I disagree with AOPA

[SkyHog]

http://www.aopa.org/whatsnew/newsitems/2005/050712senate.html

I'm surprised that New Mexico had the guts to suggest something like this, however, I must say....

Its about time we have a set out guide that says "If you violate the FRZ - you will be punished this way."

Its excessively tough, and it doesn't do much to get rid of the unneeded restrictions, but every time someone violates the air space, we take a step back from a useful solution. Burn 'em. Make the violators pay for stupid mistakes.

Pop up TFRs are a different story. While there's still no excuse for violating them, at least they haven't been published and known for over 2 years.

My only fear with this - I hate giving power to the federal government. Everytime they get more power, we lose another freedom somewhere. Unfortunately, I feel this is a necessary evil tho.

 

[Don Jones]

Wow, you sure couldn't tell from that warm and fuzzy e-mail I got from Domenici in regards to the letter I sent that they had something like that up their sleeve. Politicians, can't live with them, and in Domenici's case, can't seem to get them voted out of office.
Don

 

[tom.]

Its about time we have a set out guide that says "If you violate the FRZ - you will be punished this way."

Its excessively tough, and it doesn't do much to get rid of the unneeded restrictions, but every time someone violates the air space, we take a step back from a useful solution. Burn 'em. Make the violators pay for stupid mistakes.
.

Just what we need, another ridiculous law. And the public will love it. Confiscate a mortgaged aircraft (usually property of the bank) and set a fine no one can pay. I'm OK with it too-- as long as motor vehicle violations (which kill 40,000 people a year) are dealt with in similar fashion.

 

[dogman]

So I guess the next thing would be a $10,000 for bumbling into an MOA or $5,000 for bumbling Class Bravo?????????????

There are some people who do not like the fact that we have the freedom to fly like we do. They will do anything to take it away, may be even if it is with one bite of the ax at a time. Remember you can cut down the biggest of trees with an ax, one small bite at a time!

On the other hand I do not kknow how these pilots are doing this over and over.
I know there are many pilots who are so anti radio or anti controlers that they do not talk on the radio or call FSS. How do you get to these people?
May be it is in our flight training system or some thing missing in our BFR?

 

[inav8r]

So I guess the next thing would be a $10,000 for bumbling into an MOA or $5,000 for bumbling Class Bravo?????????????

You can fly, albeit it a bit reckless, into MOA's, WARNING and ALERT areas any time you please - you're allowed in there!

 

[fgcason]

How do you get to these people?
May be it is in our flight training system or some thing missing in our BFR?

I said it before, I'll say it again:
Putting this information up somewhere on a website or burying it deep in the middle of a 40 page NOTAM does squat nothing to those who don't go hunting for half a day to find it. There are probably still pilots out there that don't know that DC is off limits.
Put together a small 3-4 page set of instructions including chart exerpts telling exactly how and how not to do things near the DC area and include a summary of suggestions by pilots who actually fly in the area (NOT FAA/gov't types that just push pencils)
Then send the thing registered mail to every single pilot in the country even if it's someone 40 years out of airplanes living in a remote cabin in Alaska.

This won't solve the problem but at least you can get the information to these idiots. After that it's up to them to read and follow it.

$100K fine? Petty cash where all us rich pilots come from...or so the story goes...

A message to all politicians and lawmakers everywhere since they can't figure it out: Fine's don't solve problems. Creating a new law that gets buried in some filing cabinet in a sub basement somewhere secret doesn't solve problems. Finding out what is actually wrong and fixing it does does solve problems.

 

[SJP]

I said it before, I'll say it again:
Putting this information up somewhere on a website or burying it deep in the middle of a 40 page NOTAM does squat nothing to those who don't go hunting for half a day to find it. There are probably still pilots out there that don't know that DC is off limits.
Put together a small 3-4 page set of instructions including chart exerpts telling exactly how and how not to do things near the DC area and include a summary of suggestions by pilots who actually fly in the area (NOT FAA/gov't types that just push pencils)
Then send the thing registered mail to every single pilot in the country even if it's someone 40 years out of airplanes living in a remote cabin in Alaska.

This won't solve the problem but at least you can get the information to these idiots. After that it's up to them to read and follow it.

$100K fine? Petty cash where all us rich pilots come from...or so the story goes...

A message to all politicians and lawmakers everywhere since they can't figure it out: Fine's don't solve problems. Creating a new law that gets buried in some filing cabinet in a sub basement somewhere secret doesn't solve problems. Finding out what is actually wrong and fixing it does does solve problems.

Interesting - pretty much exactly what I wrote to Phil Bowyer a couple weeks ago. Never got a reply.

 

[MSmith]

Sorry, Nick, but I agree with AOPA.

This is WAY to harsh. It also doesn't take rental aircraft into account.

Or for that matter, accidental incursions (like the KingAir struck by lightning, doing his damnedest in IMC just to stay in the air). How can you take his plane away when all he's done is survive a major problem.

Take the fine down to the value of the aircraft and remove the seizure and I might support it. Poor pilots fly cheaper aircraft for a reason.

Better - require use of at least a portable GPS with up to date information in the ADIZ. That's about $500 per pilot/plane, plus maybe $300 a year for updates.

 

[SJP]

Sorry, Nick, but I agree with AOPA.

This is WAY to harsh. It also doesn't take rental aircraft into account.

Or for that matter, accidental incursions (like the KingAir struck by lightning, doing his damnedest in IMC just to stay in the air). How can you take his plane away when all he's done is survive a major problem.

Take the fine down to the value of the aircraft and remove the seizure and I might support it. Poor pilots fly cheaper aircraft for a reason.

Better - require use of at least a portable GPS with up to date information in the ADIZ. That's about $500 per pilot/plane, plus maybe $300 a year for updates.

I think the key term is 'negligent'.

If you are in an emergency, doing everything required, then I wouldn't consider that 'negligent'.

Unfortunately, given the recent transgressions, I just don't see how the AOPA can defend successfully against the rule being put in.

Steve

 

[corjulo]

Tough call. Skyhog makes a good argument. But a penalty like that could bankrupt someone.

The Clinton/Durbin proposal is only to examine the issue. Clintons husband had a soft-spot for GA, as does John Kerry. I have no idea about these other guys. I don't know about republicans but I hear there are quit a few aviation friendly republican senators. We need to focus on them

 

[Ed Guthrie]

Better - require use of at least a portable GPS with up to date information in the ADIZ. That's about $500 per pilot/plane, plus maybe $300 a year for updates.

Side bet: Folks with GPS comprise a vast majority of the violators...

 

[Richard]

Side bet: Folks with GPS comprise a vast majority of the violators...

Harley's gonna get you for that. By definition, majority is vast.

 

[Greebo]

Harley's gonna get you for that. By definition, majority is vast.

Um...no.

Having a majority means you just have the most.

Vast means having a great extent in size, quantity, etc.

A 51% to 49% is a majority, but it is a slim majority.

A 80% to 20% is a majority - a VAST majority.

 

[Tom-D]

Let us not forget, the skys over America belong to the people, not the Airlines, congress, or the military.

And until we get off our butts and elect officals that will do what we want we have no argument.

Think about it, how many candidates did you campain for last election?

If the Answer is zero, then shut up and set down, you are the problem.

 

[corjulo]

Let us not forget, the skys over America belong to the people, not the Airlines, congress, or the military.

And until we get off our butts and elect officals that will do what we want we have no argument.

Think about it, how many candidates did you campain for last election?

If the Answer is zero, then shut up and set down, you are the problem.

Not me dude. Worked my butt off for Dean then Kerry. And I personally asked both about general aviation. Dean needed a bit of educating but Kerry was right on it. Also hammered Leiberman but got no satisfaction.

I would venture to say most people on this board take voting pretty seriously.

 

[SkyHog]

The idea, to me at least, is that it is an excessively high fine. Shouldn't matter tho - no one should be busting the airspace.

No one busts, no one pays the fine. Everyone's happy.

Oh - and I volunteered for Bush's campaign in 2004. I handed out flyers to people by Hastings telling them where to vote, and why to vote for Bush. I'd say that I have the right to state an opinion, Although campaign or not - all I say is that you have to vote. I've never heard anyone claim that you've gotta campaign to complain. That doesn't make sense.

 

[Tom-D]

Not me dude. Worked my butt off for Dean then Kerry. And I personally asked both about general aviation. Dean needed a bit of educating but Kerry was right on it. Also hammered Leiberman but got no satisfaction.

I would venture to say most people on this board take voting pretty seriously.

One person isn't the rule.

 

[wsuffa]

The problem with this kind of law is that it can be applied in an arbitrary and capricous manner. Irresponsbile pilots have brought this on, our elected officials are being inconvenienced.

My bet is that a bunch of 'em sign on to the bill.

This is the same kind of knee-jerk as the one about broadcast indecency that followed the Janet Jackson incident. Huge fines, license revocation, but no requirement for the agency to establish or publicize criteria. Just the ability for an agency to act in an arbitrary and capricious manner.

 

[Lawreston]

Harley's gonna get you for that. By definition, majority is vast.

 

[Richard]

Doncha remember, you 'called me on the carpet' for saying that exact same thing. I'm a recovering perfectionist but I still remember that. M'gosh, now that I think about it I can still hear all my teachers...they're in my head, make it stop.

 

[silver-eagle]

Today it's the FRZ. What happens when it's the airspace over your airport? Where will you draw the line?
100K or any totally unreasonable amount will not stop anyone and let us NOT forget the reason the FRZ is there... To PROTECT Washington against an attack. Fining Fred at an amount SURE to bankrupt him for life for an accidental incursion in a small GA that NEVER possed an honest danger is morally corrupt. It's political grandstanding at its finest. Pander to the unknowing masses for those extra votes.
I propose we argue that cars, trucks, and busses not be allowed inside the FRZ. You can certainly carry far more anything in a ground based vehicle than in a small GA. How soon after will the FRZ, ney, the whole ADIZ, be recinded.
Yes. A fine should be imposed but isn't anyone listening? The FAA has the power (AND DID). The last accidental incursion cost the pilot his license for 10 months. They could have imposed nearly anything.
So, do we really need this? I think not.

 

[Anthony]

Today it's the FRZ. What happens when it's the airspace over your airport? Where will you draw the line?
100K or any totally unreasonable amount will not stop anyone and let us NOT forget the reason the FRZ is there... To PROTECT Washington against an attack. Fining Fred at an amount SURE to bankrupt him for life for an accidental incursion in a small GA that NEVER possed an honest danger is morally corrupt. It's political grandstanding at its finest. Pander to the unknowing masses for those extra votes.
I propose we argue that cars, trucks, and busses not be allowed inside the FRZ. You can certainly carry far more anything in a ground based vehicle than in a small GA. How soon after will the FRZ, ney, the whole ADIZ, be recinded.
Yes. A fine should be imposed but isn't anyone listening? The FAA has the power (AND DID). The last accidental incursion cost the pilot his license for 10 months. They could have imposed nearly anything.
So, do we really need this? I think not.

I agree. The threat GA poses is not a $100K risk if the tractor trailer, mini-van or Honda Civic isn't assessed the same fee. Good lord!

 

[SkyHog]

Today it's the FRZ. What happens when it's the airspace over your airport? Where will you draw the line?
100K or any totally unreasonable amount will not stop anyone and let us NOT forget the reason the FRZ is there... To PROTECT Washington against an attack. Fining Fred at an amount SURE to bankrupt him for life for an accidental incursion in a small GA that NEVER possed an honest danger is morally corrupt. It's political grandstanding at its finest. Pander to the unknowing masses for those extra votes.
I propose we argue that cars, trucks, and busses not be allowed inside the FRZ. You can certainly carry far more anything in a ground based vehicle than in a small GA. How soon after will the FRZ, ney, the whole ADIZ, be recinded.
Yes. A fine should be imposed but isn't anyone listening? The FAA has the power (AND DID). The last accidental incursion cost the pilot his license for 10 months. They could have imposed nearly anything.
So, do we really need this? I think not.

I understand your points clearly. The problem is that if the punishments that are in place now were working, then we wouldn't have as many ADIZ incursions as we've had (I believe its like 1 or 2 a day if not more), and we certainly wouldn't have had the FRZ violations.

Look at the punishments for other dumb crimes. Is stealing cable really worth $10,000 and up to a year in prison? Of course not. The punishment is excessive because there is no excuse for stealing cable.

What about $1000 per offense for graffiti? Graffiti is a serious problem, and we need to stop the vandalism. Excessive penalties help stop problems.

It doesn't work for drug offenses however, as people willing to commit drug offenses are immoral enough for punishments such as this to mean anything to them (IMHO).

 

[Rick Davis]

It seems like a huge part of the problem is that our politicians are located near several large metropolitan areas. Wouldn't it make more sense to move them someplace in North Dakota or Wyoming? Someplace with one road in and out, and one phone line? Congress could be in session from November - March, when the area does not have so many tourists.

I think that this would go a long way toward solving a lot of the country's problems.

Best,

 

[fgcason]

It seems like a huge part of the problem is that our politicians are located near several large metropolitan areas. Wouldn't it make more sense to move them someplace in North Dakota or Wyoming? Someplace with one road in and out, and one phone line? Congress could be in session from November - March, when the area does not have so many tourists.

I think that this would go a long way toward solving a lot of the country's problems.

Nope. Won't work. The minute you send them to WY or ND is the minute they realize how unprotected the rest of the country is. For your protection they will emergency invoke the DHS written million pages of unconditionally safe citizens everywhere laws then run the North Korean flag up the pole above the US flag and insist on goose stepping.
The largest part of the problem is the politicians are out of touch with the citizenry. Leave 'em in the cities where they belong and won't wreck the rest of the country...or send them to North Korea. Or just fire them all and start over. Gene pool needs some cleaning anyway.

1984 anyone?



Oops. Told myself to stay away from all political topics. I'll give myself a negative reputation point for this post...

 

[poadeleted1]

Tough call. Skyhog makes a good argument. But a penalty like that could bankrupt someone.

The Clinton/Durbin proposal is only to examine the issue. Clintons husband had a soft-spot for GA, as does John Kerry. I have no idea about these other guys. I don't know about republicans but I hear there are quit a few aviation friendly republican senators. We need to focus on them

And here I thought that soft spot was between their ears.

 

[Lawreston]

Doncha remember, you 'called me on the carpet' for saying that exact same thing. I'm a recovering perfectionist but I still remember that. M'gosh, now that I think about it I can still hear all my teachers...they're in my head, make it stop.

I remember something about it; but didn't it involve something about large majority or small minority?

On a parallel with the above I, yesterday, received the latest periodical from one of Maine's elite law firms(whose expertise allowed me to enter this airplane ownership status). On page 2 is the big headline: The Insurance You Forgot You Had(and which you need more of).

I've been assured by one of the principal owners that the chuckle at the next staff meeting will be the author/editor having failed to follow the old English class rule, Never use a preposition to end a sentence with.

And Bob commented, Thanks for the tip, Jerry; now, go flying. Do you suppose that was soft rhetoric for Go fly a kite?

HR

 

[bbchien]

The solution is education, always education. We have to start requiring security education at our BFRs or Annual FR's if necessary. We gotta stop this.

 

[John J]

The solution is education, always education. We have to start requiring security education at our BFRs or Annual FR's if necessary. We gotta stop this.

I could not agree more. Education does work.

Thank you Dr. Buce from an older pilot who learns from everyone.

John J