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. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#61
|
|||
|
|||
UAV's and TFR's along the Mexico boarder
"Jack" wrote in message m... Larry Dighera wrote: Here's a political football for you: the whole damn border ought to be a TFR and a triple concertina wired no-man's land, with well-armed guards shooting on sight anything that moves. Why? Why, to increase inflation, of course. But a small ancillary benefit might be to also decrease terrorist access, for those who think that's important. 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. Jack |
#62
|
|||
|
|||
UAV's and TFR's along the Mexico boarder
"Wendy" wrote in message ink.net... "Larry Dighera" wrote in message ... On Sat, 14 Jan 2006 18:56:08 GMT, "Wendy" wrote in . net:: So how does it work with the Global Hawk UAV which was granted a national certificate of authorization by the FAA in 2003 to fly on an IFR flight plan in unrestricted airspace in the US? I presume you are referring to this/: http://www.apfn.net/Messageboard/8-1...on.cgi.33.html San Diego - Aug 18, 2003 The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) has granted a national Certificate of Authorization (COA) to the U.S. Air Force to routinely fly the Northrop Grumman-produced RQ-4 Global Hawk aerial reconnaissance system in national airspace. The certificate is the first national COA granted for an unmanned air vehicle (UAV) system. The high altitude, long endurance Global Hawk currently flies in restricted airspace during take-off and landing before quickly ascending to altitudes high above commercial air traffic. ... Above 18,000' MSL _all_ aircraft are separated by ATC. As you'll note, the UAV climbs and descends in Restricted airspace. We wouldn't want to endanger civil Part 91 flights operating below Positive Control Airspace with a blind UAV. So why don't we just put the UAVs on the boarder above 18,000 ft? Because then they couldn't get press for imposing a window dressing TFR. |
#63
|
|||
|
|||
UAV's and TFR's along the Mexico boarder
Here's a political football for you: the whole damn border ought to be a
TFR and a triple concertina wired no-man's land, with well-armed guards shooting on sight anything that moves. ask the former border patrols from East-Germany. They have some knowledge. Nah, they couldn't keep people *in*. This is a totally different problem. -- Jay Honeck Iowa City, IA Pathfinder N56993 www.AlexisParkInn.com "Your Aviation Destination" |
#64
|
|||
|
|||
UAV's and TFR's along the Mexico boarder
On Sat, 14 Jan 2006 23:29:26 GMT, "Jay Honeck"
wrote: ask the former border patrols from East-Germany. They have some knowledge. Nah, they couldn't keep people *in*. This is a totally different problem. What? The East Germans didn't want freedom, opportunity, health care, schools? They weren't willing to die for the chance? Don |
#65
|
|||
|
|||
UAV's and TFR's along the Mexico boarder
The East German government was trying to keep people in the country. The
US government is trying to keep Mexicans out of the US. "Don Tuite" wrote in message ... On Sat, 14 Jan 2006 23:29:26 GMT, "Jay Honeck" wrote: ask the former border patrols from East-Germany. They have some knowledge. Nah, they couldn't keep people *in*. This is a totally different problem. What? The East Germans didn't want freedom, opportunity, health care, schools? They weren't willing to die for the chance? Don |
#66
|
|||
|
|||
UAV's and TFR's along the Mexico boarder
Jay Honeck wrote:
ask the former border patrols from East-Germany. They have some knowledge. Nah, they couldn't keep people *in*. This is a totally different problem. oh, I see, so the Great Wall of China or the Ligne Maginot -- both built with the best technology available at the time, both to keep some folks *out*, both just as successful -- would be better examples then? --Sylvain |
#67
|
|||
|
|||
UAV's and TFR's along the Mexico boarder
"sfb" wrote:
The East German government was trying to keep people in the country. The US government is trying to keep Mexicans out of the US. No, we are trying to keep illegal people out of the US, to likely include Muslim terrorists who want to kill us. Big difference. Ron Lee |
#68
|
|||
|
|||
UAV's and TFR's along the Mexico boarder
Larry, you must be a liberal. Facts should never get in the way of
reality. Ron Lee Larry Dighera wrote: On Sat, 14 Jan 2006 20:32:27 GMT, Jack wrote in : : Larry Dighera wrote: Here's a political football for you: the whole damn border ought to be a TFR and a triple concertina wired no-man's land, with well-armed guards shooting on sight anything that moves. Why? Why, to increase inflation, of course. You mean to imply that the increased federal spending necessary to implement what you suggest will be so massive as to affect the rate of inflation? Or are you implying that the higher cost of wages as a result of drying up the illegal immigrant labor pool will result in higher prices? Or ... But a small ancillary benefit might be to also decrease terrorist access, for those who think that's important. Despite the fact, that the Bush administration finds no difficulty in using national security as an excuse for war, torture, trampling citizens' Constitutional liberties and illegal domestic spying, it's apparent that Bush finds even higher priority in keeping the cost of labor down, than in actually securing the nation's borders. |
#69
|
|||
|
|||
UAV's and TFR's along the Mexico boarder
Dave Stadt wrote:
"...the whole damn border ought to be a TFR and a triple concertina wired no-man's land, with well-armed guards shooting on sight anything that moves. "...to increase inflation, of course. "But a small ancillary benefit might be to also decrease terrorist access, for those who think that's important. 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. Ok, Dave, I've removed all the really confusing parts. Read and THEN respond, please. Jack |
#70
|
|||
|
|||
UAV's and TFR's along the Mexico boarder
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. George Patterson Coffee is only a way of stealing time that should by rights belong to your slightly older self. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|