10-12-2006, 04:52 PM | #41 | |
Resident Jackass
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Roswell, New Mexico
Posts: 1,846
|
Quote:
|
|
10-12-2006, 06:20 PM | #42 |
Assistant to the Regional Manager
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: The Orgasmatron
Posts: 24,338
|
In fairness to hoya, I imagine many citizens ask the same question, innocently enough. If hoya were to be perfectly candid, hoya might admit a visceral dislike for Bush that anything he can critisize relative to the Administration, makes him look at a matter cynically. There is much to be cynical about.
However, hoya's cynicism centers on the mistaken belief that government can cure all problems. I imagine significant numbers of citizens believe NORAD has the technical capacity to know, and then to inform its chief automatically and immediately, that X number of planes, private and commercial, are straying into dangerous civilian areas. If people were aware of the daily number of near misses, they would be horrified. And interestingly, easterners believe, because it's New York City, everybody should be concerned. BTW, did anybody see the blurb on CB which stated that the flight instructer was an LDS man from Walnut Creek California, leaving a wife and children? To answer hoya's question, it is NOT feasible to police the skies as hoya might believe. And it is not feasible for the chief to be advised of every mishap instantly, especially given verification procedures and chain of command. So I actually am glad the chief keeps informed through the public commerical sites as well as his government sources, as I believe in many instances, commercial works better and more quickly than governmental.
__________________
Ἓν οἶδα ὅτι οὐδὲν οἶδα |
10-12-2006, 06:26 PM | #43 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: the far corner of my mind
Posts: 8,711
|
Hoya you appreantly want to retreat to the very narrow issue you raised originally, as oppsoed to discuss and defend the implications and premises raised and suggested by your question and comments. Fine.
In answer to your question, it is more troubling that a plane flew into a building.
__________________
Sorry for th e tpyos. |
10-12-2006, 07:00 PM | #44 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 5,996
|
Quote:
|
|
10-12-2006, 07:04 PM | #45 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 5,996
|
Quote:
|
|
10-12-2006, 07:13 PM | #46 | |||
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: the far corner of my mind
Posts: 8,711
|
Quote:
Quote:
Or perhpas you mean this comment? Quote:
__________________
Sorry for th e tpyos. |
|||
10-12-2006, 07:15 PM | #47 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: the far corner of my mind
Posts: 8,711
|
Wow, now I have a school of thought? Maybe now my wife will realize that all the time I waste, er, spend on CG is worth it.
__________________
Sorry for th e tpyos. |
10-12-2006, 07:18 PM | #48 | |
Master
|
Quote:
__________________
Ernie Johnson: "Auburn is a pretty good school. To graduate from there I suppose you really need to work hard and put forth maximum effort." Charles Barkley: "20 pts and 10 rebounds will get you through also!" |
|
10-12-2006, 07:19 PM | #49 | |
Assistant to the Regional Manager
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: The Orgasmatron
Posts: 24,338
|
Quote:
I do not believe we can protect our financial capitol. It is more than government could ever do, given the resources necessary and we do not possess the requisite technology. For example what the jets going to do, assuming their weapons will accurately target a low tech prop plane? Should they fire knowing if they miss, their missles will explode upon a neighboring building? Why should NORAD become immediately aware of all planes over Manhattan? Are you stating it should become no flyzone? Are you a pilot? Have you ever started flight school? Have you participated in the military? If so, you must be aware of the chain of command. Are you aware of the intricacies of radar? Why do you believe the myth that we are capable of knowing what's out there, or that notices should travel up our chain of command instantaneously?
__________________
Ἓν οἶδα ὅτι οὐδὲν οἶδα |
|
10-12-2006, 07:29 PM | #50 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 5,996
|
As to the first quote, you extrapoltated from that that I was arguing that we should have secure airspace everywhere in the country (and then invented a mysterious claim that there is a central database holding information for every flight in the country). So yes, that is a perfect example of what I am saying. No, I was not aware the plane did not need a flight plan. No, that does not change the fact that the plane should have been detected flying at under 500 feet over Manhattan (which almost ensures it will hit something), nor that the plane should have been even more detectable given the distress signal it issued.
As to the second quote, it wasn't a plane in distress "near" Manhattan. It was a plane in distress over Manhattan flying at under 500 feet. If Norad can't recognize that as being a threat, we are in real trouble (meaning my second option for reasons to be concerned would be the more troubling aspect). Ironically, your second quote directly counters your assertions that I am attempting to claim we should have nationwide secure airspace. |
Bookmarks |
|
|