Re: Oops.

probably just an "al-queda" cell doing some target practice.............

shockie B)

I wonder why they say " a hobby rocket was fired AT"..... How do they know that? I mean how do they know the intent of the person that launched the rocket?

shockie B)

That looks like a journalistic spin.

From the pilot's perspective, "Wow, someone tried to hit me with that thing!". So far, there's no perspective from the person who launched the rocket, or expert commentary on how unlikely it is that a model rocketeer would have a targetting system.

It's unfair. I guess journalism has its own rules.

Dwayne Surdu-Miller SAROS #1

Well, it's kind of hard to tell: "It was a small rocket, and I saw it go by my airplane real fast" seems to be the gist of what's actually known so far. (Has anybody even reported what altitude the airplane was at when the rocket was seen?)

-dave w

It seems for years now, that articles on radio and TV seem to only confuse and leave the listener with more questions than answers.

All too often, I hear pieces telling me that someone was convicted of such-n-such crime, then telling me someone else has an alibi for him and that he shouldn't have been convicted. End of story. I'm left doubing the system instead of getting affirmation that it's working right.

This week, I heard a story about a policeman who had been fired for drunk driving. OK, that's usually enough justification. Then the story went on to say that that was the first ever blemish on the officer's record, ending his _18-year_ career! He had ~130 commendations in that time, and not a single black mark. Not one!

Now I'm left wondering why he got fired. Shouldn't such a record entitle someone to a 2nd chance? Shouldn't he be allowed to go to rehab and make amends? With an 18-year career and ~130 commendations, isn't this person worth salvaging?

So, first the punishment fits the crime, then it doesn't. Now, I'm confused and frustrated. Why didn't they keep him? What happened that the reporter is not telling me? Did he go berserk and commit some unreported unforgiveable act? Would he not agree to rehab?

Where's the rest of the story? If his record was that dang good and they still fired him, then we're not getting all the story.

Either the reporter couldn't get the whole story, or he didn't tell it all. Either way, it's pretty trashy behavior.

If this was rare, I wouldn't compain. But it seems like I don't hear a story of crime anymore that doesn't leave me wondering if the system is working right.

Does Terry Nichols deserve what he's getting? Or is he the victim of overzealous persecution and prosecution trying to nail everyone McVeigh ever talked to?

I want more black and white and a little less gray.

Doug

I know. My 14 yo nephew witnessed one of them.

Who was that? I know Chris Shaw's the DA, right? Or is he state's attorney?

18 years of service with 0 black marks. ~130 commendations. He's not a perv.

Good enough?

Doug Say hi to cousin Goober for me :)

OMG...do you think this might just be a plant by the BATF? Maybe? Yes? I say yes. Notice how they don't have any names or anything? Maybe the launcher of so called "hobby-style rocket" was a BATF team...you think so?

You know - I bet they're just doing this to try and get some news in front of the judge? Trying to "prove" that this is real? I'd like to see the real story behind this.

Also, this is why we have things we like to call NOTAM's and WAIVER's...the pilot is supposed to know that that is OUR airspace for the event - do not enter!

What a load of BS...

Jason

Oh, crap! Probably some 12 year old out in the field thinking it would be Kewl.

I wonder what "nearly struck the wing of his plane" actually means? Does it mean missed by 15cm or 15m?

Do You really want the media, to tell you what You should think?

I understand how you can make that question. But don't you agree that we don't seem to get a coherent story from the media?

By the time I get to the end of the story, I always wonder why the guy got convicted if there was so much in doubt.

I want it to make sense.

Doug

Doug,

Way back in the dark ages (when I was in High School) I considered a career as a journalist. I remember learning about how to construct a good story, the 5 W's: Who, What, Where, When, Why. If you don't know why, don't guess. That is called "hard news". Most of today's "news" is really editorial. The writer's or editor's personal belief on the subject is advanced through careful crafting and presentation of "the facts". Pravda would be proud.

When I read the "news" I want facts. If there are multiple sides of an issue I'd like each side presented fairly and evenly. I'll make my own opinions thank you.

Luckily, I outgrew my > Dwayne Surdu-Miller wrote:

100% wrong and dangerous.

You DO NOT have the airspace when you get a waiver for HPRs or when you have "Notified" for LMRs. you can *NEVER* operate a rocket in a manner that could endanger aircraft or persons. PERIOD. They have the 'right of way' and you must pull the safety key if you see an aircraft anywhere within your launch area. including those that are far away but might see the launch and take evasive action thinking it was a missile.

-Fred Shecter NAR 20117

Did the rocket appear to be coming from a burning van?

In Canada there's no such thing as a waiver (some in the FAA consider the term a misnomer for reasons Fred points out). Transport Canada issues a launch authorization for a designated airspace. The permit holder is responsible for the permitted activities in that airspace during the period unless there is an emergency. The authorizations go out on class 1 NOTAMS to ATC airport FSS etc. Some permanent HPR sites are indicated on navigation charts, active subject to NOTAM. So if you are a pilot in Canada and fly into one of these designated areas, you are effectively flying into restricted airspace. Not good if there happens to be an Transport Canada inspector there attending the rocket launch and he gets your registration. This has happened. It's everybody's airspace and an authorization permits you to conduct activities in a manner that will not present a hazard to air traffic. There are very few differences in Canadian/U.S. air regs. None the less, if an aircraft enters the authorized airspace, launch activities must stop until the aircraft has left.

In any event the Hamilton incident was not in an authorized launch area. I occurred close to an airport. The incident occurred on the published ILS/NDB approach to Hamilton (YHM) so the air traffic is routine there. The C-172 had just received clearance from YYZ ATC to descend from 3200 to 2700 feet when the pilot reported a rocket or flare going past the wing. The time was about 16:00 EST and the conditions were VFR. There are a lot of questions to be answered still. This one is being taken very seriously. Officially T/C is not releasing anything pending an investigation.

Anthony J. Cesaroni President/CEO Cesaroni Technology/Cesaroni Aerospace

887-2370 x222 Toronto (410) 571-8292 Annapolis

"Fred Shecter" wrote in message news: snipped-for-privacy@news.boeing.com...

key if you see

away but might

The thing I find disturbing about the above is that appears that it (whatever 'it' was) was under power at 2700 feet, if the above is to be interpreted correctly. My first thought was a kid with a model rocket, but hearing these details that doesn't appear to be possible.

David Erbas-White

We had a situation a few years ago where the FAA got "third hand" reports of someone launching rockets at aircraft. When the word got to one of my FAA contacts he called me and we figured out what happened...

Remember the "telephone" game where you wisper something to someone, and it goes around the circle and gets distorted at each step?

Well it just so happened I chatted with a couple spectators at our NIRA launch that weekend. They were pilots for AA, saw our NOTAM, and came out to see what was up. They seemed to have a good time just watching us fly.

Then they get back to the "office" monday, and mention they saw us fly rockets the day before. Someone else passes the story on, and assumes they saw the rockets wizz past their cockpit. Suddenly we're shooting our rockets at airliners...

Some time catch me in person and I'll tell you a story from where I used to work about how I got zapped for someone elses screwups on my performance review by third hand information.

NEVER take any incident reports except from the actual witnesses. That's why we have hearsay rules in court.

Bob Kaplow NAR # 18L TRA # "Impeach the TRA BoD" >>> To reply, remove the TRABoD!

This was in CANADA...

But why doesn't the headline ever read "Rocket almost hit by small plane"?

Bob Kaplow NAR # 18L TRA # "Impeach the TRA BoD" >>> To reply, remove the TRABoD!

... or 15 Km?

If we assume for a moment that this was a small aircraft flying low and a model rocket, it's most likely that all he actually saw was a streak in front of him and a smoke trail.

While driving home yesterday a semi just missed hitting me at 80 MPH by about 3 feet...

Of course he was in the lane next to me, and just went on by, but that wouldnt' make much of a headline, would it?

Bob Kaplow NAR # 18L TRA # "Impeach the TRA BoD" >>> To reply, remove the TRABoD!

ROTFL!

Bob Kaplow NAR # 18L TRA # "Impeach the TRA BoD" >>> To reply, remove the TRABoD!