Dangerous Cessna evacuates govt again

Christopher Campbell wrote:
On 5/11/05 9:40 AM, in article
, "Paul kgyy"
wrote:

True to the rugged pioneer spirit of our great country, DC cowered
for
cover again as a Cessna violated the no-fly zone. Fighter jets
were
scrambled to deal with this imminent threat to the security of our
nation.


The pilots of those fighter jets, armed to the teeth, would be
arrested the
moment they flew a Cessna 150 into the same area. Apparently the
latest
technology in military armament is less dangerous than a Cessna 150.
What
does the government know about our little airplanes that we don't? We
should
form a committee to study the secret powers we are wielding!

You're not supposed to point out facts like that.
According to their logic
A fully armed supersonic fighter crashing into a building won't have
half the effect that a C152 will have..
Who's running the asylum ?

kontiki wrote:

Soon Washington DC will be like Berlin... barbed wires, tanks and outposts.

You haven't been here recently, have you. It already looks like that.

Sport Pilot wrote:
Yes, it's silly for the gov't to scatter like hens when a Cessna

approaches,

but that's not the point.


Not when its possible for a C150 to carry a small A bomb in a suitcase.

A Geo Metro could carry a similar size bomb and could have gotten closer
to the Capitol than the plane managed to do.

Jay Honeck wrote:
AOPA or the like should help make examples of these pilots, in a big
public way. "We won't tolerate ignorance among our own and suggest
immediate revocation of their flying privileges".


At first blush upon reading this I thought "How ridiculous!"

However, the more I consider it, the more I think John is onto something
here. If we, the pilot community, don't do something to make it apparent
that these morons who keep busting the TFRs are NOT representative of the
rest of us, nor do they reflect the predominant attitude of most pilots, nor
do they reflect a general lack of intelligence shared by other pilots, I
fear that the federal government is simply going to make the whole danged
East Coast a no-fly zone.

The ADIZ already encompasses an area with a population bigger than your
entire state.

Jay Honeck wrote:
AOPA or the like should help make examples of these pilots, in a big
public way. "We won't tolerate ignorance among our own and suggest
immediate revocation of their flying privileges".


At first blush upon reading this I thought "How ridiculous!"

However, the more I consider it, the more I think John is onto something
here. If we, the pilot community, don't do something to make it apparent
that these morons who keep busting the TFRs are NOT representative of the
rest of us, nor do they reflect the predominant attitude of most pilots, nor
do they reflect a general lack of intelligence shared by other pilots, I
fear that the federal government is simply going to make the whole danged
East Coast a no-fly zone.

It is indeed unfortunate that the general, non-aviation public only
receives its information from the likes of CNN, MSNBC, etc., etc. When
was the last time any of you saw any mention of the hundreds or even
thousands of pilots small, private airplanes in a responsible and safe
manner. So today we have one person violate the D.C. no-fly zone. The
American people MUST be made to understand that this one very, very tiny
incident when taken in the context of many GA flights go unnoticed day
in and day out.
Arnold Sten

Peter Clark wrote:
On 11 May 2005 18:51:01 GMT, (Jay Masino)
wrote:


The latest report on WTOP (news station in DC) was that the aircraft WAS
squawking the correct code, but that there was some sort of communications
problem. I'm glad to see that everyone was so willing to jump on top of
our brother pilots.


The ADIZ procedures require immediate egress from the ADIZ upon lost
comms through shortest-exit to the boundary.

That restriction is only for lost TRANSPONDER capability. And of course
it presumes that the pilot knows the transponder is out.

It was added after the
incident before Reagan's funeral. Issues with the ADIZ itself and
problems created by pilots not following procedures therein have been
not infrequent since it's inception.

You can't blame the whole ADIZ piece of **** on pilots. It took
badgering the FAA for over a year to get them to chart the blasted
thing for example. The TRACON and the other political entities
are still having ****ing matches over operations (or else the
Kentucky governor fiasco wouldn't have happened either).

On Wed, 11 May 2005 20:03:57 +0100, "S."
wrote:


"Paul kgyy" wrote in message
roups.com...
True to the rugged pioneer spirit of our great country, DC cowered for
cover again as a Cessna violated the no-fly zone. Fighter jets were
scrambled to deal with this imminent threat to the security of our
nation.


Hi Folks,

As always, intelligent (sometimes pithy !) observation from members of the
aviation community in the above postings ; I agree with all of it.

Newsreel footage of EVERYONE in D.C. scattering in all directions has just
been shown on Channel 4 news (U.K.) ; it looked like a badly made disaster
movie. A police officer shouted "GET OUT, NOW !" to the floor of the House.
Unseemly and totally lacking in composure or dignity.

If this is what an off-track Cessna can do the the worlds most
technologically powerful and sophisticated nation, I have to ask "Have the
terrorists already won ?".

I would have to say that the answer to this question is a resounding
YES! Between people living in fear in that area of a possible attack
(mostly because of our wonderful news media), and all the restrictions
that are placed on wrong people or wrong areas they have at least
scored a huge victory in the battle if not the war. The ironic part
is that while we are imposing all these rules on people who are here
legally we still have people who want give "illegal aliens" driver's
licenses and jobs!( I know another topic all together)


I hope to go to San Diego, and work my way up to CPL in August, achieving
the last of my life's ambitions at 48.It would be tragic if the authorities
were to restrict the people who could take the controls of an aircraft, by
way of "security measures".

Idiots like this one today may curtail that, if they don't take the ease of
access to flying, just a little bit less for granted.



Something to remember though through all of this is that it was a
"STUDENT" and instructor. The instructor maybe should have been
paying a little more attention and take much better action and paid a
little more attention but I know that there were many times my
instructor sat silently waiting to see how long it would take for me
to correct my mistakes. Of course I myself would have went out of my
way to aviod the hassle of that area completely but the instructor may
have wanted the student to get a lesson on dealing with the ADIZ since
he would be flying in that area..to the instructor's credit the
student just got a lesson that he will never forget if he gets to fly
again!!

On Wed, 11 May 2005 15:27:01 -0400, "W P Dixon"
wrote in
::

WOW!
One would have to be pretty stupid to fly over DC in todays world.

Or disoriented above an undercast, or electrical failure, or ...

I can
understand the "No Fly Zone" policy, but I can't understand why all the cops
in the area have to act like Soviet paratroopers are descending around
Washington Monument.

What better way for high school graduates to promote their self
importance?
[interesting military story snipped]

I agree with the take their license away.

How can you make that statement without all the facts?

"Sport Pilot" wrote:

Not when its possible for a C150 to carry a small A bomb in a suitcase.


Apparently you do not understand nuclear weapons.

1) You can NOT put "A bomb" in a suitcase.
2) Considering the weight of such "suitcase" it would take 4 people to carry
it.
3) You need explosives to compress the plutonium to approx 3 times normal
density, not to mention the weight of the shielding you need, unless you
want to be a martyr.
4) By skipping 3) the device would be enough radioactive to harm the one who
is carrying it - they would be dead before they got to target!
5) Oh, by the way, by skipping 3) radiation sensors around various areas
would go ape ****.

In short, "A bomb" suitcase is nothing but paranoia (but that's already
mentioned in thread, so i won't go into it again).

Paul kgyy wrote:

True to the rugged pioneer spirit of our great country, DC cowered for
cover again as a Cessna violated the no-fly zone. Fighter jets were
scrambled to deal with this imminent threat to the security of our
nation.

AOPA Phil Boyer was interviewed on CNN at 1745 EDT. He set the record
straight by stating that a C150, carrying two adults and full fuel has
little to no cargo capacity (polite way of saying no explosives). Boyer
also did say that the two pilots flying the 150 made a stupid mistake
and the security people in Washington acted in accord with proper plans.

This interview was just after some undersecretary for Homeland Security
stated to Wolf Blitzer that a "small aircraft of this size can carry 0ne
or Two THOUSAND pounds of explosives". Talk about your typical
uneducated Washington Bureaucrat!