liable to retaliate given the
actions they've taken already. I certainly wouldn't call attention to
myself given his previous behavior. If he had real problems he
was dealing with and was working with the tenants to resolve them
then it would be different.



"William W. Plummer" wrote in message
...
No. Anonymous letters are a coward's way of communicating. Please talk
to him face-to-face and give him your card so he knows who is speaking to
him.


OtisWinslow wrote:
Boycott the FBO. Buy gas and get maintenance at another field.
Send him an anonymous letter that he's going to be boycotted if
the crap continues.


"Roger" wrote in message
...

We have some turf wars going on and it looks like the pilots may be
the losers.

First: we have a small airport with two runways 18/36 at 3000' X 75
and 06/24 at 3800' X 75. No scheduled flights or even charters at
present.

We are finally reaching the point where pilots are congregating around
a couple areas on the field around and in specific hangars, or several
hangars. Up till a couple years ago the place was dead except on week
ends and after work in warm weather. Now we have a lot of activity
most of the day what with the pilots congregating. They've also
restored a couple planes and purchased another.

These are active pilots who fly a lot. The one couple has flown a new
SR-22 nearly 500 hours since last June when they purchased it new.
The guys in the one hangar are flying at least 30 hours a week (maybe
as much as 50 with three small planes (two tail draggers and a 150)
There are a couple instructors in there as well.
After flying they hang around the hangar, have a couple beers and eat
pop corn.

As one of the Airport advisory members told the city, "this is the
kind of activity we should be encouraging".

Basically they know every one on the field.
As the AOPA says, they are our best security as they'd instantly
recognize, or rather not recognize any one not normally there..

The FBO has taken exception to this. He does not like the pilots
parking on the field around the hangers. Actually, he has a feud
going with a couple guys in the one hangar and classes any one else
over there as being with them and against them. The cars do not
impede aircraft movements. No one drinks and flys.

He has bent the city's ear to the point they have a draft of new
regulations, but at least are asking for pilot input.

Did I mention a couple of the guys in there are mechanics? The ones
he's feuding with?

There is another group on the other side of the field but he can't see
them from his hangar and isn't feuding with any of them (at present)

They do not want any cars on the field except when the pilots go to
their specific hangar. Parking will be in designated areas, No
alcohol on the filed (zero tolerance meaning none even in cars or
trucks) Cars will require a permit be displayed in the window at all
times. I have a bad back and need to park right by the hangar.
Your wife and kids, or friends will need to be escorted in to your
hanger, or be escorted out to the plane after you taxi to the ramp.

Landings will be on runways only. No grass and no taxiways. This
kinda puts a crimp in tail draggers on windy days, or practicing
emergency landings, or real soft field landings.

This came about when a tail dragger practicing emergency procedure
landed on a taxiway. (Some of the help doesn't recognize safe and
unsafe operations. If it's different, then it must be unsafe) Good
thing they weren't watching when I did an engine out and over shot the
turn to the runway while still 20 feet in the air.. It was safe, but
would probably have scared the crap out of the one individual.

There's much more, but the changes run about 5 pages not counting
another set for ultra lights and another set for "parachute"
operations.

He's been bending enough ears that the city is doing a lot of this out
of CYA ignorance and trying to pretend they have a big airport.
Once they got the city attorney involved they are trying to cover
every possible legal alternative.

Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com

On Mon, 04 Apr 2005 11:47:29 GMT, "OtisWinslow"
wrote in
::

Boycott the FBO. Buy gas and get maintenance at another field.
Send him an anonymous letter that he's going to be boycotted if
the crap continues.

So you think a campaign of disrespectful intimidation will win the
day? Grow up!

"Larry Dighera" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 04 Apr 2005 11:47:29 GMT, "OtisWinslow"
wrote in
::

Boycott the FBO. Buy gas and get maintenance at another field.
Send him an anonymous letter that he's going to be boycotted if
the crap continues.

So you think a campaign of disrespectful intimidation will win the
day? Grow up!

What was suggested is in no way disrespectful or intimidating. More on the
order of civil disobedience which is a time honored, centuries old way of
getting a point across.

On Mon, 04 Apr 2005 22:17:49 GMT, "Dave Stadt"
wrote in ::


"Larry Dighera" wrote in message
.. .
On Mon, 04 Apr 2005 11:47:29 GMT, "OtisWinslow"
wrote in
::

Boycott the FBO. Buy gas and get maintenance at another field.
Send him an anonymous letter that he's going to be boycotted if
the crap continues.

So you think a campaign of disrespectful intimidation will win the
day? Grow up!

What was suggested is in no way disrespectful or intimidating.

How does what was suggested by Mr. Winslow respect the concerns of the
FBO?

You have a lot to learn about human nature if you actually believe
that threatening the FBO is going to change his mind? It will only
escalate the negative feelings, and galvanize the FBO and others into
feeling justified in taking punitive action against "renegade" pilots.

Did the felling of the WTC towers and threats of future terrorism
cause the US to retreat? Think about it.

More on the order of civil disobedience which is a time honored,
centuries old way of getting a point across.

Without some history of _rational_, face-to-face discourse, the
disobedience you suggest is tantamount to terrorism.

Talk first. Listen to each side of the argument of each issue.
Suggest creative solutions based on mutual compromise. The side who
first resorts to emotional outbursts or forsakes rational thought
loses.

"Larry Dighera" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 04 Apr 2005 22:17:49 GMT, "Dave Stadt"
wrote in ::


"Larry Dighera" wrote in message
.. .
On Mon, 04 Apr 2005 11:47:29 GMT, "OtisWinslow"
wrote in
::

Boycott the FBO. Buy gas and get maintenance at another field.
Send him an anonymous letter that he's going to be boycotted if
the crap continues.

So you think a campaign of disrespectful intimidation will win the
day? Grow up!

What was suggested is in no way disrespectful or intimidating.

How does what was suggested by Mr. Winslow respect the concerns of the
FBO?

You have a lot to learn about human nature if you actually believe
that threatening the FBO is going to change his mind? It will only
escalate the negative feelings, and galvanize the FBO and others into
feeling justified in taking punitive action against "renegade" pilots.

Did the felling of the WTC towers and threats of future terrorism
cause the US to retreat? Think about it.

More on the order of civil disobedience which is a time honored,
centuries old way of getting a point across.

Without some history of _rational_, face-to-face discourse, the
disobedience you suggest is tantamount to terrorism.

Talk first. Listen to each side of the argument of each issue.
Suggest creative solutions based on mutual compromise. The side who
first resorts to emotional outbursts or forsakes rational thought
loses.

Not buying gas at an FBO is terrorism? Yea right.

You guys forget.. the FBO already has the city managers and the lawyers
ear.. you are way behind the power curve in this. You need to organize into
a pilots committee and then address his issues rather than confront them and
it needed to be done months ago.

The FBO is a business owner and businesses pay taxes... the county or city
do not realize that your purchases from his business is what is paying the
taxes.

Welcome to "city life"

BT

"Larry Dighera" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 04 Apr 2005 22:17:49 GMT, "Dave Stadt"
wrote in ::


"Larry Dighera" wrote in message
. ..
On Mon, 04 Apr 2005 11:47:29 GMT, "OtisWinslow"
wrote in
::

Boycott the FBO. Buy gas and get maintenance at another field.
Send him an anonymous letter that he's going to be boycotted if
the crap continues.

So you think a campaign of disrespectful intimidation will win the
day? Grow up!

What was suggested is in no way disrespectful or intimidating.

How does what was suggested by Mr. Winslow respect the concerns of the
FBO?

You have a lot to learn about human nature if you actually believe
that threatening the FBO is going to change his mind? It will only
escalate the negative feelings, and galvanize the FBO and others into
feeling justified in taking punitive action against "renegade" pilots.

Did the felling of the WTC towers and threats of future terrorism
cause the US to retreat? Think about it.

More on the order of civil disobedience which is a time honored,
centuries old way of getting a point across.

Without some history of _rational_, face-to-face discourse, the
disobedience you suggest is tantamount to terrorism.

Talk first. Listen to each side of the argument of each issue.
Suggest creative solutions based on mutual compromise. The side who
first resorts to emotional outbursts or forsakes rational thought
loses.

See if you can get some help from AOPA.