TSA DID NOT STOP EAA B-17 at Stockton, CA 4-28-09

[Taigh Ramey]

I just found out that the Transportation Security Administration at Stockton Airport in California told EAA to cease and desist letting people tour through the B-17 Aluminum Overcast about an hour ago.

I was told that security was the issue but I suspect that there may be other reasons behind the scenes.

I hope to find out more about this soon as we are hosting the Collings Foundation here at Stockton late in May.

Have any other tour operators or sponsors out there run into TSA or other airport problems like this?

Moderator Edit - by Ryan Keough
EAA submitted a clarification to us whereby the issue was NOT with the TSA or DHS but was rather an issue between the airport and Fixed Base Operator. EAA voluntarily suspended ground tours to keep conflict to a minumum in this matter.

Though there are several troubling initiatives coming from the Dept. of Homeland Security and its TSA division that are compelling EAA and other aviation groups to work aggressively to protect our flight freedoms and privileges. This particular issue, however, has no connection with DHS, TSA, or any federal airport security mandate.

To retain the credibility of WIX and other organizations connected in an effort to show Congressional and other federal officials that our community has its facts straight and is focused on the right battles, I'd ask us to refrain from further perpetuation of the rumor. Let's fight the battles where we can make a difference...

The EAA “Salute to Veterans” B-17 tour will continue normal operations this weekend in Napa, Calif. More information on the entire tour is available at www.b17.org.

I (Taigh Ramey) have just confirmed what Ryan found out earlier as I just returned from the B-17 folks and the tour organizers here at Stockton.

Last night at the County Airport Advisory Committee the two stop organizers stood up and reported that TSA had shut them down. This was alarming to all of us hence my post above. I just learned that TSA had no part whatsoever in stopping operations here at Stockton. It was EAA doing so to try and protect the FBO from further action.

The FBO was protesting the imposition of a $500 fee plus a $1500 security deposit to obtain a permit to allow the EAA's B-17 to visit and they declined to continue the permit process.

Once again TSA had nothing to do with shutting down EAA's operations here at Stockton. I apologize for any misunderstandings. I am relieved that this is a local matter without any broader implications.

Last edited by Taigh Ramey on Wed Apr 29, 2009 2:13 pm, edited 2 times in total.

[Ztex]

Hmmm....TSA huh?

Not surprised....

I do feel a bit of rage coming though...

[Lynn Allen]

Meanwhile Air Force One is playing pylon 7 with the Statue of Liberty in New York City...

Lynn

[David_Aiken]

The US Navy stepped in to prevent civilians from recovery of US Navy "owned" crash sites (on land and in waters). The US Navy is rumored to have extended this to active owned and flown -formerly wrecked- US Navy aircraft.

I heard the rumor that the USAF is wanting to take over FIFI... Could the USAF be wanting ALL the USAAF/USAF aircraft back 'in their control'...like the USN seems to be actively doing?

[A2C]

The US Navy stepped in to prevent civilians from recovery of US Navy "owned" crash sites (on land and in waters). The US Navy is rumored to have extended this to active owned and flown -formerly wrecked- US Navy aircraft.

I heard the rumor that the USAF is wanting to take over FIFI... Could the USAF be wanting ALL the USAAF/USAF aircraft back 'in their control'...like the USN seems to be actively doing?

Konichi Wa Aiken San. I believe that all gumint agencies will "overstep", and ignite condemnation upon themselves by the general populace.

[B29B24crewchief]

The US Navy stepped in to prevent civilians from recovery of US Navy "owned" crash sites (on land and in waters). The US Navy is rumored to have extended this to active owned and flown -formerly wrecked- US Navy aircraft.

I heard the rumor that the USAF is wanting to take over FIFI... Could the USAF be wanting ALL the USAAF/USAF aircraft back 'in their control'...like the USN seems to be actively doing?

No the USAF will not and are not trying to take over FIFI!! Let me say that if that were to ever happen, and it won't, I'm moving to the Mexican Rivera!! Cozumel Baby!! Isn't that South Texas??

Dave

[A2C]

THIS NEW ADMIN. IS GETTING OUT OF HAND.


Whoa there chief. The TSA is a creation of the past administration, as is the Large Aircraft Security Program. It was out of hand long before the new administration took over (not that it appears to be getting any better). That being said, I'll try to find out what happened at work (EAA) tomorrow and if I can, I'll share it here.

Let's tone it down a little bit, and remember the spirit of this post. It's about TSA gumint "power grabs", and that's what this discussion is all about. I wrote earlier that the problem was subtle and hard for the common man to identify about 4 mths ago, and now the craziness is getting more explicit and clearly defined where everybody can see it quite clearly.

[Dan Johnson II]

Explain to me again why Bill Greenwood got run out of here?

[RyanShort1]

I have an idea...lets PROFILE!

Didn't you see they just did that? Something about right wings...

Oh, that didn't apply to aircraft?

Sorry. didn't mean to mention anything political.

I sure wish this didn't seem more and more like it was going to affect folks who actually enjoy their heritage. are proud of our country's history, and promote those who have and do put their lives out on the line so we can elect whomever the people choose.

Ryan

[A2C]

Explain to me again why Bill Greenwood got run out of here?

This is a legal discussion about the TSA, and that impacts aviation which directly applies to Warbirds Resource Group.

[JDK]

Mod post: Please keep it to the question, which is about a TSA action we'd like to know about and, if as reported would like to act against.

Steer clear of insults, name calling and party political remarks please.

Going on like a bunch of clowns isn't going to help or impress anyone, and may work against those trying to do something about the matter.

Thank you for your effort.

[Ztex]

Yes JDK has it exactly right...partisan bickering or ugly name calling will not help our cause...righteous indignation and statement of fact along with a little anger I think is acceptable

[Ryan Keough]

Taigh... thanks for highlighting us to this. If you learn more and get the chance to post back, these are the specific questions I am interested in.

1) Was the TSA concerned about ramp access and public on said ramp or was it having to do with flight operations, ie: passengers flying aboard who were not security screened, ID checked, etc.

2) Was the display location close to a SIDA or other Part 121 operation where there may have been a security breach? I am not familiar with EAA's operation -- do they have ropes and cones delineating the display area?

3) Whenever you find out, can you share what the exact reasons for closure were? Is this part of that ambiguous security directive 8F that is causing a stir in Colorado currently?

I am watching this with a keen eye as such an enforcement impacts my organization (Warbirds Unlimited Foundation) as well as Collings Foundation, Liberty Foundation, EAA, CAF AZ Wing, CAF B-24 / B-29 Sqd., Yankee Air Force, Pacific Prowler, AAF / Exec. Sweet, and many others who remote base their aircraft and fundraise with them.

Keep us informed Taigh... thanks.

[gary1954]

I just sent this to the KeystoneCops'

What??? is going on in Stockton California, when the TSA stops the touring of Citizens through a 60 year old World War Two heavy bomber? What is the thinking behind this, or is there any thinking at all?
I'd just like to know.

[Matt Gunsch]

ZTEX, Why was my post removed ? are you doing censorship now ? for those who did not see it, I said we need to tell those DELETED who they work for.
That is pertaining to this subject.