UAV's and TFR's along the Mexico boarder

"John Doe" wrote in message
nk.net...

"Dave Stadt" wrote in message
news

"John Doe" wrote in message
ink.net...

I doubt it. Are the UAV's going to swoop down and gather up the
illegals?
By the time a UAV spots something and Border Patrol gets there the
illegals are long gone. Or are you saying the UAV's can discern
between
normal everyday illegals and terrorist? If so I would like to hear
more.

How you figure? illegals crossing the border are going to outrun a UAV
circling overhead? This I gotta see.

So the UAV sees them, now what? The Border Patrol stationed 25 miles
away dashes out and catches them. I doubt it. Isn't it true the Border
Patrol or whomever doesn't have the resources to detain and return
illegals and in fact leaves most of them go inside this country (US of
A)? Soooooo what are the UAVs going to accomplish other than taking
pictures of millions illegally crossing the border. At best it is a
multi-million dollar AN3 bolt in a 12 inch hole.


What do you think the Border Patrol does? Just stroll down the road and
if they happen to see an illegal, they arrest them? They've been dashing
out to locations tripped by sensors for years to catch illegals.

And they catch what? Maybe a couple of percent? Many of those are turned
lose on US soil. So what if the UAV can spot them for 30 hours, enough
people are simply not available to dash out as you say and apprehend. UAVs
are not a solution.

Here, esp. on the Spanish border (better: the base in North Africa),
Europe
has a similar problem with illegal immigrants. I don't see a long term
solution coming up. We can't hide behind our fences forever.

It's not "hiding behind a fence" to expect immigrants to follow proper
procedures. No country can long survive an invasion -- peaceful or
otherwise -- and that's what has happened to America.

We're not talking thousands, or even hundreds of thousands -- we're talking
MILLIONS of people.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

"Larry Dighera" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 15 Jan 2006 11:57:08 -0500, Bob Noel
wrote in
::

In article ,
Larry Dighera wrote:

Where is the up-side of domestic UAV operations?

do you equate UAV operations with only military use?

In my opinion, the only justification for removing the pilot from the
aircraft is if the mission is too dangerous to risk human life.


Or too boring...

Jay B

On Mon, 16 Jan 2006 00:29:07 GMT, "John Doe"
wrote in . net::

Total politics. This is so overkill for border patrol it
makes me sick. Talk about fraud, waste and abuse of taxpayer money.



Well, that's kind of the way I see it also. :-)

On Mon, 16 Jan 2006 00:43:46 GMT, "John Doe"
wrote in et::

Is an LAPD helicopter with the same
camera on board as the UAV now doing domestic spying?

It's possible for that helo to be used for rescue and other
constructive purposes, unlike a UAV whose mission profile is solely
surveillance and weapons delivery.

Please. Don't be
surprised if in 5-10 years every metro police department has transitioned
from helicopters to UAVs.

The world is rapidly becoming a rather disappointing environment. :-(

In article , Martin Hotze
wrote:

this has nothing to do with it. most of those illegals don't have the
financial means to follow the rules.

?????

--
Bob Noel
goodness - the NFL officials are making
the NHL officials look like geniuses

"John Keeney" wrote in message
oups.com...


Answer a question for me: is this a little bitty slow UAV that's hard
to see from any kind of distance or one of the larger, faster ones that
can run a light plane down from behind where the pilot couldn't see it
coming?


We're talking about these or something very close.

http://www.airforce-technology.com/projects/predator/

Martin Hotze wrote:

this has nothing to do with it. most of those illegals don't have the
financial means to follow the rules.

Not our problem.


still: you/we can't hide behind a fence forever and just go on building an
even higher fence. You can only try to minimize the social problems on both
sides (esp on the other side) of the fence.

Exactly!

Ron Lee

George Patterson wrote:
John Keeney wrote:

Answer a question for me: is this a little bitty slow UAV that's hard
to see from any kind of distance or one of the larger, faster ones that
can run a light plane down from behind where the pilot couldn't see it
coming?

Someone claimed that a 182 wouldn't be able to carry all the gear that this
thing does. That would argue for the larger aircraft.

Well, one of the more favored UAVs is the size of the 737...

Larry Dighera wrote:
On Sun, 15 Jan 2006 03:01:29 GMT, Dave S

THe only practical gripe that I could agree with is that this is a
"slippery slope" regarding airspace grabs via the TFR/"PFR" process...
otherwise, the existing structure, design and location of this
particular TFR doesnt create much of a problem (when compared to the
ADIZ, MickeyMouse TFR's, 60 mile Presidential no-fly zones, and such.

So you feel that operating a UAV on this border patrol mission at a
cost that exceeds that of operating a C-182 by several orders of
magnitude is not worth griping about? Why is a UAV the platform of
choice in this mission? It's technology is unnecessary ill suited to
the mission; the money is better spent on ground agents and
deportation funding. There is no rational justification for using
UAVs, in my opinion. It's just a way for the Bush administration to
get headlines and pander to General Atomics's business interest
without materially affecting the influx of illegals which might dry up
the cheap labor pool.

Larry -- do we know what the mission really is? I think we're all
assuming it's border patrol for drugs and/or illegal immigrants. If
you take a look at the MOA/R/A areas down there, the TFR closes a small
gap between the Fuzzy MOA and the Restricted areas around
sierra Vista. This now creates a complete "wall" along the entire
AZ and NM border. I think the TFR was the quickest and simplest
approach to the border, whereas creating a new MOA or R area
would require public comment and lots of time.