AVmail
AVmailSelected email from AVweb members. Contributions for possible publication in AVmail are welcome at editor@avweb.com. The views expressed in this section are strictly those of the contributors, and are not necessarily shared by AVweb, its staff or management.
NOTE: If we select your email for publication, we reserve the right to edit it for length and to excise language we deem offensive. We will post your name unless you specifically ask us not to do so.
| Byron
Blake
30 Jun 2002 |
Boeing Thinks Small AVweb wrote:
Essentially the $100,000 'investment' is the cost of a good condition used Cessna 172, probably one of the best aerial surveillance platforms ever. From CAP's use of Cessna 140s in the 1940s to today, the Skyhawk and some of its derivatives remain one of the best aircraft for aerial photography, search and rescue, power and pipe line patrol and general air to ground observation. The Skyhawk has reasonable range, can be modified for real slow flight, has a number of useful STCs and used in hard IFR to severe and clear VMC and operate in and out of large and dinky strips. Its operating expenses can be very low if maintenance and proper operating techniques are used. It is truly an under appreciated aerial platform. I'm continued to be amazed that the Feds scrap existing technology in favor of re-inventing the wheel. AVweb responds... Hmmm... I guess the challenges that remain are (1) obtaining 12-hour range from a Skyhawk, and (2) finding Skyhawk pilots who consider themselves "essentially disposable." (Given recent events, the former may be more difficult than the latter.) --Mike Busch, Editor-in-Chief |
| Dwight
Lytle
28 Jun 2002 |
Definition of "Night" As I am preparing for my checkride for my Private Pilot License, I wanted to know how long I can practice until, with the long summer days before us. I've gotten answers like "I think you have to be down a 1/2 hour before civil twilight or something" and I decided I better find out for myself what the rules really are...
And no I do not have the endorsement, so I simply cannot fly "at night," which means I better have that Cessna tied down by the end of Civil Twilight. So when is the end of Civil Twilight? FAR 1.1 tells us that it's "...as published in the American Air Almanac, converted to local time." So I searched and searched http://aa.usno.navy.mil/ for this "American Air Almanac" I could not find one. What I did find however, and ordered, was "The Air Almanac 2003" issued by The Nautical Almanac Office, United States Naval Observatory under the authority of the Secretary of the Navy. Now I find that this year's edition is out of print, and they have closed the local U.S. Govt. Bookstore, I suppose one might try the local Library. My 2003 Air Almanac arrived, and along with the book came this:
Now we all know (after the Gulfstream crash at Aspen) the NTSB just told the FAA that their definition of "night" might need some fixing due to the differences in twilight in mountainous areas... And if the publication that determines "night" for the FAA is no longer published what then? AVweb responds... Sounds like a job for the Transportation Security Administration. --Mike Busch, Editor-in-Chief |
| Louis E
Frank
28 Jun 2002 |
Fossett's Round-The-World Balloon Flight What's with the attitude re your report on Fossett's 6th attempt? It takes more than money to set or break dangerous records in aviation -- how about courage? How many billionaires have swam the channel -- and how about the author of this report? I appreciate the humor that AVflash and AVweb reflect in content, but this sounds like sour grapes -- shame on you! AVweb responds... Swimming the channel is one thing, although we can't for the life of us figure out why anyone would want to do that, either. What we saw was a billionaire (Fosset) sponsored by a corporate giant (Budweiser) using the latest technology and a 24-hour grounds staff to stay away from bad weather long enough to float around the world. Even our own staff can't agree on whether Fossett's flight was an admirable feat or a useless stunt. Clearly, whether such an activity represents a worthwhile activity is in the eye of the beholder. For the most part, our comments simply reflected the fact that our eyes are getting a bit tired. --Mike Busch, Editor-in-Chief |
| Brian
Boyd
27 Jun 2002 |
Don Brown: A Week in the Life I just read Don Brown's day-by-day commentary of his work week as a controller at Atlanta Center. Having just earned my private ticket last month, I can only speak from my "nubie" perspective. I have always respected the controllers with whom I communicate here in LAX/So-Cal land, but Don's description really emphasizes the need for pilots to maintain this respect at all times. Thanks to Don for sharing the info with us, and keep it coming.
|
| Robert
Johnson
27 Jun 2002 |
Eclipse Jet I am a retired, one time pilot, and aviation enthusiast. I also live in Albuquerque, New Mexico, home of Eclipse Aviation. Although I read and enjoy AVweb, I am puzzled and a bit dismayed about how you are treating the development of Eclipse. Many comments in your articles seem to disparage the efforts to design, build and sell Eclipse aircraft. For example: "Nimbus and Eclipse snagged the spotlight announcing news of the mega-order of jets, from the manufacturer that has yet to build one." Similar remarks have occurred in previous articles. What gives? Do you know something about the management, that leads you to add snide comments about the company? Do you truly doubt that the company will produce and sell aircraft? Do you suspect some hoax is being perpetrated on the aviation community? Do you doubt that Albuquerque is the right place to set up an airplane manufacturing facility? I have no financial interest in Eclipse, nor do I know anything else about them except that they are attempting to add a new business to our economy, which as you may know is one of the poorest in the nation. We need this chance. Your little "put downs" seem unworthy of you and I don't see you acting this way with other start up companies. Maybe you could tell us what is really on your mind. Thanks for all the good reading. In spite of my disappointment with your coverage of Eclipse, I still think you folks do a really great job.
AVweb responds... We've expressed some skepticism about Eclipse in the past, but we're anxiously awaiting the forthcoming prototype rollout and first flight, and we're looking forward to reporting on it. If the prototype comes in close to its weight target -- which has been the undoing of past attempts to build low-cost light jets -- we'll be right up there in front of the rooting section. For the record, we think Albuquerque is simply a peachy keen place for an aircraft factory. --Mike Busch, Editor-in-Chief |
| Thomas
McPartlin
27 Jun 2002 |
Smoke Hoods on Airlines I loved Mike Busch's article on smoke hoods. But be advised: My family and I each traveling with an EVAC-U8 smoke hood had them seized by airport and Wakenhut personnel at Denver International Airport this Monday as "banned by the FAA." Northwest Airlines, our carrier, also said they are banned. They are not, of course. Stupid people allowed to enforce good programs equals poor results. "We have met the enemy and it is us!" (Pogo) AVweb responds... Yours is the first report I've heard like this. In normal times, this is the sort of thing that ought to be escalated to a supervisor. Nowadays, however, doing that could result in being strip-searched and missing your plane. <sigh> --Mike Busch, Editor-in-Chief |
| David
W. Stewart
27 Jun 2002 |
Aircraft Accident Investigations With all of the budget concerns over what it costs to run the FAA and the associated alphabet soup groups, couldn't the government do away with full-scale FAA and/or NTSB investigations of every accident or incident involving an aircraft. There are thousands of auto accidents in the USA every day, many of which involve fatalities. Is there a Federal agency that commits countless man-hours to investigating these individually? Not that I am aware of. AVweb responds... Actually, David, the majority of GA accidents receive relatively cursory investigation, and "full-scale" investigations are reserved for the really serious or important ones. Personally, I think that accident investigations are one of the most useful and important functions the government performs in aviation, and one of the last where I'd like to see cutbacks. --Mike Busch, Editor-in-Chief |
| Van
Lanier
27 Jun 2002 |
Eclipse Jet Let's give Eclipse a chance to bring its new jet to market; goodness knows GA could use a shot in the arm. Bashing Eclipse for getting tangled up in the Nimbus debacle isn't useful. If you'd ever tried to raise $250 million in venture capital, you might appreciate the risks an entrepreneurial company takes. As a leading aviation media outlet, AVweb could really help the GA industry by encouraging innovation, rather than following along with the herd of old industry gatekeepers. AVweb responds... We've certainly expressed some healthy skepticism about Eclipse in the past, but we definitely hope they succeed, and are looking forward to reporting on the prototype rollout and first flight that are expected in the next few weeks. --Mike Busch, Editor-in-Chief |
| Scott
Rodriguez
27 Jun 2002 |
Fossett's Round-The-World Balloon Flight How about polling AVweb's readers (QOTW?) on aviation record setting (solo circumnavigation in a balloon, time-to-climb stuff, fastest plane on XX hp, etc.). Ask about the validity (all the important cool stuff was perhaps done long ago), the need, why people do it, how it impacts the public perception of aviation folks, maybe how it varies from "stunts" (such as pre-teen pilots traveling across the U.S., Lucky Lindy's recreation by the grandson, etc.) AVweb responds... Excellent idea, Scott. On our QOTW list. --Mike Busch, Editor-in-Chief |
| Danny
Galbraith
27 Jun 2002 |
Fossett's Round-The-World Balloon Flight I receive the AVflash mail because I am interested in aviation in general. I am also a balloon pilot. Your comments on Steve Fossett "billionaire playboy" are totally unfounded and undeserved. Yes he has to money to attempt to fly around the world, but playboy? I question your reason for even reporting the event if you cannot see that this is the last great aviation event, and remember we balloonists started the aviation thing in the first place. So cut the crap, and give him his dues. Regards from down under, from where he departed and where he will return.
|
| Mark
Stern
27 Jun 2002 |
R-44 Fire Hazard AVweb wrote:
I thought your treatment of the Robinson causing the fire was unusually harsh and unfair, especially the part intimating that the failure to warn about fires was endemic to Robinsons. As a student pilot, every helicopter pilot is taught to be aware of his exhaust height and the nature of material around him due to fire hazard in any off airport landing. The same hazard exists for fixed wing a/c and automobiles, except they are less likely to land in the middle of a fresh cut or combustible field. The actual height in the Robinson is actually somewhat higher than average for most piston helicopters and therefore less likely to cause a fire. There are numerous ways that all helo manufacturers try to improve the situation, including installing higher skids or custom exhaust kits (to raise the heat source higher), etc. This actually costs money which many commercial operators don't want to spend, even though they know that their a/c will be used in these hazardous situations. It sounds like if there was a fire, the pilot was not fully aware of his surroundings, and it just happened to be a Robinson involved in these two situations because it is the best, most efficient a/c to use in that situation and more R44's are flying. AVweb responds... Mark, your point is certainly well-taken that such fire hazards are not limited to Robinson helicopters, and I can't see anything in our story that suggests that it is. All helicopter pilots operating in areas of flammable materials need to be mindful, and even hot air balloon pilots are cautioned about fire hazards when launching from grassy fields. --Mike Busch, Editor-in-Chief |
| Milo J.
Tichacek
24 Jun 2002 |
C-130 Air Tanker Crash With reference to your C-130-A crash article, I have 12,500 hours in the C-130. I flew them from 1968 until 1982 as Chief Pilot of the C-130 Division of Saturn Airways/Transamerica Airlines. We operated 15 C-130's in both domestic and international operations. In 1975 we lost a C-130 over Illinois due to wing separation after it encountered wind gusts of 1.4G's. Shortly after that AIA (Alaska Interl Air) lost a C-130 over the North Slope also due to wing separation in light to moderate wind turbulance. These C-130's were not the weaker A models, these were the B and C models which already had the improved wing structure over the A model. Immediately after these wing separations, Lockheed provided a new genereration of center sections and wings which eliminated this problem. I cannot understand that an NTSB inspector (as published in a flying magazine) did not have previous knowledge of the problems with A-model wings. Everybody knows that the A model has an extremely weak structure. Even the Air Force had several wing separations after hard landings in the A model. It is beyond me that anyone would use these airplanes in such a demanding operation as firefighting. Should they continue using these A model C-130's in these situations, I can almost guarantee you that there will be many more problems.
|
| Paul
Irvine
24 Jun 2002 |
R. Scott Puddy My relationship with Scott was brief. On June 11th he was my instructor as I worked on getting checked out in the J3 Cub at Attitude Aviation. In fact he showed up for that lesson in the Yak N644LL and he gave me a quickie tour of it. We enjoyed an excellent session of touch-and-gos that lasted nearly 1.5 hours. During that lesson Scott taught me something I had never done before -- power off wheel landings. His demonstration and verbal coaching were so good that I was nailing them after the second try. We decided that another session of perfecting my three-pointers would finish up my check out and I said I would call and make an appointment with him the next week. Needless to say, that was an awkward call as it was just one day after his tragic accident and I had no idea that anything had happened. Although I knew him only in the form of a student-instructor relationship, I'll have to admit that the news of his untimely death was quite a shock to me and was something that hit close to home. I'm not new to aviation nor am I new to losing an acquaintance related to aviation, but whenever it does happen it causes one to ponder and reaffirm just what it is that drives this passion of ours. Scott will be missed, but with the knowledge that he died following his passion. Something that he truly loved.
|
| Don
Woods
24 Jun 2002 |
El Toro Backers Sue Navy AVweb wrote:
This is at least the second time you have besmirched "Los Angeles" in connection with El Toro. The El Toro airport is about 30 miles away from the closest part of Los Angeles City, and about 25 miles outside of Los Angeles County. I don't think that "Los Angeles" voters, of either type, had anything to do with voting on El Toro, in Orange County. Please recheck your facts. |
| Michael
Clow
24 Jun 2002 |
El Toro Backers Sue Navy You might want to note that El Toro is in Orange County, quite a bit nearer to Los Angeles than to San Diego. AVweb responds... Can we at least agree that El Toro is between Los Angeles and San Diego? --Mike Busch, Editor-in-Chief |
| David
Ream
24 Jun 2002 |
R. Scott Puddy I've enjoyed Mr. Puddy's contributions, and I mourn his loss from our community. |
| Mike
Weller
24 Jun 2002 |
Graphical Depiction of TFRs AVweb had a depiction of the TFR superimposed over a Washington, D.C. Sectional for the article on the 182 that ventured where none should tread. Did AVweb do that for the article, or did you get it from an outside source? I think that I can write some software that will draw that from the textual description of the airspace boundaries, but I hate to re-invent the wheel. The only real difficulty is that the textual description might not be sufficient or accurate. In that case, who would be held liable for a possible incursion -- (1) the pilot because they didn't read the text, (2) the cartographer, because they didn't read the text, or (3) the government person because they didn't write the text correctly? May we live in interesting times, AVweb responds... Our story clearly indicated that the graphical depiction of the DC-area TFR was from AOPA. As for the software you propose, it apparently already exists. See the AVmail below from reader Bruce Alter... --Mike Busch, Editor-in-Chief |
| Bruce
Alter
24 Jun 2002 |
Graphical Depiction of TFRs RMS Technology's Flitesoft flight planning software already has the capability of plotting TFRs. Every time I start my Flitesoft program, I have an option of connecting to the Internet and updating the TFR data. When I select the map with my flightplan, the TFRs are depicted and by getting the TFR number and checking the text data, I get the details. Check it out.....works great. That being said, anyone who doesn't know about the TFR around Washington must have been in suspended animation for the last nine months. AVweb responds... Or perhaps from west of the Mississippi. --Mike Busch, Editor-in-Chief |
| John
Tollini
24 Jun 2002 |
Graphical Depiction of TFRs AVweb wrote:
I would love to see the "graphical depictions" that Phil Boyer refers to in the attached story. As an FAA briefer, I have never seen any graphical depictions provided by Washington. The only ones I have seen, are those that have been created locally by our briefers or web published by AOPA or Jeppesen. The only advantage that we have is our experience in deciphering the FDC notams generated by Washington. AVweb responds... Maybe you can get the FAA to spring for a copy of RMS Flitesoft... --Mike Busch, Editor-in-Chief |
| Steven
H. Zysman
24 Jun 2002 |
Airport Security Demands Pilot Certificate Yesterday, I flew into Fisher's Island, N.Y., airport (0B8) from Hartford (HFD) on an IFR flight plan. Upon landing I was greeted by an airport attendant who explained to me that they require a copy of my pilot's license. He indicated that this new security measure is in place due to the proximity to New York City. (90 nm !!) I reluctantly complied and followed him up to the airport office where he stuck my license in the fax machine to make a copy and collected the $5 landing fee. I was told never to give my license to anyone but the FAA. I feel like I was violated but as an aircraft renter that had to have the aircraft back in Hartford in short order I didn't want to "cause any trouble" that might hold me up. I don't believe that this airport has the authority to require this documentation, and would like to call someone and complain. I don't know where to begin. Can you help ??
AVweb responds... Steve, you might want to talk to AOPA, since they have been deeply involved in the pilot ID debate. It's important to make a clear distinction between SHOWING your certificate to someone and SURRENDERING it. I would have no qualms at all about SHOWING my pilot credentials to any uniformed officer on demand, but I would not SURRENDER my certificate to anyone but the FAA and then only on advice of counsel (presumably after the FAA had brought a certificate action against me and I decided I was done contesting it). Allowing an airport security official to photocopy your certificate strikes me as annoying but perhaps not unreasonable. I'm guessing that if you'd insisted on not relinquishing physical possession of the certificate, the security person would have permitted you to make the photocopy while he supervised you. This is probably a question best answered by an aviation attorney, which I'm not. So I asked AVweb's aviation law editor Phil Kolczynski, and here's in part what he told me:
One more observation: Nowadays, when you fly via the airlines, you have to show your photo ID to all manner of folks ranging from federal security personnel to airline gate agents. Can you refuse to do so? Sure. They just won't let you on the plane. I hate to say it, but sometimes you just have to go with the flow. --Mike Busch, Editor-in-Chief |
| Name
Not Given
23 Jun 2002 |
ATC Manpower Shortage The Bureau of Labor Statistics is saying almost the opposite, or are trying to drive away applicants by talking about the "keen competition": So who do we believe? |
| Allan
Devore
23 Jun 2002 |
R. Scott Puddy Scott was good at everything he did: friend, lawyer, pilot, writer, son, etc. I am still in shock over our loss of him. I felt absolutely empty when I heard the news. Scott was a wonderful person, and all his friends will miss him immensely. Most of all he will be missed by his dad. They were best friends who shared together the wonder and joy of flight and now must experience its tragic element. I hope you will write more good things about my friend so that the AVweb readership can know more about the fine young man we have lost. Scott's enthusiasm for flight should inspire all of us just as much as the zeal of others in the past who have been lost pursuing their lofty dreams to cheat gravity and death. |
| Donna
McGinnis
23 Jun 2002 |
ATC Privatization The reason the government wants to be rid of the ATC responsibilities and give it to a private concern is that they DO NOT understand it and are not smart enough to learn to understand it. So if they give it away, what makes one think a private concern can handle it? Is Washington that dumb to think we (the aviation community) does not know that? |
| Ronald
Wheeler
21 Jun 2002 |
R. Scott Puddy I sincerely regret the untimely death of R. Scott Puddy. He had the rare ability to be able to define a point and get it across to the reader with the least amount of technical jargon. His analysis of the "flight into icing conditions" issues in his articles cut to the quick and pushed a few sensitive buttons in the aviation community as well as the FAA --buttons which need constant pushing. Scott and I corresponded via e-mail about this issue for about six months. The company for which I worked lost a plane and pilot as a result of induction icing. Scott’s input about the overbearing tactics of the FAA (defined as tighter oversight) helped to developed some proper responses by the company. His knowledge of the icing issues was expansive. Scott did not believe in the old adage that "the last FAA inspector coming in the office door is always right." Scott’s informative articles will be sorely missed as will my e-mail exchanges with him. I send my condolances to his family and friends. |
| Martin
Huhn
21 Jun 2002 |
C-130 Air Tanker Crash I am currently living overseas, I saw a brief moment of the tanker plane crash. was I wrong in hearing the camera/news crews comments? I am living in a country that English is not the first language. so the tape was aired unedited for dialogue. "Oh yea!" and "yeaaa!" were heard off camera. I even think I heard a "all right". Were these hideous comments broadcast in North America? The correct comments would be "oh my gawd!" and "oh no!" not some cheering sounds as some of our aviation colleagues met their untimely destiny. The world has become a sick and twisted place! My thoughts and prayers go out to the families of the flight crew. AVweb responds... Martin, I was surprised to hear the same thing, until I realized that the people on site were cheering the tanker's spraying of fire retardant. Their elation quickly went away after the aircraft crashed. If you listen carefully, you will hear "oh sh@* and another explicative followed by "Oh my God." Obviously, they were not thrilled about the tragic accident. As an interesting side note, I live in Colorado and we are now faced with grounded C-130s as well, even as the fire nears my city. --Art Weiss, AVweb News |
| Paul
Hekman
21 Jun 2002 |
White House TFR Violation AVweb wrote:
Oh, my, have we come to a humbling state as a nation when panic ensues from a Cessna 182. During the London Blitz, Churchill continued to occupy his official quarters until a bomb landed in his back yard. We have become a nation of invertebrates. |
| Franklin
Newton
20 Jun 2002 |
Woes Continue For Flight Schools AVweb wrote:
Yes, I am afraid when "little airplanes" fly over my house too. Senator Nelson and his friends are right, let's chop them all up for Pepsi cans and terrorism will go away. Right? |
| Steve
Mann
20 Jun 2002 |
ATC Manpower Shortage Could be that the FAA is not hiring replacement controllers so that when the shortage occurs, they can proclaim that only privatization can fill the gap? |
| Mel
Brown
20 Jun 2002 |
When You Gotta Go AVweb wrote:
I've gotta tell you that the little piece in Monday's AVflash about Congressman so-and-so having to empty his bladder into a cup due to maxed out privies onboard was hitting below the belt. As you get older and stuck in a similar situation remember this news tidbit and then think how you'd feel about reading of it online tomorrow. Not only was it not newsworthy and unfunny it showed woefully poor judgment on the part of one of your staffers and was incredibly un-AVflash-like. Otherwise, keep up the good work as your service is always a welcome catch-me-up for us airplane nuts.
AVweb responds... Yes, Mel, we went a little over the top on this one. The original point was to highlight the 30-minute rule, but we got carried away with the humorous circumstances to the detriment of the underlying story. We stand properly chastised. --Mike Busch, Editor-in-Chief |
| Cliff
Johnson
20 Jun 2002 |
C-130 Air Tanker Crash AVweb wrote:
I find a striking similarity between this accident and the one involving a T-34 involved in simulated air combat near Atlanta some years back. As a result of that T-34 accident, the FAA imposed a very onerous AD requiring reworking of the main spar on all T-34s regardless of their history. My question is will the FAA and the military treat this event similarly and require extensive (expensive?) spar rework on ALL C-130s or will they use common sense as they should had done regarding the T-34s? Any wing spar will fail if you pull enough g's enough times. AVweb responds... I hear you, Cliff, but I think we really need to wait an let the accident investigators do their job. --Mike Busch, Editor-in-Chief |
| Joseph
Roux
20 Jun 2002 |
ATC Manpower Shortage The current age restriction on candidates desiring to become controllers needs to be revisited. There are a great number of individuals who have come into the aviation fold in their 30s and 40s who would bring maturity, enthusiasm, and support to the controller community. Some individuals would probably even be willing to pay a portion of the training costs, thereby reducing the investment the FAA makes in bringing controllers on board. The FAA should reconsider this dated policy and look to the pilot community they are currently serving for great candidates whose only drawback is they were born before the 70s. |
| Gene
Whitt
20 Jun 2002 |
R. Scott Puddy I read and saw pictures of Yak accident, and read who piloted aircraft on AVweb. I have always like to think of Scott as one of my proteges. Not one of my flying students but one of my writing students. We parked our aircraft in the same area on the East Ramp of Concord's Buchanan Field. Some years ago I gave Scott four floppies of flying material I had written. Subsequently, when I saw his writings I would send him my comments. He often told me that I had roused his interest in writing about aviation. He will be sorely missed.
|
| Walter
Shelhamer
20 Jun 2002 |
Firearms In The Cockpit It may come as a surprise to many, but commercial pilots have had guns in the cockpits for years. Yes, it is true. And if it were me, I would rather be shot with a 38 or 357 than one of these. All commercial planes carry flare pistols! How would you like to have one of these placed against your belly and fired? Talk about bad heartburn ... and you don't have to worry about a bullet going through the cabin or wall of the airplane. I think this would be a great deterrant, maybe it should be publicized a little more. I'm just an aircraft mechanic. Hey, what do we know? |
| David
E. Huffstutler
20 Jun 2002 |
Pilot Photo IDs Okay, now the FAA is apparently going ahead with AOPA's suggestion that every pilot carry a government-issued photo ID. From my viewpoint, for this to be an effective security measure, every airport, from ORD down to the local sport flyer's grass strip will have to have a paid security guard working 24/7 checking each pilot as he boards his plane to prepare for take off. Who will be paying for the security guard at your local airport's gate to check the photo ID? Who will be paying for the 7-foot-high security fence which will have to installed around each country airport? What federal agency will be handling the written reports from the security guards concerning who entered each airport, what time they entered, their business, etc.? If there is not enough takeoffs and landings to justify a 24/7 guard, will we have to make an appointment just to practice pattern work? |
| Jamie
Beckett
19 Jun 2002 |
R. Scott Puddy It was with great sadness that I read today's AVweb AVflash when it arrived in my e-mail box. The news of R. Scott Puddy's crash into a hillside changed my morning mood and will certainly stay with me for a good long time to come. I never had the pleasure of meeting Mr. Puddy, but I wrote a piece about an RV fly-in this past year that he edited for your publication. During the editing process we passed e-mail back and forth, resulting in our getting to know each other a bit while we were getting the story set for publication. From that exchange I certainly can't say I knew the man well, but I can say that as my conduit to AVweb, I found him to be humorous, intelligent, professional and well worth stumbling across. My condolences to you, there at the office who must miss him terribly. Your inclusion of his passing in your publication was well done, and while unexpected, I appreciate being presented with that sad news in such a respectful manner. It seems that it's always hard to say something of value when it is most needed. Perhaps it's not possible at all.
|
| Don
& Norma Wilfong
20 Jun 2002 |
R. Scott Puddy To all of the friends, family and co-workers we send our deapest condolences for the untimly loss of Mr. Puddy's life.
|
| Byron
Blake
19 Jun 2002 |
SWA Obese Pax Policy Southwest Airlines is re-instating its policy of charging "large" customers for two seats when they don't fit into one. I strongly support this policy.
It this discriminatory? You bet. Let's allow everyone to fly and see what happens. Lets disregard physical fitness for police, firefighters, pilots and drivers, period. Sorry, health can be a major risk factor in all sorts of occupations, endeavors and activities. Its about time a corporation stands up for what is the right thing to do. Who said life is fair or suppose to be fair, it isn't. Tough. Yes, I am a pilot and I'm also a Southwest stockholder, but I am not an employee nor have I ever been of Southwest.
AVweb responds... Let me guess, Byron: You're skinny and Republican. How'd I do? --Mike Busch, Editor-in-Chief |
| Chet
Marks
18 Jun 2002 |
The Death of General Aviation I got my license four years ago, and I am finally ready to buy a plane. And all of this just in time to witness the death of GA. The TSA and homeland security looks to be the final straw for GA. Well at least I got to enjoy flying before Big Brother took that right away. AVweb responds... You may be overreacting, Chet. At least I hope so. We'll know in a few months. --Mike Busch, Editor-in-Chief |
| Bert
Yetman
17 Jun 2002 |
Professional Pilots Federation Thanks for placing the Professional Pilots Federation (PPF) petition for exemption on your site. I must point out to you that the Chicago Tribune article, which you obviously used as a guide, was mistaken on its identification of Sam Woolsey as the President of the PPF. I am, and have been, President of the PPF for many years now. Mr. Woolsey has been an invaluable source of information to us.
AVweb responds... Sorry, Bert. We knew that. --Mike Busch, Editor-in-Chief |
| Jim
Haynes
17 Jun 2002 |
ATC Privatization I believe if anyone takes the time to contrast Rick Durden’s inflammatory column "How Many Are Going To Die, Mr. President?" which is filled with few facts and many errors, with the carefully researched and balance report "How to Commercialize Air Traffic Control" prepared by Bob Poole of the Reason Foundation in February of 2001, they will understand why a U.S. ATC system, freed from the inefficiencies of the FAA, makes perfect sense. It only takes a look to our north in Canada where Nav Canada has reduced the cost to the user, and improved efficiency in the almost six years it has been in existence to understand why Poole, a transportation expert, feels this way. Their safety record is superb, and they safely landed in Canada all the US traffic enroute over the Atlantic to the U.S. on September 11th. Nav Canada controls the North Atlantic airspace with state-of-the-art technology, far above anything the FAA is using. Comments by AOPA’s counterpart in Canada, COPA, contradict Durden. While COPA remains concerned that GA pilots in Canada pay both a fuel tax and a nominal annual ATC charge, its members are generally pleased with the improved service they receive from NAV Canada and some even believe the heightened service compensates for the "double taxation." Poole's paper recommends replacing the fuel excise tax with user fees that would have a net effect of zero to the cost of operating most GA aircraft. He recommends that Flight Service remain unchanged as the collection and dissemination of weather information and search and rescue is an inherently governmental function. This report can be found at http://www.rppi.org/ps278central.html. Twelve former FAA Administrators and other distinguished air transportation experts have endorsed this study and its recommendations. The main distracters are the controllers’ union, NATCA, and other unions, that see this as a threat to their growing membership. More information on ATC corporatization and many of the articles that have been written on this subject in both the aviation and lay press can be found at http://www.avgroup.com/atc.htm. As a general aviation pilot having flown in the ATC system, in the US, Canada, and Europe, I understand ATC issues and have worked to improve the system for many years. Bob Poole is right on the money.
AVweb responds... We're going to have to agree to disagree on this one, Jim. Rick Durden's core argument is that if ATC if fee-based, Part 91 operators will have an incentive not to use ATC services, and that will be bad for safety. That seems like a pretty solid argument to me. I don't believe you are correct when you state that the main opponents of ATC privatization in the U.S. is NATCA. The fact is that AOPA, NATA, EAA, and all the other alphabet groups that represent private aviation are strongly opposed to the concept. --Mike Busch, Editor-in-Chief |
| Jay
Henning
17 Jun 2002 |
When You Gotta Go AVweb wrote:
I enjoy AVweb's news and irreverent comments. However, the "story" about the congressman needing to relieve himself into a cup was neither news or amusing. What's next, fart jokes? Even a congressman deserves a little privacy. Keep up the other good work. AVweb responds... You're right, Jay. Concensus among the AVweb news team is that we went a little over the top on this one. The purpose (really) was to highlight the 30-minute rule but the circumstances let us run away with the humor a bit and the point was lost. Thanks for pointing it out. --Russ Niles, AVweb News |
| David
Gillingham
17 Jun 2002 |
National Air Tour Do you have a contact for the Aviation Foundation of America referenced in "On the Fly" for June 17, 2002? AVweb responds... Sorry, David, we should have included that information. Web address is www.NationalAirTour.org and phone is 651-255-1999. --Russ Niles, AVweb News |
| Ed
Wischmeyer
17 Jun 2002 |
AVweb Writing Style Do you folks think that your repeated sarcasm and casual insults help in some way? Do they convey more facts, facilitate communication, inspire the FAA to be more cooperative, increase safety, encourage the recruitment of new pilots, or aid the industry in some way?
AVweb responds... No, Ed, we think it makes AVweb more fun and interesting to read. Most of our readers seem to agree, although occasionally we do go a bit over-the-top and get our wrists slapped by readers when we do. But if you don't step over the edge of the envelope on occasion, how can you tell where the edge is? --Mike Busch, Editor-in-Chief |
| James
Carney
17 Jun 2002 |
CEO Of The Cockpit I love Kevin Garrison's column's "CEO of the Cockpit." I print them out and take them with me on my trips to share with fellow crew members. They have literally been read around the world. All of Capt. Garrison's columns are RIGHT ON! With all the BS going on in our industry since 9/11, if you don't have some form of sense of humor you will go nuts (or to jail). Keep up the good work.
|
| George
Sears
17 Jun 2002 |
AOPA Co-Opting The Sport Pilot NPRM? I was reading some of the Sport Pilot comments. AOPA is basically supporting SP, but only with the 'driver license' medical. They also want to expand the SP/DL medical to Rec Pilot. This is taking things back, since AOPA and EAA both wanted to lower the med in Rec Pilot a few years back. Going this route lets pilots with a Private or better have access to a lot more aircraft. Both EAA and AOPA have looked at SP from the standpoint of what it would do for existing pilots, to a considerable degree. This is especially apparent in AOPA's request to the FAA to move quickly on the pilot certificate, even if the (sportplane) aircraft certification is not completed. The aircraft certification could be a difficult thing. The 'good' manufacturers in the light sport and ultralight areas have tended to favor a set of regs, industry regs. It hasn't happened, and people have tried. Now it 'has' to happen, and hopefully pressures will be brought to bear to force the issue. How safe can you make light aircraft? I know enough about some designs, and their real world experiences, to feel relatively confident. Many of the designs are based on good engineering honed by trial and error. Engines tend to be simple. When people build the 'good' designs correctly, learn to fly them, and maintain them, the results have been pretty good. The horror stories begin when any element of the picture is left wanting. Fuel systems are a key element, and setting a high standard here might really help. Anyway, AOPA wants to set the pilot standards before the aircraft design parameters are known. Isn't there a relationship between the aircraft and the flight curriculum? Certainly, the level of training for emergencies will depend on how likely it is that an 'emergency' will occur. So setting the standards for pilots, mechnaics, and aircraft should be done with an eye to make the regulations are thorough as possible, and leaving plenty of room for one element of the regs to backstop another. It's important to ask if anyone is selling Sport Pilot with safety as a key element? I remember a lot of talk when various proposals were being kicked around. For some in the industry, it became a version of "Name that Tune", or 'who can train a pilot in the fewest hours'. The idea sort of centered around the '20 hour' pilot. Many UL instructors say that 10 hours is sort of what people will pay for, remembering that there is no examination and no certificate, so no need for any training at all. Well, this is required. Does another 5 or 10 hours matter? What gets left out? What absolutely has to be taught. This isn't PPL. The emphasis will be very different. Does anyone even know what the curriculum should be? There were a lot of problems with other motorized devices, in their early days. Stuff that rolled over or capsized or was hard to control, etc. Aviation doesn't need to go through these growing pains. It's been through them, with Ultralights. Many sportplanes will be UL designs, and the rest of the world has sportplanes, anyway. It's silly to shortchange the curriculum, or try to design it before everyone knows what the big picture looks like. It's a little discouraging to see the sportplane process bent by AOPA and the others who just want a reduced medical. For those, like me, who wonder why sport aviation has been so slow to develop, a major problem has been the medical. Beyond this, the comments of USUA president, John Ballantyne, are interesting. The main thing he points out is that the ARAC committee charged, mid-90's, with delivering something beyond the illegal 'fat ultralight' had a unanimous proposal years ago. It went to the FAA, and apparently was never seen again. Much has happened since, and much of it has more to do with finding avenues for aging certificate holders who lose a medical, not with developing something for new aviators. Alas, USUA's proposal for a two tiered system would spread resources very thin, and still doesn't answer the question why both high and low weight aircraft can't be included in one proposal. The problem is that there is no proposal for self-regulated instructors in Sport Pilot, and USUA has had success in training and regulating their instructors. Do we really need separate instructors for 300 pound aircraft versus 500 pound aircraft? There are already calls for the weight for SP piloted airplanes to be increased to 1600, which brings in the older GA trainers. The regulation is not on the books, and there already seem to be 'fat' sportplanes. I hope the FAA, the EAA, the AOPA and the USUA all look at the big picture. I'd like to see a comprehensive set of regs for pilots, mechanics, and aircraft. I'd like to see sound standards for the aircraft and the pilots. The 80 hour mechanic is clearly not ideal. It's acceptable if everyone understands the limitations. The good news for the mechanics would be if the guy gets that certificate, and puts in two full time weeks on the job, he has twice as much experience as he did when he started. The FAA shouldn't let people pick the proposal apart. If they are genuinely committed to making it work, they should take their time and get everything in place over the next year. Anyone who really wants to fly can still get a rec or private. |
| Warren
Edgar
17 Jun 2002 |
G8 Summit Meeting AVweb wrote:
30,000 Square MILES????? How about just the whole earth or something? Is the 30,000 square miles figure correct or a typo? AVweb responds... No, Warren, it's not a typo. The TFR is kind of a flattened circle 200 miles in diameter, which, according to a math formula I looked up, equates to 31,416 square miles with a little lopped off for the flattened side. It would take me a couple of hours to cross it in my C-140 (assuming I didn't get shot down en route). TFRing the whole earth would be overkill, don't you think? --Russ Niles, AVweb News (and based in Canada) |
| John
Wainwright
17 Jun 2002 |
G8 Summit Meeting AVweb wrote:
You gotta be kidding, right? Since when has Canada had "attack helicopters"? The best we're got is a military equivalent of a Bell 412 with everyone who can squeeze onboard hanging out the doors on landing to demonstrate how important they are. F-18s too? No way!! They're being used by our military for long cross-country "training" flights to their friends' weddings (at about CDN$24,000/hour, equivalent to US$12,000/hour). Let's see one of them try to fly formation on a Cessna 150 in order to "escort" it out of the area. What a hoot that would be. Get real, people. The frightening announcements are exactly what they appear to be: frightening announcements. What a frightening thought! |
| Ron
Taylor
15 Jun 2002 |
ATC Privatization Executive orders come and go with each administration and some are worse than others. Reagan promised to take care of the problems with the ATC system prior to his election...and his reaction was a lifetime Executive Order ban for a majority of PATCO union Controllers. President Clinton signed an Executive Order that lifted the PATCO ban...yet a lockout is still in play and thousands of PATCO controllers will never be allowed back. The ATC system has made alot of changes over the years, some good and bad, but I'm sure you will agree that all the current Air Traffic Controllers that man the FCT [contract tower --ed] program do an excellent job in providing a highly professional service to their aviation community, and country. All controllers are pros and none are better than the other whether they work in the Private or Federal Sector.
|
| Dave
Main
13 Jun 2002 |
ATC Privatization AVweb wrote:
As a pilot, I take exception to Enright's terminology. Otherwise I guess I will just sit back and let ATC do all my "landings." Hmmm. Maybe my passengers would rather I was more involved ... what do you think?
|
| Michael
Robins
12 Jun 2002 |
Class N, K and U Airspace I just read John Reno's note [AVmail, 29 May 2002] regarding the Class N, K and U airspace, and started to hear a couple of pennies screaming to get out of my pocket. I would like to see the U.S. resist blind obedience to ETC's (European Traffic Control) dictates every time it reinvents itself, and instead lobby hard for a creative yet workable compromise. One such idea I had would be to dust off the Good Old U-S-of-A airspace designations (that actually made sense to me) and combine them with whatever flavor of the day Europe has in mind for us. Using the current designations as an example, what's so wrong with the phraseology "Stay clear of the Class Bravo TCA," or "You are cleared to transit the Class Delta ATA"? (Gosh, I hope I got these straight!) This way, instead of getting jerked around every couple of years, the U.S. could retain designations that have a good descriptive quality and would not have to be relearned, at least by pilots who never leave the U.S. This scheme would still accommodate the Europeans who can change their mind every month if they wish. I don't know if this has been thought of before, and maybe it would cause more problems than it solves, but I thought sharing a solution was better than just venting. |
| Dave
Friedenberg
13 Jun 2002 |
General Aviation Airport Security What with all the hoopla about airport security, what happens when we have to enter a secured airport that has no security force on duty to chase an ELT , either on the ramp or in a hanger? We will have to call the local authorities and have them get someone out of bed at "0 dark hundred" and have them come in to open the secured area so that the ground forces can chase the errant ELT. The alternative to that action is to have the airport operator do a walk around each day with a handheld receiver tuned to 121.5/243 to assure that there are no ELTs going off on his facility. This would definitely save a lot of AFRCC and CAP time in the long run. 406MHz is up and coming. Are the secured airports ready to search out these newer ELTs, in lieu of CAP coming in in the dark of night?
|
| Charles
J. Money
13 Jun 2002 |
G8 Summit Meeting I do not usually send letters to any information service, but I feel that I must send this to you for no other reason than to relieve some of my frustration. For 20 years now I have owned a hangar at, and I have flown out of, Calgary Springbank Airport (CYBW). I paid to have electricity and gas service brought to my building but sewer and water was not available. Sewer and water could have been provided by our MOT, who owned the airport, but apparently they couldn't afford the cost of it. Now, our egotistical Prime Minister seems to believe that Canada must host this ridiculous G8 Summit Meeting and it also seems our airport is to be the nerve centre for providing security for this two day meeting. During the last year, and particularly the last few days, the airport is turning into an armed camp with police and army personnel along with their equipment, including ground-to-air rocket launchers and, reportedly, 60 armed helicopters and 24-hours-a-day F18 surveillance. The word is they are authorized to shoot first and ask questions later if any aircraft enter the no-fly zone centred in our area. All this for the bargain price of more than $500 million. I wish they could afford to supply me with a sewer and water line. If anyone is planning to fly to Canada from June 24 to June 29, I strongly advise they avoid our area. |
| Name
Not Provided
14 Jun 2002 |
Must GPS Lights and Switches be TSO'd? I recently read with great interest the article in AVweb's Avionics section by Larry Anglisano on upgrading a VFR GPS installation to IFR. I am installing a GNC300XL in my 182 and am in the process of scraping together all of the necessaries. My avionics installer tells me that the annunciators and switches have to be TSO'd, however, I cannot find anything in the TSO 129 spec that indicates such. Am I missing something? Is the installer correct? Larry does not say, specifically, that the annunciator/switches have to meet TSO specs in his article. EDMO sells annunciator/switches for GPS installations. I asked the EDMO folks if the switches provided by ElectroMech were TSO'd. THe answer came back "no." If my installer is correct then a reputable vendor is selling "GPS Switch Kits" (presumably for IFR) that are not legal? Is it up to the installer & FSDO to determine suitability? Any help or clarification is appreciated. What do the letters "TSO" stand for? AVweb responds... Your installer is correct, ALL parts must be FAA/PMA approved, and in the case of an IFR-approved GPS installation, must be TSO'd. "TSO" stands for "Technical Standard Order" and is a standard set of specifications approved by the FAA, and a "TSO'd" product must meet the requirements of that TSO. You may want to look at FAR 21.303 subpart K, it dives into TSO parts. Mid-Continent manufactures an annunciator panel and/or switching panel for the 300XL that does meet the TSO. Have your shop look at the MD-41 line. Larry did a bang up job on his GPS article and probably assumed that the installing agency would tell the aircraft owner the parts must meet the FAA TSO. As far as EDMO selling non-TSO parts, that's fine ... this is America and you can sell anything you like, but that doesn't mean you can install them in an IFR system. There are some loopholes in the FARs that may allow you to install non-TSO parts but no reputable shop would dare go there. --Tom Rogers, Avionics West, Inc. (www.avionicswest.com) |
| Ron
Ludema
13 Jun 2002 |
Michigan's New Flight School Rule Michigan now requires Criminal History background check on ALL students that want to enroll in any Michigan licensed flight school. This includes sending them to get fingerprinted. This will break the back of many small operators. Communicate your comments to: Thomas S. Krashen, Manager
|
| Warren
Morningstar
13 Jun 2002 |
Approach Plates on the Web AOPA has been offering free approach plates on the Web since January 2001. The NACO (formerly NOS) instrument procedure charts are current for instrument flight and are included in AOPA's Airport Directory Online. Both the charts and airport directory information are free to AOPA members at www.aopa.org/members/airports/ . AVweb responds... Thanks, Warren. Yes they are. (Now if only I could only remember my $%&*! password... <sigh>) --Mike Busch, Editor-in-Chief |
| Karin
Cozzolino
12 Jun 2002 |
Kevin Garrison: Grumpy Old Captains I've hung in there through all seven of Kevin Garrison's columns. The man flies heavy iron and writes with heavy irony. But I wonder, just a little, what his point is? Mr. Garrison has a job that is arguably perceived by pilots and non-pilots alike as one of the most fascinating to be had. In his latest column he acknowledges this, but puts a negative spin on it. Egads, imagine, ground-pounding clods actually dare to speak to him about what he does, and in so doing reveal their vile ignorance! How utterly crass! How horrendously irritating! How totally un-cool! It makes me wonder why Mr. Garrison has elected to write about flying for the airlines if it irks him to tell people about what he does. His columns so far have dwelt mostly on his various (and apparently endless) pet peeves and what's wrong with his job; there's been little to no content about what, beyond the money, keeps him coming back for more. After plowing through seven columns' worth of what gripes him about his job, his industry, his management, his co-workers, and the passengers he hauls, I wonder what he's trying to get across. That the airline business isn't perfect? That anyone who sees or says anything positive about it just doesn't "get it"? That the non-flying public is a bunch of morons and his columns are supposed to make all us pilots laugh at them because we're insiders and we're in on the "us vs. them" humor? Or that he's some sort of lovable misanthrope and his downbeat spin on things is ultimate proof that he's cool? The Curmudgeon of the Cockpit is a writer of erudition and wit. I would love to read a column where he drops the weary, cynical, man-of-the-world style and writes,with passion and honesty, about the side of flying that fires his intellect and imagination and makes him grin. There has to be something about flying that does, because if he's only in it for the money, AVweb has picked the wrong columnist. Please, Mr. Garrison? AVweb responds... Karin, I can tell you authoritatively that Kevin Garrison does NOT write his column "only for the money." And you'd be making a serious mistake to conclude that his fictitious "CEO of the Cockpit" persona has any resemblance to the real Capt. Garrison, any more than Klyde Morris (the ant) resembles Wes Oleszewski (the cartoonist), or Forrest Gump resembles ... well, you get the idea. --Mike Busch, Editor-in-Chief |
| Lisa
Eagleson-Roever
12 Jun 2002 |
Kevin Garrison: Grumpy Old Captains In response to Kevin Garrison's question, "Why do people think I'm lying when I make an announcement?" I can pose a plausible answer: because they are lied to at the gate. I've flown just long enough to know that if my flight is delayed, it is highly unlikely that any airline will tell the truth as to why it is delayed--especially when the "half-hour delay" extends to eight hours and the gate folks are STILL calling it a "half-hour delay" after they've changed the ETD for the fourth time. For one delayed flight I was given the following reasons for the delay by the same gate agent in the same conversation: 1) weather (it was summer and there wasn't a storm system to be found on any radar between there and our destination nor the airport where our plane was coming from; when I pointed this out--no wonder airports no longer have tvs--I was told....) 2) mechanical problem and no plane available to send in its stead (to which I said, "You're telling me this airline doesn't have a single spare plane that can get here in less than seven hours?"...making one last attempt, I was told....) 3) security issue and no, we can't discuss it And that was before Sept. 11, 2001.
Keep up the columns that educate! Maybe word will filter out past the GA readership to those silly producers who create "news segments" on how a small GA plane or a tornado can destroy a nuclear power plant dome (as if!). |
| Rick
Cremer
10 Jun 2002 |
Department of Homeland Security AVweb wrote:
HeeHeeHeeHeeHaaHaaHaaHaaHaaHaaHaaHaaHooHooHooHoHooHooHooHoo. My oh my oh my ... ROFLMAO... Well, hell, now we'll have NINE agencies that don't,won't, and never will talk to each other. And I know of what I speak, been there done that...
|
| Heinz
Faber
10 Jun 2002 |
Tiltrotor Bashing AVweb wrote:
Just a note to let you know that I object to your (too frequent) bashing of the Osprey. I feel that such comments plant the idea that the Tiltrotor is a flawed idea, and will discourage military as well as potential commercial customers of the derivative BA609. Admittedly, the V-22 has had some very unfortunate accidents, and perhaps some over-zealous record keeping by customers that desperately need the capability this aircraft provides. However, the recent modifications and current flight test program will result in an even better aircraft, but only if nay-Sayers like you don't succeed in killing the Tiltrotor idea in it's infancy. I plan to terminate my subscription to AVflash the next time I read another "Tiltrotor bash."
|
| Larry
Rachman
10 Jun 2002 |
Thoughts on Tew-Mac Recently, I took a short detour during a recent business trip, and checked out a long-closed GA airport that used to be about 19 miles northwest of Boston's Logan International. Got myself good and depressed, too. Then, I wrote this:
|
| Mike
Sanders
10 Jun 2002 |
ATC Privatization Why are NATCA and AOPA against ATC privatization? LESS government is better. Pay for performance. Pay for results. When the government is involved, the entire objective gets lost. Why in the world would anyone not want less government? The inept bureaucratic employee's should be the only opposition. The capable employees should want privatization.
|
| Mary
Graul
10 Jun 2002 |
Kevin Garrison: Grumpy Old Captains I seldom read articles, but for some reason was drawn to Kevin Garrison's "Grumpy Old Captains" column. I "captain" a Saratoga, a long way from an MD80, but I have always marveled at the fact that my passengers -- including my husband -- judge the trip by my landing. Kevin's right: Nobody compliments or criticizes my enroute even though they are also listening to ATC and me and even though my moves in the air are much more important than the quality of my landing!
|
| Douglas
Garrou
10 Jun 2002 |
Kevin Garrison: Grumpy Old Captains Kevin Garrison, in his latest column, wants to know: "Speaking of PAs, why do passengers think we lie to them all the time when we tell them things?" Umm ... Captain, you may want to sit down for this ... This may be hard to believe, but it turns out that the OTHER people who work for your airline are CONSTANTLY lying to your passengers! So it's a rational (if erroneous) assumption that you are also flinging bull. My all-time personal favorite: "If you run you can make it." Translation: run somewhere else so I don't have to deal with your missed connection and so I can continue eating this donut. We passengers are capable of a few rants too, I guess... Great columns.
|
| George
Simon
10 Jun 2002 |
Sport Pilots Flying and Maintenance. I must answer some verbal trash and plain old pilot egotism. Mr. Walter Hake [AVmail, 7 May 2002] -- Your statement that most future Sport Pilots and most present pilots have more technical education than most A&P's is sheer nonsense. That is a classic example of the low opinion held by most pilots concerning A&P's. It is a strong indicator of one of the basic problems that we have in General Aviation. I am an A&With IA as well as a Flight Engineer with a shade over 10,000 hrs. I have a college degree, a wall full of training certificates as well as several hundred books on every aviation subject under the sun. Anytime sir, that you and your "pilot" buddies want to match techno cal wits with me, just name the time and place. I have flown with many, many Capts and F/Os. The good ones I could count on one hand, the majority were average, and a few were a danger to themselves and anyone they came in contact with. The good ones never had to say that they were good, they didn't have to. The ones that said that they were good, were so busy talking, they didn't have time to fly. I am 65 years old and have been working in aviation since I was 14 years old. I figure with 51 years behind me, I can speak with some authority. I own my own GA Maintenance Shop and deal with pilot owners every day. I know all my customers, the wives and the children. I have that added burden that most A&P's do not. Now the nitty-gritty. We had "Sport Pilots" of a sort in aviation some 70 odd years ago. We had no pilot training standards, no physical standards, no maintenance standards. In fact, we had no standards at all. These pilot/owners did all the maintenance and flying. They were called barnstormers. They flew slow , light and simple aircraft, but they killed so many of themselves and others, that in 1926, the Air Commerce Act was passed and we began to control and regulate an industry that was killing too many people. I don't think that we should go backwards. Most of our regs were written with crashed airplanes, poor maintenance and blood. This Sport Pilot thing is not about safety, its about getting more members in the EAA and AOPA. Its about more money for more political clout. It's wrong, and I'm fighting it with all I got. I have convinced over a dozen owners to drop membership in AOPA over this issue. This Sport Pilot thing is an insult to every Private Pilot and A&P. We "paid our dues" and worked hard to be a part of aviation, why lower the standards for a bunch of "wannabes"? I have a huge investment in training and tools. Why should I stand by and let someone with 80 hours of training and a pocketful of cheap tools do marginal work on an aircraft that, when it crashes and kills someone, will have a negative impact on me because I am in aviation? Sorry guys, I think its bad for all concerned. AVweb responds... George, you ask, "Why should I stand by and let someone with 80 hours of training and a pocketful of cheap tools do marginal work on an aircraft that, when it crashes and kills someone, will have a negative impact on me because I am in aviation?" My answer: Because it's his aircraft and his life at risk, and this nation allows individuals to make their own risk-management decisions. It's one thing to hang up a shingle and do aircraft maintenance on other people's aircraft for a living, and quite another to swing wrenches on your own private aircraft that carries only yourself and your family. I'm an A&P, too, but I am 100% in support of aircraft owners being allowed to do as much maintenance on their own private Part 91 aircraft as possible, so long as those aircraft are in strictly non-commercial service. --Mike Busch, Editor-in-Chief |
| Byron
Blake
10 Jun 2002 |
AOPA Nuke Plant Study AVweb wrote:
Pilots are some of the most outspoken and politicized folks I know and I'm one of them. However, our hobby and/or occupation must be looked at from an unbiased view when it comes to operations, procedures and performance. Only in this way can we all be precise, safe and professional pilots. That being said, the AOPA/NUKE study is a joke. The results of the study had been pre-determined. Do you really think AOPA make a big to do about a study if it had the opposite conclusion: that GA was a threat to Nuke plants? We won't really know until some unfortunate, idiotic, insane lunatic tries it, of course, and here's hoping we never find out. AOPA often makes lots of pre-conclusions. About proposed ADs, NPRMS and medical self-certification with respect to the Sport Pilot Proposal. The latter gets me really mad. Any reduction in medical certification standards, will have to increase the accident rate. Even if accidents that are directly causes by pilot medical problems are small, as AOPA suggests, that small differential, will only have a negative impact on safety. I'm for INCREASING medical standards, because when I read NTSB reports I conclude that medical problems is one under-addressed safety issue. That's an entirely different topic. AOPA has its pilots, members and its own interests at stake. It is a biased institution. I also happen to not only be a member of AOPA but a financial contributor to AOPA's ASF safety institution. However, I know a bias when I see one.
|
| John
Towner
09 Jun 2002
|
Approach Plates on the Web I have heard there is a web site that will give you updated approach plates for airports. Do you know if this is true or if this exists. AVweb responds... EchoFlight presently maintains such a site at http://edj.net/cgi-bin/echoplate.pl. This is presently free, although I'm not sure how long it will remain that way. --Mike Busch, Editor-in-Chief |
| Don
Gallion
09 Jun 2002 |
Grumpy Old Captains I'm a grumpy old ATC supervisor at Jacksonville Center. I got a real laugh out of Kevin Garrison's column, as well as a bit of a look in the mirror. 20 years ago when I first started in the ATC business, I was a controller at Atlanta Center. I found myself at a dinner party where in the process of making small talk with other guests, a well to do lady in her 50s asked what I did for a living. I explained that I was an air traffic controller, to which she replied "oh, you work at the airport". I explained to her that I worked at the enroute center in Hampton, about 20 miles south of Hartsfield. She said that she didn't realize that there was an airport in Hampton, but (as she patted my arm in a reassuring manner) "don't worry, if you work hard you'll get to the big airport someday." I stifled my desire to laugh and said "thank you." Like you, over the years I've heard enough of this that a similar comment today would probably just piss me off. So, after 20 years of working in Enroute Centers, I'm still waiting to get to the "big airport". Keep up the good work, Kevin, and I won't ask what route you're flying. |
| Mike
Palmer
8 Jun 2002 |
C-152 Pilot Met By SWAT Team At St. Mary's, Md. You have to remember that most cops are stunted mentally. They're really children who have a fascination with guns. They have little fascination with weightier things, like the Law they swore to uphold. (Most cops are high school grads with C+ GPA's.) They seem to enjoy escalating the situation. The paramilitary style training (where WE are the enemy) doesn't help. A little "Golden Rule" would go along way, but sadly, that Rule is lacking nowadays. How hard would it have been to wear a badge and say "Police officer. It's a little unusual to have anyone around this late. May I see your pilot license please?" (The pax didn't have to show ID.) An older fellow, like myself, who tries to apply the Golden Rule, would have simply waited to see what the two people were up to. It's not like terrorists are going to blow up that little airport in five minutes. Waiting for a few minutes, one would see two people tying down the plane, perhaps a guy and a gal talking and laughing lightly about the flight, and setting up camp. Hardly two Arabs plotting disaster. But it's easier - and more fun - to shoot first. [Suppose Mrs./Miss Woods had had an emergency - say, an alternator off line, or battery overcharge? She would have legitimately landed without radios, and might have even run away from the plane after shutting down if something was smoldering in the cabin - only to be potentially gunned down.] Apparently most of you don't seem to mind the arrogance of the police and the resultant "collateral" damage. Maybe you will just as the bullet enters your brain. Oops. Too late. |
| Jim
Pennington
07 Jun 2002 |
General Aviation Security As I read the article about our friends in Washington's concern over G.A. Security, my thoughts drift to this falls election campaigns. How many of the naysayers of General Aviation Security will be soliciting for donated (FREE) air transportation aboard one of our aircraft? I submit that their transportation might constitute a security breach. Campaign activities might lead to re-election which could lead to the curtailment of our flying privileges. My solution is to let them take the airlines. |
| Philip
W.gilbert
7 Jun 2002 |
General Aviation Security Do you have Senator Kohl's email address, as I would like to send a rebuttal to him and copy your staff.
AVweb responds... You can email Senator Kohl via his Web site at You can also find a recent statement of his regarding aviation security at but don't read it on an empty stomach... --Mary Grady, Senior News Editor |
| Byron
Miranda
7 Jun 2002 |
Military Attracts More Pilots I would guess the primary reason the military isn't having as many pilots leave the service is because pilots are not currently allowed to leave. "Stop-loss" has been in effect since Sept 11 . While restrictions on some Air Force personnel have since been lifted, this is not the case for those in aviation career fields. If there are still pilots entering the service, but none leaving, of course the numbers improve. It will be interesting to see what happens when the restrictions are lifted. |
| Paul
Parson
7 Jun 2002 |
General Aviation Security I read with interest the various comments by your politicians on security issues relating to light aircraft. Viewing the situation from afar (New Zealand) I cannot help wondering when the paranoid politicians are going to demand transponder units in all motor vehicles to enable them to be tracked in case they might be used by terrorists in the same way as middle east terrorists do in Israel. The situation seen from here seems ludicrous: Even if a terrorist loaded his C152 with the max. load of explosives the damage, though deadly, would not have the catastrophic effect that can be obtained by using an airliner. Be realistic, you myopic politicians, and realize that you can never have 100% guarantee of your security. It would seem that the U.S. politicians (for their ends?) have not come to terms, as the Brits and many other nations have, that in the modern world you can only do a limited amount before you impose unacceptable limits that make the government as oppressive as those groups that you are trying to protect your selves against. In short: Politicians, butt out of the light aircraft scene. You accept the risks imposed by motor vehicles (note the massive damage done by your home-grown terrorists a couple of years ago) and these can cause much greater devastation than a light aircraft. So accept the lesser risk posed by light aircraft -- note the minimal damage caused by the light aircraft that was flown into the multi-story building in Florida -- and start being realistic!
|
| Iris
Critchell
06 Jun 2002 |
C-152 Pilot Met By SWAT Team At St. Mary's, Md. In response to AVweb's commendably well-presented story on the St Mary's County Security incident, I would offer my commentary: As an active GA pilot in the West and through many different crises and security situations over 60 years of flying, perhaps we need to remind our GA Flying Pilots that their opportunity to fly is NOT a RIGHT. It is a privilege ! We can well afford to look into matters far enough to be understanding and cooperative. This action should have come as no surprise to any reasonable pilot given the warnings and the circumstances of that Memorial Day weekend. Why should we not be ready and willing to provide plenty of ID and consider how our flight operation may look to others -- such as those who are doing their best to figure out how to do a good job of these difficult security problems. Out here, in the middle of the afternoon on that Memorial Day week end taxing in to our hangar in a four-place Cessna we were followed into the front of our hangar by the local Sheriff's car. He looked us over at a courteous distance ( 20-30 feet) made his determination and turned around and left. We all waved and thanked him as he departed . We were very pleased to see this action. We would be delighted to cooperate with it. At 0130AM I hope they would be checking and I would expect to have to show ID if they needed it. After all pilots all carried a special Pilot ID card for many years in the late 40s and 50s. Why is this such a problem now? Keep up your thorough reporting ! |
| Miguel
En Ouston
06 Jun 2002 |
Tyson's Memphis Slot AVweb wrote:
Youz guyz missed a perfect opportunity by failing to add a few words to the end of the sentence, "Slot reservations may be made online or over the phone...[if you can get someone's ear...]" AVweb responds... Darn! How'd we miss that? I just HATE when that happens! --Brenda Carol, AVweb News |
| Robert
D. White
6 Jun 2002 |
Military Attracts More Pilots I would suggest that the major factor in all the military pilots delaying their release from active duty or those that have returned after leaving is that the airline jobs they were anticipating being available aren't there any more. I've talked to a number of them who planned on getting out and that was their reason for staying in.
|
| David
Phillips
06 Jun 2002 |
Military Attracts More Pilots For a slightly different perspective on "military pilot retention", please see the June, 2002 edition of "The Air Force Magazine" http://www.afa.org then click "AF Mag" icon! One contributory factor (in my view, as a retired Air Force Reserves commissioned officer, 1962 - 78) - The Secretary of Defense is moving toward more UAVs and "leapfrogging" generations of airframes in the pipeline for future "asymmetrical conflict" scenarios his war-gamers have been ;playing with in the labs and at Rand! It just hasn't "sunk in yet" with the USAF Academy and other "ring-knockers" community/ies -- or maybe it has in some quarters. Time shall tell.
|
| Donald
Hobel
6 Jun 2002 |
Eclipse Aviation Concerning the stir welding process being used by Eclipse Aviation, I assume it has all been checked, but this intimates there is some heating of the materials being joined. Any effect on the temper of the materials in the heated area as embrittlement that would lead to DH Comet type disaster over many cycles? AVweb responds... Here is some further info on the process:
This last site notes that:
Hope that helps, --Mary Grady, Senior News Editor |
| Marc
Braunstein
6 Jun 2002 |
Eclipse Aviation Aviation was built on willingness of a few to accept great financial risk. But after reading the entire article published in Inc., it makes you wonder whether Raburn & Co. are crossing the fine line between entrepreneurism and delusion. Getting this revolutionary plan (and business plan) off the ground was always going to be a monumental effort, but recent events are beginning to make it seem just a little desperate.
|
| Ray
Bloch
6 Jun 2002 |
General Aviation Security Thanks for the note on TSA's future intent. I love it when you insite [sic] and spread PARANOIA!!!!!!!! On second thought let's do this: Since there have been more car bombs that have been exploded than airplane bombs, lets ban cars from city streets so that pedestrians will be safe. I am sure your comment on this note will also be insightful. AVweb responds... No, Ray, it won't. --Mike Busch, Editor-in-Chief |
| Suzanne
Drazil
6 Jun 2002 |
Military Attracts More Pilots Three days after September 11 the US Air Force imposed "Stop Loss" on its pilots and other critical career fields. This means that even though they had retired or separated and were on terminal leave, that their retirements and separations were canceled. And still no one is allowed to leave. So, of course, there are no pilots leaving, and of course they are "coming back" because most of them had no choice. I'm not saying that many of them wouldn't have chosen to do this on their own. Just wanted to tell you what is really going on behind the numbers. There is plenty of communication about it on http://www.afpc.randolph.af.mil/retsep/stoploss.htm
|
| Richard
Herbst
6 Jun 2002 |
General Aviation Security You can't hold a country on a state of alert for more than a few days before the muscle tension forces parts and pieces to excuse themselves and leave the party. If you are John Magaw and have a budget that you must spend if it is to be replenished, you select a manageable slice of the general population (that won't play Alert according to your rules) and you apply your matrix to something you can squeeze with impunity. GA is a perfect target. As a Garbage Inspector in New York City once told me, you never bother citing small apartment houses for violations, they just won't pay. You cite those with the ability to pay, whether they clean up their trash or not. Magaw and his security Nazis have targeted a plum: a budget slot for a new aviation SS that will grow with no shortage of political and media fertilizer. Their target is not rank and file pilots who own Bonanzas and Skylanes, it is the corporate fleet that can pay for the TSA's new uniforms and recruiting and training and facilities and administrators and intelligence. If AOPA acts now, it must act strategically, strike for the heart as Von Clausewitz would say. Phil Boyer needs all the help he can get, he needs John McCain if necessary, anyone with influence and public stature because this is about much more than general aviation. Basic freedoms are on the block. Oh and by the way, watch out for them interstate truckers. You have no idea what a trailer load of bananas could do to the Pentagon. |
| Gary
Brandon
06 Jun 2002 |
General Aviation Security Guess my age is catching up to me. Perhaps TSA chief John Magaw and Sen. Herb Kohl, with their impressive command of aeronautical knowledge, could refresh my feeble memory as to the type of aircraft used to blow up the Alfred P. Murrah Building. Do these bozo's not realize that terrorist don't give a damn about our rules, laws, or way of life and that they hate us and all we represent? Gee, maybe that's why they're called terrorists. |
| Barry
Stockle
6 Jun 2002 |
General Aviation Security The security nuts and freaks in Washington and the other self-imposed empires ought look very seriously at automobiles, especially vans and pick-ups. Who knows what kind of a nut would pack a ton or so of explosives in and drive up along side a bus or park in some buildings basement. Take a look at Oklahoma City or even the first attacks on WTC. My feelings are that all vehicles must be on a "Driving Plan" filed of course with the proper federal authorities and checked every half mile along any road. And, all vehicles must be equipped with a transponder with the signal monitored by the local police or sheriff.
|
| Reb
Byrne
6 Jun 2002 |
Military Attracts More Pilots I won't dispute the facts in you paragraph on the Military attracting more pilots in the last nine months. What you need to ask is "why." I think you will find that the airline industry health is the primary reason. Many of those returning are on furlough or had just gotten out and did not get a class date. Those staying in are waiting until the hiring starts in earnest again. Yes, they are patriotic. However, they are also pragmatic.
|
| Lee S.
Gurke
6 Jun 2002 |
Harry Stonecipher Departs Boeing AVweb wrote:
In fact, Mr. Stonecipher retired effective 1 June 2002; a date which had been announced to the public last year. Your one-liner could be interpreted by many of your readers as an abrupt resignation caused by some issue related to the company's business; which is hardly the case here. Your editorial staff can do better; even with one-liners.
|
| Al
Passero
5 Jun 2002 |
Military Attracts More Pilots Although I'll bet at least some of the returning pilots/navigators mentioned below were returning because of personal feelings of duty and nationalism, I'd also wager many returned to active service after finding themselves furloughed from airlines that were cutting back dramatically after 9/11. I'm sure it wasn't just patriotism, but also the missing paycheck. |
| John
Gaitskill
5 Jun 2002 |
C-152 Pilot Met By SWAT Team At St. Mary's, Md. I'm bothered by the incident in St. Mary's, especially with regard to statement:
Did she ask for ID and eventually get it? Life gives us 24 hours a day to live. While I can understand operations early in the morning being suspicious, I hope we don't get to the point where we can only enjoy life in the daylight. It certainly would have been wise to announce the traffic, as well as be on record with a VFR flight plan. If small airports "get more serious about security," we might as well park our Cessnas. Most small airports don't have any extra money to get any more serious about security. We need to watch Senator Kohl carefully. If we get all these restrictions they want, aviation might be safe, but there will still be tens of thousands of gasoline tanker trucks freely roaming the highways that could do lots more damage than a Cessna. But then any restrictions that affect automobile drivers would be difficult to put in place. There's a whole lot more of them to get votes from. Put aviators away and the politicians can tell all the drivers how they've made the country much safer. |
| Fima
Gelman
05 Jun 2002 |
General Aviation Security When FBI issued an alert for terrorists and small planes, this is what happened to me. I was flying out from San Carlos (KSQL) near San Francisco, and a Channel 7 (ABC) television crew approached me and asked me for an interview. The interviewer asked me if I have heard about terrorist threat. No I have not. Well, now that I know about it, will I be doing anything different? Yes, I will be more vigilant. And the final question was: If I want to crash into a building, can someone stop me? My response: If someone wants to crash the car into a building, can you stop them? No you cannot. And planes are the same thing. No one can stop you if you really want to crash into the building. That last sentence made it on TV coverage. AVweb responds... Memo to file: If a TV reporter asks for an interview, just say no. --Mike Busch, Editor-in-Chief |
| Bob
Christian
02 Jun 2002 |
Airport Security Fortunately at SAV they take you behind a partition to scan your baggage. At ATL there is not even a partition. Everyone looks at you like you were a criminal! Seriously! I raised a little bit of a ruckus over it ... but there is not much one can do. Granted, they are searching little old ladies, black males and females, white males and females ... everything BUT the Muslim extremists. |
| Bob
McGrath
4 Jun 2002 |
Airport Security I have been flying on the airlines for business and pleasure since 1957 (two years after I started flying an Aeronca Champ for fun). I am almost 69 years old and look it (gray hair skinny arms, etc. ). On my last trip in early April (tryiong to get to Boston in time to see my 95-year-old mother before she died), my wife and I were subjected to a complete search of our baggage. Meanwhile a swarthy gentleman with a huge dark moustache and a towel around his head walked easily through with no questions asked. I am probably the least likely-looking terrorist that you'd ever see. But I guess we must be poltically correct ond not indulge in racial profiling!.If this continues, the terrorists have won. Next time I'll drive.
|
| Neal
Cohen
03 Jun 2002 |
C-152 Pilot Met By SWAT Team At St. Mary's, Md. First, no matter what, the deputies should have shown ID immediately. Second, maybe the deputies should have watched the "suspects" a little then made a final determination as to respond with all forces or just send two deputies out with sidearms ... or not at all. |
| Tom
Jensen
03 Jun 2002 |
Bellanca Assets Purchased AVweb wrote:
You'd have
Not to second-guess AVweb's clever writers, but you get the idea. |
| Jeff
Fancher
03 Jun 2002 |
C-152 Pilot Met By SWAT Team At St. Mary's, Md. When I was learning to fly, my instructor told me to always use the Common Traffic Advisory Frequency when flying into an uncontrolled airport. Ms. Woods "didn't think there would be anyone in the pattern at that hour." But what if someone HAD been coming in at the same time and thought the same thing? I guess that's why we're taught all those little annoying things like communicating our intentions when flying into an airport. So basically, I believe Ms. Woods just got caught bypassing common sense. Don't get me wrong though, I'd prefer that the authorities rethink the terrorism by small plane scenario. I mean, are there even any terrorists left that know how to fly?
|
| Jane
Hollingsworth
4 Jun 2002 |
C-152 Pilot Met By SWAT Team At St. Mary's, Md. The officials at St Mary's who rushed out with guns to check IDs got it wrong. The people they are trying to stop never land their aircraft. |
| Glen
Geller
4 Jun 2002 |
Mooney Eyes Baron, Bonanza If Mooney (MAC) intends to add the piston Beechcraft models because they would be a "good fit" in their product line, it seems a natural that they should try to acquire rights to build new Mooney M-10 Cadets, often referred to as Ercoupes. Certainly a low-cost, entry-level plane to introduce new pilots to the family line would be appreciated, and the M-10 has a proven history ... over 60 years of development! With all the new trainers available (Katana, etc) there must be room for one more, and if the Ercoupe could be marketed successfully there could be a tremendous call for it. Remember, there are no new C-152's out there...
|
| Morton
Mumma III
4 Jun 2002 |
C-152 Pilot Met By SWAT Team At St. Mary's, Md. Woods better wake up and do a bit of thinking! She thinks the incident "disturbing" and a violation of her civil rights. What balderdash! Wandering into the area, unannounced, at oh-dark-hundred, and she gets upset at being questioned? Wonder what she thinks her "civil rights" are in this instance; freedom from any queries? All concerned should be grateful the local authorities were awake and alert! |
| Don
Anderson
3 Jun 2002 |
C-152 Pilot Met By SWAT Team At St. Mary's, Md. I fly out of St. Mary's County airport (2W6) and flew into the airport during the Memorial Day weekend, and I take exception to the tone of that woman's expression of disappointment over the increased security at the airport. The officers who were on duty there were doing their best to be pleasant in a very tense situation. They were extremely affable, personable, pleasant, courteous, efficient, and I, for one, was happy that they were present and alert and watching out for my safety, as well as the safety of thousands of people in the county. Their position was very delicate, being responsible for any untoward activity while permitting honest citizens the freedom to exercise all of the options of our democracy. If anything had happened, they would be second-guessed to oblivion regardless of how they comported themselves. I say thank you for giving up their weekend so we could enjoy ours. I am an aircraft owner and pilot, and happy to call the officers my friends. |
| Mike
Perkins
3 Jun 2002 |
C-152 Pilot Met By SWAT Team At St. Mary's, Md. Woods thinks her civil rights were violated? Ahh, yet more evidence of the spoiled American. It seems that Americans are a little behind the rest of the world. However, henceforth we had all better get used to seeing camouflage uniforms and guns, and showing our ID when requested. The price of freedom is more than simply buying extra F-18s. |
| Leon
York
3 Jun 2002 |
C-152 Pilot Met By SWAT Team At St. Mary's, Md. I don't see how George Erichsen or anyone else could justify the actions of St. Mary's sheriff deputies. In the first place the deputies should have first identified themselves, showed their credentials, before asking for the travelers' ID. It is not illegal to land at any lighted airport at 1:30 a.m. or any time of the day or night. Are we allowing our country to become a police state because of terrorist scares? I think that would be a much worse scare than the terrorist. |
| Gerry
Parker
3 Jun 2002 |
C-152 Pilot Greeted By SWAT Team at St. Mary's, Md. I am a long-time pilot who has arrived an many a lonely airport in the middle of the night. I have never been met by the police, armed or otherwise, and don't look forward to any such experience. Having said that, it is not unreasonable for law enforcement officials to investigate a 1:30 a.m. arrival at an airport with few such arrivals. However it IS unreasonable for a couple openly unloading their aircraft to be confronted by armed SWAT team members unless there is some obvious reason to brandish weapons. While the officials need to be in a position to defend themselves, they can nevertheless treat everyone with respect and not go around terrifying folks in the middle of the night with no reasonable cause to do so. |
| Walter
Windus
3 Jun 2002 |
C-152 Pilot Met By SWAT Team At St. Mary's, Md. The law enforcement people being out of uniform should result in their receiving at least a reprimand. I think any one of us would be scared out of our wits by seeing a group of men coming at you in street clothes (hopefully not just shorts and "T" shirts) waving hand guns and semi-automatic rifles! |
| Al
Mojzisik
03 Jun 2002 |
Bellanca Assets Purchased AVweb wrote:
I respectfully submit the company name: "Bonooney Bell" or "Bellanza Moon" or possibly "Bonney Bell." |
| Greg
Milner
3 Jun 2002 |
C-152 Pilot Met By SWAT Team At St. Mary's, Md. I hangar my RV-4 at UES. Recently the security gate was inop in the open position. I work second shift and stop by my hangar after work to turn on the timer for the pre-heater if I plan on flying in the morning. Upon leaving the airport I was stopped by the police and checked out as to why I had been there. I was glad that somebody was looking after the airport and told the officer just that. He also knew the gate was inoperative. The gate finally was repaired after about three weeks. On the subject of police: I flew to C35 for breakfast recently and noticed two police cars parked side to side with the officers chatting. They were still there when I returned from breakfast. It seems maybe the local police have time to keep an eye on our airports if they wanted to. |
| Phil
Derosier
3 Jun 2002 |
C-152 Pilot Met By SWAT Team At St. Mary's, Md. It may be said that aircraft pilots are counted among this nation's intellectually elite. However, under the present political and law enforcement/surveillance atmosphere, it may be said that the pilot in this operation is one of the rare exceptions. To proclaim freedom ... while disregarding responsibility ... is the definition of recklessness.
|
| Martin
Kent, Jr.
3 Jun 2002 |
C-152 Pilot Met By SWAT Team At St. Mary's, Md. While, I am not a big fan of, nor would I appreciate, having the local authorities ask for ID at gunpoint, I do not feel that they did anything wrong. In fact, I think they were being cautious and working to protect the general public's safety. The officers were responding to an unusual situation with a heightened degree of vigilance, something that I think we all should applaud. The pilot landed the aircraft at an unusual time (1:30 a.m.), in an unusual fashion (without CTAF announcements). The police, as we all have known for some time, have been operating under increased suspicions due to 'unspecified threats' about GA aircraft. Their actions were justified and in our interests. I do, however, hope that after the officers were satisfied, that they apologized to the aircraft's occupants. I for one, appreciate the officers actions and hope that all law enforcement agencies are as alert for similar and other unusual occurrences. |
| John
Townsley
2 Jun 2002 |
Part 135 Operations Lack Security? The article "Private Plane Charters: One Way Around Air Security" published today in the Washington Post is one that ought to be discussed in the aviation press. It should also have some serious thought given to developing a strong rebuttal. The prospects of security screening at all of the Nation's thousands of public and private use airports where part 135 operations might pick up passengers is absolutely chilling. I can think of no way to more rapidly close small airports supported by cash strapped small communities. There are already several states (Iowa, Tennessee, etc.) who have gutted their state aviation programs. Cash is not available to pay for screeners at remote locations. The infrastructure does not exist, and the passenger numbers for most smaller airports are not there. |