X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Sender: To: lml@lancaironline.net Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2011 21:13:26 -0500 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from mta21.charter.net ([216.33.127.81] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.4c1) with ESMTP id 4790272 for lml@lancaironline.net; Tue, 18 Jan 2011 13:44:29 -0500 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=216.33.127.81; envelope-from=troneill@charter.net Received: from imp10 ([10.20.200.15]) by mta21.charter.net (InterMail vM.7.09.02.04 201-2219-117-106-20090629) with ESMTP id <20110118184343.DKXP3705.mta21.charter.net@imp10> for ; Tue, 18 Jan 2011 13:43:43 -0500 Received: from [192.168.1.101] ([75.132.241.174]) by imp10 with smtp.charter.net id x6jj1f0083mUFT7056jjw1; Tue, 18 Jan 2011 13:43:43 -0500 X-Authority-Analysis: v=1.0 c=1 a=X2AA--E0Y-4A:10 a=3oc9M9_CAAAA:8 a=WZEnJg0eAAAA:8 a=5Up8faWwAAAA:8 a=Ia-xEzejAAAA:8 a=fLuM78UsAAAA:8 a=oCcaPWc0AAAA:8 a=qywbhOup79ji2KtAn1wA:9 a=7SdSygtyggGolVBIPMwA:7 a=yWA994UZTo_HaGXZe2zOGTbP6IoA:4 a=pILNOxqGKmIA:10 a=CVU0O5Kb7MsA:10 a=U8Ie8EnqySEA:10 a=v6MMM96S_sUA:10 a=EzXvWhQp4_cA:10 a=3jk_M6PjnjYA:10 a=wQu1iLkf3Yc9vBJF:21 a=27dbc5ChDq6qIU1Q:21 a=4uQ9AVc7KA7eyEFzQU8A:9 a=2ZwCrcN9Yu4MhGo2LN8A:7 a=ZPDPgF7BKfUtoxjXsg24_p1zvLsA:4 From: Terrence O'Neill Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1082) Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=Apple-Mail-65--758556943 Subject: Re: [LML] Re: Airport security? X-Original-Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2011 12:43:42 -0600 In-Reply-To: X-Original-To: "Lancair Mailing List" References: X-Original-Message-Id: <4FDEB5FB-99FB-4664-8F06-2A469F344FC7@charter.net> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1082) --Apple-Mail-65--758556943 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 If there are hundreds of small airports without gates, what's the logic = of having them at bigger airports? Did you ask 'What's 'logic' mean?" How about requiring every farmer with a strip to fence in and gate? Or everyone with an ujltralight? What sillyness. terrence LNC2=20 On Jan 18, 2011, at 10:49 AM, Sky2high@aol.com wrote: > C'mon, this is an opportunity for those in the gate business. Employ = a double gate system where ones vehicle is not allowed to pass the = second gate until the first is closed. Exit must be accomplished = elsewhere with a single gate (and toll) to get out. Think of all the = people that would be employed building, installing and maintaining these = gates. > =20 > My own airport, KARR, has fences and gates. The Sky Haven hangar = complex (www.skyhaven.com) is required to operate two gates. However, = the fence at the northeast only goes 50 feet beyond the gate and if you = are willing to drive through a small swale entry, is assured. > =20 > Grayhawk > =20 > In a message dated 1/18/2011 9:11:28 A.M. Central Standard Time, = panelmaker@earthlink.net writes: > Interesting observations and questions.=20 > My question is: by keeping vehicles from entering after you, are you = the police now? Are you expected to enforce a regulation, law, what = ever? Is that responsibility passed on to you because you rent space? = Our airport does the same thing and has for a long time. I think it=92s = to placate a local congress person. >=20 > Jim >=20 > =20 > From: Lancair Mailing List [mailto:lml@lancaironline.net] On Behalf Of = marv@lancair.net > Sent: Monday, January 17, 2011 8:50 AM > To: lml@lancaironline.net > Subject: [LML] Airport security? >=20 > =20 > Posted for "Douglas Brunner" : >=20 > =20 > Yesterday (1/14), I headed out to my airport (KMTN) to do some work = on my > plane. Recently, my airport has installed a sliding gate with a code = to > control entry. > =20 > On my way in, I observed the car in front of me stop at the keypad, = spend > some time sitting there and then drive away from the entry. My = inference > was that they did not know the access code to the airport. I pulled = up to > the gate, punched in the access code and pulled through the gate. I = stopped > on the other side of the gate, to limit entry to one car. The car = which had > been in front of me (and had failed to gain entry) then tried to pull = around > me and go through the gate while it was still open. I moved my car = slightly > to block their entry figuring that if they didn't know the code, they > shouldn't be coming in with me. > =20 > Well it turned out that the two men in the car, were actually police > officers, and they did not take kindly to my blocking their entrance. = In > essence they "copped an attitude" (pun intended) and gave me a hard = time > about blocking them. After a few unkind words were exchanged, we = both went > on our ways. > =20 > Normally, I am not a huge fan of the (pseudo) security procedures at > airports. And perhaps from time to time, I have been known to let = someone > follow me in through the security gate, or to follow others in. = However in > this case, it appeared to me that they had demonstrated that they did = not > know the code so I treated them (not knowing they were cops) = differently. > =20 > Several questions/observations: > =20 > Since the number of terrorist incidents attributable to GA aircraft = both > prior to and after instituting these security precaution is ZERO, is = it > logical to infer that the procedures have been a success??? > =20 > Since the police appear to regard the security precautions as = optional > should these security precautions should be observed religiously by = non- law > enforcement types??? > =20 > Has the amount of time and money spent on airport security post 9/11, = (which > probably exceeds the GDP of some African and Latin American = countries) been > well spent??? > =20 > Or are these security precautions are an expensive charade designed = to > persuade gullible people that the government is making them safer??? > =20 >=20 > -- > =20 > For archives and unsub = http://mail.lancaironline.net:81/lists/lml/List.html > No virus found in this message. > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com > Version: 10.0.1191 / Virus Database: 1435/3384 - Release Date: = 01/16/11 >=20 --Apple-Mail-65--758556943 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset=windows-1252 If = there are hundreds of small airports without gates, what's the logic of = having them at bigger airports?  Did you ask 'What's 'logic' = mean?"
How about requiring every farmer with a strip to fence in and = gate?
Or everyone with an ujltralight?
What = sillyness.
terrence
LNC2 


=
On Jan 18, 2011, at 10:49 AM, Sky2high@aol.com wrote:

C'mon, this is an opportunity for those in the gate business.  = Employ=20 a double gate system where ones vehicle is not allowed to pass the = second gate=20 until the first is closed.  Exit must be accomplished elsewhere = with a=20 single gate (and toll) to get out.  Think of all the people that = would be=20 employed building, installing and maintaining these gates.
 
My own airport, KARR, has fences and gates.  = The Sky=20 Haven hangar complex (www.skyhaven.com) is=20 required to operate two gates.  However, the fence at the northeast = only=20 goes 50 feet beyond the gate and if you are willing to drive through a = small=20 swale entry, is assured.
 
Grayhawk
 
In a message dated 1/18/2011 9:11:28 A.M. Central Standard Time,=20 panelmaker@earthlink.net = writes:

Interesting observations=20 and questions.
My question is: by keeping vehicles from entering = after=20 you, are you the police now? Are you expected to enforce a regulation, = law,=20 what ever? Is that responsibility passed on to you because you rent = space? Our=20 airport does the same thing and has for a long time. I think it=92s to = placate a=20 local congress person.

Jim

 

From: = Lancair=20 Mailing List [mailto:lml@lancaironline.net] On Behalf Of marv@lancair.net
Sent: Monday, January 17, 2011 = 8:50=20 AM
To:=20 lml@lancaironline.net
Subject: [LML] Airport=20 security?

 

Posted for "Douglas Brunner"=20 <douglasbrunner@earthlink.net<= /a>>:

 
 Yesterday (1/14),=20 I headed out to my airport (KMTN) to do some work on=20 my
 plane.  Recently, my airport has installed a = sliding=20 gate with a code to
 control entry.
 
 On my = way in, I=20 observed the car in front of me stop at the keypad, = spend
 some time=20 sitting there and then drive away from the entry.  My=20 inference
 was that they did not know the access code to the=20= airport.  I pulled up to
 the gate, punched in the = access=20 code and pulled through the gate.  I stopped
 on the = other=20 side of the gate, to limit entry to one car.  The car which=20= had
 been in front of me (and had failed to gain entry) then = tried to=20 pull around
 me and go through the gate while it was still=20 open.  I moved my car slightly
 to block their entry=20= figuring that if they didn't know the code, they
 shouldn't be = coming=20 in with me.
 
 Well it turned out that the two men in = the car,=20 were actually police
 officers, and they did not take kindly = to my=20 blocking their entrance.  In
 essence they "copped = an=20 attitude" (pun intended) and gave me a hard time
 about = blocking=20 them.  After a few unkind words were exchanged, we both=20 went
 on our ways.
 
 Normally, I am not a = huge fan=20 of the (pseudo) security procedures = at
 airports.  And=20 perhaps from time to time, I have been known to let = someone
 follow me=20 in through the security gate, or to follow others in. However = in
 this=20 case, it appeared to me that they had demonstrated that they did=20 not
 know the code so I treated them (not knowing they were = cops)=20 differently.
 
 Several=20 questions/observations:
 
 Since the number of = terrorist=20 incidents attributable to GA aircraft both
 prior to and after=20= instituting these security precaution is ZERO, is it
 logical = to infer=20 that the procedures have been a success???
 
 Since = the police=20 appear to regard the security precautions as optional
 should = these=20 security precautions should be observed religiously by non-=20 law
 enforcement types???
 
 Has the amount of = time=20 and money spent on airport security post 9/11, = (which
 probably=20 exceeds the GDP of some African and Latin American countries)=20 been
 well spent???
 
 Or are these security=20= precautions are an expensive charade designed to
 persuade = gullible=20 people that the government is making them=20 safer???
 

--
 
For archives and unsub http://mail.=
lancaironline.net:81/lists/lml/List.html

No = virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 10.0.1191 / = Virus=20 Database: 1435/3384 - Release Date:=20 01/16/11


= --Apple-Mail-65--758556943--