English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

After 09/11, does it make sense to allow 'rich guy' mosquitocraft to fly around in our cities? Don't crashes like Lidle's make the case for cancelling aircraft access to urban areas?

I know we're goring some pretty important oxen here to even ask the question. It's almost like complaining about golf courses during a drought. But the safety and well-being of the millions of city dwellers should outweigh the convenience and sightseeing desires of a few rich guys, don'tcha think?

2006-10-14 16:34:47 · 6 answers · asked by nora22000 7 in Cars & Transportation Safety

Of course the air is divided into zones for flying, but ALL aircraft use the small aircraft low-level zones to land. Plus, the proliferation of mosquitocraft is dangerous to city dwellers, especially with terrorism.

Don't get me wrong; I think amateur pilots have been stellar in protecting themselves and others, more responsible than drivers and gun owners overall.

But can we afford --from a safety standpoint--small planes (and helicopters too) in our cities?

2006-10-15 05:04:52 · update #1

Pilots are wealthy--in time to devote to the hobby, in money for airtime, fuel, and access to craft not useful (in most cases) for practical applications such as basic transportation or support in work tasks (such as is possible with pickup trucks or cars). Even if pilot hobbyists don't see themselves as rich, they are indulging in a rich man's pastime which costs an exhorbitant amount to support compared to bowling or fantasy football hobbies, for example. Nothing wrong with that, by the way, but it should be acknowledged.

2006-10-15 19:25:26 · update #2

6 answers

YES, they should be banned from flying over highly populated areas they should go around these areas if all possible.
Situations where the airport is located may make them be over these populated areas but in travel they should try to stay as rural as possible my opinion only

2006-10-14 17:10:28 · answer #1 · answered by W S 1 · 0 1

Not any more than you might ban automobiles, (or people). People cause accidents not small airplanes. And remember those airplanes that hit the buildings on 9-11 weren't "small airplanes" either!

On the adverage airplanes are about 4,000 times (or more) safer than a car! I'm a pilot, and the most dangerous part of a trip is going to, - and leaving the airport! I do this in an automobile! For one thing the pilots don't fly drunk (they usually crash just trying to take off)! And the airplanes usually pass with miles between them not feet or inches! You might notice that buses, trains and cars crash a lot too (over 44-60,000 people a year.) In the USA normal year runs as little as less than a thousand to maybe a couple thousand, -(if a couple airliners go down)!

By the way,not all pilots are rich, a lot of these small airplanes cost a lot less than most new cars! .... Maybe so many people shouldn't be in one place The biggest place in my town couldn't hold more than 200 people, yet two buildings in New York lost over 3 thousand!

2006-10-14 23:54:59 · answer #2 · answered by guess78624 6 · 0 0

When Ryder rental trucks were used to blow up the Federal building in Oklahoma or the first World Trade Center bombing, did they ban small trucks from the streets? When cars jump the curb and run down pedestrians on the sidewalks, do they ban cars? The average Toyota can carry more explosives inside than a small airplane can, but is there any demand for keeping Toyotas out of our cities?

Homeland Security has thoroughly examined the uses of small airplanes flying over our cities and have determined that they DO NOT pose a threat to the average citizen, any more than cars or small trucks do. To consider banning small airplanes from our cities is just the knee-jerk reaction of an ignorant person.

2006-10-15 12:32:46 · answer #3 · answered by JetDoc 7 · 0 0

Shouldn't they ban cars for the same reason? If cars don't follow the rules, how many people do they kill? I think it's more than aircraft. Generally speaking, most airplane pilots take their responsibilities very seriously, because it's THEIR life that is at the greatest risk. Okay, it was a spectacular crash and all, but how many people outside of Lidle's airplane got hurt? Zero.

2006-10-14 23:44:30 · answer #4 · answered by Picture Taker 7 · 0 0

they cannot fly as high as the commercial planes cause they will interrupt the flight paths, the sky is broken into a "highway system" for all kinds of aircraft, the smaller use the smaller "side streets" of the sky, there was a malfunction in the planes computer and there was extremely bad fog so they could not see, it would be better to make it so small planes cant fly with such bad weather

2006-10-14 23:41:53 · answer #5 · answered by let it be 3 · 0 0

no. dont be lame. use common sense

2006-10-14 23:37:48 · answer #6 · answered by audball 1 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers