# Blimps banned; do their owners get help? **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [October 31, 2001, 6:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/blimps-banned-do-their-owners-get-help/90674 "2001-10-31T06:33:55Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [October 31, 2001, 6:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/blimps-banned-do-their-owners-get-help/90674/1 "2001-10-31T06:33:55Z")
Since blimps are banned within 3 miles of stadiums, it looks like TV and other media are not hiring the blimp companies to do any work. Are they being helped like the airline companies did? ---
**Author:** ![Caracticus\_Potts](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/bcef8e/32.png) [@Caracticus\_Potts](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Caracticus_Potts)\ **Post date:** [October 31, 2001, 6:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/blimps-banned-do-their-owners-get-help/90674/2 "2001-10-31T06:42:38Z")
I don’t think the cropdusters were helped when they were grounded for a period of time. So I don’t imagine the blimps are either. They’re really just advertising, not a primary income source for the company. ---
**Author:** ![BobT](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/8e8cbc/32.png) [@BobT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BobT)\ **Post date:** [October 31, 2001, 6:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/blimps-banned-do-their-owners-get-help/90674/3 "2001-10-31T06:47:02Z")
Blimps aren’t banned over EVERY sporting event, but their use has been restricted. I think Goodyear will be able to absorb the loss. ---
**Author:** ![Caracticus\_Potts](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/bcef8e/32.png) [@Caracticus\_Potts](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Caracticus_Potts)\ **Post date:** [October 31, 2001, 7:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/blimps-banned-do-their-owners-get-help/90674/4 "2001-10-31T07:01:01Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by BobT \* > \*\*…Goodyear will be able to absorb the loss. \*\* Firestone on the other hand … would probably have a problem with their blimps exploding over sporting events … especially if they were manufactured by Ford. 😉 ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [October 31, 2001, 7:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/blimps-banned-do-their-owners-get-help/90674/5 "2001-10-31T07:10:51Z")
Well, Goodyear now only owns three blimps; the rest are owned by other companies that even Goodyear contracts to display their logo: [http://www.lightships.com/index2.html](http://www.lightships.com/index2.html) ---
**Author:** ![Caracticus\_Potts](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/bcef8e/32.png) [@Caracticus\_Potts](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Caracticus_Potts)\ **Post date:** [October 31, 2001, 7:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/blimps-banned-do-their-owners-get-help/90674/6 "2001-10-31T07:14:54Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by GIGObuster \* > \*\*Well, Goodyear now only owns three blimps; the rest are owned by other companies that even Goodyear contracts to display their logo: > \*\* Hmmmm. Shouldn’t be a big deal. But for some reason I find that depressing. ☹ ---
**Author:** ![Booker57](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/b9e5f3/32.png) [@Booker57](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Booker57)\ **Post date:** [October 31, 2001, 7:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/blimps-banned-do-their-owners-get-help/90674/7 "2001-10-31T07:59:36Z")
If you are depressed try watching a movie. “Black Sunday” is good. 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![Broomstick](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/broomstick/32/246_2.png) [@Broomstick](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Broomstick)\ **Post date:** [October 31, 2001, 11:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/blimps-banned-do-their-owners-get-help/90674/8 "2001-10-31T11:39:08Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Caracticus Potts \* > I don’t think the cropdusters were helped when they were grounded for a period of time. So I don’t imagine the blimps are either. The _only_ part of aviation that has been offered aid is the airlines - just them. The rest of us can just go to hell, I suppose. No, cropdusters were not compensated - even though they were grounded during a busy time of the year for them. Neither were flight schools that were shut down, or banner towers, tow-planes, construction helicopters, or any other “little guy” enterprises. If you want to help out the little guy, there is currently a bill in Congress to lend some aid to small general aviation businesses. For details, go to [http://www.aopa.org](http://www.aopa.org) > [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Caracticus Potts \* > They’re really just advertising, not a primary income source for the company. That’s a pretty bizarre take on the situation. “Just advertising?” Aside from Goodyear, there are other companies flying blimps (typically unmanned) for whom advertising is their entire business. This is the same problem faced by banner-towing planes. Advertising is their whole reason for being. Most of the planes they use have been modified to tow banners and are licensed ONLY for that activity and therefore can not be easily switched to doing something else. A lot of small aviation businesses have disappeared over the last two months. Despite the fiction that all folks involved with airplanes are the idle rich, these people are not. Maintaining these machines is expensive, income is dependent on things like the weather which are unpredictable, and most of these folks _personal_ income is not much above poverty because most of the money the business makes go back into their business. Apparently, your business only matters if you’re Big Business. ---
**Author:** ![Tranquilis](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tranquilis/32/3639_2.png) [@Tranquilis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tranquilis)\ **Post date:** [October 31, 2001, 12:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/blimps-banned-do-their-owners-get-help/90674/9 "2001-10-31T12:07:47Z")
To re-enforce what **broomstick** has been saying: I work in the consulting field, and I personally know six commercial owner/operator pilots who work consulting during the day so that they have some steady income to back-stop their aviation business on nights and weekends. These guys all live closer to the bone than I do, despite having a side business: Aviation is _expensive_! The business just helps defray the cost of flying, and if they get lucky, sometimes they actually turn a profit. Why do they do it? For the love of it, I suppose. Since 9-11, four of them have put their businesses up for sale, and only one has anything like steady work. ---
**Author:** ![Johnny\_L.A](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/johnny_l.a/32/1084_2.png) [@Johnny\_L.A](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Johnny_L.A)\ **Post date:** [October 31, 2001, 1:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/blimps-banned-do-their-owners-get-help/90674/10 "2001-10-31T13:08:20Z")
> [@](#): > > there are other companies flying blimps (typically unmanned) Ar? I’ve never heard of unmanned blimps. The Fuji, Metlife, Budwiser and others that fly… er, _flew_ around here had pilots in them. I drive by the Goodyear landing field twice a day, and it’s been strange not seeing that big silver thing there. > [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Broomstick: > Despite the fiction that all folks involved with airplanes are the idle rich, these people are not… most of these folks personal income is not much above poverty… > > _Originally posted by Tranquilis_ > These guys all live closer to the bone than I do, despite having a side business: When I started flying helicopters in 1992, one of the instructors told me that his income for the previous **year** was $6,000. In L.A. He’s now a co-owner of the company and it has (I think) four helicopters of its own, plus a Cessna 172. They have a couple of Robbos on leaseback. He must be making a better living (he drives a newer Ford Explorer now instead of a well-used VW Rabbit); but the fact is that if they don’t fly, the only money that comes in is from the odd ground school session. And those birds still have to be paid for. So does the rent, hangar and outside storage. And the guys who own the leaseback aircraft? They’re probably counting on people renting their helis so that they can make the payments on them. Helicopters are maintenance intensive. Fixed-wing aircraft also get more maintenance than cars. When the aircraft aren’t flying, the mechanics aren’t getting any business (except for annual inspections, perhaps). And they require fuel to fly. No flying, no buying fuel. So the fuel guys take a hit. A lot of pilots eat at restaurants, diners, taco/hamburger stands, or even 7-11s near the airport. While the eateries don’t depend on pilots for their businesses (except perhaps the ones that are actually on the airport), they’re still losing sales. News, traffic and sight-seeing aircraft are still banned within enhanced class B airspace. So are banner tows. I heard on the radio that General Aviation is a $20 billion per year industry. (Here, I’ll write that out: $20,000,000,000.) I heard a woman on the teevee say it was a $60 billion industry. Either way, GA puts a buttload of money into the economy. I don’t own a GA business and I don’t even own my own aircraft, but I think that the government should assist the businesses they are ruining. ---
**Author:** ![Johnny\_L.A](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/johnny_l.a/32/1084_2.png) [@Johnny\_L.A](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Johnny_L.A)\ **Post date:** [October 31, 2001, 1:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/blimps-banned-do-their-owners-get-help/90674/11 "2001-10-31T13:09:36Z")
> [@](#): > > there are other companies flying blimps (typically unmanned) Ar? I’ve never heard of unmanned blimps. The Fuji, Metlife, Budwiser and others that fly… er, _flew_ around here had pilots in them. I drive by the Goodyear landing field twice a day, and it’s been strange not seeing that big silver thing there. > [@](#): > > _Originally posted by Broomstick:_ > Despite the fiction that all folks involved with airplanes are the idle rich, these people are not… most of these folks personal income is not much above poverty… > > _Originally posted by Tranquilis_ > These guys all live closer to the bone than I do, despite having a side business: When I started flying helicopters in 1992, one of the instructors told me that his income for the previous **year** was $6,000. In L.A. He’s now a co-owner of the company and it has (I think) four helicopters of its own, plus a Cessna 172. They have a couple of Robbos on leaseback. He must be making a better living (he drives a newer Ford Explorer now instead of a well-used VW Rabbit); but the fact is that if they don’t fly, the only money that comes in is from the odd ground school session. And those birds still have to be paid for. So does the rent, hangar and outside storage. And the guys who own the leaseback aircraft? They’re probably counting on people renting their helis so that they can make the payments on them. Helicopters are maintenance intensive. Fixed-wing aircraft also get more maintenance than cars. When the aircraft aren’t flying, the mechanics aren’t getting any business (except for annual inspections, perhaps). And they require fuel to fly. No flying, no buying fuel. So the fuel guys take a hit. A lot of pilots eat at restaurants, diners, taco/hamburger stands, or even 7-11s near the airport. While the eateries don’t depend on pilots for their businesses (except perhaps the ones that are actually on the airport), they’re still losing sales. News, traffic and sight-seeing aircraft are still banned within enhanced class B airspace. So are banner tows. I heard on the radio that General Aviation is a $20 billion per year industry. (Here, I’ll write that out: $20,000,000,000.) I heard a woman on the teevee say it was a $60 billion industry. Either way, GA puts a buttload of money into the economy. I don’t own a GA business and I don’t even own my own aircraft, but I think that the government should assist the businesses they are ruining. ---
**Author:** ![Tranquilis](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tranquilis/32/3639_2.png) [@Tranquilis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tranquilis)\ **Post date:** [October 31, 2001, 2:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/blimps-banned-do-their-owners-get-help/90674/12 "2001-10-31T14:22:55Z")
> [@](#): > > News, traffic and sight-seeing aircraft are still banned within enhanced class B airspace. So are banner tows. Of the two owner/operators I know that are staying afloat, one flies cargo in the evenings, and he has steady work. The other operates a Hughes 500, flying contract for surveyors, real estate, and power companies (power line surveys) on the week-ends. He’s holding his own, but only just. The other four flew sightseeing and charter, and are all out of business. Worse, the market for aircraft seems to have died, so they’re having a hard time unloading their assets. ---
**Author:** ![DougC](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/7feea3/32.png) [@DougC](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DougC)\ **Post date:** [October 31, 2001, 4:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/blimps-banned-do-their-owners-get-help/90674/13 "2001-10-31T16:32:29Z")
- - - Re: Unmanned Blimps— I have heard of these, maybe- - There was a story in the local business section some time back about a guy who had an aerial photography business that used an unmanned blimp. The blimp was only about 15 or 20 feet long, and it had remote-controlled cameras of some sort that attached onto it. It was hooked to a big reel of cable in the back of the truck, and was spooled out after he had parked upwind of the site to be photographed. It was always on the cable; it didn’t have any engines or steering on it so it couldn’t fly around on its own (unless the cable broke I suppose). ~ -And I guess that’s really more of a _balloon_, but it was blimp-shaped… - MC ---
**Author:** ![kniz](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/c37758/32.png) [@kniz](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kniz)\ **Post date:** [October 31, 2001, 6:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/blimps-banned-do-their-owners-get-help/90674/14 "2001-10-31T18:03:28Z")
I don’t understand all the restrictions put on small aircraft. The 9/11 event was made possible because of very large planes fueled up to the max. When the question of nuculeur plants came up, the experts said they could handle anything and then they had to back off because the design didn’t take the large planes into account. But what’s all this got to do with small planes. Can’t they tell the difference on the radar screens? It isn’t crop dusters because the idea of them delivering anthrax has been proven wrong. My idea is that they want to look like they’re doing something. It is CYA at its best. ---
**Author:** ![kniz](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/c37758/32.png) [@kniz](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kniz)\ **Post date:** [October 31, 2001, 6:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/blimps-banned-do-their-owners-get-help/90674/15 "2001-10-31T18:08:47Z")
One more comment and this one not in support of general posting to this thread. It may be different in some parts of the country, but here in Mississippi, the weather has been so good that those few days the crop dusters were grounded did not hurt them or the farmers. I’m not a farmer, but live in the country with crops all around. I haven’t seen a better year in the 15 years I’ve lived here. ---
**Author:** ![Keeve](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/f07891/32.png) [@Keeve](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Keeve)\ **Post date:** [October 31, 2001, 6:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/blimps-banned-do-their-owners-get-help/90674/16 "2001-10-31T18:59:43Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Broomstick \* > \*\*If you want to help out the little guy, there is currently a bill in Congress to lend some aid to small general aviation businesses. … Apparently, your business only matters if you’re Big Business. \*\* And what about Little Guys who are **not** in aviation? No one is helping them either. What about all the businesses that have to repair their windows and clear up the debris and won’t reopen till spring? We’ve got stores here in NYC whose only problem is that they were too close to the WTC and they’ve been closed because they’re inside the closed-off “crime scene” area. How about companies who have relocated to Central NJ. Who will pay their moving costs, or the commuting costs of employees who used to take the subway for under $15/week, and now have to buy a car? I seem to read about many charities whose big problem is that they collected more money than they know what to do with. I don’t get it. There are plenty of legitimate people to help. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Great\_Gazoo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/67e7ee/32.png) [@The\_Great\_Gazoo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Great_Gazoo)\ **Post date:** [October 31, 2001, 7:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/blimps-banned-do-their-owners-get-help/90674/17 "2001-10-31T19:14:00Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by kniz \* > \*\*I don’t understand all the restrictions put on small aircraft. The 9/11 event was made possible because of very large planes fueled up to the max. When the question of nuculeur plants came up, the experts said they could handle anything and then they had to back off because the design didn’t take the large planes into account. But what’s all this got to do with small planes. Can’t they tell the difference on the radar screens? It isn’t crop dusters because the idea of them delivering anthrax has been proven wrong. > > My idea is that they want to look like they’re doing something. It is CYA at its best. \*\* I’ll keep posting this until everyone sees it, thank you very much 🙂 Cropdusters, in particular, but any small plane could disperse large amounts of Sarin, smallpox, anthrax, etc. ---
**Author:** ![DougC](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/7feea3/32.png) [@DougC](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DougC)\ **Post date:** [November 1, 2001, 11:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/blimps-banned-do-their-owners-get-help/90674/18 "2001-11-01T11:41:07Z")
> [@](#): > > I don’t understand all the restrictions put on small aircraft. The 9/11 event was made possible because of very large planes fueled up to the max. - - - It goes something like this: -If terrorists can’t get their hands on a 550 MPH jumbo jet, then maybe they can get their hands on a 450 MHP business jet. If not that, then maybe a 350 MPH turboprop. See? The _jets_ didn’t knock down the towers, the fires did. -And “they” weren’t suspected of having anthrax, but they did. Almost _any_ aircraft is an easy way to spread chem/bio weapons. Dare you assume “they” have nothing else to attempt? ~ As for the flight restrictions, it’s only so drastic because it’s never been done before, and it didn’t last long anyway. The major airlines will shrink, but they’ll expand again eventually if they can find the profits. Light planes are lots of fun, but if operating a flying business (for whatever reason) is too expensive, then it means that Adam Smith thinks there’s too many people doing it. Lifestyle, my foot. We might as well subsidize horse-drawn buggy builders, too. - MC ---
**Author:** ![Cliffy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/59ef9b/32.png) [@Cliffy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cliffy)\ **Post date:** [November 1, 2001, 3:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/blimps-banned-do-their-owners-get-help/90674/19 "2001-11-01T15:21:04Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Broomstick \* > \*\*The _only_ part of aviation that has been offered aid is the airlines - just them. The rest of us can just go to hell, I suppose. > > \ > > Apparently, your business only matters if you’re Big Business. \*\* I don’t necessarily disagree, but he argument (and it’s not irrational) is that if crop dusters or airport restaurants go down, that’s bad news. But a country that doesn’t have an effective means of moving business travelers can never sustain (or now, recover) a strong economy. This is the same reason there is a Railway Labor Act separate from the standard Labor legislation. Businesses going belly-up are bad for the economy, but large-scale transportation businesses going belly-up do considerably more damage to the economy than other kinds. –Cliffy ---
**Author:** ![Broomstick](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/broomstick/32/246_2.png) [@Broomstick](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Broomstick)\ **Post date:** [November 3, 2001, 12:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/blimps-banned-do-their-owners-get-help/90674/20 "2001-11-03T00:39:56Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by MC \* > > > [@](#): > > > > I don’t understand all the restrictions put on small aircraft. The 9/11 event was made possible because of very large planes fueled up to the max. > > - > - > - It goes something like this: > -If terrorists can’t get their hands on a 550 MPH jumbo jet, > then maybe they can get their hands on a 450 MHP business jet. > If not that, then maybe a 350 MPH turboprop. > See? Uh, not quite. The overwhelming majority of planes grounded fly under 150 mph. Want a comparison? My pickup truck wieghs twice as much, goes 20 mph faster at full throttle, and carries 3 times the payload of the biggest plane I fly. No one asked me to park the truck. The BUSINESS aircraft - the jets, commuter turboprops, and even the bigger prop planes - those “350 mph turbroprops” - were allowed to resume flying a week before the little guys, and are far less restricted in where they can go. In other words, by your rationale the restrictions are ass backward. > [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by MC \* > As for the flight restrictions, it’s only so drastic because it’s never been done before, and it didn’t last long anyway. Right. Not long. Just long enough to put 75% of the flight schools within 100 miles of Chicago out of business for good. > [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by MC \* > The major airlines will shrink, but they’ll expand again eventually if they can find the profits. Light planes are lots of fun, but if operating a flying business (for whatever reason) is too expensive, then it means that Adam Smith thinks there’s too many people doing it. > Lifestyle, my foot. > We might as well subsidize horse-drawn buggy builders, too. - MC Prior to September 11 the small aviation was _expanding_ and business was doing better than it had been since the mid 70’s. The ONLY factor that trashed the industry was the _prolonged_ shutdown. (No one is arguing about the September 11 grounding) Why? For two weeks (rural areas) to six weeks (urban areas like Chicago) the bills kept coming in for rent, insurance, employees, maintenance, and so forth but _no one was permitted to earn money_. If the car dealers weren’t permitted to sell cars for six weeks but still had to pay the utilities, rent, taxes, and so forth on their inventory would THEY stay in business? Perhaps THEIR profession is “too expensive” and we should not support the lavish lifestyle of car dealers or their patrons, hmm? The Adam Smith rationale only works in a free market. For September, aviation was not a free market. [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/blimps-banned-do-their-owners-get-help/90674.md?page=2)