Episode #103

A place to post misc. feedback to individual eps.
Forum rules
We'd love to have you Reply to posts in this Forum, but please don't create new Topics here. One exception: If we haven't created a thread for a particular episode, feel free to get it started. For other subjects, I suggest creating new Topics in Virtual Hangar=>Other Topics. Thanks.
User avatar
Scofreyjet
Posts: 391
Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2008 11:13 pm
Location: Billerica, MA/KBED

Re: Episode #103

Postby Scofreyjet » Wed Nov 05, 2008 11:09 pm

The comments are piling up in the public comment area of the TSA's LASP docket. However, I just tripped over something new (but old...) mixed in - a "supporting document" posted by the TSA. It's called a "REGULATORY EVALUATION, REGULATORY FLEXIBILITY ANALYSIS, TRADE IMPACT ASSESSMENT,
AND UNFUNDED MANDATES DETERMINATION".

Just short of 200 pages, and dated July of this year, it includes the rough implementation cost estimates for this program, among other things - can you say "hundreds of millions of dollars?" I bet you can...

If you go to the docket (see link in previous post) look in the left column and click on the "Supporting and Related Materials" link. It's a Word document over 12MB large...
Jeff Ward
I love things with wings!
Scofreyjet on Twitter

User avatar
mdpilots
Posts: 64
Joined: Sat Feb 23, 2008 12:54 pm
Location: Montgomery County Airpark - KGAI

Congressional Flying Club

Postby mdpilots » Tue Dec 23, 2008 7:26 pm

Jeb mentions the Congressional Flying Club in this episode. Interestingly enough (at least to me), there are TWO Congressional Flying Clubs in the DC area. I happen to belong to one of them.

Ours is not associated with Congress, but was formed at and based out of Congressional Airfield in Rockville, Maryland in the 1950s. When that airport later became Congressional Shopping Center (boo), the flying club briefly moved to Davis Airport in Laytonsville, Maryland and then over to Montgomery County Airpark in Gaithersburg, Maryland where it still exists today. You can read about our club's history at http://www.cfcmss.org/about.html.

Does the actual Congress-associated Congressional Flying Club still exist?

Jack may remember that he was so kind as to write an "Around the Field" article this summer about one of our airplanes. The story was about my son and I flying the club's Cessna Cardinal into Oshkosh. The dragon on the tail caught Jack's eye. So he decided to make us semi-famous for a few days ;-).

Adam

User avatar
jackhodgson
Site Admin
Posts: 1289
Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2007 5:07 pm
Location: Lookout Point, Nottingham, NH / Nashua Airport (ASH)
Contact:

Re: Congressional Flying Club

Postby jackhodgson » Wed Dec 24, 2008 5:22 pm

My goal is to eventually make *everyone* who attends airventure -- and for that matter, everyone who loves aviation -- famous for at least a few days.

Here's the column with the piece about Adam and Adam Jr.

www.airventure.org/news/2008/2mon28/around_field.html

-- Jack

fordan
Posts: 45
Joined: Mon May 05, 2008 4:58 pm
Location: Southern NJ
Contact:

Re: Congressional Flying Club

Postby fordan » Sun Dec 28, 2008 12:38 am

jackhodgson wrote:My goal is to eventually make *everyone* who attends airventure -- and for that matter, everyone who loves aviation -- famous for at least a few days.


Sort of a reverse Wowbagger the Infinitely Prolonged. :D What's the attendance figures for Oshkosh? 50,000 attendees? You'll need to be immortal too, I suspect.

Hmmm, speaking of Oshkosh, I really should make my hotel reservations. If I book soon, I may still be able to stay someplace in WI....

User avatar
jackhodgson
Site Admin
Posts: 1289
Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2007 5:07 pm
Location: Lookout Point, Nottingham, NH / Nashua Airport (ASH)
Contact:

Re: Episode #103

Postby jackhodgson » Mon Dec 29, 2008 12:08 pm

Even longer.

Correct me if I'm wrong but AirVenture gets more like 750,000 attendees.

I consider it job security.

-- Jack

User avatar
RigaRunner
Posts: 133
Joined: Tue Feb 12, 2008 11:34 pm

Re: Episode #103

Postby RigaRunner » Mon Dec 29, 2008 11:21 pm

Today is the last day for comments on theTSA's Large Aircraft Security Program. FWIW, here's what I sent in:

"I believe this proposal is unwarranted, unnecessary and excessively burdensome.
It would place expensive and complicated new requirements on general aviation
owners and pilots, a group which has given the federal government not one bit of
evidence of being a threat to the nation's security.

"Indeed, the TSA and FAA have not produced any evidence that this class of
general aviation pilots and their aircraft present any security or safety
hazard. The proposed requirements go far beyond reasonable and proportionate
measures, especially in comparison to what other federal authorities have
imposed on the owners and drivers of trucks (which have, in fact, in the past
been used in terrorist attacks), or the owners and users of personal firearms
(which clearly pose much more imminent and lethal potential danger).

"This proposal represents a case of a federal agency proposing to regulate a
behavior because it will be easy to impose regulations, not because it will
measurably improve or increase the public safety. It amounts to "security
theater" in which federal agencies take actions and impose burdens to give the
appearance of making the public more secure, when in fact the proposed measures
do little or nothing except cost the taxpayer and the citizens time, money and
freedom.

"Unless the agencies can prove with specific facts and hard evidence that true
hazards exist and that the proposed regulations will eliminate or substantially
reduce those risks, the proposed rules and regulations should be rejected."

I guess I would add that if we don't hang together on this stuff, the TSA will hang us separately.
Cheers...
A commercial pilot, IFR rated, who flies a Cirrus SR22 out of JYO.
Image

User avatar
jackhodgson
Site Admin
Posts: 1289
Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2007 5:07 pm
Location: Lookout Point, Nottingham, NH / Nashua Airport (ASH)
Contact:

Re: Episode #103

Postby jackhodgson » Tue Dec 30, 2008 7:40 am

Very well said. Thank you.

-- Jack

I especially like the term "security theater". Is that yours?

fordan
Posts: 45
Joined: Mon May 05, 2008 4:58 pm
Location: Southern NJ
Contact:

Re: Episode #103

Postby fordan » Tue Dec 30, 2008 12:09 pm

Don't know if Riga came up with it independently, but "Security Theater" has been out there for a while. Bruce Schneier is credited with coining it.

Bruce is well known in computer security circles (he designed the Blowfish and Twofish cryptographic algorithms, and wrote the "bible" on cryptography for laymen, Applied Cryptography) and has also branched out to cover security in general. Thus he's not a huge fan of the TSA. :D Bruce did an interesting interview with the head of TSA, Kip Hawley back in 2007, and regularly posts about TSA follies and how what they do isn't particularly useful in his published essays and blog.

User avatar
jackhodgson
Site Admin
Posts: 1289
Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2007 5:07 pm
Location: Lookout Point, Nottingham, NH / Nashua Airport (ASH)
Contact:

Re: Episode #103

Postby jackhodgson » Tue Dec 30, 2008 4:51 pm

Thanks for the info. I'm gonna look up the Bruce Schneier site.

Regardless what's its source I think "Security Theater" really sums up what's going on these days. They've announced a TFR over Manhattan for New Years Eve.

Dave Higdon
Posts: 808
Joined: Thu Dec 20, 2007 1:02 pm

Re: Episode #103

Postby Dave Higdon » Wed Dec 31, 2008 1:23 pm

RigaRunner wrote:Today is the last day for comments on theTSA's Large Aircraft Security Program.


OK, gang, with no disrespect meant to RigaRunner, Monday was not the last day for commenting on the TSA's Too-Stupid-Act proposal for applying an airline-style system of security to private, FAR 91-operated GA aircraft with MGTOW exceeding 12,500 pounds...

One more time for the record: Monday, Dec. 29, was not the last day to comment. It was the final day per the TSA's original NPRM publication date back in October, which set the comment period at an unacceptably short 60 days; several GA alphabet groups and at least one U.S. Congressman formally requested that the TSA extend the date to allow at least 120 days, which the agency did.

In fact, the TSA has acceded to requests to hold public hearings on the proposal, all of which occur after the original comment cut-off date. The TSA announced on Dec. 17 that public meetings will take place Jan. 6 in White Plains, N.Y.; Jan. 8 in Atlanta; Jan. 16 in Chicago; Jan. 23 in Burbank, Calif.; and Jan. 28 in Houston. The meetings start at 9 a.m., and pilots can register the day of the meeting in their area beginning at 8 a.m.

Now, the new end to the expanded 120-day comment period on the LASP proposal is Feb. 27.

So there is still time aplenty to file your own comments with our TSA; and remember, be more polite than I tend to be here... :roll:

Dave


Return to “Episodes”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests