Cleveland Air Show.. what if...

What if the FAA was actually on our side with regards to the Cleveland
Air Show. Those of you not AOPA Members or AVWEB readers may be unaware
that the Cleveland Air Show is under direct threat because of the
"Stadium No Fly Zones" that were enacted into public Law. The airport
(or the airspace needed for the show) is within the protected distances
from the Baseball and Football stadiums.. and both are having games this
weekend.

Baseball is Friday night which will blackout the twilight show at the
Airshow.. and there is a football game on Sunday, but its "exhibition"
so it doesn't really count. The FAA has taken a hard interpretation of
the law (as passed by Congress) and initially said "no fly during the
ballgame, PERIOD" which would have deemed the US MILITARY as well as
nationally known civilian performers a risk to the safety of attendees
at the ballgame. The FAA came back when confronted and said "well, we
will waiver the military guys, but the civvies are still grounded!"

So, wise pilots of usenet.. maybe its intentional, or maybe its just
dumb "luck" but perhaps the FAA is taking the hard line out of some sort
of support???! for GA? By taking the more restrictive interpretation do
you think the FAA is trying to send a message that maybe the law needs
to be changed/rescinded? Good time to call your Congressman?

God Forbid the FAA takes an even harder stance and decides that Airshows
themselves are "an open air gathering" of too many people and decide to
impose no-fly zones at all proposed airshows... Naaa.. they wouldnt do
that, would they?

By the way, Texas pilots.. Kay Bailey Hutchinson, the Honorable Senator,
is on the Transportation Committee... hint hint

Dave

Dave S wrote:

What if the FAA was actually on our side with regards to the Cleveland
Air Show.

I'm not so sure that the FAA is intentionally supporting us, but I believe that you
have a point. It may be possible for groups like AOPA to use this incident to get the
stadium bill repealed.

George Patterson
If you want to know God's opinion of money, just look at the people
he gives it to.

Without exception, every FAA staff person that I've spoken with who has
expressed an opinion (off the record, of course) has been in general
agreement with "the rest of us" in the aviation community: all the so-called
"security" restrictions imposed after 9/11/01 are unnecessary, ineffective,
and misguided. As much as pilots like to grouse about the FAA, I'm
convinced they think the post-9/11 airspace restrictions are as stupid as
the rest of us do.

While I'm sure they are "on our side" (which happens to be the side of
rational policies based on reality rather than hysteria) as much as they can
be, they aren't the ones responsible for the policies, but they are the ones
stuck enforcing them. I think the more that things get back to "normal"
(NOT the Orwellian "new normal" that is mouthed by the goons who keep
chanting, "everything's different now after 9/11") the better, and I bet the
good folks at the FAA think so too.

If only we had some powerful congresscritters who were air racing fans!


--
David Herman
N6170T 1965 Cessna 150E
Boeing Field (BFI), Seattle, WA
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Visit the Pacific Northwest Flying Forum:
http://www.pacificnorthwestflying.com


"Dave S" wrote in message
ink.net...
What if the FAA was actually on our side with regards to the Cleveland
Air Show. Those of you not AOPA Members or AVWEB readers may be unaware
that the Cleveland Air Show is under direct threat because of the
"Stadium No Fly Zones" that were enacted into public Law. The airport
(or the airspace needed for the show) is within the protected distances
from the Baseball and Football stadiums.. and both are having games this
weekend.

Baseball is Friday night which will blackout the twilight show at the
Airshow.. and there is a football game on Sunday, but its "exhibition"
so it doesn't really count. The FAA has taken a hard interpretation of
the law (as passed by Congress) and initially said "no fly during the
ballgame, PERIOD" which would have deemed the US MILITARY as well as
nationally known civilian performers a risk to the safety of attendees
at the ballgame. The FAA came back when confronted and said "well, we
will waiver the military guys, but the civvies are still grounded!"

So, wise pilots of usenet.. maybe its intentional, or maybe its just
dumb "luck" but perhaps the FAA is taking the hard line out of some sort
of support???! for GA? By taking the more restrictive interpretation do
you think the FAA is trying to send a message that maybe the law needs
to be changed/rescinded? Good time to call your Congressman?

God Forbid the FAA takes an even harder stance and decides that Airshows
themselves are "an open air gathering" of too many people and decide to
impose no-fly zones at all proposed airshows... Naaa.. they wouldnt do
that, would they?

By the way, Texas pilots.. Kay Bailey Hutchinson, the Honorable Senator,
is on the Transportation Committee... hint hint

Dave

A point to mention (that I didn't realize), the baseball stadium holds 29,000
people & the airshow hosts 60,000 daily (so I'm told). Which event has a
greater terror potential and exposure? Isn't it ironic!
VL

MLenoch wrote:

A point to mention (that I didn't realize), the baseball stadium holds 29,000
people & the airshow hosts 60,000 daily (so I'm told). Which event has a
greater terror potential and exposure? Isn't it ironic!

Don't point that out to Congress. Some of them are stupid enough to push through a
bill to bann aircraft at airshows!

George Patterson
If you want to know God's opinion of money, just look at the people
he gives it to.

MLenoch wrote:

A point to mention (that I didn't realize), the baseball stadium holds 29,000
people & the airshow hosts 60,000 daily (so I'm told). Which event has a
greater terror potential and exposure? Isn't it ironic!
VL

Heh, good point. Perhaps a more sensible regulation would be to ban all
major sporting events when in the vicinity of an airshow!

Happy Flying!
Scott Skylane