Warbird Information Exchange

DISCLAIMER: The views expressed on this site are the responsibility of the poster and do not reflect the views of the management.
It is currently Sat May 03, 2025 5:13 pm

All times are UTC - 5 hours


Classic Wings Magazine WWII Naval Aviation Research Pacific Luftwaffe Resource Center
When Hollywood Ruled The Skies - Volumes 1 through 4 by Bruce Oriss


Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 22 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

What to do with anti-aviation activists?
Drop them out of a bomb bay at altitude 41%  41%  [ 9 ]
Use them to chock the wheels on a B-29 during full-power engine testing 5%  5%  [ 1 ]
Stuff them in the cowls to keep the engines warm between low-altitude training flights over complainer's houses 0%  0%  [ 0 ]
Pitot tube covers 9%  9%  [ 2 ]
Live-fire bombing targets 0%  0%  [ 0 ]
Chop 'em up to fill potholes in the taxiway 0%  0%  [ 0 ]
Use them as scarecrows to reduce birdstrikes 0%  0%  [ 0 ]
Arresting cable weights 0%  0%  [ 0 ]
Drive them across minefields ahead of our troops 18%  18%  [ 4 ]
Glue them to videocameras containing tapes of Kim Jong Il's picture being used as toilet paper and drop them into North Korea 14%  14%  [ 3 ]
Tugboat hull bumpers 0%  0%  [ 0 ]
Something else that's completely unprintable, even in this company 14%  14%  [ 3 ]
Total votes : 22
Author Message
PostPosted: Wed Jun 17, 2009 10:56 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Oct 24, 2006 9:47 pm
Posts: 69
Location: Melbourne, FL
There's a website for an anti-aviation group that us using a B-25 photo as part of their logo. I'd love to know who owns the B-25, as I'm quite certain they wouldn't appreciate their beautiful warbird being misappropriated by a bunch of anti-American SOBs for such purposes. It has yellow around the front of the cowls, a tail code beginning with S for sure and ending possibly in C, late-war stars & bars, and otherwise appears to be bare metal or at least light colored. I'm knee-deep in the fight here against the town of Grant-Valkaria FL and the nut-jobs trying to kill X59, and have learned you can give absolutely no quarter to these anti-airplane Communist nut job "neighborhood groups" who will stop at nothing to destroy aviation and aviators in any way possible. Anyway, I'd love to get in touch with the owner of this particular plane... anyone know who that is?

BTW the website (I hate to dignify it by posting, actually) is at keep falcon field safe .com (remove the spaces, I don't want to help Google add to their rankings by posting a good link!)


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jun 17, 2009 11:04 pm 
Offline
1000+ Posts!
1000+ Posts!
User avatar

Joined: Sun Dec 03, 2006 7:43 pm
Posts: 1454
Location: Colorado
That is B-25D 43-3634 known as "Yankee Warrior" and owned by the Yankoo Air Museum.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jun 17, 2009 11:05 pm 
Offline
3000+ Post Club
3000+ Post Club

Joined: Thu Dec 21, 2006 8:32 am
Posts: 4324
Location: Battle Creek, MI
That's the Yankee Air Museum's B-25D 43-4634 "Yankee Warrior." A genuine WWII combat vet.

SN

<edit> beat me to the "submit" button by a minute!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: anti aviation types
PostPosted: Wed Jun 17, 2009 11:42 pm 
Offline
1000+ Posts!
1000+ Posts!
User avatar

Joined: Sat Oct 07, 2006 9:24 pm
Posts: 1748
Location: atlanta,georgia
Dont worry,they will probably lose the homes in defalt and cant wine anymore.See the positive side to the down turn. :lol:

_________________
Hang The Expense


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jun 17, 2009 11:54 pm 
Sounds like a bunch of flag-burnin', splay toed, long-haired, dope smokin', tree-huggin', bunny humpin' hippies and Commies!!


Last edited by Dan Jones on Wed Jun 17, 2009 11:57 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jun 17, 2009 11:57 pm 
Offline
3000+ Post Club
3000+ Post Club
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 30, 2004 2:29 pm
Posts: 4525
Location: Dallas, TX
First, I'm not sure this is relevant to our forum, despite the B-25 picture...
Second, while I don't like some of the things on the website and generally agree with the sentiment that the airport existed first, there are also some possibly valid points there about the training environment. I have first hand experience with the problems that can result from communications issues and foreign students.
Oh, and my vote is none of the above. I'd like to invite them to come along with me in the L-5 for a ride - a nice ride, not the sad ideas above. We need to promote aviation, not cause further offense.

Ryan

_________________
Aerial Photographer with Red Wing Aerial Photography currently based at KRBD and tailwheel CFI.
Websites: Texas Tailwheel Flight Training, DoolittleRaid.com and Lbirds.com.

The horse is prepared against the day of battle: but safety is of the LORD. - Prov. 21:31 - Train, Practice, Trust.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: My Comment
PostPosted: Thu Jun 18, 2009 12:35 am 
Offline
1000+ Posts!
1000+ Posts!
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 20, 2008 5:04 am
Posts: 1179
Location: Merchantville, NJ
This is my comment- Wonder if they will post it? :twisted:

First, I will assume you are prejudice against foreigners, as you complain about non-English speaking pilots. I must also assume you do not know that to get a certification in the US, you are required to read, write, speak and understand the English language. Also that English is the international language of Aviation, and all certificated(licensed) pilots are REQUIRED to use it during all flight operations. So, to start, your group is both prejudiced and ill-informed.

Second, I must believe that you are in favor of higher taxes, and more unemployment. You see, General Aviation airports pull in a lot of money- and from that money is paid local taxes- those evil foreign students and the companies teaching them, are paying taxes you would otherwise be responsible for. Also, those businesses employ flight instructors- members of your own community(and usually underpaid for their efforts), who probably deal with the same companies you work for, spending their money(made from those evil foreigners, paying to learn a useful, employable skill) at local businesses, which also pay taxes. Also, the fuel used has taxes paid from it- taxes used to support the aviation system, and also state taxes. Lets see, 800 takeoffs & landings a day, using about 6.8 gallons/hour, so about .68 gallons for a circuit of the field(maybe a little less) from fuel taxed(in Az. at $.347/gal) is only about $188.77 a day, but that is considering only that used for 1 takeoff, flight about the pattern, and one landing. Lets assume the average pilot will be flying about 2 hours, from switch on to switches off, roughly 13 gallons. And let us only assume about 5/8 of those 800 daily flights meet the 2 hour criteria, and all of those are in moderate fuel sippers- Cessna 172s. $2,255.50 a day. So lets take the two figures- $2,255.50 + 70.79(3/8 of 188.77, for the 3/8 who just do pattern work.) and make it $2,326.29 a day tax revenue generated, which you do not need to pay... Now, we\'ll figure 350 days a year fully flyable weather- it is Arizona, after all, great flying weather. $814,201.50 taxes raked in. Of course this number is incorrect- it is LOW, possibly only 50% of the actual figure, as many pilots do not just make 2 hour trips. But with all those flights, a lot of fuel is sold, and all of it taxed- and by my figures, that is $814,201.50 YOU do not need to pay.

Now lets look at our underpaid flight instructors, not to mention the other support staff & operations- mechanics, line boys, etc. and figure the instructor is making around $25,000 a year. Of that, about 25% goes to state and federal takes, and a good deal goes into rent, mortgage, and other housing payments in your township. Then there is the money spent in local businesses. And don\'t forget the money spent by the STUDENTS- those foreigners you already have admitted to being worried about, since you are prejudiced against them. They all bring money into your community.

Third- look at your community- 462,823 people(2008 info). About 333,232 of age to pay taxes. Lets say 25% don\'t own homes, or rent, where the tax money goes to the city. So249,924 taxpayers. And of those, another 10% are exempt for some reason. 224,931 people paying tax. So, eliminating that $814,201 would only be about $4 per person, per year. Nothing at all. But that was only for FUEL TAX. What about all the other taxes- generated revenue for your state and city generated by the airport. Sure- you are only complaining about the students- the rest of the airport is fine! You\'ll spend the $4.00! But what about the sales taxes, employment taxes, and other revenue they generate. I\'m sure it is only a few hundred dollars per person. And sure, the local stores can survive- they don\'t need foreigner\'s business. And flight instructors can go elsewhere(I think your tax base just shrunk a little- when the instructors left, and those businesses depending on their purchases failed) So your tax rates go up.

Oh, and I guess you never read of the history of \"your\" airport- and I quote from your own city web page:\"Originally opened in 1941 as a pilot training base for Royal Air Force pilots during World War II, Falcon Field Airport is committed to providing the public with a valuable air transportation resource that enhances the aeronautical industry for the community by maintaining a high level of safety and friendly professional service. \" The RAF was foreigners. And America, being the nice country we are, gave them a place to learn to fly to save their nation. And now we should throw those other evil foreigners out, so you can be a bigoted NIMBY. Grow up and quit crying. There is no danger from the so-called language issue: they have to know enough English to follow the tower\'s instructions when they are solo, which is not too long, and not early in the lesson. And there is an FAA Certificated flight instructor with them the rest of the time- And they definitely speak English! I love your use of \"Competing for space\" What a great battle cry. But false- the tower is controlling that.

Simple economics- Students leave, Taxes Increase. But THAT is what you want! To be ignorant, overtaxed bigots. Please send your student pilots here, to NJ- we can use the revenue & jobs! Especially in this economy!

By the way, Does the Yankee Air Force know you are illegally using the photo of their aircraft without permission, to promote an anti-aviation program? They will know soon- it has already been brought to their attention, I\'m sure!

I\'m also forwarding this website address to a few letter organizations, and informing them you are promoting anti-aviation bigotry...

Have a great day!
Scott


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jun 18, 2009 1:55 am 
Offline
1000+ Posts!
1000+ Posts!
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 25, 2005 11:36 am
Posts: 1202
Small point....... As far as use of the photo is concerned.... Depends on who took it.......

If they have the right to the "photo" itself and it was taken when the aircraft was out in public... Not a whole lot the YAF can do about it.

Mark H

_________________
Fly safe or you get to meet me .......


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jun 18, 2009 1:55 am 
Offline
Long Time Member
Long Time Member

Joined: Sat Dec 22, 2007 12:36 am
Posts: 7961
Location: Mt. Vernon, WA.
ROBBIE R-
Thank you fro bringing a voice of common sense and moderation to what was looking like a Hyde Park SOAPBOX show-and Dan Jones, you somehow forgot 'nuke the gay whales for Jesus' line from your overpressure event.
Heres hoping everyones overpressure relief valves have sucessfully reseated and/or the too many oat sodas have worn off-

_________________
Don't make me go get my flying monkeys-


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jun 18, 2009 2:05 am 
Offline
Long Time Member
Long Time Member
User avatar

Joined: Tue May 11, 2004 5:42 pm
Posts: 6884
Location: The Goldfields, Victoria, Australia
RyanShort1 wrote:
Oh, and my vote is none of the above. I'd like to invite them to come along with me in the L-5 for a ride - a nice ride, not the sad ideas above. We need to promote aviation, not cause further offense.

Quite.

It isn't a going to be won by getting aggressive - 'nice 'em to death' and being endlessly reasonable but firm, sticking to the facts and keeping the door open works. Real hard for people to demonise you that way.

Just my 2d.

_________________
James K

"Switch on the underwater landing lights"
Emilio Largo, Thunderball.

www.VintageAeroWriter.com


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jun 18, 2009 6:14 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Aug 19, 2004 8:34 pm
Posts: 476
Location: MD in body, TX in spirit
RyanShort1 wrote:
First, I'm not sure this is relevant to our forum, despite the B-25 picture...
Second, while I don't like some of the things on the website and generally agree with the sentiment that the airport existed first, there are also some possibly valid points there about the training environment. I have first hand experience with the problems that can result from communications issues and foreign students.
Oh, and my vote is none of the above. I'd like to invite them to come along with me in the L-5 for a ride - a nice ride, not the sad ideas above. We need to promote aviation, not cause further offense.

Ryan


Ryan - thank you for a good reasonable response. I agree that that these folks are misguided and I am tired of seeing people on both sides of most issues like this stoke up fires when it is not necssary.

While it may not work at least trying to do the right thing will put you a step ahead in the long run and end the cycle of pointless bickering that goes nowhere

Steve S


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jun 18, 2009 9:13 am 
Offline
1000+ Posts!
1000+ Posts!
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 25, 2005 11:36 am
Posts: 1202
So I looked at the website....... A few things........

First..... Picture..... Covered by text, hard to see it.

Next, as a retired lawyer....... Its called MOVING TO THE NUSIANCE....... If you move there you know there is an airport there and you can't complain. Thats how it goes. They really don't have a legal leg to stand on.

Last, go there and read the comments..... The people posting there are 100% against any changes (I only read half of them too), so I'd say there isn't a lot of support for screwing over Falcon Field...........


So lets get back to WWII Aircraft...

Mark H

_________________
Fly safe or you get to meet me .......


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jun 18, 2009 9:20 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 14, 2007 9:10 am
Posts: 869
Location: Littleton,Colorado
JDK wrote:
Quite.

It isn't a going to be won by getting aggressive - 'nice 'em to death' and being endlessly reasonable but firm, sticking to the facts and keeping the door open works. Real hard for people to demonise you that way.

Just my 2d.

100% correct. What JDK said will be the only way to "Win" this fight.
Best Regards,

_________________
Live the Good Life
Bluedharma
http://flickr.com/photos/bluedharma/
http://www.airport-data.com/photographe ... arma;1045/
bluedharmawix@gmail.com
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jun 18, 2009 9:39 am 
The Inspector wrote:
ROBBIE R-
Thank you fro bringing a voice of common sense and moderation to what was looking like a Hyde Park SOAPBOX show-and Dan Jones, you somehow forgot 'nuke the gay whales for Jesus' line from your overpressure event.
Heres hoping everyones overpressure relief valves have sucessfully reseated and/or the too many oat sodas have worn off-


I thought about it, but I figured that would be a little "over the top". :D


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jun 18, 2009 9:51 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue May 31, 2005 1:40 pm
Posts: 936
Location: Deer Park, NY
This article mentions the recent court ruling in SMO where the court threw out the ban there on certain types of corporate jets. This set a precedent so there is not a lot the city can do luckily. Of course I guess the city could charge a ridiculous landing fee or something like that to try and discourage operations?

http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/ ... s0617.html

(Check out some of the comments posted at the end of the article, ".....the Commemorative Air Force planes that fly on Saturday, now they are LOUD")

Pete


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 22 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 10 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group