A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Piloting
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Can anyone explain what TFR's are supposed to do?



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old October 15th 03, 02:49 PM
Corky Scott
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Can anyone explain what TFR's are supposed to do?

I haven't figured out why TFR's exist. How are they supposed to
protect the President and/or whatever else?

Does the Secret Service and the FAA really think that just having a
"no flight activity" within an imaginary circle sixty miles across
will really stop a determined assailant?

Besides, light airplanes just don't have the hitting power to cause
much of a problem for anything but a "soft" target, and any soft
target would be so small as to be an immensely hard target to hit, not
to mention how difficult it would be to be at the right place and time
to actually have a shot at hitting it while it's in the open.

I mean come'on, once the president's airplane is on the ground, he's
off and rolling on a schedule that has him moving constantly. Talk
about a moving target! And then when he stops, it's often inside a
big building.

Those times he might be scheduled for an outdoor address, I can see
the Secret Service getting a bit uptight about that and not wanting
stray airplanes around at that point, but how often does that happen?

Are the airliners prevented from flying within the TFR? If not, can
someone explain why not? It wasn't a lightplane that caused the
collaps of the WTC.

Is the TFR anything but a panacea for the Secret Service? Something
they can point to as proof that they take their job seriously?

Sort of reminds me of that old joke about a guy walking down the
street who spots another guy jumping up and down and waving a bag
above his head. The first guy stops and asks whats going on. The
second guy says he's scaring elephants away.

"There aren't any elephants around here." The first guy says.

"Pretty effective isn't it?" The second guy responds.

Corky Scott


  #2  
Old October 15th 03, 03:09 PM
Roger Long
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Giving the gub'mit every benefit of the doubt, although without any evidence
that anyone currently in the administration could find their ass with both
hands, I think the idea is to reduce the number of radar targets they would
need to deal with if someone did attempt an aerial attack. Our GA planes
themselves are not the threat, they would just provide cover for one.

Being realistic, it's just more mindless knee jerking to make the uniformed
public feel better.

--
Roger Long


  #3  
Old October 15th 03, 04:05 PM
C J Campbell
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

The TFRs are supposed to prevent an unspecified attack on the President of
the United States by unspecified persons.

While it is true that the TFRs are probably ineffective and they are
discriminatory, it is not true that general aviation airplanes pose no
threat or that their threat is less than that of ground vehicles.

A small airplane can approach a target at speeds in excess of 200 mph and
drop a bomb or detonate itself with little warning. The fact that the same
mission could be accomplished by other means, such as a truck full of
explosives, is irrelevant. It is possible that the means of attack is more
important to the attacker than the effectiveness of the attack -- the whole
"terror from the skies" thing.

Small airplanes flown by the Civil Air Patrol carried bombs and were
effective during WW II in patrolling against submarines and even managed to
sink one.

As Lee Harvey Oswald demonstrated, there is no way to protect the President
or anyone else against a determined and possibly suicidal attacker. There
will always be people who are willing to take great risks to get close to
the President, although no one has made a serious attempt since Gerald Ford.



  #4  
Old October 15th 03, 04:45 PM
Ron Natalie
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Corky Scott" wrote in message ...
I haven't figured out why TFR's exist. How are they supposed to
protect the President and/or whatever else?


That's the general principle.

Does the Secret Service and the FAA really think that just having a
"no flight activity" within an imaginary circle sixty miles across
will really stop a determined assailant?


The FAA ain't running the circus. I suspect that the Secret Service
feels that by keeping all (or at least) most friendly traffic out of the
area, it makes it easier to spot the unfriendlies.

The TFR's used to follow the president around for certain appearances
but they were MUCH smaller than the recent oens.

Are the airliners prevented from flying within the TFR? If not, can
someone explain why not? It wasn't a lightplane that caused the
collaps of the WTC.


The argument (laughable) is that air carriers have gone through a more
rigorous security procedure and aren't a problem.



  #5  
Old October 15th 03, 04:48 PM
Ron Natalie
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"C J Campbell" wrote in message ...

As Lee Harvey Oswald demonstrated, there is no way to protect the President
or anyone else against a determined and possibly suicidal attacker. There
will always be people who are willing to take great risks to get close to
the President, although no one has made a serious attempt since Gerald Ford.


Excuse me? Hinkley managed to get a bullet into Ronald Reagan and turned
James Brady into a candidate for national vegetable.



  #6  
Old October 15th 03, 05:05 PM
Ben Jackson
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In article ,
Ron Natalie wrote:
The FAA ain't running the circus. I suspect that the Secret Service
feels that by keeping all (or at least) most friendly traffic out of the
area, it makes it easier to spot the unfriendlies.


And notice when they're serious about it the TFR is 60 miles across.
Really makes you wonder what the point of a 6 mile wide TFR is. I can
cross from the edge of that to the center in 1 minute. Then what?
It's stupid, but I'd hate to generate so much discussion about it that
they "solve" the problem by widening the TFRs.

--
Ben Jackson

http://www.ben.com/
  #7  
Old October 15th 03, 05:17 PM
John Harlow
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

As Lee Harvey Oswald demonstrated, there is no way to protect the
President
or anyone else against a determined and possibly suicidal attacker. There
will always be people who are willing to take great risks to get close to
the President, although no one has made a serious attempt since Gerald

Ford.

Which president did Gerald Ford attempt to kill (besides himself, of
course)?


  #8  
Old October 15th 03, 05:45 PM
Ross Richardson
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

It makes the American public and media feel good that something is being
done. The other benefit is that the TFR tells everyone where the
President every minute. (Oh, unless they put one up for mis information)

Corky Scott wrote:

I haven't figured out why TFR's exist. How are they supposed to
protect the President and/or whatever else?

Does the Secret Service and the FAA really think that just having a
"no flight activity" within an imaginary circle sixty miles across
will really stop a determined assailant?

Besides, light airplanes just don't have the hitting power to cause
much of a problem for anything but a "soft" target, and any soft
target would be so small as to be an immensely hard target to hit, not
to mention how difficult it would be to be at the right place and time
to actually have a shot at hitting it while it's in the open.

I mean come'on, once the president's airplane is on the ground, he's
off and rolling on a schedule that has him moving constantly. Talk
about a moving target! And then when he stops, it's often inside a
big building.

Those times he might be scheduled for an outdoor address, I can see
the Secret Service getting a bit uptight about that and not wanting
stray airplanes around at that point, but how often does that happen?

Are the airliners prevented from flying within the TFR? If not, can
someone explain why not? It wasn't a lightplane that caused the
collaps of the WTC.

Is the TFR anything but a panacea for the Secret Service? Something
they can point to as proof that they take their job seriously?

Sort of reminds me of that old joke about a guy walking down the
street who spots another guy jumping up and down and waving a bag
above his head. The first guy stops and asks whats going on. The
second guy says he's scaring elephants away.

"There aren't any elephants around here." The first guy says.

"Pretty effective isn't it?" The second guy responds.

Corky Scott

  #9  
Old October 15th 03, 05:45 PM
Steven P. McNicoll
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Corky Scott" wrote in message
...

I haven't figured out why TFR's exist. How are they supposed to
protect the President and/or whatever else?


Most of them have nothing to do with the President.


  #10  
Old October 15th 03, 05:45 PM
Ron Natalie
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Ross Richardson" wrote in message ...
It makes the American public and media feel good that something is being
done. The other benefit is that the TFR tells everyone where the
President every minute. (Oh, unless they put one up for mis information)

The American public doesn't know the TFR's exist.


 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
An odd clearance...can anyone explain? Andrew Gideon Instrument Flight Rules 32 September 18th 04 09:35 PM
Puget Sound TFRs reduced in size - charted here David H Owning 3 January 10th 04 07:01 AM
wasn't Toyots supposed to come out with a plane a few years ago? James Home Built 2 December 22nd 03 06:45 AM
TEC, can anyone use small words and explain this to me? Snowbird Instrument Flight Rules 11 November 16th 03 06:51 PM
Please explain T3 Military Aviation 28 November 15th 03 12:11 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:08 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.