Mother of all TFRs

[Michael]

Southern Arizona is now one big TFR for border protection. Its between 12,000 and 14,000 from dusk till morning. AOPA is sure making a stink about it allready. How could this be a bad thing? What pilot cant simply either go under or over the TFR?? We need our borders protected out here AOPA. I disagree with AOPA on this. I dont see it as being a problem at all.

AOPA link: http://www.aopa.org/whatsnew/newsitems/2006/060123uav.html

 

[rmciottijr]

I agree Mike one thing AOPA can do is insure us that they don't close the border completely to air travel for GA.

Bob

 

[SkyHog]

Southern Arizona is now one big TFR for border protection. Its between 12,000 and 14,000 from dusk till morning. AOPA is sure making a stink about it allready. How could this be a bad thing? What pilot cant simply either go under or over the TFR?? We need our borders protected out here AOPA. I disagree with AOPA on this. I dont see it as being a problem at all.

AOPA link: http://www.aopa.org/whatsnew/newsitems/2006/060123uav.html

Thank you Michael. Someone needed to say it. It'd be different if it went from surface to 18000 or something, but its a 2000 foot block in an area that has relatively low elevations anyways, and in the middle of the night.

I think the FAA should be commended for finding a time and location that would make the smalled impact, not reprimanded by AOPA.

 

[Let'sgoflying!]

I don't like it on the principle of it being another airspace grab. This one is an innocuous time/alt/location BUT once it is accepted - where will it end? Think ahead to the year 2050, 2100, think about future generations of pilots - when yet another 20? or 30?% of US airspace is lost to SUA of one form or another.
Raise your hand: how many of us can go in a straight line in any direction and altitude, 300nm and not be affected by SUA right now? Another nail.

 

[silver-eagle]

I don't like it on the principle of it being another airspace grab. This one is an innocuous time/alt/location BUT once it is accepted - where will it end? Think ahead to the year 2050, 2100, think about future generations of pilots - when yet another 20? or 30?% of US airspace is lost to SUA of one form or another.
Raise your hand: how many of us can go in a straight line in any direction and altitude, 300nm and not be affected by SUA right now? Another nail.

I agree with Dave and AOPA. It isn' that it is necessarily a bad thing. The point is, we're losing more and more airspace WITHOUT due process. MOA and restricted airspace at least have the appearance of discussion. TFRs do not. BAM! It's there. Temporary? Ha! Like taxes, it's a convenient way to get around their own formal processes for proper development of airspace restrictions.
We're on the losing end and all we can do is "Get over it."! Just don't go away quietly. Fight on AOPA!

 

[Michael]

How can this TFR possibly effect you?? Why do you care?? I dont like the fact that i pay taxes. I dont like the fact that my taxes go to illegal immagrants crossing the border each night in the thousands. I dont care for the fact that the mexican government is now escorting illegals across. Or that maps and instructions are being handed out to prospected border crossers. But i do have to "get over it" like you put it john. Because untill now, the government hasnt done anything to help us. Now they decide to fly unmanned planes in an effort to help secure our borders. The TFR is so you dont get hit by one while flying in the area. I still dont see why this is an issue to you. This TFR wont affect a single pilot.
there are alot of things the government has a right to. flying is a privledge remember? so is driving for that matter.

 

[Let'sgoflying!]

I dont care for the fact that the mexican government is now escorting illegals across.

I am with you on that - I live in a border area too and see what burden the illegal imm. issue is putting on local schools, hospitals etc.

BUT there is a better solution, one that I think we can all agree with:
Make them hire pilots to fly real planes. We already have a system in place, they could easily have funded the USBP to do this work with the development funds for this one tiny project I bet. More work for pilots, someone with EYES in the airplane, job gets done, no airspace grab, no threat to future airspace grabs. Whatdya think?

 

[Michael]

BUT there is a better solution, one that I think we can all agree with:
Make them hire pilots to fly real planes.

I dunno. Sounds like a tax increase to me. If you can get congress to swap out some of them dog programs in order to fund that idea. Im all for it. But we know that will never happen.
If AOPA really wants to help, Why cant they stick to airport closures and regulations. I really dont think the government is just setting up TFRs all over the country to slowly take away our airspace.Do you?

 

[wsuffa]

Southern Arizona is now one big TFR for border protection. Its between 12,000 and 14,000 from dusk till morning. AOPA is sure making a stink about it allready. How could this be a bad thing? What pilot cant simply either go under or over the TFR?? We need our borders protected out here AOPA. I disagree with AOPA on this. I dont see it as being a problem at all.

AOPA link: http://www.aopa.org/whatsnew/newsitems/2006/060123uav.html

Michael,

I agree with AOPA's position. I've flown through that area on any number of occasions (Victor airway V198 is the "route west" from San Antonio if you're headed to Phoenix, Tucson or points in that direction).

Take a look at the MEAs for V198, V66, and V16. The MEA is between 9,000 and 11,000. Westbound, you'll be limited to 10,000... or 14,000... only (depending on the route segment). Eastbound, you get 9 or 11. Only. There's little room for error, and there is NO room to avoid adverse condition. The winds through that section can lead to a lot of turbulance, meaning you'll want to be higher. Sorry, you can't climb through the TFR.

Effectively, for many GA aircraft, that will force a reroute around those airways. Big deal? Remains to be seen. From my standpoint, squeezing air traffic in such a little vertical area over the mountains, eliminates options and compromises safety.

FOr the TFR areas that lie substantial distances away from the airways, I think less harm is done.

 

[AdamZ]

This is a tough one, a double edged sword if you will. I am definitly not in favor of airspace grabs and am a believer in the slippery slope theroy of give them and inch and they will take a mile. BUT I do beleive we are facing a serious illegal immigration porblem and I don't understand why more folks don't get upset by it. Now I don't live in a border state ( Although the amount of people crossing in to Philadelphia from New Jersey every day is distrubing, but at least most of them go home every night LOL)
But our county seat has had a HUGE influx of Illegal Mexican Immigrants who are creating a big problem driving unregisterd uninsured cars getting drunk and getting in accidents. I have seen the numbers increase dramatically in the past few years. Sadly it is hurting the legal immigrants more than anyone but thats a different thread.

Anyway as far as TFRs go its about the only one I have seen since 9/11 that makes any sense. Makes more sense that the DC ADIZ for sure. Perhaps one solution is to make it an MOA or Warning Area.

 

[Greg Bockelman]

Southern Arizona is now one big TFR for border protection. Its between 12,000 and 14,000 from dusk till morning. AOPA is sure making a stink about it allready. How could this be a bad thing? What pilot cant simply either go under or over the TFR?? We need our borders protected out here AOPA. I disagree with AOPA on this. I dont see it as being a problem at all.

AOPA link: http://www.aopa.org/whatsnew/newsitems/2006/060123uav.html

Michael,

While in theory this sounds like a good thing, I see it as a quiet errosion of our freedoms. A little here and a little there and pretty soon our airspace will look like China's. There all airspace is controlled by the military with very little dedicated to civilian aviation. Why is a TFR needed at all to do what they are doing? Can't they do it without a TFR?

 

[SkyHog]

Here's the deal - I'd much rather lose 2000 feet of airspace in the middle of the night than lose my job to an illegal, or have to deal with even more "bilingual" nonsense at government facilities.

The government needs to step in somewhere to stop the flow, and since opening fire is considered "too harsh" maybe this is the next best thing. Anyone who live in a bordering state, or within 500 miles of Mexico should understand this.

As Michael said - I'd much rather know that they are there and be able to avoid the altitudes of the UAVs, rather than have a Mid Air with one because we were at the same altitude.

There are very few TFRs I'll say are worthwhile. This is one.

 

[Ken Ibold]

There are very few TFRs I'll say are worthwhile. This is one.

In that case, is shouldn't be a TFR; it should be a restricted airspace or MOA, set up in accordance with due process.

The convenience of the TFR process has the powers-that-be forgetting what the "T" stands for.

 

[mgkdrgn]

Unfortunatly, it WILL be a tax increase -because- they are using the UAV's. It's been shown in several studies that they are MORE expensive to operate than "real" airplanes. Still has a pilot, only he is on the ground. However there is VASTLY more "ground support" needed than for a manned aircraft.

The are using UAV's because somebody in someone-of-influnce's political district is producing them, and selling them to the gvmt. Since they bought them, they have to come up with something to do with them.

I dunno. Sounds like a tax increase to me.

 

[poadeleted20]

For now, UAV's are not supposed to operate outside restricted areas. The FAA is working with industry to figure a way to make it safe for UAV's to operate in general use airspace, but that's a ways off. If the government is to operate those UAV's for night border patrol, they have to have restricted airspace, and without an existing R-Area for that, they have to make a temporary R-Area. That process is supposed to be temporary, either because the need is temporary, or the need is immediate and they don't want to wait for the permanent R-Area to be established.

Now, if the government were to go through the process of making a permanent R-Area, and later gets permission to fly those UAV's in non-SUA, the R-Area will continue to exist, and we'll have to go through a big regulatory process to disestablish it. If they set up a temporary R-Area, they can pull it down the instant they get a way to operate their UAV outside R-Areas.

Which would you rather see now, given that they are going to operate those UAV's?

BTW, a TFR is temporary R-Area.

 

[fgcason]

How can this TFR possibly effect you?? Why do you care??

The DC ADIZ does not affect me. Why should I care if they make it permanent way over there on the east coast a couple tanks of fuel away from where I fly? They can't even hit me with their AA guns or missiles from this distance.
The same concept applies. It's all about the gov't slapping up more and more fences in the park until we're down to staying out of the park entirely and looking in from a distance wishing we were allowed to go play like we use to be able to do.

This TFR wont affect a single pilot.

Today, probably not for the most part. How about 20 years worth of expansion later?

there are alot of things the government has a right to. flying is a privledge remember? so is driving for that matter.

Privilege does not mean the gov't has the right to shut us down piece by piece. They are under the impression it does. TFR to PFR to ADIZ to R-#. The 200 year old rule book was set up the way it was for a reason.


As for Dave's the 300 mile straight line question. Yes, I can do that...assuming I don't mind risking getting arrested, shot down or center punched by some high speed military shaped blur.


Security is an issue. I understand that. There are also a bunch of "instant magic solutions" being implemented that does not do what they think it does.

 

[Let'sgoflying!]

swap out some of them dog programs in order to fund that idea.

Michael don't be too quick to discount the dogs, if they did not have the K9 program, few of the aliens and almost none of the drugs would be stopped in this area! Every week the newspaper has another story of a canine alert on a vehicle or person resulting in an arrest for drugs or money.
In fact, the dogs are probably one of the better decisions the organization made.
Which is cheaper to feed, do you think - the beagle with the drugs in pic or a UAV?

 

[Greg Bockelman]

There are very few TFRs I'll say are worthwhile. This is one.

Nick. Explain to me why this needs to be a TFR.

BTW, what happened to your avatar?

 

[Michael]

Michael don't be too quick to discount the dogs, if they did not have the K9 program, few of the aliens and almost none of the drugs would be stopped in this area! Every week the newspaper has another story of a canine alert on a vehicle or person resulting in an arrest for drugs or money.
In fact, the dogs are probably one of the better decisions the organization made.
Which is cheaper to feed, do you think - the beagle with the drugs in pic or a UAV?

Good one Dave.

 

[4CornerFlyer]

Without giving an opinion on whether the large airspace restriction is necessary, to those who favor it because of the "illegal problem," do you think that unmanned aricraft flying over open desert at night will solve that problem? Really?

Jon

 

[Bill]

do you think that unmanned aricraft flying over open desert at night will solve that problem? Really?

Thermal imaging can quickly pinpoint popular routes. And, don't some of those aircraft carry armament?

 

[Let'sgoflying!]

Good one Dave.

And I understand your point about the tiny airspace and how little it will affect anyone, plus it is addressing an important national issue.
However, I see this tiny sliver of airspace as just 1/10000 of what is to come.
The inch->mile idiom comes to mind.
I like the idea of GA digging its heels in at anything that weakens us and our freedom.

 

[Michael]

And I understand your point about the tiny airspace and how little it will affect anyone, plus it is addressing an important national issue.
However, I see this tiny sliver of airspace as just 1/10000 of what is to come.
The inch->mile idiom comes to mind.
I like the idea of GA digging its heels in at anything that weakens us and our freedom.

I hate to bring it up again,i feel like im coming across as bitching, but its not our freedom. or right. Its a privledge. They can take away all of our airspace for any reason, and there isnt anything AOPA can do about it, but waste our money complaining about it.

When i was little, i loved my little clapping monkey doll. it would screem and bang these sybols. it was pure entertainment. My mother set rules as to when i could use it. becuse im sure it was annoying to her. I complained, cried. thats not fair etc. it was finally taken away from me.

we are in the same boat here. the FAA ows us no airspace at all. Why do we start complaining when a small chunk is taken from us, so that government work can be done? sure its an inconvienence to us as pilots to go around that airspace..but try driving it. im sure you would much rather fly around it.

i am happy with the airspace i have left. and more happy that at least the apearence of something is getting done on our borders.
thats all i have to say about that.

 

[SkyHog]

Nick. Explain to me why this needs to be a TFR.

BTW, what happened to your avatar?

I think this needs to be a TFR because the 2 alternatives I can think of are worse.

1) They fly the UAVs without letting us know where
2) They restrict the airspace permanently.

Plus - I like the idea of the government doing something to stop the illegals. Anything would be better than what we do now.

And....someone complained about my avatar. Negative rep

 

[ejensen]

Without giving an opinion on whether the large airspace restriction is necessary, to those who favor it because of the "illegal problem," do you think that unmanned aricraft flying over open desert at night will solve that problem? Really?

Jon

Not as long as there are jobs waiting. I was the Yucatan in December. Workers repairing Cozumel and Cancun were reportedly getting $10/day which was double neighboring states. Folks were standing in line for work. Supply will go away when there is no demand.

 

[SkyHog]

Without giving an opinion on whether the large airspace restriction is necessary, to those who favor it because of the "illegal problem," do you think that unmanned aricraft flying over open desert at night will solve that problem? Really?

Jon

Its gotta work better than the current program that is virtually non-existant. My understanding is that the UAVs will be there to support those on the ground in detaining illegals.

Right now, we probably catch about 1% of them (my guess, not a real number). If this increases it to 2%, that's a huge difference.

 

[Richard]

I hate to bring it up again,i feel like im coming across as bitching, but its not our freedom. or right. Its a privledge. They can take away all of our airspace for any reason, and there isnt anything AOPA can do about it, but waste our money complaining about it.

When i was little, i loved my little clapping monkey doll. it would screem and bang these sybols. it was pure entertainment. My mother set rules as to when i could use it. becuse im sure it was annoying to her. I complained, cried. thats not fair etc. it was finally taken away from me.

we are in the same boat here. the FAA ows us no airspace at all. Why do we start complaining when a small chunk is taken from us, so that government work can be done? sure its an inconvienence to us as pilots to go around that airspace..but try driving it. im sure you would much rather fly around it.

i am happy with the airspace i have left. and more happy that at least the apearence of something is getting done on our borders.
thats all i have to say about that.

Michael, I don't think you're bitching. The FAA administers the airspace, we the people own the airspace. They can not give or take. If they take they need to establish a very good reason why they're taking. What will you do when you are unhappy with the airspace you have left? You present a sound arguement but I disagree that what we have now will remain as is in perpetuity. That is, little by little is off limits to GA until one day we wake up to find all we can do is fly the patt 'tween 1000-1500 hours.

BTW: the CA Pilot's Assoc (CPA) maintains that flying is a right, not merely a privilege. Because flying is transportation and there are fed and state legal precedents to people's rights to travel. Sounds specious but it looks like they have a case for flying being a right.

I too had a clapper monkey. I **** canned it 'cause he spooked me out. He just sat there and stared at me. One night just as I was nodding off he let loose with a single clap. I felt that if I didn't do something soon the next night he'd be at my throat. Next morning, straight into the trash. Take that you creepy monkey!

 

[Richard]

Without giving an opinion on whether the large airspace restriction is necessary, to those who favor it because of the "illegal problem," do you think that unmanned aricraft flying over open desert at night will solve that problem? Really?

Jon

If they drop frags they will. UAVs will give observers real time video (IR, false color, normal) of how many are crossing where and who is carrying what. The real reason for the UAVs is it removes personnel from potential threat. Our guys are underarmed and not yet treating this as the war it is becoming.

From a legal POV it is far easier to take a block of airspace than to stake high dollar ground monitoring subject to vandalism. If you're gonna' put up the ground monitoring you're gonna' have to have the personnel to monitor/maintain. Which puts them in the threat zone.

The threat will greatly diminish once our govt gets serious about the threat. In that respect, use of UAVs represent a soft response by our elected leaders. The TFR will disappear when our govt gets serious. But that won't happen until the position held by the bleeding hearts is resolved. They see it as a human rights issue. I see it as a sovereignty and economic issue.

Ask yourself how the scenario will play out when someone is killed for what many view as simple trespassing. This current TFR and use of UAV are steps to avoid that confrontation. But how do you win a fight by avoiding the head-on confrontation? Most assuredly, it is a fight.

 

[wsuffa]

I think this needs to be a TFR because the 2 alternatives I can think of are worse.

1) They fly the UAVs without letting us know where
2) They restrict the airspace permanently.

Plus - I like the idea of the government doing something to stop the illegals. Anything would be better than what we do now.

And....someone complained about my avatar. Negative rep

Ah, but this will become a permanent restriction. And it will soon extend over the entire border. Of that, I have no doubt.

Michael, you may well be happy. Those of us that have had to deal with P-49, the ADIZ, routine visits of the President to our city (and being grounded entirely), are less than enthusiastic about further airspace restrictions. I have no real issue with the areas that don't impede on the existing airways. In fact, substantial portions of those areas over existing R-areas.

Don't believe for a minute that this will solve the illegal problem. We need to do a lot more... and I agree that we should.

 

[Henning]

How can this TFR possibly effect you?? Why do you care?? I dont like the fact that i pay taxes. I dont like the fact that my taxes go to illegal immagrants crossing the border each night in the thousands. I dont care for the fact that the mexican government is now escorting illegals across. Or that maps and instructions are being handed out to prospected border crossers. But i do have to "get over it" like you put it john. Because untill now, the government hasnt done anything to help us. Now they decide to fly unmanned planes in an effort to help secure our borders. The TFR is so you dont get hit by one while flying in the area. I still dont see why this is an issue to you. This TFR wont affect a single pilot.
there are alot of things the government has a right to. flying is a privledge remember? so is driving for that matter.

I don't understand how the UAVs help, are they armed? O-2s with the miniguns under the wing, I can see that, that would be useful. We can watch them cross the border all the time, stopping it is another issue.

 

[Bill]

I too had a clapper monkey. I **** canned it 'cause he spooked me out. He just sat there and stared at me. One night just as I was nodding off he let loose with a single clap. I felt that if I didn't do something soon the next night he'd be at my throat. Next morning, straight into the trash. Take that you creepy monkey!

Hah, you're too much, Richard, that had me laughing out loud. Oh boy, that is funny.

 

[wsuffa]

I too had a clapper monkey. I **** canned it 'cause he spooked me out. He just sat there and stared at me. One night just as I was nodding off he let loose with a single clap. I felt that if I didn't do something soon the next night he'd be at my throat. Next morning, straight into the trash. Take that you creepy monkey!

Was it, by chance, named.... Chucky???...

 

[poadeleted20]

I don't understand how the UAVs help, are they armed? O-2s with the miniguns under the wing, I can see that, that would be useful. We can watch them cross the border all the time, stopping it is another issue.

I can't see the ICEmen launching Hellfires at a line of unidentified human heat blooms, especially after that flap over the two Marines shooting that kid on the other side of the border (even if he did unintentionally fire his .22 in their direction). However, the UAV's do provide excellent sensor platforms to guide ground vehicles to intercept, and unlike you or me in a light plane, can stay on station for 14 hours without need of a piddle pack or worse.

 

[Richard]

Hah, you're too much, Richard, that had me laughing out loud. Oh boy, that is funny.

It's twu. I got a million of these stories. Look for my new book, Go To Hell, Clapper Monkey, and Other Childhood Stories.

 

[Richard]

Was it, by chance, named.... Chucky???...

Naw, this pre-dates freaky chucky. More like, "My name is Talking Tina and I'm going to kill you". Anyone remember that one? Now that I think about it Tina could have been Chucky in drag. Now that's scary!

 

[mgkdrgn]

The border patrol already KNOWS the popular routes. What they don't have are sufficient boots on the ground and the b*lls (read "political will") to use them.

Thermal imaging can quickly pinpoint popular routes. And, don't some of those aircraft carry armament?

 

[wsuffa]

How many tunnels under the border have they found in the last couple of weeks? Three or more?

UAVs won't stop that stuff....

 

[Henning]

I can't see the ICEmen launching Hellfires at a line of unidentified human heat blooms, especially after that flap over the two Marines shooting that kid on the other side of the border (even if he did unintentionally fire his .22 in their direction). However, the UAV's do provide excellent sensor platforms to guide ground vehicles to intercept, and unlike you or me in a light plane, can stay on station for 14 hours without need of a piddle pack or worse.

I do 14 hrs standing on my head. I've taken more ****es in a bottle and created more bag bombs than I can count. Gimme the O-2 with the minigun. "How can you shoot at women and children like that?", "Easy, you just don't lead them as much."

 

[Dave Krall CFII]

I do 14 hrs standing on my head. I've taken more ****es in a bottle and created more bag bombs than I can count. Gimme the O-2 with the minigun. "How can you shoot at women and children like that?", "Easy, you just don't lead them as much."

Words to live and die by...
Didn't our president pardon illigeal aliens awhile back and if so, why would we expect any really effective anti-border crossing actions from him or the administration? Do they want to see our USA overpopulated to the point it approaches the "quality of life" that the predominantly Mexicans but others too are trying to escape?

 

[Henning]

Words to live and die by...
Didn't our president pardon illigeal aliens awhile back and if so, why would we expect any really effective anti-border crossing actions from him or the administration? Do they want to see our USA overpopulated to the point it approaches the "quality of life" that the predominantly Mexicans but others too are trying to escape?

The world has about 5 Billion people too many, go do your part to save the world.