Interesting piece of information:
http://www.ncpa.org/sub/dpd/index.php?Article_ID=17736

"Stuart Fields" wrote:

Interesting piece of information:
http://www.ncpa.org/sub/dpd/index.php?Article_ID=17736

Getting rid of the secret ballot for union organizing. Will secret voting in general
elections be next? I wonder where the ACLU stands on this?

Wes

--

When in trouble or in doubt, run in circles, scream and shout.

"Wes" wrote in message
...
"Stuart Fields" wrote:

Interesting piece of information:
http://www.ncpa.org/sub/dpd/index.php?Article_ID=17736

Getting rid of the secret ballot for union organizing. Will secret voting
in general
elections be next? I wonder where the ACLU stands on this?

Wes

--

When in trouble or in doubt, run in circles, scream and shout.

Another example is the TSA wants all people that have access to the flight
ramp at airports where commercial operations occur, to have a background
check and a pass. This means if I land there to get fuel and I am on the
ramp to go to the toilet, get oil, use the phone I have to have a background
check and a pass. Crop dusters that also disperse fire retardants and use
several different airports during fire season would also be required to have
a background check and a pass. This is an example of a bureacrat with
little to no competency in the field that he is able to write regulations on
coming out with something so stupid it is unbelievable.
Yeah Large Strong Government is just the answer to our problems. It is not
hard at all to find example, after example that parallels the above bit of
stupidity. It bears repeating: Any time you have a group whose continued
existence does not depend on their competency, you have a high probability
of generating the kind of behavior often seen in government. Arrogance,
stupidity and the waving of power for power's sake.

Let the Record show that "Stuart Fields" on or about
Mon, 16 Mar 2009 07:08:25 -0700 did write/type or cause to appear in
rec.crafts.metalworking the following:

"Wes" wrote in message
...
"Stuart Fields" wrote:

Interesting piece of information:
http://www.ncpa.org/sub/dpd/index.php?Article_ID=17736

Getting rid of the secret ballot for union organizing. Will secret voting
in general
elections be next? I wonder where the ACLU stands on this?

Wes

--

When in trouble or in doubt, run in circles, scream and shout.

Another example is the TSA wants all people that have access to the flight
ramp at airports where commercial operations occur, to have a background
check and a pass. This means if I land there to get fuel and I am on the
ramp to go to the toilet, get oil, use the phone I have to have a background
check and a pass. Crop dusters that also disperse fire retardants and use
several different airports during fire season would also be required to have
a background check and a pass. This is an example of a bureacrat with
little to no competency in the field that he is able to write regulations on
coming out with something so stupid it is unbelievable.
Yeah Large Strong Government is just the answer to our problems. It is not
hard at all to find example, after example that parallels the above bit of
stupidity. It bears repeating: Any time you have a group whose continued
existence does not depend on their competency, you have a high probability
of generating the kind of behavior often seen in government. Arrogance,
stupidity and the waving of power for power's sake.

Any entity which is big enough to supply all your needs, is big
enough to determine what those needs are.

Just think back to the back to school shopping expeditions when
you were in high school. Who was buying the clothes you would need?
Your mom. And what was she buying? Not necessarily what you thought
was cool, but what she thought was nice.

-
pyotr filipivich
We will drink no whiskey before its nine.
It's eight fifty eight. Close enough!

On Mon, 16 Mar 2009 07:08:25 -0700, Stuart Fields wrote:
"Wes" wrote in message
"Stuart Fields" wrote:

Interesting piece of information:
http://www.ncpa.org/sub/dpd/index.php?Article_ID=17736

Getting rid of the secret ballot for union organizing. Will secret voting
in general
elections be next? I wonder where the ACLU stands on this?

Another example is the TSA wants all people that have access to the flight
ramp at airports where commercial operations occur, to have a background
check and a pass. This means if I land there to get fuel and I am on the
ramp to go to the toilet, get oil, use the phone I have to have a background
check and a pass. Crop dusters that also disperse fire retardants and use
several different airports during fire season would also be required to have
a background check and a pass. This is an example of a bureacrat with
little to no competency in the field that he is able to write regulations on
coming out with something so stupid it is unbelievable.
Yeah Large Strong Government is just the answer to our problems. It is not
hard at all to find example, after example that parallels the above bit of
stupidity. It bears repeating: Any time you have a group whose continued
existence does not depend on their competency, you have a high probability
of generating the kind of behavior often seen in government. Arrogance,
stupidity and the waving of power for power's sake.

"... But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably
the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism,
it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to
provide new Guards for their future security."
--- http://www.ushistory.org/Declaration/document/index.htm

Cheers!
Rich

On Mar 16, 4:18*pm, pyotr filipivich wrote:

* * * * Any entity which is big enough to supply all your needs, is big
enough to determine what those needs are.

* * * * Just think back to the back to school shopping expeditions when
you were in high school. *Who was buying the clothes you would need?
Your mom. *And what was she buying? *Not necessarily what you thought
was cool, but what she thought was nice.

I doubt there's a better example of this than the military. They
attend to all your "needs", by their definition, and ask of you only
what you are capable of, again by their definition.

I thought there were some nteresting parallels here...



He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the
public good.

He has forbidden his Governors to pass Laws of immediate and pressing
importance, unless suspended in their operation till his Assent should be
obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.

He has refused to pass other Laws for the accommodation of large districts of
people, unless those people would relinquish the right of Representation in the
Legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only.

He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and
distant from the depository of their Public Records, for the sole purpose of
fatiguing them into compliance with his measures.

He has dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly
firmness his invasions on the rights of the people.

He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be
elected, whereby the Legislative Powers, incapable of Annihilation, have
returned to the People at large for their exercise; the State remaining in the
mean time exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions
within.

He has endeavoured to prevent the population of these States; for that purpose
obstructing the Laws for Naturalization of Foreigners; refusing to pass others
to encourage their migrations hither, and raising the conditions of new
Appropriations of Lands.

He has obstructed the Administration of Justice by refusing his Assent to Laws
for establishing Judiciary Powers.

He has made Judges dependent on his Will alone for the tenure of their offices,
and the amount and payment of their salaries.

He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to
harass our people and eat out their substance.

He has kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies without the Consent of
our legislatures.

He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil
Power.

He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our
constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of
pretended Legislation:

For quartering large bodies of armed troops among us:

For protecting them, by a mock Trial from punishment for any Murders which they
should commit on the Inhabitants of these States:

For cutting off our Trade with all parts of the world:

For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent:

For depriving us in many cases, of the benefit of Trial by Jury:

For transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offences:

For abolishing the free System of English Laws in a neighbouring Province,
establishing therein an Arbitrary government, and enlarging its Boundaries so as
to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same
absolute rule into these Colonies

For taking away our Charters, abolishing our most valuable Laws and altering
fundamentally the Forms of our Governments:

For suspending our own Legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with
power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever.

He has abdicated Government here, by declaring us out of his Protection and
waging War against us.

He has plundered our seas, ravaged our coasts, burnt our towns, and destroyed
the lives of our people.

He is at this time transporting large Armies of foreign Mercenaries to compleat
the works of death, desolation, and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of
Cruelty & Perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally
unworthy the Head of a civilized nation.

He has constrained our fellow Citizens taken Captive on the high Seas to bear
Arms against their Country, to become the executioners of their friends and
Brethren, or to fall themselves by their Hands.

He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavoured to bring
on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages whose known
rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and
conditions.

Let the Record show that Jim Wilkins on or about
Mon, 16 Mar 2009 14:23:54 -0700 (PDT) did write/type or cause to
appear in rec.crafts.metalworking the following:
On Mar 16, 4:18*pm, pyotr filipivich wrote:

* * * * Any entity which is big enough to supply all your needs, is big
enough to determine what those needs are.

* * * * Just think back to the back to school shopping expeditions when
you were in high school. *Who was buying the clothes you would need?
Your mom. *And what was she buying? *Not necessarily what you thought
was cool, but what she thought was nice.

I doubt there's a better example of this than the military. They
attend to all your "needs", by their definition, and ask of you only
what you are capable of, again by their definition.

But not everybody got a uniform issue. Everybody had a mother buy
them clothes.


tschus
pyotr

-
pyotr filipivich
We will drink no whiskey before its nine.
It's eight fifty eight. Close enough!

"Stuart Fields" wrote in message
news

"Wes" wrote in message
...
"Stuart Fields" wrote:

Interesting piece of information:
http://www.ncpa.org/sub/dpd/index.php?Article_ID=17736

Getting rid of the secret ballot for union organizing. Will secret
voting in general
elections be next? I wonder where the ACLU stands on this?

Wes

--

When in trouble or in doubt, run in circles, scream and shout.

Another example is the TSA wants all people that have access to the flight
ramp at airports where commercial operations occur, to have a background
check and a pass. This means if I land there to get fuel and I am on the
ramp to go to the toilet, get oil, use the phone I have to have a
background check and a pass.

The FBI has already done a check on anyone with a license.


JC

"John R. Carroll" wrote in message
...

"Stuart Fields" wrote in message
news

"Wes" wrote in message
...
"Stuart Fields" wrote:

Interesting piece of information:
http://www.ncpa.org/sub/dpd/index.php?Article_ID=17736

Getting rid of the secret ballot for union organizing. Will secret
voting in general
elections be next? I wonder where the ACLU stands on this?

Wes

--

When in trouble or in doubt, run in circles, scream and shout.

Another example is the TSA wants all people that have access to the
flight ramp at airports where commercial operations occur, to have a
background check and a pass. This means if I land there to get fuel and
I am on the ramp to go to the toilet, get oil, use the phone I have to
have a background check and a pass.

The FBI has already done a check on anyone with a license.


JC
Are you sure of this?? How about the Ultralight pilot? Hey maybe we just
found a way to keep the ultralights away from airports. Another freedom shot
in the butt. Even if true, I'm still left with my passengers. They can't
get out of the plane and go to the toilet. All this in the name of
security. The cure is swiftly becoming worse than the disease.

"Stuart Fields" wrote in message
...

"John R. Carroll" wrote in message
...

"Stuart Fields" wrote in message
news

"Wes" wrote in message
...
"Stuart Fields" wrote:

Interesting piece of information:
http://www.ncpa.org/sub/dpd/index.php?Article_ID=17736

Getting rid of the secret ballot for union organizing. Will secret
voting in general
elections be next? I wonder where the ACLU stands on this?

Wes

--

When in trouble or in doubt, run in circles, scream and shout.

Another example is the TSA wants all people that have access to the
flight ramp at airports where commercial operations occur, to have a
background check and a pass. This means if I land there to get fuel and
I am on the ramp to go to the toilet, get oil, use the phone I have to
have a background check and a pass.

The FBI has already done a check on anyone with a license.


JC
Are you sure of this??

Very.

How about the Ultralight pilot?

That's just your type certification. The rest is the same.


Hey maybe we just found a way to keep the ultralights away from airports.
Another freedom shot in the butt. Even if true, I'm still left with my
passengers. They can't get out of the plane and go to the toilet.

shrug
You are responsible for them and they shouldn't be wandering around on their
own in the first place.
Nothing scares me more than people on the ramp. Not even a fire, well -
maybe that.

All this in the name of security. The cure is swiftly becoming worse than
the disease.

I suppose.


JC

"John R. Carroll" wrote in message
...

"Stuart Fields" wrote in message
...

"John R. Carroll" wrote in message
...

"Stuart Fields" wrote in message
news
"Wes" wrote in message
...
"Stuart Fields" wrote:

Interesting piece of information:
http://www.ncpa.org/sub/dpd/index.php?Article_ID=17736

Getting rid of the secret ballot for union organizing. Will secret
voting in general
elections be next? I wonder where the ACLU stands on this?

Wes

--

When in trouble or in doubt, run in circles, scream and shout.

Another example is the TSA wants all people that have access to the
flight ramp at airports where commercial operations occur, to have a
background check and a pass. This means if I land there to get fuel
and I am on the ramp to go to the toilet, get oil, use the phone I have
to have a background check and a pass.

The FBI has already done a check on anyone with a license.


JC
Are you sure of this??

Very.

How about the Ultralight pilot?

That's just your type certification. The rest is the same.

Hey JC: The Ultralight pilot does not have a license. And while I have
always been responsible for my passenger's behavior, is this going to
statisfy the TSA? If I'm a charter pilot, I don't necessarily know my
passenger's background. Am I responsible for clearing them?


Hey maybe we just found a way to keep the ultralights away from airports.
Another freedom shot in the butt. Even if true, I'm still left with my
passengers. They can't get out of the plane and go to the toilet.

shrug
You are responsible for them and they shouldn't be wandering around on
their own in the first place.
Nothing scares me more than people on the ramp. Not even a fire, well -
maybe that.

Does this mean the death of airshows and fly-ins?


All this in the name of security. The cure is swiftly becoming worse
than the disease.
I think that this is another not-thought-out piece of bureacratic BS that
will be increasingly a more common experience with a "Stronger Government"

I suppose.


JC

Stuart Fields wrote:

How about the Ultralight pilot?
That's just your type certification. The rest is the same.

Hey JC: The Ultralight pilot does not have a license. And while I have
always been responsible for my passenger's behavior, is this going to
statisfy the TSA? If I'm a charter pilot, I don't necessarily know my
passenger's background. Am I responsible for clearing them?


Wait a minute, Stuart...

Ultralights - real honest to FAR 103.7 ultralights - are single seat only.

If you are flying an "ultralight" with two seats, you are already illegal
as hell!

Stuart Fields wrote:

Another example is the TSA wants all people that have access to the
flight ramp at airports where commercial operations occur, to have a
background check and a pass. This means if I land there to get fuel and
I am on the ramp to go to the toilet, get oil, use the phone I have to
have a background check and a pass.

This already exists for commercial docks. Everyone on the ship has to
have a "Transport Workers Identification Card" whether or not they are a
transport worker.
I have it on very good information that the TSA airport screeners do not
know what the "TWIC" card is.

Kevin Gallimore

"cavelamb" wrote in message
m...
Stuart Fields wrote:

How about the Ultralight pilot?
That's just your type certification. The rest is the same.

Hey JC: The Ultralight pilot does not have a license. And while I have
always been responsible for my passenger's behavior, is this going to
statisfy the TSA? If I'm a charter pilot, I don't necessarily know my
passenger's background. Am I responsible for clearing them?


Wait a minute, Stuart...

Ultralights - real honest to FAR 103.7 ultralights - are single seat only.

If you are flying an "ultralight" with two seats, you are already illegal
as hell!

Actually he's just full of it period.
He's got to register the thing.
A charter pilot will have a part 135 or 141 ticket.IOW-FOS.


JC

"cavelamb" wrote in message
m...
Stuart Fields wrote:

How about the Ultralight pilot?
That's just your type certification. The rest is the same.

Hey JC: The Ultralight pilot does not have a license. And while I have
always been responsible for my passenger's behavior, is this going to
statisfy the TSA? If I'm a charter pilot, I don't necessarily know my
passenger's background. Am I responsible for clearing them?


Wait a minute, Stuart...

Ultralights - real honest to FAR 103.7 ultralights - are single seat only.

If you are flying an "ultralight" with two seats, you are already illegal
as hell!

Let me say it another way. We have an airport where commercial flights take
place. A legal ultralight aircraft can and has landed there. The
ultralight pilot (single seat) did not have a pilot's license. They are not
required. Where was the background check again?

If I'm a charter pilot, I may have, if JC is correct, have a background
check. My passengers may not have. If I am fueling at the pumps, number
one, the passengers are required to de-plane. Number 2, my passengers may
need to use the restroom. Does TSA expect me to go with my male and female
passengers into the toilet? I'll lose control of one of them.
There are far too many normal situations at our airport where commercial
flights take place that would not lend themselves to the background check
and passes proposed by TSA. LAX, SFO, airports like that also have charter
aircraft land there and passengers deplane and not thru the covered aisles
attached to the aircraft either. We walk accross the ramp to board a small
commuter airline at LAX.

"John R. Carroll" wrote in message
...

"cavelamb" wrote in message
m...
Stuart Fields wrote:

How about the Ultralight pilot?
That's just your type certification. The rest is the same.

Hey JC: The Ultralight pilot does not have a license. And while I have
always been responsible for my passenger's behavior, is this going to
statisfy the TSA? If I'm a charter pilot, I don't necessarily know my
passenger's background. Am I responsible for clearing them?


Wait a minute, Stuart...

Ultralights - real honest to FAR 103.7 ultralights - are single seat
only.

If you are flying an "ultralight" with two seats, you are already illegal
as hell!

Actually he's just full of it period.
He's got to register the thing.
A charter pilot will have a part 135 or 141 ticket.IOW-FOS.


JC

JC You must not be a pilot. 1. Ultralights are NOT registered. They are
not considered by the FAA as aircraft but as motor vehicles and do not
require registration. I have a bunch of experience with the Popular
Rotorcraft Association and have personal knowledge of numerous Legal
Ultralight devices that are not registered anywhere with anyone. 2. I can
fly paying passengers in a light aircraft with a commercial pilots license
in an aircraft not operated under either the part 135 or 141. Also as I
told cavelamb, the Inyokern airport has commercial airline operations. An
ultralight has landed there and was even based there being operated by an
individual without a pilot's license as the pilot's license is NOT required
for the operation of an Ultralight. I have a pilot's license with both
fixed and rotory wing ratings. I've been involved in aviation since the
late 50's and have never heard that the FBI does background checks on people
with a pilot's license. Do you have a reference for this?

"John R. Carroll" wrote in message
...

"cavelamb" wrote in message
m...
Stuart Fields wrote:

How about the Ultralight pilot?
That's just your type certification. The rest is the same.

Hey JC: The Ultralight pilot does not have a license. And while I have
always been responsible for my passenger's behavior, is this going to
statisfy the TSA? If I'm a charter pilot, I don't necessarily know my
passenger's background. Am I responsible for clearing them?


Wait a minute, Stuart...

Ultralights - real honest to FAR 103.7 ultralights - are single seat
only.

If you are flying an "ultralight" with two seats, you are already illegal
as hell!

Actually he's just full of it period.


He's got to register the thing.
A charter pilot will have a part 135 or 141 ticket.IOW-FOS.


JC

You are right about someone being full of it.

I forgot to add. I've flown two different helicopters that qualify as
Ultralight helicopters. There is NO pilot's license requirement and there
is NO registration requirement. Yes they are single seat as all legal
Ultralights are. See the Mosquito.

"Stuart Fields" wrote in message
...

"John R. Carroll" wrote in message
...

"cavelamb" wrote in message
m...
Stuart Fields wrote:

How about the Ultralight pilot?
That's just your type certification. The rest is the same.

Hey JC: The Ultralight pilot does not have a license. And while I
have always been responsible for my passenger's behavior, is this going
to statisfy the TSA? If I'm a charter pilot, I don't necessarily know
my passenger's background. Am I responsible for clearing them?


Wait a minute, Stuart...

Ultralights - real honest to FAR 103.7 ultralights - are single seat
only.

If you are flying an "ultralight" with two seats, you are already
illegal
as hell!

Actually he's just full of it period.
He's got to register the thing.
A charter pilot will have a part 135 or 141 ticket.IOW-FOS.


JC

JC You must not be a pilot.

I am.
Single and multi engine land. I was flying before you had to be instrument
rated to get the multi rating and had a 310-UA before I solo'd.
The price was right and I liked the plane.
I'm not current in anything at the moment and flying in California is such a
PIA that I won't likely bother.

1. Ultralights are NOT registered. They are not considered by the FAA as
aircraft but as motor vehicles and do not require registration. I have a
bunch of experience with the Popular Rotorcraft Association and have
personal knowledge of numerous Legal Ultralight devices that are not
registered anywhere with anyone. 2. I can fly paying passengers in a
light aircraft with a commercial pilots license in an aircraft not operated
under either the part 135 or 141. Also as I told cavelamb, the Inyokern
airport has commercial airline operations. An ultralight has landed there
and was even based there being operated by an individual without a pilot's
license as the pilot's license is NOT required for the operation of an
Ultralight. I have a pilot's license with both fixed and rotory wing
ratings.

Ah, so your one of those crazy *******sG
It's unnatural to have your wing whizzing around in circles.
Robinson is right down the street from me and I get a kick out of watching
IP's trying to teach their students.
That's about as dangerous as it gets.

I've been involved in aviation since the late 50's and have never heard
that the FBI does background checks on people with a pilot's license. Do
you have a reference for this?

Every licensed pilot was run after 9-11. I don't know the criteria.
You must remember how long it was before private aviation came back to life.
Anyway, you guys and your ultralights ought to be getting your gas at Mobil
stations. You do burn Avgas don't you?

JC

"Stuart Fields" wrote in message
...

"John R. Carroll" wrote in message
...

"cavelamb" wrote in message
m...
Stuart Fields wrote:

How about the Ultralight pilot?
That's just your type certification. The rest is the same.

Hey JC: The Ultralight pilot does not have a license. And while I
have always been responsible for my passenger's behavior, is this going
to statisfy the TSA? If I'm a charter pilot, I don't necessarily know
my passenger's background. Am I responsible for clearing them?


Wait a minute, Stuart...

Ultralights - real honest to FAR 103.7 ultralights - are single seat
only.

If you are flying an "ultralight" with two seats, you are already
illegal
as hell!

Actually he's just full of it period.


He's got to register the thing.
A charter pilot will have a part 135 or 141 ticket.IOW-FOS.

You are right about someone being full of it.

I forgot to add. I've flown two different helicopters that qualify as
Ultralight helicopters. There is NO pilot's license requirement and there
is NO registration requirement. Yes they are single seat as all legal
Ultralights are. See the Mosquito.

No thanks.
The things always looked like suicide traps to me.
That's all I need to know.

JC

"John R. Carroll" wrote in message
...

"Stuart Fields" wrote in message
...

"John R. Carroll" wrote in message
...

"cavelamb" wrote in message
m...
Stuart Fields wrote:

How about the Ultralight pilot?
That's just your type certification. The rest is the same.

Hey JC: The Ultralight pilot does not have a license. And while I
have always been responsible for my passenger's behavior, is this
going to statisfy the TSA? If I'm a charter pilot, I don't
necessarily know my passenger's background. Am I responsible for
clearing them?


Wait a minute, Stuart...

Ultralights - real honest to FAR 103.7 ultralights - are single seat
only.

If you are flying an "ultralight" with two seats, you are already
illegal
as hell!

Actually he's just full of it period.
He's got to register the thing.
A charter pilot will have a part 135 or 141 ticket.IOW-FOS.


JC

JC You must not be a pilot.

I am.
Single and multi engine land. I was flying before you had to be instrument
rated to get the multi rating and had a 310-UA before I solo'd.
The price was right and I liked the plane.
I'm not current in anything at the moment and flying in California is such
a PIA that I won't likely bother.

1. Ultralights are NOT registered. They are not considered by the FAA as
aircraft but as motor vehicles and do not require registration. I have a
bunch of experience with the Popular Rotorcraft Association and have
personal knowledge of numerous Legal Ultralight devices that are not
registered anywhere with anyone. 2. I can fly paying passengers in a
light aircraft with a commercial pilots license in an aircraft not
operated under either the part 135 or 141. Also as I told cavelamb, the
Inyokern airport has commercial airline operations. An ultralight has
landed there and was even based there being operated by an individual
without a pilot's license as the pilot's license is NOT required for the
operation of an Ultralight. I have a pilot's license with both fixed and
rotory wing ratings.

Ah, so your one of those crazy *******sG
It's unnatural to have your wing whizzing around in circles.
Robinson is right down the street from me and I get a kick out of watching
IP's trying to teach their students.
That's about as dangerous as it gets.

I've been involved in aviation since the late 50's and have never heard
that the FBI does background checks on people with a pilot's license. Do
you have a reference for this?

Every licensed pilot was run after 9-11. I don't know the criteria.
You must remember how long it was before private aviation came back to
life.
Anyway, you guys and your ultralights ought to be getting your gas at
Mobil stations. You do burn Avgas don't you?

JC

JC I do not own an Ultralight. I publish the Experimental Helo magazine
and as such have been allowed to fly several experimental and certified
helicopters. BTW the 254 lb. Ultralight Mosquito was much easier to fly
than the R-22. I do own a Baby Belle experimental class helicopter and
have some 240 hrs in it. I've not done any multi-engine but have flown most
single Cessnas, Pipers, Aeronca, Aircoup and have an hour in a T-38 with
about 1 minute at mach 1.3. I've got 90 sport parachute jumps (not current)
and have been a skydiver driver in Cessna and Pipers. I burn 100LL in the
Baby Belle but the Ultralights that I'm aware of all use Mogas. I tell all
my aviation friends that to be careful during pre-flight to push on the
leading edge of your wing and if doesn't move, then abort cause there is
something very wrong. I also tell all my friends that if you are setting in
a helicopter and don't feel any vibration, you are clear to step out and
walk away for it is on the ground with the engine dead and the blades
stopped. I also wonder just what kind of a background check the FBI could
do without interviewing people that know the individual pilot? I've been
interviewed for background checks for security clearances for a couple of
people and it was face-to-face and numerous questions fielded and
undoubtedly cost more than a few hundred dollars of taxpayer's money for
each one.
All that said, the TSA and ramp badge BS has got more problems than can be
cured.

On Mon, 16 Mar 2009 14:57:28 -0700, pyotr filipivich wrote:
Let the Record show that Jim Wilkins on or about
Mon, 16 Mar 2009 14:23:54 -0700 (PDT) did write/type or cause to
appear in rec.crafts.metalworking the following:
On Mar 16, 4:18*pm, pyotr filipivich wrote:

* * * * Any entity which is big enough to supply all your needs, is big
enough to determine what those needs are.

* * * * Just think back to the back to school shopping expeditions when
you were in high school. *Who was buying the clothes you would need?
Your mom. *And what was she buying? *Not necessarily what you thought
was cool, but what she thought was nice.

I doubt there's a better example of this than the military. They
attend to all your "needs", by their definition, and ask of you only
what you are capable of, again by their definition.

But not everybody got a uniform issue. Everybody had a mother buy
them clothes.


My Mom bought me my Boy Scout uniform. ;-)

Cheers!
Rich

"Stuart Fields" wrote in message
...

"John R. Carroll" wrote in message
...

"Stuart Fields" wrote in message
...

"John R. Carroll" wrote in message
...

"cavelamb" wrote in message
m...
Stuart Fields wrote:

stopped. I also wonder just what kind of a background check the FBI could
do without interviewing people that know the individual pilot?

A lot.
By the time anyone gets around to having thier ticket, they've done stuff.
DHS can, given a Zip code and DOB, identify a person with 99 percent
certainty.
They have access to every State and Federal database and something else much
more complete - Fusion Centers.
This stuff is highly automated. I think what they do is run personal info
against a profile and if you get kicked - they look deeper.

I've been interviewed for background checks for security clearances for a
couple of people and it was face-to-face and numerous questions fielded
and undoubtedly cost more than a few hundred dollars of taxpayer's money
for each one.
All that said, the TSA and ramp badge BS has got more problems than can be
cured.

I'm going to be at FAA Long Beach shortly on a PMA and will pass on your
comments. I'll also inquire about the background check as well as
UltraLite's in controlled air space.


JC

"John R. Carroll" wrote in message
...

"Stuart Fields" wrote in message
...

"John R. Carroll" wrote in message
...

"Stuart Fields" wrote in message
...

"John R. Carroll" wrote in message
...

"cavelamb" wrote in message
m...
Stuart Fields wrote:

stopped. I also wonder just what kind of a background check the FBI
could do without interviewing people that know the individual pilot?

A lot.
By the time anyone gets around to having thier ticket, they've done stuff.
DHS can, given a Zip code and DOB, identify a person with 99 percent
certainty.
They have access to every State and Federal database and something else
much more complete - Fusion Centers.
This stuff is highly automated. I think what they do is run personal info
against a profile and if you get kicked - they look deeper.

I've been interviewed for background checks for security clearances for a
couple of people and it was face-to-face and numerous questions fielded
and undoubtedly cost more than a few hundred dollars of taxpayer's money
for each one.
All that said, the TSA and ramp badge BS has got more problems than can
be cured.

I'm going to be at FAA Long Beach shortly on a PMA and will pass on your
comments. I'll also inquire about the background check as well as
UltraLite's in controlled air space.


JC
JC there is, I think some issues with Ultralights in controlled airspace.
Again, I'm not an Ultralight operator so am not current on those rules.
Although we have a commercial operator here at IYK we are considered Class G
and have 3 Ultralights listed as operating here. From my experience this
is not totally unusual. Now there have been Ultralights flying around at
Oshkosh and it sure qualifies as controlled airspace. As I write this I
remember a new Mosquito dealer at Van Nuys which is controlled airspace. A
quick check shows Class D when the tower is operational and Class E when it
is not. The Class E is an upgrade from the prior Class G. Again there is
no Pilot's license required to fly the Ultralight. A quick check shows that
a clearance from the appropriate ATC is required to operate an Ultrlight in
Class E airspace. It appears that it is also possible to operate an
Ultralight in a Class B airspace with ATC approval. I guess this means if
you have radio contact and request permission to land your Ultralight at LAX
and receive an OK, Gawd I can't imagine it, you are Ok to land!! Power to
the controllers.


Stu