White House & Capitol Evacuated

[airspeed]

Noone deserves that. What about if U made the mistake?

 

[TDTURBO]

Noone deserves that. What about if U made the mistake?

Maybe I was a little harsh, but all you need is a GPS to keep you out of harms way. What this plane has single handedly done is ruin it for everyone else flying GA. I think he should never fly again and consider himself REAL lucky he is alive. How stupid can you be to fly over the White House anyway? Lost or not, if you are that dumb, you shouldn't be flying or have kids to further propagate a polluted gene pool. Maybe if people knew they would get shot down if the TFR was violated, we would have less violations which limit our freedoms as GA pilots in the US. It's always one or two idiots that ruin it for everybody else, get rid of the idiots, gets rid of the problems. Harsh yes, but effective.

As far as me making that mistake, only if I was incapacitated due to a heart attack or stroke. I would willingly kill myself if I was that stupid.

 

[airspeed]

I am sorry to hear that, I think you show alot of anger. When emotions influence decisions it sometimes can be pretty bad. Like I stated I am sure that it was a mistake and however big and I do agree big mistake it was your proposal of shooting down and killing innocent people because of a mistake, well if thats the case lets invent the thought police while we are at it. Some MIT grad can come up with an implant that will relay in real time your thoughts to the TSA, FBI, CIA, etc. IF your thoughts are to go bomb or kill government agents you will be terminated instantly by an implant on your nuts. I think many people have those thoughts come April 15th every year!!

 

[TonyC]

This is a joke right?

Are you telling me that a student pilot can take another student pilot up for joy rides?

That's like the blind leading the blind but it wouldn't surprise me coming from the incompetent FAA.

No, the joke is your reading comprehension.

Here's what I said:

A private pilot is allowed to carry a passenger, even if the passenger happens to be a student pilot.

Now, the subject of the above sentence is "a private pilot." A private pilot is one who holds a certificate that allows him to operate certain airplanes under certain conditions. He is not allowed to operate his airplane for hire, but he is allowed to carry passengers. He can even carry passengers that happen to be student pilots.

YOU were the one who erroneously substituted "student pilot" for "private pilot." It was simple, therefore, to tear down the straw argument you constructed. I didn't say it - - you made it up.

When gkrangers tried to correct you, scolded him, directing him to "read it again." You're the one that needs help reading - - you should have listened to him.

I suggest you sharpen up on your "English skills," as you say, and while you're at it, you might work on your logic skills, as well.


I'm rather surprised you're not praising these guys for acquiring valuable experience in handling intercepts by F-16s, just in case they ever need to invoke their services for real.

"Incompetent FAA"?!?!? HA!


pot ... kettle ...



Now, about what YOU said here ...

I do realize that the student pilot can take up a licensed pilot as long as he has a current medical ...

Are you saying a student pilot can take a passenger?

 

[TDTURBO]

For a military pilot, you sure have a lot to learn. Do you think you are able to shoot down an airliner loaded with hundreds of innocent people? You better be, because that is policy if a commercial or private plane violates TFR's over highly sensitive areas with unknown intentions. If you don't like it, then get out of the military.

It has nothing to do with my feelings, it's for the good of society. The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few or the one. If you do the crime, you do the time.

 

[TDTURBO]

No, the joke is your reading comprehension.

Here's what I said:



Now, the subject of the above sentence is "a private pilot." A private pilot is one who holds a certificate that allows him to operate certain airplanes under certain conditions. He is not allowed to operate his airplane for hire, but he is allowed to carry passengers. He can even carry passengers that happen to be student pilots.

YOU were the one who erroneously substituted "student pilot" for "private pilot." It was simple, therefore, to tear down the straw argument you constructed. I didn't say it - - you made it up.

When gkrangers tried to correct you, scolded him, directing him to "read it again." You're the one that needs help reading - - you should have listened to him.

I suggest you sharpen up on your "English skills," as you say, and while you're at it, you might work on your logic skills, as well.


I'm rather surprised you're not praising these guys for acquiring valuable experience in handling intercepts by F-16s, just in case they ever need to invoke their services for real.

"Incompetent FAA"?!?!? HA!


pot ... kettle ...



Now, about what YOU said here ...

Are you saying a student pilot can take a passenger?

Yes I am, only if the student pilot is carrying a passenger that is a current pilot with an active medical, the way it sounded, you implied that a student pilot could carry passengers that are not rated. We already went over this and I admitted my mis-understanding. If that isn't good enough, then too bad.

 

[airspeed]

I have been out of the military for a longtime, and I am glad I was never faced with that situation. Maybe you should become a talk show hosts, you sound like you might be related to Morton Downey JR!

 

[TonyC]

Are you saying a student pilot can take a passenger?

Yes I am, only if the student pilot is carrying a passenger that is a current pilot with an active medical, ...

Thank you for clarifying. On this point, also, you are wrong. Reference Federal Aviation Regulation Part 61 CERTIFICATION: PILOTS, FLIGHT INSTRUCTORS, AND GROUND INSTRUCTORS Subpart C--Student Pilots Sec. 61.89 General Limitaions

(a) A student pilot may not act as pilot in command of an aircraft:
(1) That is carrying a passenger;

(emphasis added for the English impaired)

There are no exceptions to this regulation of which I am aware. Can you enlighten us?

... you implied that a student pilot could carry passengers that are not rated.

I implied nothing of the sort. Do I need to go back and highlight with italics, boldface, and underline the sentence you seem to have trouble reading?

A private pilot is allowed to carry a passenger, even if the passenger happens to be a student pilot.

There. I even threw in a different color for free. Only an idiot could say that I implied a student pilot could carry passengers, period.


Wait - - you're the one who claims student pilots can carry passengers.


Never mind.

We already went over this and I admitted my mis-understanding. If that isn't good enough, then too bad.

No, what you did was say, "Ok Gk, that's what I thought you meant" to gkrangers when he said he could not find the misinterpretation that you found. Acknowledging what he said is not equivalent to admitting that you were wrong.


English...


FARs...


What is it that you do for a living?!?!?







.

 

[millhouse21]

That was beautiful. Thank you.

 

[bigD]

Yes I am, only if the student pilot is carrying a passenger that is a current pilot with an active medical, the way it sounded, you implied that a student pilot could carry passengers that are not rated. We already went over this and I admitted my mis-understanding. If that isn't good enough, then too bad.

I work for a guy that's not a pilot. His company employs me to be a passenger in his airplane. So I guess you can say that even with no pilot certificate, he's allowed to carry passengers as long as one of them meets the requirements to fly his plane, and that person is sitting up front.

 

[flyifrvfr]

Maybe I was a little harsh, but all you need is a GPS to keep you out of harms way. What this plane has single handedly done is ruin it for everyone else flying GA. I think he should never fly again and consider himself REAL lucky he is alive. How stupid can you be to fly over the White House anyway? Lost or not, if you are that dumb, you shouldn't be flying or have kids to further propagate a polluted gene pool. Maybe if people knew they would get shot down if the TFR was violated, we would have less violations which limit our freedoms as GA pilots in the US. It's always one or two idiots that ruin it for everybody else, get rid of the idiots, gets rid of the problems. Harsh yes, but effective.

As far as me making that mistake, only if I was incapacitated due to a heart attack or stroke. I would willingly kill myself if I was that stupid.

The comparison of a turn signal or running a redlight to getting shot down for a navigational error shows that the punishment should fit the crime. Escorting the pilot out of the area was preferable to smoking him. I agree that if the pilot had not responded to the flares, he should be smoked because of a failure to communicate either by turning and following the fighters, or making radio contact. Not replying communicates that you are a threat and a solution to the threat means getting smoked. He should and no doubt will lose his license. This punisment clearly fits the crime.

 

[westwind]

I have some questions for those military guys that might be able to enlighten me and the "Shoot'em down" advocates (with which I am most certainly NOT alligned). Suppose a shot was authorized and taken. Just how big a heat signature or radar return will you get from a 150 and is there not the chance that the missile just whizzes right past the intended target? I just envision the F-16 sliding in behind the 150, which was headed toward the White House. If you get a hit, now you have how much blazing debris falling over a huge, populated area? If you miss, then isn't that stray missile headed toward the area you were trying to protect? Have our armed forces ever practice-fired against a 150 drone?
If not, it seems like a bad place to be testing missiles.
I for one, am glad that cooler heads prevailed.

 

[Brett Hull]

An add-on to bagel bomber's question: If Habib is intent on smashing his mighty C-150 into the White House with the intent of the impact releasing a chemical agent into the atmosphere, wouldn't shooting him down do the same thing?

The terrorists have succeded. There sure as hell are a ton of scared people around here.

 

[EagleRJ]

A C-150 has plenty of heat signature for a heat-seeking missile to lock onto, and the AIM-9 Sidewinder the F-16 carries has a 20-pound warhead. The only thing reaching the ground intact would be the engine block.

Shooting down a terrorist aircraft that is carrying a chemical or biological payload would probably reduce the danger, since dispersing the agent at a higher altitude would reduce its concentration, maybe even below lethal levels.

I don't think we'll see an actual shoot-down unless the aircraft has been confirmed to be hostile. The fallout for killing a wandering student pilot would be severe, and would be another win for the terrorists. We should focus our efforts on educating both the public and the anti-GA politicians about the real nature of the threat. People just need to relax when they see an airplane in the sky.

 

[SammyG]

I fly around Kennedy Space Center airspace here in Florida all the time. No excuse for penetrating that airspace here, everyone is aware of it.

So how these local guys could have dinged a restricted airspace in their own area is beyond me.

 

[apcooper]

You know the real underlying reason why most of the public doesn't like those little airplanes? Any guesses? Well IMHO I believe that deep inside they are simply jealous that we can all have the privledge and skills to do something that they can't. Of course when something like this comes up it is simply convienent to play the scare card. They cherry pick reasons not related to their inner emotions to support their prevailing inner emotions.

As for the government, yes it is so obvious they have eggs on their preverbial faces. They do whatever they need to get elected. Here is a startling example that I'm sure most of you can not only relate to but totally agree with. The border. We have over 5 million OTM (other than Mexican) undocumented illegals in this country and a mostly wide open border to boot. If just 1% of those are criminals and 1% of the criminals are terrorists that is still 500 terrorists. That is 500 too many for myself. How about you Mr Bush? This is 100 times more of a threat to our security than GA. The reason of course why Bush (as well as Clinton, Bush41, and Regan) will not/did not secure the border is simply because they want all the hispanic votes. If God forbid another 9/11 happens and it is traced back to the border, all hell will break loose and I predict unlike on 9/11 when everyone rallied behind the president that this time he would not only go down as the worst president in history but very likely be impeached and removed! This is a totally non-partisan statement in case you didn't know. Surly, president Bush knows what a huge risk he is taking by being passive about this, right, and the fact that he had the nerve to call the Minuteman "vigalanties" is unbelieviely outrageous!! If I were president I would immediatly sign an exectutive order to send the national guard to the southern border to back up the BP. This would easily stop 90% of all violent illegals from entering the US. I would also set up a comprehensive guest worker program for law abiding imigrants as well.

 

[bigD]

Well IMHO I believe that deep inside they are simply jealous that we can all have the privledge and skills to do something that they can't.

Do you pick up girls with that line too? Holy crap man - lol.

 

[apcooper]

Do you pick up girls with that line too? Holy crap man - lol.

Yea, I do all the time Big D!! Please note the sarcasm!!

 

[bigD]

Heh, well put some sarcasm tags on that thing! You had me going there.

 

[SigAV8R]

He should and no doubt will lose his license. This punisment clearly fits the crime.

According to AOPA's website, the max penalty enforceable by the FAA is revocation of the license. However, it goes on to state that the pilot may attain the license again by simply taking the written and practical tests again. Is it just me...or HOW IN THE H*LL is that "punishment that fits the crime?" So the PIC will get his hand slapped at the most and then be back in the air within the year. I think that guy should be banned from flying (as a pilot) for life. Harsh? Yes, but it fits the crime better IMO. For those like flyifrvfr who make your living on GA, this should be a no-brainer.