UPDATE: Aircraft hit building at 71st and York Ave on East Side of Manhattan

Rush Limbaugh Show ^ | 10/11/06 | Rush Limbaugh

[Yossarian]

Rush reports that a Cessna has been reported as crashing into (at least one) apartment complex in NYC Mannhattan's upper east side - on East 71st Street.

[sarasota]

Thanks for the heads up.

[sarasota]

Well said.

[narby]

a small aircraft flown at high speed into the Statue of Liberty's face, or into the top of the St. Louis Arch is nothing to sneeze at and the damage would be rather sad.

Your enthuseasm for restricting my right to travel by the means of my choice merely because you might be sad *if* such an event occured looks pretty authoritarian to me.

In fact, if people traveled long distances exclusively by small aircraft rather than large airliners, 9/11 wouldn't have happened at all, because small airplanes simply cannot do that kind of damage.

I firmly believe I have a right to fly my airplane anywhere I want to that does not significantly disturb the peace, or does not conflict with other flight patterns required for safe air travel, as defined by the federal airspace rules. We have a constitutional right of assembly, and implicit in that right is a right to travel to your assembly by whatever means handy. I prefer to do that in my airplane whenever possible, and I resent people seeking to limit my rights because of their irrational fears.

[conservative in nyc]

They found Lidle's passport near the crash site. It was either Lidle or someone who had his passport. The media speculation on that was grounded. Now, about the other passengers - the medical examiner said there were 4 dead. He was incorrect. There were only two - now known to be Lidle and his flight instructor.

[Arkinsaw]

If we are destined to have a terrorist attack, I would sure rather they hit an empty copper symbol then a packed Yankee Stadium ....

I would rather have neither. And luckily, its not an either or situation, you can restrict joyriding around both.

[Moose4]

That makes me believe it was a mechanical failure of some sort--ceilings were around 1000-1500 feet, visibility 5-8 miles. Probably not prudent for a low-time VFR pilot to be out in alone, I'd guess, but with a CFI in the cockpit, why not? They're humming along fine at 700 feet, and then all of a sudden, they do a 120-135 degree hard left into Manhattan. It doesn't make any sense, not to my non-pilot eyes.

}:-)4

[Pukin Dog]

I think your definition of 'travel' could use some work?

Travel is a point to point process, far removed from "flying your aircraft anywhere you want". And who decides whether someone's peace is disturbed?

Are you suggesting that we throw out the hi and low jetways and just let pilots just GPS hop their way to their destinations? Maybe they should just landmark it?

Damn, Narby.

I know that many of the current rules are draconian and many seem senseless, but the fact remains that too many people are a risk in the skies. Your rights are supposed to end at the beginning of threat against another's rights. I dont think anyone is 'enthusiastic' about putting limits on them.

[narby]

I suggest you take your own advice.

And that's coming from someone who can't decide whether one could do more damage driving a 20 ton truck filled with barrels of fuel into the lobby of a building vs. a 0.6 ton Cirrus airplane flown half way up the side of it.

If your assumption is wrong the worst case scenario is such a terrorist event could happen.

Any terrorist event could happen, at any time. Restricting the rights of Americans for very low grade threats merely because people are ignorant on the capabilities of small aircraft would be stupid.

Come on, think. A four seat airplane about the weight of a Volkswagen isn't a 400 thousand lb 767 just because both of them have wings.

[RDTF]

trying to figure out what was dfferent about that report!

[angcat]

You suck

[RS]

"And luckily, its not an either or situation, you can restrict joyriding around both."

... and just how does that restrict terrorism ?

[angcat]

Hi Jersey,

I was food shopping tonight when my husband called and told me. Shocking indeed. Sad for his wife and child. Kinda brought back bad memories of Thurman.

:(

[Arkinsaw]

Your enthuseasm for restricting my right to travel by the means of my choice merely because you might be sad *if* such an event occured looks pretty authoritarian to me.

Yes, I've heard of thousands of civil rights violations since 911. People mad about airport security...mad about President Bush listening to phone calls...mad about closing off Pennsylvania Avenue...etc., etc. Problem is that we are at war and even conservatives have to put up with some restrictions on things they like also.

In fact, if people traveled long distances exclusively by small aircraft rather than large airliners, 9/11 wouldn't have happened at all, because small airplanes simply cannot do that kind of damage.

They can do damage. 911 plotters were scoping out crop dusters of course, some of our major symbolic targets like Statue of Liberty, Gateway Arch, Space Needle, could suffer from such an attack. I hope you are never proven wrong.

I firmly believe I have a right to fly my airplane anywhere I want to that does not significantly disturb the peace, or does not conflict with other flight patterns required for safe air travel, as defined by the federal airspace rules.

And liberals believe they should be able to talk to whoever they want in Pakistan without being listened to and believe that it is a violation of rights to have watch lists or maintain databases, etc., etc. So the appeal to civil rights is not an automatic win in an argument. Your rights are not going to be terribly harmed by restricting joyriding around the Statue of Liberty. It is a target and wartime.

We have a constitutional right of assembly, and implicit in that right is a right to travel to your assembly by whatever means handy.

Try travelling to your assembly by flying over the White House and landing in the Capital parking lot. I suspect that you will have little luck in reaching your assembly. Because its restricted. Just like the airspace around the Statue of Liberty and other important targets should be. You act as if you can fly anywhere without restriction...you cannot. And for good reason. The reason for the restriction is more important than your right in those cases. So you must prove that your right to fly over the Statue of Liberty is more important than the need for the restriction. I posit that you cannot.

[LeGrande]

Lots of people are yelling about restrictions on liberty at this moment or violations of civil rights....as if there were no 911......some have a point about some things....but there are necessary restrictions and life is not the same during wartime.

Why do you think GA is a threat? If you wanted to ban commercial traffic, you may have a point. I might even support you there, since we have demonstrated proof of what a big airliner is capable of.

But trying to restrict GA more than it is is simply silly. I can carry a lot more explosives in a Pinto than I can in a Cirrus and have a lot more penetrating power too.

Now that I think about it we should ban private cars. Cars definitely kill a lot of people and they are the terrorists preferred choice of weapon.

[ClearBlueSky]

Thank you- I wondered why it wasn't mentioned in the news! Serves me right for reading a thread too quickly.
I'm certainly happy it wasn't a terrorist attack.
Now I have to research the writer of the note to see how accurate( or not) my analysis was.

[narby]

I'm mad because of these people who are all fired up to shut down flying merely because it's an airplane involved in an accident.

Read the part above: "as defined by the federal airspace rules." above. I'm not advocating ignoring the existing rules by any means.

I'm worried that we're on the edge of losing the rights for citizens to fly their own airplanes. Not just because of ignorant people who think small planes are real terrorist tools, but also because the pilot population is shrinking. At some point we will lose the critical mass of pilots buying airplane stuff, and that stuff will no long be manufactured. And when airports are not used, then they will be closed, and the more closed airports, the fewer people will fly, snowball...

[RS]

This will be interesting to check back in a week or so and see what the price is ...

http://www.trulia.com/property/31760816-524-E-72nd-St-New-York-NY-10021

[Arkinsaw]

... and just how does that restrict terrorism ?

Like I said in an earlier post (you can look), none unless you provide the means to defend your restriction. I said that it was illegal to fly planes into buildings and yet it did not stop someone.

There should be restrictions in place, and if they are violated by an aircraft, the violator will get a Phalanx shredding. No different of an idea that you depth charge the hell out of any submarine found lurking in the Potomac or arrest Pakistanis found carrying 500 cell phones. You defend and fortify yourself. War is hell.

[LibertyLee]

I just feel sorry for pitcher's wife...losing her husband after he's only 2 months on the team...that's got to tear her and her family up...prayers to them and whoever else lost their lives...

[sarasota]

Just an attempt to keep the viewing audience coming back after the break!