david.ross
Regular Member
imported post
I don't know what other states allow hunting from the air, but in Alaska this would crash the aircraft industry completely. Not only just private aircraft but commercial facilities as well. Many have been talking about saying "screw it, I'll sell my plane." Many airports get a hefty fee, 200-400USD, for pilots to park their aircraft.
They're making security proposals for a problem which doesn't exist!
I'm listing two articles, and I quote from the first one, "'When we make a rule it's very broad initially so that we can narrow it down as we get the information that we need,' Baird said."
http://www.ktuu.com/Global/story.asp?S=9862552
http://www.alaskajournal.com/stories/021309/loc_img_local_1001.shtml
I don't know what other states allow hunting from the air, but in Alaska this would crash the aircraft industry completely. Not only just private aircraft but commercial facilities as well. Many have been talking about saying "screw it, I'll sell my plane." Many airports get a hefty fee, 200-400USD, for pilots to park their aircraft.
They're making security proposals for a problem which doesn't exist!
I'm listing two articles, and I quote from the first one, "'When we make a rule it's very broad initially so that we can narrow it down as we get the information that we need,' Baird said."
http://www.ktuu.com/Global/story.asp?S=9862552
http://www.alaskajournal.com/stories/021309/loc_img_local_1001.shtml
[font="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"]TSA security proposal worries Alaska aircraft owners[/font]
[font="verdana, sans-serif][b] By Rob Stapleton [/b]
[i]Alaska Journal of Commerce[/i] [/font]
[font="verdana, sans-serif"] [/font]
[font="verdana, sans-serif"]A new Transportation Security Administration proposal has Alaska pilots and aircraft owners concerned that their aircraft will be over regulated, and may force them to quit flying and scrap their planes.[/font]
[font="verdana, sans-serif"]The proposal, dubbed the large aircraft security program, would require the owners of aircraft that have a gross weight of 12,500 pounds or more to implement the same security measures used on commercial passenger and air cargo aircraft in the U.S.[/font]
[font="verdana, sans-serif"]The regulation would require pilots and their mechanics to have criminal background checks, check passengers against the federal "no fly" list, and that flights using these aircraft - both commercially and privately flown - be approved before each departure.[/font]
[align=center]
Don Ballard, a pilot for a DC-3 aircraft, says that should proposed Transportation Security Administration regulations for large aircraft become law, aircraft like the one shown would become scrap metal. Photo/Rob Stapleton/AJOC [/align] [font="verdana, sans-serif"]The rule would also require some aircraft to carry federal air marshals if directed to by the TSA.[/font]
[font="verdana, sans-serif"]The proposal would also require any airport that hosts these aircraft to have on staff a trained TSA officer and the necessary equipment to screen passengers and crew.[/font]
[font="verdana, sans-serif"]Alaska airports that would be affected by the proposal include Aniak, Dutch Harbor, Galena, Merrill Field, Palmer, Kenai, Lake Hood and Unalakleet and other rural airports used by aircraft for business, commercial and private use.[/font]
[font="verdana, sans-serif"]TSA officials would not reply to specifics about the proposed rule.[/font]
[font="verdana, sans-serif"]"The only thing that I can say is that we are hoping to learn more about the concerns of the aviation community about this anti-terrorism regulation for aircraft from comments posted on the NPRM docket (notice of proposed rule making)," said a spokesperson for the TSA.[/font]
[font="verdana, sans-serif"]The 260-page proposal, finalized in October 2008 by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, says the government should consider all aircraft, from 747s to hot air balloon, to be potential threats, according to the Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association, which opposes the rule.[/font]
[font="verdana, sans-serif"]The costs to conform to such mandates is the main concern for the owners of the aircraft affected. Security measures to facilities could cost as much as $400,000 per airport, according to state DOT officials. Aircraft owners would have to pay for passenger and other security checks.[/font]
[font="verdana, sans-serif"]If the regulation passes, Bush Air Cargo pilot Don Ballard says his airplane would be scrap metal. Ballard flies building materials, supplies and mining equipment to remote locations with a DC-3 aircraft from the Palmer airport.[/font]
[font="verdana, sans-serif"]Aircraft used to fly freight and cargo, business charters and medevacs would be affected.[/font]
[font="verdana, sans-serif"]Alaska large aircraft owners say the proposed regulation would curtail commerce, require expensive changes at state, municipal and privately owned rural airports, and will breach civil rights of rural residents.[/font]
[font="verdana, sans-serif"]Lee Ryan, the chairman of the Governor's Advisory Board on Aviation, said direct impacts of the overall aviation industry in Alaska represents $4 billion, making it the fifth largest industry in the state.[/font]
[font="verdana, sans-serif"]"This will have impacts in an already stressed industry," said Ryan.[/font]
[font="verdana, sans-serif"]Another pilot and private aircraft owner agrees.[/font]
[font="verdana, sans-serif"]"The large aircraft security program will impose new and onerous security regulations and restrictions on owners, operators, pilots, and passengers, flying in these privately owned aircraft and at medium and large airports that serve large aircraft," said Lars Gleitsmann, an aircraft owner.[/font]
[font="verdana, sans-serif"]Gleitsmann and 29 others gathered on Feb. 5 at the Alaska Aviation Heritage Museum in Anchorage to discuss how to approach the Alaska congressional delegation to stop this regulation from becoming law.[/font]
[font="verdana, sans-serif"]If security upgrades at one airport can't be made, owners will have to move their aircraft to airports that meet the TSA requirements.[/font]
[font="verdana, sans-serif"]"This proposal is ludicrous," said John Reffertt, a Palmer resident and co-owner of two C-119 Flying Boxcars that are parked on the Palmer municipal airport's ramp. "This will force me to move the C-119s, where I am paying $200 a month, to Anchorage international - if they will take the aircraft - where I will have to pay $2,000 or more a month to park them."[/font]
[font="verdana, sans-serif"]The TSA estimates that the LASP will cost $190 billion to secure approximately 10,000 aircraft in the nation, and says that aircraft owners will pay for 85 percent of the program.[/font]
[font="verdana, sans-serif"]This amounts to nearly $190,000 per aircraft to create a security program for each aircraft approved by the TSA, criminal background checks of pilots, mechanics and dispatchers, biannual audits of the program, the cost of air marshals, and third-party audits of the passengers and travel authorization, according to estimates by the National Business Aircraft Association.[/font]
[font="verdana, sans-serif"]The regulation would also oppose Alaska state law, by not allowing firearms or items pilots use in emergency survival kits. Only tools or survival gear that can be accessed by the pilot while in flight can be carried.[/font]
[font="verdana, sans-serif"]The regulation has a "prohibited items list" that includes 80 items, tools, knives, firearms and even golf clubs, that can't be stored on the aircraft for survival, maintenance or for commercial or industrial use.[/font]
[font="verdana, sans-serif"]"In many cases the aircraft that will need these so called security mandates are not even worth the $190, 000 that will have to be spent to make them legal to fly again," said Gleitsmann.[/font]
[font="verdana, sans-serif"]Alaska aircraft owners and pilots who oppose this regulation hope to convince the Alaska congressional delegation of their position for either a waiver or to stop the rule.[/font]
[font="verdana, sans-serif"]Bart Tiernan, past president of the Alaska Airmen's Association and a large-aircraft owner, said the TSA held several public comment meetings across the country. Notably missing from the meeting list, however, were Alaska and Hawaii, two states that rely most on air traffic using these types of aircraft.[/font]
[font="verdana, sans-serif"]As proposed, the regulations would apply only to aircraft with a maximum gross takeoff weight of 12,500 pounds, but aviation organizations say they worry that the rule would eventually be aimed at smaller aircraft down the road.[/font]
[font="verdana, sans-serif"]According to written and audio testimony from the hearings posted online, Ed Bolen, president of the National Business Aviation Association, offered his comments at a hearing in Texas Jan. 28.[/font]
[font="verdana, sans-serif"] "The TSA's proposal would overwhelm businesses, airports and others across the general aviation community, at a time when it is beset with challenges in the current marketplace," Bolen said. "Equally unfortunate, the burden the proposal would produce would not result in a clear security benefit."[/font]
[font="verdana, sans-serif"]The regulations would affect an estimated 15,000 aircraft, 10,000 operators, and 450 airports nationwide. In Alaska, about 100 aircraft used for freight owned by 25 separate owners would be affected. The number of business aircraft privately owned that fit this category is unknown but substantial, according to Tiernan.[/font]
[font="verdana, sans-serif"]Finally, the TSA is proposing that aircraft operators pay a third party to conduct regulatory oversight and ensure compliance. What has always been a government function would be outsourced, creating privacy concerns and placing the cost burden on aircraft operators.[/font]
[font="verdana, sans-serif"]These requirements, if passed would include fingerprinting and performing background checks on all flight crews, vetting passengers against the government's "No Fly List" before every flight.[/font]
[font="verdana, sans-serif"]"The reality of this regulations is that it will once again add another expense, as an unfunded mandate, require aircraft owners to check their passengers before making a flight and is ridiculous because these aircraft don't have the range to fly anywhere where they could be used as a weapon of destruction, " said Tiernan.[/font]
[font="verdana, sans-serif"]Public comments on the proposal are due by Feb. 27.[/font]
[font="verdana, sans-serif"]Rob Stapleton can be reached at rob.stapleton@alaskajournal.com.[/font]
