CBS Evening News and our planes

Anyone who missed it on the news can go to cbsnews.com and see it. Some of the most irresponsible and uneducated reporting I've ever
seen.

Bill Lamb


----- Original Message -----
From: James R. Cunningham
To: mustangaero@yahoogroups.com ; jpheymd@netdoor.com
Sent: Wednesday, January 14, 2004 8:20 PM
Subject: M.Aero: CBS Evening News

Bob Orr (spelling??) gave a rabble-rousing and devastating anti General
Aviation report on CBS Evening News tonight, using Eagle's Nest Airpark in West Virginia as his example, while showing a couple of small taildraggers and small Cessnas. He's calling for severe security to be placed on the use of small aircraft. I suggest that we all make an effort to watch the report and then contact AOPA, EAA, and our state and national Congressional representatives to try to offset this. While I don't argue that a Cessna 170 full of explosives could do some damage, I think that a car or SUV could do far more, and to a larger range of targets. I would suggest that any restrictions that should be placed on our planes, hangers, and airports should also be placed on our cars and houses.
Jim Cunningham

My letter to CBS Evening News. Folks, please join me in expressing displeasure to their management.
JimC
----------------

Gentlemen, I was horrorstruck as I watched the General Aviation Report
on the Wednesday evening news. It appeared to me to be stunningly inept and error prone. Aside from the fact that there are less than a third the number of public use airfields in the United States than you report, there is a deep seated underlying fallacy in your report.

It is true that my 58 year old Piper Cub could carry a pilot, a maximum
of 12 gallons of gas, and perhaps 120 pounds of explosives on a flight
of almost 2 hours duration at a speed close to 75 miles per hour (at
which time there would be no gas left). Perhaps enough energy to damage the living room of a double-wide house trailer. This is typical of all of the aircraft that reside at the airport where I hanger my four
planes. But any terrorist would be able to carry a larger bomb load
faster, much further, and more conveniently using any passenger car
stolen from any curbside or driveway. The curbside or driveway theft
would also result in far less chance of being intercepted by someone who realizes that the terrorist is a stranger and out of place. And unlike
your reporter, most terrorists are very likely smart enough to realize
that.

I would suggest that any of these ridiculous security measures that you
suggest are needed for residential airparks and public-use airfields of
similar size are also pertinent to automobiles, and there would be an
equal need that they should also be applied uniformly to each and every
personal car, SUV and other privately owned vehicle in the United
States.

Possibly, a security agent could be assigned to come to each of our
homes to search our cars and briefcases before we leave each morning to drive to work? Or for each trip to the mall to grocery shop? This would be a far more productive and cost effective use of security personnel than searching our tiny airplanes.

Gentlemen, please do your homework before attempting to terrify the
general public. After watching your report, I couldn't help but feel
that your goal was to keep the maximum number of fannies glued to their
sofas during your commercial breaks. Your time would be better spent
reporting news, not manufacturing a simulation of it.

My very best wishes to your management, and I hope you will take time to think about the public consequences of your actions.
Jim Cunningham

Don't forget about boats. Small pleasurecraft operate on drinking water reservoirs, in the vicinity of dams, power plants, etc. Remember the USS Cole? Using their rationale, does every bass boat in every back yard need an armed guard?

I deliberately omitted mention of pleasure boats because there are few enough of them that they might fall under the same restrictions that may hit our planes. There are enough private automobiles in the US that the public outcry would be horrendous if restrictions were placed on them, so I think they are the appropriate comparison due to the politics of the situation.
JimC