Justice Department Aircraft?
Fuel Exhaustion?
http://www.comcast.net/video/plane-lands-on-n-j-highway/1775504741/Comcast/1775347611/
What about the NJ CAP? There was nothing in there that indicated anything about CAP.
According to this it was on loan to the local prosecutor and the pilot also flies for CG Aux.
http://www.myfoxny.com/dpp/news/local_news/new_jersey/plane-lands-on-i80-in-new-jersey-20110131-akd
Can't think of why a prosecutor's office needs a small plane for operational purposes.
Well, I don't see any aircraft in NJWG with that kind of a "fuel problem".
They said nothing about CAP in the whole thing. You think they would have eaten up "US Air Force" if it was.. the justice dept. has airplanes too.
Cute Tecnam P92: http://www.tecnam.com.au/category/22/default.asp (http://www.tecnam.com.au/category/22/default.asp)
Prisoner Transports....
Why not lol
That type plane was a joy to fly. As far as mission capability, the only thing I can think of is of the good down looking visibility while burning like 6 gallons of auto gas/hr.
US Justice Department??? Seems like a pretty vague title. DEA, CBP, FBI? None of which fly LSA's that Im aware of.
Quote from: Flying Pig on February 03, 2011, 05:38:23 AM
US Justice Department??? Seems like a pretty vague title. DEA, CBP, FBI? None of which fly LSA's that Im aware of.
According to one of the news stories I read, it was some sort of "security training" flight and had a pilot, flight instructor, and LEO on aboard. Most likely they are withholding the actual agency for opsec-type reasons.
I seem to recall an article (3 or 4 years ago ?) about the potential use of LSAs (such as the SkyArrow 600) as a cheap L.E./Homeland Security surveillance aircraft. Good visibility tandem seating /slow/low fuel burn etc.
Never heard where the idea ultimately went.
One can look at photos of the aircraft showing tail number of the aircraft - N911TE - and check the public FAA database. It's registered to the Sheriff's Association of Texas.
Photos of the tail show the logo of the Bergen County, NJ prosecutor's office.
From a public news article about the crash: The plane is registered to the Sheriff's Association of Texas. A spokesman for the association said the plane is owned by the Department of Justice and was loaned to the Bergen County Prosecutors Office through as "a cooperative lower-cost aviation asset for law enforcement."
Mike
Quote from: blackrain on February 03, 2011, 02:54:48 PM
I seem to recall an article (3 or 4 years ago ?) about the potential use of LSAs (such as the SkyArrow 600) as a cheap L.E./Homeland Security surveillance aircraft. Good visibility tandem seating /slow/low fuel burn etc.
Never heard where the idea ultimately went.
Hopefully the idea went right into the toilet!!!
Maybe, if all you want to do is orbit a staionary location. An LSA would be useless in real world surveillance ops. You start traveling to locations, flying IFR, into and out of locations and carrying any mounted optics. I have never done a surveillance op with the eyeball nor do I plan to. Even if you decided to use an LSA with the MK-1 eyeball, you would be hard pressed to do any mobile surveillance. Not a good idea when you target vehicle is driving down the freeway and pulling away from you. LSA's have a
VERY limited use for any type of real surveillance. If you just want to motor around and check the box on your security check log, fine.....but thats about it. Flying a Turbo 206, Im even lacking in some respects because its loaded ot max gross weight with comm gear and a big fat camera. Not to mention the cop in the back seat who's made it a point to not miss any meals >:D
If you had an LSA patrolling a small city or assisting on local call to hep with perimeters you would be OK usually. But your response time would be unacceptable in most real world LE applications unless you were just covering a small area.
Quote from: Flying Pig on February 03, 2011, 05:00:13 PM
Quote from: blackrain on February 03, 2011, 02:54:48 PM
I seem to recall an article (3 or 4 years ago ?) about the potential use of LSAs (such as the SkyArrow 600) as a cheap L.E./Homeland Security surveillance aircraft. Good visibility tandem seating /slow/low fuel burn etc.
Never heard where the idea ultimately went.
Hopefully the idea went right into the toilet!!!
Maybe, if all you want to do is orbit a staionary location. An LSA would be useless in real world surveillance ops. You start traveling to locations, flying IFR, into and out of locations and carrying any mounted optics. I have never done a surveillance op with the eyeball nor do I plan to. Even if you decided to use an LSA with the MK-1 eyeball, you would be hard pressed to do any mobile surveillance. Not a good idea when you target vehicle is driving down the freeway and pulling away from you. LSA's have a VERY limited use for any type of real surveillance. If you just want to motor around and check the box on your security check log, fine.....but thats about it. Flying a Turbo 206, Im even lacking in some respects because its loaded ot max gross weight with comm gear and a big fat camera. Not to mention the cop in the back seat who's made it a point to not miss any meals >:D
If you had an LSA patrolling a small city or assisting on local call to hep with perimeters you would be OK usually. But your response time would be unacceptable in most real world LE applications unless you were just covering a small area.
Wasn't judging whether it was a good or bad idea. From a weight perspective you may have to limit it to rookies at least in the back seat who haven't been making a lot of visits to the donut shop. >:D Yet....
Limited usefulness granted and would probably be restricted to a short radius of operation over an urban area. Nice and bumpy ride during the summer too. That said a small sensor package controlled from the ground in place of a back seat observer would probably be better. Guess that would make it a contradiction in terms,essentially a manned UAV.
;D
Quote from: Flying Pig on February 03, 2011, 05:00:13 PMAn LSA would be useless in real world surveillance ops.
What about for traffic surveillance? Would an LSA be cost effective enough as a platform for catching speeders?
Most agencies that do traffic use their planes for other missions. Traffic is just one mission, so now you have to maintain a separate fleet for one specific mission. If all you were doing was orbiting a traffic zone that would work. But your plane isnt much good for anything else. In modern day LE, good surveillance is done with a long range color camera, thermal and NVGs. Obviously not everyone can afford that stuff. We are getting ready to put a $170K upgrade on our plane for the optics alone. The original camera was $475K. Its never a good thing when your undercover officer can hear the plane orbiting overhead while hes trying to make a deal, praying the bad guy doesnt catch on.
Semantics, but traffic isnt "surveillance" in the LE arena. Traffic watch is traffic watch. If all you had was an LSA, you could do what you could do, but that isnt a whole lot. Units who use LSA's for Law Enforcement arent even scratching the surface, but if thats all they need, then I guess they'd be happy. If it helps them break in an aviation unit to hopefully justify something else, then I say go for it. But an LSA should be a starting point from an LE standpoint hopefully.
Quote from: N Harmon on February 03, 2011, 06:21:52 PM
Quote from: Flying Pig on February 03, 2011, 05:00:13 PMAn LSA would be useless in real world surveillance ops.
What about for traffic surveillance? Would an LSA be cost effective enough as a platform for catching speeders?
I don't want it easier for them to catch me. >:D I still have a tendency drive like I'm in Iraq.
I can neither confirm or deny a LE aircraft MAY have gotten me back in the 80s.