More incursions...

There is a glider club just NE of P-40. When the expanded zone goes into effect, that club gets shut down.

Why do they have to report every "nick" of the zone.
Mr. Prez comes out here for 2 days this week, every flight school and tourist ride operation is shut down. They and the County Dept of Aviation (FBO) should be sending the White House an invoice for lost revenue.
 
Last edited:
Better yet, if we didn't have these retarded restrictions, there wouldn't be any incursions.
 
There is a glider club just NE of P-40. When the expanded zone goes into effect, that club gets shut down.

Why do they have to report every "nick" of the zone.
Mr. Prez comes out here for 2 days this week, every flight school and tourist ride operation is shut down. They and the County Dept of Aviation (FBO) should be sending the White House an invoice for lost revenue.

Why not? I think the US Constitution would be evident of the illegality of the Feds taking from pvt enterprise.
 
996. Fly in formation spelling out "We love the USA". Could backfire, but the result is probably what's going to happen anyway if someone doesn't do something soon.
 
The only outcome of a mass violation of restricted airspace would be more draconian restrictions with the media and government further demonizing private pilots and "those evil little planes". Sadly, while I am all for civil disobedience, we only have pressure on our legislators as a means to try to improve the situation.
 
The idea of filing for compensation is interesting. It sounds to me like those people with property rights could have a claim under the takings clause in the Fifth amendment.

I wouldn't think pilots who merely wanted to use the airspace would have a leg to stand on, since they don't have an absolute right to that particular airspace. But, if I operated an airport or flying school (which I don't) that was located within the TFR, and I could document specific lost income resulting from imposition of the TFR, I'd be inclined to file a claim with the federal government for damages.

Any constitutional lawyers on the board that would care to weigh in on whether that kind of claim would have a chance?
 
we only have pressure on our legislators as a means to try to improve the situation.

Yeah, we'd have as much luck getting them to take a pay cut. It is NEVER going to happen.
 
Any constitutional lawyers on the board that would care to weigh in on whether that kind of claim would have a chance?

Given the precedent of Kelo v. New London, I'd say such a case would simply be covered under eminent domain.

From the Opinion:

"[The court] has embraced the broader and more natural interpretation of public use as “public purpose.” See, e.g., Fallbrook Irrigation Dist. v. Bradley, 164 U.S. 112, 158—164. Without exception, the Court has defined that concept broadly, reflecting its longstanding policy of deference to legislative judgments as to what public needs justify the use of the takings power." (Emphasis mine)





(I'm not a lawyer. And I don't stay in Holiday Inn Express anymore. Strictly Hilton properties, thank you.)
 
While I agree that the government can close the airspace without violating anyone's Constitutional rights, the question remains whether this constitutes a "taking" requiring compensation.
 
Please remember that this is Hangar Talk, not Spin Zone, and post your responses accordingly. Thank you.
 
Yeah, we'd have as much luck getting them to take a pay cut. It is NEVER going to happen.


Then we will lose our priviliges. Maybe we already have to a certain degree. Dr. Bruce likes to say VFR is dead. Well, its not, at least not yet. In recent days, months, years I have still flown over major chunks of this country, usually talking to ATC, but at my choice.

We can still fly through the DC area. Yes, we have to take a course if VFR to prove our affirmative negligence, but we can still do it. For how long? Who knows?
 
Then we will lose our priviliges.
Yes, we will, because we as a collective group continue to demonstrate our inability to comply with increasingly onerous restrictions. It keeps getting worse and worse, rather like a ball bearing sliding off the outside of an inverted cereal bowl.
Maybe we already have to a certain degree. Dr. Bruce likes to say VFR is dead.
in the Eastern seabord, it appears to be.
Well, its not, at least not yet. In recent days, months, years I have still flown over major chunks of this country, usually talking to ATC, but at my choice.
well there are still a few areas in the West, in which "control is not exercised".
We can still fly through the DC area. Yes, we have to take a course if VFR to prove our affirmative negligence, but we can still do it. For how long? Who knows?
Not much longer. Sigh.
 
They tried that...ever hear of the DC airports that are under the FRIZ (or whatever they are caling that DC ADIZ area [country in a country])
 
Isn't the very point of civil disobedience to put pressure on the legislators?

Are you saying "Mr Smith Goes To Washington" was, although encouraging and hopeful, a sham?

We need to rock the boat in a very visible way. There needs to be a strong coalition which will stand in the breach.

The event would be mass advertised. The purpose would be told and the totalitarian nature of govt would be revealed. The time schedule would not be advertised.

It's high time we the people got out from under the absurd weight of this federal govt.

OR,

let's just sit back and enjoy a cold one while watching the idiot box. Move along, nothing to see here.

Need to have the AOPA and EAA sanction it...
 
Sorry guys, the whole country is not the East coast. I fly all over the place VFR.
 
Sorry guys, the whole country is not the East coast. I fly all over the place VFR.


The east coast is still fine for VFR and if you follow the procedures so is the DC area.
 
Back
Top