# Closing Miegs Field **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [March 31, 2003, 8:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/closing-miegs-field/165525 "2003-03-31T20:15:09Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 9
**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:** [April 18, 2003, 10:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/closing-miegs-field/165525/161 "2003-04-18T10:59:30Z")
I suppose I should dissect **Koala’s** latest cite, the one that supposely supports the “small plane as terror risk”. First of all, I _specifically_ excluded the Tampa incident from consideration, but, of course, that is the one incident she (is **Koala** a she? I don’t know, anyhoo…) zeros in on. Let’s look at some of this, shall we? > [@](#): > > A teenager’s suicidal flight … Note that this article even starts out calling this _suicide_, not _terrorism_ > [@](#): > > There are no regulations that private aircraft have additional security measures apart from door locks and ignition keys, he said, although general aviation groups are encouraging plane owners to increase security. Again, more poor understanding of the situation by the media. Probably doesn’t help that this is a foreign journalist (BBC) discussing American regulations. In fact, there was never a _requirement_ for general aviation airplanes to be manufacturer with either door locks (some of them don’t have doors) or ignition keys. So the first part of that contains some error. Secondly, there are NOW requirements for owners to “secure” their airplanes. If you do have a no-door, no key plane you pretty much have to lock it up inside at night. I’ve already mentioned the prop locks now required on the rentals where I fly. It’s not a matter of “encouraging” security - new security was _required_ and is now in place. > [@](#): > > “There was not a perceived threat,” said Admiral John Stufflebeem, adding, “He didn’t take off with a flight full of explosives.” OK, there we go - **the military did not perceive this kid as a threat.** Who did? The media - because a whacko kid sells more cornflakes than a troubled, suicidal teen I guess. It’s right there in black and white - one teen in an otherwise empty plane is not considered a threat to the military. Please tell me why I should take the word of a BBC journalist over that of an Admiral in regards to a threat assessment of something near a military base. > [@](#): > > No one was killed or injured apart from the teen, and the building suffered no major structural damage. In other words, this isn’t much of a threat. Sure, people were disturbed at the time it happened. Frankly, I’m disturbed when I’m walking near a skyscraper and a window-washer drops something - I mean, it might fall on my head. But that’s not the same thing as _terrrorism_. The reaction since then by many (and many were quoted on TV video clips just after the Meigs vandalism) is that “Oh, you mean like in Tampa? Well, that didn’t do hardly any damage, did it?” or the like. > [@](#): > > The AOPA, along with other general aviation organisations, has called for the government to adopt new tougher security standards for general aviation. > > They call new difficult-to-counterfeit photo ID’s for pilots. They say that the US government should review all existing and new pilot certificates to ensure that that the pilots are not on terrorist "watch lists. > > Pilots renting or purchasing aircraft should be made to provide government-issued identification. Gosh, that doesn’t sound like general aviation avoiding the problem, does it? We want _effective_ security measures – because we’d like to feel safe, too. By all means - check out the pilot databases for known terrorists (of course, the Sept 11 guys weren’t known to be terrorists beforehand…), work on the ID problem (we’ve since come up with a workable solution, at least for the short term, and discussions are on-going about future changes) This article actually makes the case that this was NOT terrorism but the actions of a troubled individual. If that’s the standard for terrorism then the drunks sleeping on the CTA, or the mentally ill homeless people wandering Wacker Drive are all “terrorists” because they are disturbing and some people view them as threatening. Or maybe **Koala** is defining all suicide as terrorism becuase it’s “disturbing”? Or maybe the airplane crash itself was the terrorism? In that case Flight 587 which landed on Rockaway was terrorism - I mean, it scared the dickens out of a LOT of people, killed not only everyone aboard but folks on the ground… oh, wait, even the media said that was “just” a plane accident. Guess that definition doesn’t work, either. Try again, **Koala** - find EVEN ONE instance where a small plane was used for terrorism. That is, used to delibrately cause terror. ---
**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:** [April 18, 2003, 11:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/closing-miegs-field/165525/162 "2003-04-18T11:02:58Z")
By the way - the TFR over downtown Chicago was lifted yesterday. We can now resume flying laps around the Sear Tower and Hancock buildings with impunity. _Duck, **Koala** , duck!_ ---
**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:** [April 18, 2003, 1:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/closing-miegs-field/165525/163 "2003-04-18T13:06:36Z")
> [@](#): > > _KoalaBear wrote:_ > The object is to kill enough people with sufficient brutality that you put the rest of the population in mortal panic… > > …Impact damage isn’t important to a terrorist; body count is all that matters. > > Nobody can calculate the risk of a scenario like this. It hasn’t happened yet, so we don’t know exactly how it might be done. It has been shown that delivery trucks are a _far greater risk_ than light aircraft. There are many more of them, and they are more suited to “killing people with sufficient bruatlity to put the rest of the population in mortal panic”. Trucks have been used to bomb the Federal building in Oklahoma City, the WTC, the marine barracks in Beirut, and a couple of U.S. embassies in Africa. Car bombs are used routinely in Israel and other places. They have caused much more damage than any light aircraft has. Of course, **no** terrorist attacks have been used as terror weapons. Tampa was a **suicide** , not a terror attack – and the only one hurt was the kid, and the damage was minimal. So think of _that_ next time you’re downtown and you see a Ryder truck on the road. Any one of them can be loaded with explosives, and you’ll never know it until you see the fireball and the shockwave, heat and debris comes flying at you! So why aren’t you trying to rid the city of trucks? > [@](#): > > Meigs isn’t really the issue and terror isn’t really the issue Yes it is. You maintain that small airports are terror threats. We have shown that they are not. > [@](#): > > while we can’t live _withou_t airports we can cetainly live with _fewer_ of them, so a reduction in capacity is inevitable from this point. You are not qualified to make that determination. > [@](#): > > Every airport that gets closed pinches their lifestyle tighter… It’s not about lifestyle, which has been pointed out several times in this thread. > [@](#): > > What they fail to realize I think is that the strategy of contradicting even the most obvious facts _harms_ their cause far more than it _helps_ it. Oh that’s rich, coming from _you!__You_ are the one who is contradicting the mountain of obvious facts. Okay, I’m stepping out of the debate here for a moment. This is not a personal attack. You can take it or leave it as you wish. But I have noticed a pattern in your posts. First, you have an irrational fear of small aircraft. They are irrational because, as we have shown, they are not a significant risk. When we point this out, you refuse to listen. Second: When we ask you for _factual_ evidence to support your side, you either refuse to give it or you deflect the question. Third: You have accused us of trying to get you to provide us with “ammunition” to use against you. Fourth: You have accused us of setting “traps”. Fifth: In your last post you accused us (in colour and in bold type) of “calling in reinforecements”, as it were, to gang up on you. These indicate there may be issues that would be more benficially addressed elsewhere. ---
**Author:** ![Dinsdale](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/97f17d/32.png) [@Dinsdale](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dinsdale)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2003, 1:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/closing-miegs-field/165525/164 "2003-04-18T13:49:57Z")
You guys still at it? Just wanted to say I’ve run past Meigs/Northerly several times over the past coupla weeks, and I really miss seeing the planes land and take off. Can’t say I feel any safer for it. At least they still have the wind socks up. Not sure I understand Daley’s reasoning on how closing Meigs made Chi safer such that the no-fly zone could be lifted. **Johnny** - have to agree fully with your comment on trucks. I’m sure I’m not the only city dweller/commuter who has made an informal short list of spots where a van or truck full of fertilizer, ala OK City, could do some real damage. ---
**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:** [April 20, 2003, 9:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/closing-miegs-field/165525/165 "2003-04-20T09:56:32Z")
Yeah, we’re still at it. I think one of the things that pisses me off is the way Daley keeps saying he did this for the “people who live and work in the high-rises”. _I’m_ one of “those people”, yet I certainly don’t want this, don’t approve, and don’t feel Daley did this for me. He did it for his own, selfish reasons. And no, I most certainly do NOT feel safer. In fact, I find the notion that a mayor feels perfectly justified in bulldozing a legal operation in the middle of the night to be EXTREMELY threatening. On what other matter will he find the law inconvenient and just ignore it? ---
**Author:** ![KoalaBear](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/e47c2d/32.png) [@KoalaBear](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/KoalaBear)\ **Post date:** [April 21, 2003, 6:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/closing-miegs-field/165525/166 "2003-04-21T18:26:35Z")
> [@](#): > > _Originally posted by Broomstick_:… California, Nevada, Arizona, and Texas also lead the nation in airplane thefts - drug runners steal them, load them with contraband, and use them as transports. I see. So we can gather from this: (1) General Aviation facilities are sufficiently insecure that [several dozen](http://www.ofainc.com/newsletters/1998/ofapg3.html) light planes are stolen every year, and (2) Stolen planes are routinely used to commit other felonies? > [@](#): > > Yes, there may be airfields out there that haven’t improved their security … the FAA had the authority to come out to a field and correct problems on the spot - and they have done so in my area when owners refused to cooperate. (3) Some airports have failed to implement federally mandated security improvements, and (4) Some owners are so reluctant to cooperate the FAA must force them to comply? Sounds like you’re _confirming_ the government’s general aviation concerns rather than _denying_ them. > [@](#): > > > [@](#): > > > > But what’s to stop someone from using the same aircraft to distribute an aerosolized biotoxin over an urban area instead? > > 1. It’s not nearly as easy to steal a cropduster as people think. > 2. A randomly chosen light plane is poorly designed for this task > 3. You’d need massive, massive amounts of stuff for an arial drop > 4. The payload in a small plane is very limited. > 5. “Biotoxins” are not as easy to deploy as the news media leads you to believe. 1. If it’s easy to steal an airplane, it’s easy to modify it afterward. 2. There is no evidence that stolen planes are selected at random. 3. [VX achieves 50% lethality in dosages as low as 10 mg (liquid), 30 mg-min/m3 (vapor)](http://www.fas.org/nuke/intro/cw/agent.htm#b02). 4. If it’s big enough to haul cocaine, it’s big enough to haul anthrax. 5. Explain how Postal workers died simply handling the envelopes. The U.S. Army estimates that the letter sent to Senator Leahy [could have killed tens of thousands of people](http://www.anthrax.osd.mil/threat/weapon.asp) had the toxin been efficiently dispersed. > [@](#): > > **Koala** , it’s not just that it closed - it’s the MANNER in which it was closed. Daley broke the law and thinks he can get away with it - _that’s a real problem_. Broomstick, don’t you recognize the irony of someone who behaves as honorably as yourself pointing the finger of moral outrage at _anybody_, let alone the mayor of Chicago? > [@](#): > > No one is above the law, but if he gets away with this he will be, and what will he do next? I’ve asked myself the same question. > [@](#): > > Complacency? I think not! Koala, I have a deep understanding of the risks of aviation… **Empty Assurances in Aerospace History** [ul][li]“A coaxial secondary hydraulic system will do fine – it’s not like the frigging engine might fall off.” – _Chief Designer of the DC10_[/li][li]“Sure they’re brittle, but it’s _Florida_ for chrissakes! How cold can it get?” – _Challenger O-ring manufacturer_[/li][li]“Oxygen generators are harmless - but don’t list them on the manifest and don’t tell anyone I told you to load them.” – _ValuJet Hazardous Materials Coordinator_[/li][li]“It was discarded after 30 years of service, yes, but the wiring’s still good as new.” – _TWA flight 800_[/li][li]“A ‘meter’ is what, three feet?” – _Programmer of the Mars Polar Observer_[/li][li]“Sticky rudder? Sheeya. PROVE the 737 has a sticky rudder. It’s our most popular model.” – _Boeing Aircraft Corporation_[/li][li]“Zzzzzzzz.” – _Boston Logan baggage checkers one lazy September morning_[/li][li]“We’ve analyzed the tape, and we’re certain that piece of insulating foam was too light to have harmed the Columbia.” – _NASA safety analysts_[/li][li]“It’s not nearly as easy to steal a cropduster as people think.” – _Broomstick_[/ul][/li][quote] I am willing to tolerate much more risk in my life than you are. [/quote] Even the monkey sometimes slips. > [@](#): > > When and where have I lied? 04-09-2003, Page 3: “_The Department of Homeland Security, the Transporation Security Administration, the CIA, and the FBI have all stated that Meigs is NOT a security risk and recommended NOT closing it_.” > [@](#): > > But unless you can demonstrate that I’ve lied (you know, with cites) you’re out of line. You demonstrated it for both of us (you know, with cites), one of which contradicted you directly: “_‘DHS was never consulted regarding the airport’s terror threat potential,’ [Ridge] said_”. > [@](#): > > I guess you just can’t accept that maybe your view is not the majority, at least on this thread? _n_ x 0 = 0. If the esteemed opposition is unable to advance their argument by factual, logical or truthful means, numerical advantage is meaningless. ---
**Author:** ![PVenkman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/ed8c4c/32.png) [@PVenkman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/PVenkman)\ **Post date:** [April 22, 2003, 7:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/closing-miegs-field/165525/167 "2003-04-22T19:50:32Z")
KoalaBear, for the record: To the best of my knowledge I don’t know Broomstick or any other Doper in real life. I’ve never IM’d another Doper (or emailed, phoned, etc.). Any and all communication I’ve had with any Doper has been on this public message board. All the thoughts I’ve posted here have been my own. I’m quite certain you now owe me an apology; I’m also certain I won’t get it. You never did answer my questions. ---
**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:** [April 22, 2003, 8:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/closing-miegs-field/165525/168 "2003-04-22T20:56:31Z")
**KoalaBear** : You’re asking for zero risk. I’m sorry to have to be the one to tell you, but life ain’t like that. In fact, you can bet you’ll never get out of it alive. 1. In life there are risks. 2. Small aircraft are not zero-risk, but they are not a significant risk. 3. You are no safer with Meigs closed than you were when it was open. You are more likely to be blown up by a car-bomb. You are much more likely to be involved in an automobile accident. You could always be run over by a speeding ice cream truck. Someday you will die. There is no such thing as “zero-risk”. Deal with it. ---
**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:** [April 23, 2003, 2:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/closing-miegs-field/165525/169 "2003-04-23T02:28:05Z")
I’d have to say it’s obvious that **KoalaBear** has a bug up his/her backside in regards to planes. No matter what anyone says it’s twisted to support a fear-based argument. Seriously, **Koala** , how do you intend to elminate risk? At what point is the risk level “acceptable” to you? When all the airplanes are gone? Because that’s what it sounds like. > [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by KoalaBear \* I see. So we can gather from this: (1) General Aviation facilities are sufficiently insecure that several dozen light planes are stolen every year May I point out that one of the articles YOU cited stated clearly that the theft rate has DROPPED this year? Definitely a postive trend and a sign of INcreasing security. And compare the number of planes stolen vs. the number of cars, trucks, motorcycles, and boats. Mind you - a small boat loaded with explosives blew a hole in the USS Cole, a truck bomb blew up the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building. How can you _possibly_ justify slamming general aviation - when NO small plane has EVER been used in a terrorist act - and NOT demand the stricter regulation and/or elmination of such dangerous vehicles as boats and trucks? My goodness - just about ANYONE can rent a truck for Ryder and goodness knows what they’re loading into the back of it! > [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by KoalaBear \* (2) Stolen planes are routinely used to commit other felonies? Typically, it’s drug running. Quite a few are sent to “chop shops” to be rendered into parts, just as stolen cars are. > [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by KoalaBear \* (3) Some airports have failed to implement federally mandated security improvements > (4) Some owners are so reluctant to cooperate the FAA must force them to comply? It’s more a matter of money than will, **Koala** - just as the airlines have been asking who is going to pay for all the additional security, small airport owners are asking who’s going to pay to put up new fencing, hire security guards, and so forth. Or did you think these things came free somehow? > [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by KoalaBear \* 1) If it’s easy to steal an airplane, it’s easy to modify it afterward. And what do you base THAT statement on? Are you an A&P? Aero-engineer? Have you ever built so much as a _model_ airplane? No, it is NOT as easy to modify an airplane and have it work as most people think - that’s why experimental homebuilt aircraft have a crash rate about 10 times that of factory-built airplanes, and most of those occur in the initial 40 hours of test-flying the design. > [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by KoalaBear \* 2) There is no evidence that stolen planes are selected at random. I’d expect not - if you’re running a chop-shop you’ll be looking for something to provide the parts in most demand. If you’re running drugs you want something small that can land off-field in remote areas. For that matter, you provide no evidence that planes AREN’T stolen at random, either. Just a bald-faced statement. I fail to see what that statement of yours has to do with Meigs, security, or the temperature of spit in Wichita > [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by KoalaBear \* 5) Explain how Postal workers died simply handling the envelopes. They didn’t. Just _handling_ anthrax usually doesn’t make a person seriously ill, much less kill them. (It can cause a very very nasty rash, true, but it’s almost never fatal unless it becomes secondarially infected and the victim is too stupid/stubborn to go to a doctor) It’s _ **inhaling** _ anthrax that kills. The postal sorting machinery slammed the tainted envelopes around sufficiently to force the spores through the microscopic pores in the envelope paper and into the surronding air, where it could be easily inhaled. Next time you offer an example please be aware of the facts beforehand, OK? I get tired of explaining reality over and over. Given the amount of exposure, it’s actually puzzling MORE people didn’t become sick or die. Which supports my statement that it’s a lot harder to kill lots of people with bioweapons than one might initially think. > [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by KoalaBear \* The U.S. Army estimates that the letter sent to Senator Leahy could have killed tens of thousands of people had the toxin been efficiently dispersed. IF. IF. IF. It actually was NOT dispersed “efficiently”, now was it. AGAIN, it’s not as easy to turn biological agents in to weapons of mass destruction as people think. In fact, the ONLY one I really fear is smallpox - spreads as easily as the common cold, kills 30-50% of victims, _has been used_ as a bioweapon by the United States Government. Worry much more about that one - and, by the way, it’s not spread by airplanes. > [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by KoalaBear \* Broomstick, don’t you recognize the irony of someone who behaves as honorably as yourself pointing the finger of moral outrage at _anybody_, let alone the mayor of Chicago? If I’ve behaved honorably then I have a right to point fingers of “moral outrage” at someone who flouts the law, most particularly an elected official. Where are you reading irony into that? > [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by KoalaBear \* “A coaxial secondary hydraulic system will do fine – it’s not like the frigging engine might fall off.” – _Chief Designer of the DC10_ That’s not general aviation. > [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by KoalaBear \* “Sure they’re brittle, but it’s _Florida_ for chrissakes! How cold can it get?” – _Challenger O-ring manufacturer_ That’s not general aviation > [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by KoalaBear \* “Oxygen generators are harmless - but don’t list them on the manifest and don’t tell anyone I told you to load them.” – _ValuJet Hazardous Materials Coordinator_ That’s not general aviation. > [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by KoalaBear \* “It was discarded after 30 years of service, yes, but the wiring’s still good as new.” – _TWA flight 800_ That’s not general aviation. > [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by KoalaBear \* “A ‘meter’ is what, three feet?” – _Programmer of the Mars Polar Observer_ That’s not general aviation. > [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by KoalaBear \* “Sticky rudder? Sheeya. PROVE the 737 has a sticky rudder. It’s our most popular model.” – _Boeing Aircraft Corporation_ That’s not general aviation > [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by KoalaBear \* “Zzzzzzzz.” – _Boston Logan baggage checkers one lazy September morning_ That’s not general aviation > [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by KoalaBear \* “We’ve analyzed the tape, and we’re certain that piece of insulating foam was too light to have harmed the Columbia.” – _NASA safety analysts_ That’s not general aviation. In other words, **Koala** EVERY SINGLE ONE of your arguments “against” general aviation have _nothing to do with_ general aviation. You’re comparing apples and oranges. You don’t even know the difference between the airlines and general aviation, do you? You can’t tell the difference between a low-orbit shuttle and a Piper Cub, can you? Once _again_ you display ignorance of the subject at hand. How can you expect to be taken seriously? If you want to argue that space travel or commercial airlines are unsafe your examples might be valid, but they are unrelated to general aviation. They are irrelevant to Meigs field - you couldn’t physically land a DC-10 or 737 there. If you want to argue Meigs is a security risk you’ll have to use examples from _general aviation_ to demonstrate that, not NASA or the airlines. Try again. ---
**Author:** ![KoalaBear](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/e47c2d/32.png) [@KoalaBear](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/KoalaBear)\ **Post date:** [April 23, 2003, 5:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/closing-miegs-field/165525/170 "2003-04-23T17:44:32Z")
> [@](#): > > Seriously, Koala, how do you intend to elminate risk? At what point is the risk level “acceptable” to you? In my opinion, when it’s as difficult to steal a light plane as it is to hijack a commercial airliner the risk will be acceptably low. Closing facilities we don’t need – like Meigs – and imposing stricter security at open general aviation airports would be a very good way to start. > [@](#): > > > [@](#): > > > > Stolen planes are routinely used to commit other felonies? > > Typically, it’s drug running. Quite a few are sent to “chop shops” to be rendered into parts, just as stolen cars are. Then there are likely to be plenty of agricultural fitments available on the black market, yes? Perhaps even whole planes constructed entirely of stolen parts? > [@](#): > > > [@](#): > > > > Some owners are so reluctant to cooperate the FAA must force them to comply? > > It’s more a matter of money than will, Koala - just as the airlines have been asking who is going to pay for all the additional security, small airport owners are asking who’s going to pay to put up new fencing, hire security guards, and so forth. _Very Good_, Broomstick. Now you see the principal reason why Meigs was closed – the operational cost of the facility exceeded its benefit to the community. This was true before 9/11, but especially true afterwards. With respect to private airports, those that cannot afford to meet federally mandated security requirements _should_ be closed: you can’t operate a chop shop without a supply of parts. > [@](#): > > > [@](#): > > > > There is no evidence that stolen planes are selected at random. > > I’d expect not - if you’re running a chop-shop you’ll be looking for something to provide the parts in most demand. Nor are you likely to ask your customers if they have felonious intentions for the equipment you’re selling them. > [@](#): > > I fail to see what that statement of yours has to do with Meigs, security, or the temperature of spit in Wichita First, you’ve explained that someone who wants a crop duster for some reason can obtain the parts if not the entire aircraft on the black market; second, that private airports are resisting the security reforms necessary to prevent aircraft from being stolen because it’s unprofitable. That’s a strong argument for closing such facilities, and I thank you for making it. > [@](#): > > > [@](#): > > > > Explain how Postal workers died simply handling the envelopes. > > … The postal sorting machinery slammed the tainted envelopes around sufficiently to force the spores through the microscopic pores in the envelope paper and into the surronding air, where it could be easily inhaled. _Very Good_, Broomstick. If a mail sorter can shake enough anthrax spores through an envelope to kill a man, how many can you kill with a 50-lb bag sprinkled over an urban area from a light aircraft? 750,000 perhaps? More? _One_ stolen plane per year is too many in this day and age; several dozen is inexcusable. > [@](#): > > In other words, Koala EVERY SINGLE ONE of your arguments “against” general aviation have nothing to do with general aviation. Correction, Broomstick: they’re not arguments “against” anything, but a humorous way to illustrate the hollowness of the statement “_It’s not nearly as easy to steal a cropduster as people think_.” I didn’t anticipate that you’d prove the emptiness of that assurance _for_ me by explaining how easily such equipment might be obtained on the black market instead. However, I must admit I like the tendency of the conversation lately: we’re damaging your case more effectively together than I would otherwise be capable of doing alone. ---
**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:** [April 24, 2003, 12:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/closing-miegs-field/165525/171 "2003-04-24T00:13:24Z")
> [@](#): > > _Originally posted by KoalaBear_ > > > [@](#): > > > > _Originally posted by somebody else_ Seriously, Koala, how do you intend to elminate risk? At what point is the risk level “acceptable” to you? > > In my opinion, when it’s as difficult to steal a light plane as it is to hijack a commercial airliner the risk will be acceptably low. Closing facilities we don’t need – like Meigs – and imposing stricter security at open general aviation airports would be a very good way to start. Well, OK, that’s valid opinon. I disagree with it, and I think you’re working from flawed information, but I’ll accept it’s _your opinion_/ First of all, the risk posed by a light airplane is nowhere near that posed by a commercial jet. By that reckoning we should impose the same security on knives as we do on nuclear weapons. _A light plane - by virtue of being small and slow - can **never** cause as much damage as an airliner_. Secondly - Meigs was _not_ useless, despite the propaganda out of City Hall. As we have mentioned _numerous_ times, over 200 medical flights a year passed through Meigs, it was a base for Coast Guard and fire department rescues and helicoptors, and it allowed light plane traffic to go somewhere else besides O’Hare, Midway, Palwaukee, and Waukegan, all of which are at or above capacity. It was NOT useless or unneeded. As I have said - security HAS improved at small airports. I know this because I fly into and out of small airports all the time. Is it perfect? No – but that’s partly because the system was built entirely without consideration to terrorist threat and we’re having to adapt extremely quickly. However, I can tell you from my own personal experience flying in several states that GA security HAS improved a great deal over the past year and a half. I can’t land anywhere anymore without someone being on duty at the airport and asking me who I am and what I’m doing. I am now asked for ID routinely which I _never_ was before 9/11. These are real improvements. I’ve told you about stricter practices regarding locks, access to planes, and other securing of hardware. You choose to ignore all this and pretend nothing’s changed. You’re wrong. > [@](#): > > _Originally posted by KoalaBear_[ > Stolen planes are routinely used to commit other felonies? > [@](#): > > _Originally posted by Broomstick_[ > Typically, it’s drug running. Quite a few are sent to “chop shops” to be rendered into parts, just as stolen cars are. > [@](#): > > _Originally posted by KoalaBear_[Then there are likely to be plenty of agricultural fitments available on the black market, yes? Perhaps even whole planes constructed entirely of stolen parts? _Extremely_ unlikely to be any cropdusters or cropduster parts on the black market. First of all, cropdusters are, as I have said, much more closely guarded than the average general aviation airplane. It’s a very, very small market - a “hot” airplane would stand out far too much. And those airplanes are NOT easy to fly. It’s a high risk profession not just from the airplanes and the low flying but the chemicals used are highly toxic. Pilots involved in cropdusting must undergo training and certification, continuing education, and deal with considerable additional regulations and oversight. There _were_ a few instances of folks inquiring on the Internet about modifying small planes for cropdusting shortly after 9/11. I know that in several instances they were reported directly to the FBI. In fact, one of my flying e-mail lists had one guy who we had known for years was FBI (as well as a recreational pilot) and we discovered another agent as well. So even areas where this information is available are under surveillance. It’s a little creepy, but that’s modern life, now isn’t it? The stolen airplanes used by drug runners are snatched, loaded south of the border, used, and then abandoned as quickly as possible. The object is not to get caught and the drug runners view them as disposable commodities. A stolen plane - unless it’s chopped - is extremely traceable. The darn things either broadcast their license number - which would be on a “hot” list - or broadcast no license at all, which ALSO attracts a great deal of attention. Having been aboard a plane with a broken transponder even before 9/11 I can tell you that ATC has always been very interested in folks who aren’t broadcasting their identity. Nowadays, that can get you an F-16 escort, and does. Sure, there have been some planes stolen this past year - I’d also wager they’re _recovering_ more of them, too. > [@](#): > > _Originally posted by KoalaBear_ > > > [@](#): > > > > _Originally posted by Broomstick_ > > It’s more a matter of money than will, Koala - just as the airlines have been asking who is going to pay for all the additional security, small airport owners are asking who’s going to pay to put up new fencing, hire security guards, and so forth. > > Very Good, Broomstick. Now you see the principal reason why Meigs was closed – the operational cost of the facility exceeded its benefit to the community. This was true before 9/11, but especially true afterwards. Not true at all. Before Daley was elected Mayor Meigs broke even most years and even showed a _profit_ on some. Daley’s first attack over 15 years ago was to cut the operational hours by 30%. He imposed a multitude of fees, such that it caught more to park a plane at Meigs than it cost to rent one per hour. He abolished the flight school and charter services that used to operate out of there and supply revenue. He kicked out all the tenants - renting storage space to people with airplanes is a MAJOR source of revenue to small airports and that alone almost killed the airport. He did all that so he could then claim that airport “couldn’t make a profit” and provide yet another reason to kill it. So tell me, Koala, how come a small, 4,000 foot airstrip in the middle of Podunk, Anywhere can manage to make enough money to stay in business but Meigs can’t? It’s not logical, when Meigs had 30,000 flights a year and other, smaller airports turn a profit at a tenth the number of flights? It’s not that Meigs _can’t_ make a profit - _ **it’s not allowed to** _. Because that would mess with Mr Daley’s master plan. My home field’s runway is no longer than Meigs. We’re not in an urban center but on the fringes. It generates $125 million a year in revenue and employs 50 people. Meigs could do even better - if the Mayor backed it. There’s a mayor in Ohio with a very similar downtown on-the-lakefront airport who said on TV Daley was crazy for bulldozing Meigs, that HIS airport was a real powerhouse and money-maker for his city. > [@](#): > > _Originally posted by KoalaBear_[ > With respect to private airports, those that cannot afford to meet federally mandated security requirements should be closed: Actually, the Feds have been quite helpful in assisting small airports in meeting their new requirements. It’s LOCAL requirements that have been most burdensome. It is the City of Chicago that required Meigs to install the same level of security as O’Hare and Midway - despite the risks being so much lower. The Feds are not requiring that every pilot be fingerprinted and subjected to a background check and personally approved by a state bureaucrat in order to keep their airplane within a state - that’s been a requirement in a couple of states. And it’s stupid and redundant. The day I went for my flight physical I surendered my privacy to the Federal government and gave them access to any and all of my medical records, driving history, and criminal records (if any). Even prior to 9/11 you couldn’t get a pilot’s license without at least that much of a check on you. The Feds have since gone through their list of pilots again looking for problems. It’s a bunch of small-fry politicians trying to _appear_ to do something when really they’re spending money uselessly on fruitless and duplicative efforts. Better to spend that money on a security guard for a water treatment plant, or a hazmat training course for the fire department. > [@](#): > > _Originally posted by KoalaBear_[ > First, you’ve explained that someone who wants a crop duster for some reason can obtain the parts if not the entire aircraft on the black market; Uh, NO, that’s NOT what I said. I’ve maintained all along that it would be exceedingly difficult to either obtain a cropduster or obtain the parts that allow for spreading of various things. > [@](#): > > _Originally posted by KoalaBear_[ second, that private airports are resisting the security reforms necessary to prevent aircraft from being stolen because it’s unprofitable. You can’t stay in business if you spend money stupidly. No business willingly spends money on ineffectual items. Here’s the deal - in a lot of places either the local law enforcement aviation unit guards the airport (such as where I fly) or the Civil Air Patrol (that’s an auxillary of the US Air Force, Koala, since I expect you don’t know that either) will do it for free. And that’s usually seen as adequate, since these entities are equipped to communicate directly with the authorities who can do something about the situation, or ARE said authorities. Daley, however, insisted that the guarding of Meigs field be done by _paid_ guards when both the Chicago police department AND the Coast Guard maintained a 24/7 presence at the field. THAT’S REDUNDANT AND STUPID. A waste of resources. Daley insisted on the same, high-traffic capacity luggage searching machines and systems as at O’Hare and Midway ALSO be installed at Meigs. And that is ALSO a waste of resources. With the small number of people going through it would be entirely possible for a small number of security personnel to thoroughly search each and every passenger and pilot AND their luggage by hand at a fraction of the cost of a full “airline sized” complement of security and the massive machinery that would NEVER be used to anything like even a half of its capacity. Again, a WASTE of resources and forcing Meigs to comply only added to the red ink caused by Daley’s hamstringing policies. There is _nothing wrong_ with criticizing bad policy. > [@](#): > > _Originally posted by KoalaBear_[If a mail sorter can shake enough anthrax spores through an envelope to kill a man, how many can you kill with a 50-lb bag sprinkled over an urban area from a light aircraft? 750,000 perhaps? More? Probably none. 50lbs is NOTHING. Cropdusters spray by the TON from 10 feet above the ground. 50lbs from a half mile in the air (which you’d have to do to spray, say, City Hall just because the damn skyscrapers are that tall) would either blow away on the wind or be so diluted as to be harmless by the time it reached the ground - if it ever did. Most would wind up on rooftops. Keep in mind, **Koala** , that anthrax is a _naturally occurring thing_. It is present in the ground _everywhere_. If you get your hands muddly in your garden you likely have an anthrax spore or three on you. One spore alone will not kill you. And, of course, this statement of yours totally ignores what I said much earlier about the difficult of spreading a powder from a small airplane. Due to the air currents around the plane most of it will wind up right back inside with you in the cockpit unless you really know what you’re doing AND you know how to modify the airplane. You are also ignoring the fact that calling attention to a bio-dispersal isn’t necessarially the best course for a terrorist - and a small plane WILL be noticed. IF that occurred the first thing that would happen is the area would be cordoned off, decontamination areas set up, tests run, the exposed populace put on antibiotics… result would be very few if any ill or dead. Some fear, yes, but also some reassurance that the safety net worked and some ideas for improving it. Not much of a gain for the bad guys. Now, if you had 20 female agents load perfume spritzers with the stuff and go around the city misting random locations… well, then you MIGHT get a serious outbreak where people are dying before anyone realizes something is wrong, people tracking the agent all over, no one knows where the source was… MUCH better at causing terror and fear, AND a few deaths. And a hell of a lot cheaper and less bother than training a pilot and stealing and airplane. Remember - we KNOW who the guys from 9/11 are. We DON’T know who mailed the anthrax. The UnaBomber went uncaught for 20 years because he used _small scale_ tactics and kept a low profile. > [@](#): > > _Originally posted by KoalaBear_[ > Correction, Broomstick: they’re not arguments “against” anything, but a humorous way to illustrate the hollowness of the statement " No, they are an apalling display of ignorance and you’re inability to construct an argument, due in large part to your lack of knowledge about aviation. Get educated. You’ll be more entertaining that way. ---
**Author:** ![KoalaBear](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/e47c2d/32.png) [@KoalaBear](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/KoalaBear)\ **Post date:** [April 25, 2003, 5:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/closing-miegs-field/165525/172 "2003-04-25T17:58:50Z")
> [@](#): > > _Originally posted by Broomstick_: > > _A light plane - by virtue of being small and slow - can **never** cause as much damage as an airliner_. Flawed reasoning: **both can be effectively used as a weapon**. A large plane can take down a skyscraper but a small plane cannot; a small plane can distribute chemicals efficiently but a large plane cannot. To say a steak knife is harmless compared to a scimitar overlooks the fact that both instruments can be used to accomplish a murder. Severing the head is more efficient than slitting the jugular, but in either case the victim would be equally dead. > [@](#): > > As we have mentioned numerous times, over 200 medical flights a year passed through Meigs, it was a base for Coast Guard and fire department rescues and helicoptors, and it allowed light plane traffic to go somewhere else besides O’Hare, Midway, Palwaukee, and Waukegan, all of which are at or above capacity. More flawed reasoning: **repetition does not transmute lies into truth**. (1) Meigs was not the linchpin of the City’s emergency response. Closing the airport does not jeopardize the delivery of fire, trauma or rescue services. (2) O’Hare and Midway are operating **below** capacity. Travel demand never rebounded to pre-9/11 levels, thus traffic at the city’s two major airports has been significantly reduced. > [@](#): > > So tell me, Koala, how come a small, 4,000 foot airstrip in the middle of Podunk, Anywhere can manage to make enough money to stay in business but Meigs can’t? Profit isn’t the sole consideration, nor the most important one. Compare Meigs to Lincoln Park Zoo, which costs a fortune to operate but doesn’t collect a penny in admission fees. Both are expenses to the Park District, but while LPZ is available for the education and enjoyment of everyone, Meigs was of primary benefit to visitors who considered themselves too rich, glamorous or important to step off a plane anywhere else. From the citizen’s perspective, if there were 14 alternative zoos in the metropolitan area including two very large zoos in the city proper, it would be ridiculous to spend millions of dollars to operate LPZ as a convenience for the benefit of tourists who consider themselves above the indignity of a brief car or train ride. You can use one of the City’s other two airports, one of the dozen in surrounding communities, or fly somewhere else if you like, but you won’t be landing at Meigs anymore without a copy of Microsoft Flight Simulator. Get used to it. > [@](#): > > > [@](#): > > > > If a mail sorter can shake enough anthrax spores through an envelope to kill a man, how many can you kill with a 50-lb bag sprinkled over an urban area from a light aircraft? > > Probably none. 50lbs is NOTHING. Cropdusters spray by the TON… **That is possibly the most fatuous remark you have ever made**. 200 pounds of weaponized anthrax, aerially dispersed on a clear night, is enough to kill three million people. It is the second most efficient means of murdering an entire population in existence. > [@](#): > > And, of course, this statement of yours totally ignores what I said much earlier about the difficult of spreading a powder from a small airplane. _Of course it ignores your earlier statements_. I don’t recognize your opinion as expert, you have a demonstrated history of lying, and the facts contradict you even when you supply the citations. > [@](#): > > … they are an apalling display of ignorance and you’re inability to construct an argument, due in large part to your lack of knowledge about aviation. Now, Broomstick. You asked me to stop pointing out that your paroxysms of hatred are symptomatic of a crippling sexual dysfunction and I’ve honored that. I expect to receive a reciprocal degree of courtesy from you, is that clear? ---
**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:** [April 25, 2003, 8:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/closing-miegs-field/165525/173 "2003-04-25T20:55:07Z")
> [@](#): > > More flawed reasoning: **repetition does not transmute lies into truth.** So, **KoalaBear** , why do you keep doing it? > [@](#): > > **That is possibly the most fatuous remark you have ever made.** 200 pounds of weaponized anthrax, aerially dispersed on a clear night, is enough to kill three million people. There is a difference between potential and reality. Just because it has the _potential_ of killing three million people does not mean that it _will_. It’s like saying, “We have enough nuclear weapons to destroy the Earth 100 time over.” What? Are you going to kill everything and then kill them 99 more times? No, of course not. Potential and reality are often not the same things. > [@](#): > > It is the second most efficient means of murdering an entire population in existence. Cite, please? > [@](#): > > I don’t recognize your opinion as expert, you have a demonstrated history of lying, 1. **Broomstick** has presented credentials that you have no reason to doubt. She has a long history of posting about aviation and **you** are the only one who says she is not qualified to do so. What makes _you_ right, and everyone else who has interacted with **Broomstick** completely mistaken about her credentials? Nothing. 2. Where has she lied? You keep bringing up the CIA. Don’t you think it’s possible – just _possible_ – that she was using hyperbole? Most people can recognize it when they see it. > [@](#): > > Now, Broomstick. You asked me to stop pointing out that your paroxysms of hatred are symptomatic of a crippling sexual dysfunction and I’ve honored that. I expect to receive a reciprocal degree of courtesy from you, is that clear? So you want us to refrain from pointing out that you exhibit all the symptoms of a paranoiac? And that you repeatedly post based on fears brought about by hysterical delusions? Just curious – How does closing Meigs protect you from SARS? ---
**Author:** ![Demise](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/34f0e0/32.png) [@Demise](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Demise)\ **Post date:** [April 25, 2003, 9:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/closing-miegs-field/165525/174 "2003-04-25T21:41:22Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by KoalaBear \* > \*\*.Now, Broomstick. You asked me to stop pointing out that your paroxysms of hatred are symptomatic of a crippling sexual dysfunction and I’ve honored that. I expect to receive a reciprocal degree of courtesy from you, is that clear? \*\* What’s clear is that you are still directly insulting people in GD, even if you are trying to disguise it. You earned a Pit thread several times over, and god only knows why **Broomstick** hasn’t given you one. :wally ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [April 26, 2003, 4:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/closing-miegs-field/165525/175 "2003-04-26T04:34:34Z")
If the mayor of my town tried to close down ANYTHING in the dark of night I would be PISSED. I don’t like snake oil politicians. Forget the airport, it is irrelevant to a discussion of terror attacks. It is the Tower that matters. Meigs was controlled airspace. Closing down the tower only decreases the control of that area. You could just as easily depart from Medway, Aaurora, Palwaukee, Shaumburg, Waukegan, etc… Although the Sears Tower was supposed to be one of the targets, it takes a really big plane to bring it down. If you tried to load explosives on a smaller plane you would certainly not do it at Meigs and draw all that attention. This was pure politics at its worst. I can only assume that Chicago will become another cash strapped housing project waiting to implode under its own weight. When I look at Daley I see a clownish Mayor McCheese who doesn’t understand what intrinsic qualities make a city worth living in or a place to visit and spend money. I wholly dislike opera but I would fight to keep it in my city for the common good. Chicago needs a mayor with more polish. ---
**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:** [May 2, 2003, 7:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/closing-miegs-field/165525/176 "2003-05-02T19:27:21Z")
Getting away from personal aquabbles Here’s an update from [AOPA](http://www.aopa.org/whatsnew/newsitems/2003/03-2-073x.html) (my bolds): > [@](#): > > _Forbes_ magazine publisher Rich Karlgaard took a swipe at Mayor Daley in his April 28 column. Under the headline “[Mayor Daley’s Big Goof](http://www.forbes.com/forbes/2003/0428/037.html),” he wrote, “This little jewel of an **airport was an asset to Chicago’s business community. It would have become more so in the years ahead.** ” That’s because of the new small jets coming online. These jets, particularly when chartered as “air limos” will be ideally suited to business travelers, and Meigs would have been the idea airport for service to Chicago. “Meigs Field was the perfect airport to serve tomorrow’s air limos,” Karlgaard told a national, business audience. “Unwisely, Chicago has surrendered a big asset.” > > [snip] > > Meanwhile, AOPA’s warnings about negative ripple effects at Chicago’s two air carrier airports, O’Hare and Midway, are beginning to come true. **Residents living near Midway are complaining** to city officials about increased noise at the airport due to increased GA traffic **since Meigs was closed**. ---
**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:** [May 4, 2003, 2:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/closing-miegs-field/165525/177 "2003-05-04T14:57:02Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by KoalaBear \* A large plane can take down a skyscraper but a small plane cannot; a small plane can distribute chemicals efficiently but a large plane cannot. No, **KoalaBear** , the _average small plane_ can NOT “distribute chemicals efficiently”. Which is _precisely_ why the Department of Homeland Security has asked the pilots of the United States to be on the look-out for _modified_ small planes and the loading of “unusual cargo”. Sure, the various government agents and authorities are looking, too, but adding 700,000+ citizens to the watch can’t hurt, especially since we’re watching for free. There’s even a hotline to directly report such suspicious things to the authorities. So… if the government can trust pilots to watch out and report this sort of thing, why can’t you? Perhaps you have a bias against pilots in general? > [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by KoalaBear \* repetition does not transmute lies into truth. Then provide cites for your statements instead of regurgitating them in paraphrase. > [@](#): > > Meigs was not the linchpin of the City’s emergency response. Closing the airport does not jeopardize the delivery of fire, trauma or rescue services. Doesn’t have to be a “linchpin” to be justified in its existance. 200 medical flights a year, various rescues… to my mind, that’s justification enough. You obviously disagree. Me, I like to have LOTS of options for rescue crews. Otherwise, why not have just one big ambulance barn for the entire city instead of scattering small-scale ambulance bases all over? The closure DOES seriously interfere with trauma transport to Northwestern Memorial Hospital. I expect they’ll come up with an alternative, but meanwhile it’s an inconvenience at best, and it might be fatal to some folks. [quote] > [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by KoalaBear \* O’Hare and Midway are operating **below** capacity. Travel demand never rebounded to pre-9/11 levels, thus traffic at the city’s two major airports has been significantly reduced. Nope, it’s back up to capacity. If anything burps in the system they have to delay/divert flights - as happened this last week when the new radar system went down. Flights went from around 90 per hour (that’s the pre-9/11 level. Actually, it’s the max permitted by the FAA) down to 70. There is NO wiggle room left in the airspace anymore. The FAA also suspended most “hold short” operations as a safety issue - just too many airplanes in one spot for the controllers to keep track of them all, and no one wants to see a runway incursion like the one at Tenerife where two fully loaded 747’s collided on the runway. When there are delays at O’Hare and Midway the planes either are diverted to other, nearby airports _when possible_ (because not all airplanes are compatible with all airports, and something like a radar failure can affect airports over a wide area) or the planes never take off, leading to delays in other parts of the country and lots of complaints. The system is quite complicated, however - it’s very hard to say that if you squeeze here it’s going to have a particular effect there or there. [quote] > [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by KoalaBear \* > Profit isn’t the sole consideration, nor the most important one. But you were arguing that the lack of profit on the part of Meigs was a justification for closing it. [quote] > [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by KoalaBear \* Compare Meigs to Lincoln Park Zoo, which costs a fortune to operate but doesn’t collect a penny in admission fees. Both are expenses to the Park District, but while LPZ is available for the education and enjoyment of everyone, Meigs was of primary benefit to visitors who considered themselves too rich, glamorous or important to step off a plane anywhere else. Actually, Meigs WAS available for “education and enjoyment”. There were viewing areas where the general public could watch the aircraft taking off and landing (these areas were separated by railings and fencing from the operational areas from a safety consideration, moving airplanes being somewhat hazardous to the incautious). This may be an alien notion to you, **Koala** , but there ARE people who enjoy watching airplanes even if they don’t fly, and in fact there are organizations of folks who indulge in airplane watching much as bird fanciers form bird-watching clubs. In addition, the Chicago Tuskegee Airmen used to regularly organize events where underpriviledged children would come out to Meigs, learn about airplanes and aviation, get a free ride, and be encouraged to stay in school, study, and pursue a career in aviation if that was their goal or interest. This was provided _at no cost_ to these children, and in many instances resulted in tutoring/mentoring relationships between the pilots and the children. Quite a nice, privately funded program that unquestionably did the city and its citizens some social good. There is more than one airline pilot - and more than one Air Force or Navy top gun - who got their first encouragement from the happenings at Meigs field. Sure, the program will continue, most likely at Lansing airport - problem is, Lansing is south of the city with _no_ public transportation whatsoever. Meigs you could get to by city bus. That’s a big deal - a lot of the families in the projects don’t own cars so if you can’t get there by bus or train you don’t go. So, for a lot of these kids the program is effectively over for good. I also take issue with this statement: > [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by KoalaBear \* Meigs was of primary benefit to visitors who considered themselves too rich, glamorous or important to step off a plane anywhere else. As a long-time Chicago pilot, I’d have to say the “rich and glamorous” use Palwaukee. For once thing, the services are better and the FBO really will roll out a genuine red carpet for you if you ask. It’s also much harder for the _papperazzi_ to get to, although Fox32 does get a foot in the door since their helicoptor is based there, or was when I flew out of there (Hanger One, to be specific) Those who want ego-stroking go to Palwaukee. Those going to Meigs (outside of previously mentioned medical and rescue flights) were small business, the Illinois governor, and various state and Federal legislators. It also served as a major staging area for the yearly Air and Water Show. The aforementioned Chicago Tuskegee airmen. And local pilots, such as myself. Oh, yes, myself - Rich? No. Glamorous? Hardly. Important? _I’m a secretary_. Wow, THAT’s a rich, glamourous, important position in life, now isn’t it? And no, I’m not doing this on my husband’s money - he earns about a 1/4 of what I do. Me thinks, **Koala** , that you have a bias against pilots in general. I don’t know what sort of “lifestyle” you think I’m enoying as one, but frankly, it isn’t what most people think. I’m wearing ratty sneakers and frayed blue jeans to the airport, flying airplanes where the seat upholstry really is repaired with duct tape, and doing without a lot of fancy toys my peers enjoy in order to afford my expensive little hobby. Personally, I feel it is worth making some small sacrifices in my life in order to fly. But I, and most other small plane pilots, are not rolling in the dough, “rich”, or glamourous. We’re secretaries, nurses, steelworkers, cops (retired and active), and other “blue collar” or low-level “white collar” types. Yes, we do have a lawyer at our field - but he’s not some free-wheeling type in Armani suits making millions. He’s a small-town generalist who does mostly estate planning for retirees - not an area you make a whole lot of money. Yes, we do have a couple of doctors - but an internist doesn’t make as much as people think they do. So, **Koala** , I have to wonder if some of your hostility towards myself and other pilots is based on a perceived class issue. If it is… ask yourself why you, yourself, don’t make enough money to do the things I do (that is - be able to afford it, not necessarially to actually do it). If you dismiss Meigs as something for only the “rich”… well, are you saying that the poor college student watching the airplanes take off and land (that was me in 1983 when I moved to Chicago) shouldn’t aspire to one day being in the cockpit? Are you saying that the little kid from the projects shouldn’t be exposed to that side of life and society? What are you saying to that child - “We’re closing this down because this is only for the priviledged and you aren’t priviledged”? Sounds like a slap in the fact to me - might as well tell that child not to dream of flying because they not only aren’t “priviledged” right now, you’re saying _they never will be_. And that’s a viciously condescending attitude from my viewpoint. Personally, I much prefer the Chicago Tuskegees’ attitude of “Kid, if you stay in school, get a good job, and work hard you, too, can enjoy this.” MUCH more positive. Show them that an honest life and honest work can get you something in life. Wow, what a concept. > [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by KoalaBear \* a convenience for the benefit of tourists who consider themselves above the indignity of a brief car or train ride. Where do you get this? I’ve ridden trains and busses in Chicago every working day for the last… oh, gosh, it’s 20 years now. I don’t find public transporation an “indignity”, nor do several hundred thousand other commuters in Chicago. Take a look at who rides the bus downtown on Michigan Avenue - fur coats and jewels all over the place. Even the rich ride the CTA. Car ride? It’s not the driving that’s a pain in the butt, it’s the _parking_. Parking in downtown Chicago is insufficient and expensive. Sure, drive my car downtown - great, then where do I put it while I’m at work/shopping/whatever? > [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by KoalaBear \* You can use one of the City’s other two airports, one of the dozen in surrounding communities, or fly somewhere else if you like, but you won’t be landing at Meigs anymore without a copy of Microsoft Flight Simulator. You really like that “sticking it to the rich” aspect of the whole thing, don’t you? Well, truth is that if I fly into someplace like O’Hare (which I am legally allowed to do) in my little beat-up old airplane it’s going to delay and inconvenience a couple hundred other folks because of the effect slow planes have on heavy airliner traffic. Ditto for Midway, it’s only marginally less crazy. Remember that next time your 747 experiences delays or is in a holding pattern when you’re returning from your next vacation or business trip. But, of course, that doesn’t matter - it’s much more important to stick it to the “rich”, the “glamourous”, the “former users of Meigs”. How _kind_ of you to _permit_ me to fly “somewhere else”. :rolleyes: Truth is, **Koala** , you _don’t_ control where I can and can not fly. That really seems to bug both you and Mayor Daley. > [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by KoalaBear \* 200 pounds of weaponized anthrax, aerially dispersed on a clear night, is enough to kill three million people. Let’s see, you have to 1. “weaponize” the anthrax - which apparently is not something terribly easy to do. I mean, that whole “anthrax in the mail” thing, while horrifying, did not result in mass casualities. 2. “aerially disperse” it - which I’ve already explained is NOT as easy as dumping a bag of dust out the window. You’ll have to modify the airplane. 3. “on a clear night” - hon, Meigs is by a BIG LAKE. “Clear nights” are a _minority_. You’ve either got fog/lake weather OR a good breeze coming off the water, either of which is going to seriously complicate your proposed terrorist attack. Then there are the nights when the prevailing westerlies will send the wind back over the water - that is, over a hundred miles of uninhabited open water. You might kill some fish (might) and an odd sailboat crew, but c’mon…! Could it be done? _In theory_. But there are so many OTHER, easier, and more certain ways to kill people… including truck bombs and suicide bombers… that this is an unlikely sceanario. > [@](#): > > _Originally posted by KoalaBear \* Of course it ignores your earlier statements_. I don’t recognize your opinion as expert And I have asked you time and time again what YOUR credentials in aviation are. Between your ignorant statements and your utter refusal to give any credentials I can only conclude _you have none_. Which gives you all the credibility of a flat-earther discussing the curvature of the horizon. As for your insinuations about my sexuality (again!) - that’s out of line in Great Debates. Again, you are invited to the Pit if you wish to play those games. I fail to see what my (or anyone’s) sex life has to do with either the closure of Meigs field, the idiocy of Mayor Daley, terorism, national security, aviation, or your inability to paricipate in a debate according to the posted rules of this forum. > [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by KoalaBear \* You earned a Pit thread several times over, and god only knows why Broomstick hasn’t given you one. Well, between helping to arrange airborne medical transport for an elderly disabled woman, family emergencies that sent me off to Michigan for a bit (which is why there’s a several day gap in my posting on the Dope), my husband off to Tennessee and Virginia, and a couple other more minor disasters I’ve been a little busy these past two weeks and just didn’t have time to waste on the likes of someone like **Koala** in a Pit rant. I mean, if I’m going to do one, I’m going to do it right. No doubt **Koala** will be gleeful to know that the cost of all of the above chaos will keep me on the ground at least a month, because the only place we could draw extra money from is the flying account. “Rich” my sweet patootie, I can only _wish_…! ---
**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:** [May 4, 2003, 3:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/closing-miegs-field/165525/178 "2003-05-04T15:21:04Z")
> [@](#): > > 1. “aerially disperse” it - which I’ve already explained is NOT as easy as dumping a bag of dust out the window. You’ll have to modify the airplane. My mom took part in an “aerial burial” back in the '70s. Of course ashes swirled around the cockpit, plus she lost her brand new Ray Bans when the slipstream caught them. There was a stylish fish swinning around, I suspect. In other “dispersal” news, I just read in _Flying_ or _AOPA Pilot_ about a crash that claimed four lives. They were dispersing the ashes of the pilot’s mother. Apparently the ashes came back into the cockpit and the pilot lost control. Pretty ironic. [nitpick] **Broomstick** , your last quote was from **Demise** ’s post. [/nitpick] At any rate, Meigs was not a terror threat. The only reason it was closed was because Daley A) wants to build something from which he can make a handsome personal profit, or B) because Daley has an irrational fear of small aircraft, hubris, and perceived authority that he is above the law or the democratic process. It’s too bad for those people whose flights are delayed because of light aircraft operating at a major airport like O’Hare. Small-aircraft pilots have the right to fly into LAX, but we don’t. Why tie up the commercial system costing the commercial carriers millions of dollars, when Santa Monica is so close? While I enjoy living under the traffic SMO’s traffic pattern I can understand how some people (as noted in the AOPA article) might not like living under the pattern for Midway. I think Friends of Meigs Field and other interested parties should get together and point out the disadvantages of closing Meigs and the illegal way it was done. I’m thinking, some television spots around election time. (And of course, criminal charges should be pressed for Daley’s violation of state and federal laws.) ---
**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:** [May 4, 2003, 3:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/closing-miegs-field/165525/179 "2003-05-04T15:22:33Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Magiver \* > If the mayor of my town tried to close down ANYTHING in the dark of night I would be PISSED. I don’t like snake oil politicians. Me, either. You know, I never actually used Meigs myself, it was the WAY in which it was shut down that ticked me off. By the way - Da Mayor is seeking the authority for the city of Chicago to condemn and acquire land in DuPage county for the purposes of expanding O’Hare. That’s right - a Cook County elected official is trying to seize land in another Illinois county. This whole mess just keeps getting snarkier and snarkier… > [@](#): > > Forget the airport, it is irrelevant to a discussion of terror attacks. It is the Tower that matters. Meigs was controlled airspace. Closing down the tower only decreases the control of that area. Yeah. I was listening to some Gary controllers (they’ve hired one of the Meigs guys, actually) who were saying how O’Hare and Midway are both arguing the _other_ guys should have control over the VFR traffic corridor - both groups feel they’re too busy and should be concentrating on taking care of the IFR traffic into and out of the big airports. Rumor has it Daley wanted the airport closed but to keep the tower open for traffic control. The FAA said no deal - if you want a tower you have to have an airport to go with it. But I have no solid cites on that. Intriguing thought, though. > [@](#): > > This was pure politics at its worst. I can only assume that Chicago will become another cash strapped housing project waiting to implode under its own weight. When I look at Daley I see a clownish Mayor McCheese who doesn’t understand what intrinsic qualities make a city worth living in or a place to visit and spend money. Yep. That’s Daley. He’s forgotten that it’s business that provides jobs and tax money - both directly and through the taxes on the employees’ income. It’s all about tourism - but only certain kinds of tourism. > [@](#): > > I wholly dislike opera but I would fight to keep it in my city for the common good. Yeah, see, that’s how I feel about golf courses – don’t like the game myself, think the courses are a waste of space and source of pollution and evironmental degradation, but I recognize that they do serve a purpose in the community and many of my fellow citizens value them highly. Therefore, I support their right to exist and recognize the benefits a country club/gold course can bring to an area. If folks are going to live heaped up in dense piles they have to develop some tolerance for activities they themselves may not enjoy but are desired or required by their neighbors. ---
**Author:** ![KoalaBear](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/e47c2d/32.png) [@KoalaBear](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/KoalaBear)\ **Post date:** [May 5, 2003, 1:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/closing-miegs-field/165525/180 "2003-05-05T01:57:49Z")
> [@](#): > > _Originally posted by Demise_: > > What’s clear is that you are still directly insulting people in GD, even if you are trying to disguise it. You earned a Pit thread several times over, and god only knows why **Broomstick** hasn’t given you one. > :wally **You accuse me of making disguised insults and then _hide behind an icon in order to call me a putz_?!** * * * > [@](#): > > _Originally posted by Magiver_: > > It is the Tower that matters. Meigs was controlled airspace. Closing down the tower only decreases the control of that area. _My, the SDMB has attracted a quite a few aviation enthusiasts lately._ I don’t think so. If the airport is closed, it isn’t adding or removing planes from the sky, so it doesn’t need a tower to manage that traffic. Chicago’s airspace is coordinated by regional ATC, so for that purpose it doesn’t matter whether Meigs is open or not. > [@](#): > > Although the Sears Tower was supposed to be one of the targets, it takes a really big plane to bring it down. More importantly it takes a small plane to efficiently disperse a chemical or biological toxin, which is one of the reasons general aviation isn’t off the hook. > [@](#): > > This was pure politics at its worst. Actually it was more like evicting boorish houseguests: You don’t let them live there until the court decides they have to go, you kick them out and let them try to sue their way back in. The more I hear about the matter, the more I’m convinced that’s why Meigs was closed the way it was. > [@](#): > > I can only assume that Chicago will become another cash strapped housing project waiting to implode under its own weight. When I look at Daley I see a clownish Mayor McCheese who doesn’t understand what intrinsic qualities make a city worth living in or a place to visit and spend money. The quality of life in Chicago or any other city is determined by a universe of factors including housing, schools, businesses, parks, transportation, cultural institutions, medical care, cost of living, crime, roads, and sanitation to name a few. The absence of a lakefront airstrip isn’t going to cause _anybody_ to sell their condominium and move to Detroit. > [@](#): > > I wholly dislike opera but I would fight to keep it in my city for the common good. I doubt you’d put up much of a fight if there were 14 opera houses in your neighborhood already including two very large ones on your own block. * * * > [@](#): > > _Originally posted by Broomstick_: > > No, KoalaBear, the average small plane can NOT “distribute chemicals efficiently”. Saying ‘the average small plane cannot distribute chemicals efficiently’ is like saying ‘the average large plane cannot fly at supersonic velocity’: the objection is irrelevant in either case. > [@](#): > > There’s even a hotline to directly report such suspicious things to the authorities. What was your license number again? > [@](#): > > The closure DOES seriously interfere with trauma transport to Northwestern Memorial Hospital. Then perhaps you can explain _how_. > [@](#): > > > [@](#): > > > > O’Hare and Midway are operating below capacity. > > Nope, it’s back up to capacity. I don’t believe you. > [@](#): > > …the Chicago Tuskegee Airmen used to regularly organize events where underpriviledged children would come out to Meigs, learn about airplanes and aviation, get a free ride… _Used to_? Are underpriveleged children too good to fly out of alternative airports now? > [@](#): > > …the > program will continue, most likely at Lansing airport - problem is, Lansing is south of the city with no public transportation whatsoever. They can rent a bus you know: schools, churches and tour groups do it all the time. > [@](#): > > > [@](#): > > > > Meigs was of primary benefit to visitors who considered themselves too rich, glamorous or important to step off a plane anywhere else. > > As a long-time Chicago pilot, I’d have to say the “rich and glamorous” use Palwaukee. For once thing, the services are better and the FBO really will roll out a genuine red carpet for you if you ask… Good. Then the rich and glamorous won’t have to slum it by landing at Meigs anymore, leaving only those with an exaggerated sense of self importance to cope with the loss. > [@](#): > > Those going to Meigs… were small business, the Illinois governor, and various state and Federal legislators… And local pilots, such as myself. Thank you for illustrating the point. > [@](#): > > Me thinks, Koala, that you have a bias against pilots in general. Methinks, Broomstick, that the tables got turned all of a sudden and that’s what you’re mad as hell about. Had the Mayor announced he was closing the airport at the end of the week, the “Fiends of Meigs” would have gotten a court injunction to hold the facility open while they postponed the inevitable for another five to ten years. By destroying the runway, the Mayor guaranteed that if an injunction was obtained to prevent the city from redeveloping the land, it would lock the airport closed while the group spends itself into the ground trying to get it open again. What can I say but \_ **Ha, Ha!** _\? > [@](#): > > So, Koala, I have to wonder if some of your hostility towards myself and other pilots is based on a perceived class issue. Actually I’m hostile to anyone who is fundamentally dishonest – if they happen to be pilots, secretaries or what have you that’s [coincidental](http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=coincidental) rather than [causal](http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=causal). > [@](#): > > I fail to see what my (or anyone’s) sex life has to do with either the closure of Meigs field, the idiocy of Mayor Daley, terorism, national security, aviation, or your inability to paricipate in a debate according to the posted rules of this forum. You’re missing the point, Broomstick, or more likely just pretending not to see it. You don’t request a cease-fire (“_we’ve already been warned by a mod to make this less personal_”) and then make remarks like these at every opportunity thereafter:[ul][li]You’ve proven yourself more ignorant than average when it comes to aviation…[/li][li]in fact, you’re cheap entertainment…[/li][li]Geez, will you get yourself educated? [/li][li]I’d have to say it’s obvious that KoalaBear has a bug up his/her backside…[/li][li]Once again you display ignorance of the subject at hand…[/li][li]they are an apalling display of ignorance and you’re inability to construct an argument, due in large part to your lack of knowledge about aviation…[/li]Get educated. You’ll be more entertaining that way.[/ul]Your sex life has equally as much to do with the closure of Meigs field, the idiocy of Mayor Daley, terrorism, national security, aviation, or your inability to conduct an honest debate. I checked the ‘posted rules of this forum’ by the way, and the only one I could find was ‘_don’t be a jerk_’: my remarks are as appropriate as yours, so you might want to try a less hypocritical approach to negotiating detente. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/closing-miegs-field/165525.md?page=8) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/closing-miegs-field/165525.md?page=10)