Skip to main content

View Diary: Exxon's Skies: Why Is Exxon Controlling the No-Fly Zone Over Arkansas Tar Sands Spill? (219 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  under direction of Tom Suhrhoff (12+ / 0-)

    That's the problem right there. There should be a government contact for all of this, not a private one.

    Stupid mistake. They deserve the criticism.

    Makes a perfectly sensible 1000' altitude rule look sinister.

    It rubs the loofah on its skin or else it gets the falafel again.

    by Fishgrease on Wed Apr 03, 2013 at 08:42:00 PM PDT

    •  Just as reasonable to (4+ / 0-)

      put this zone under the control of the guy responsible for the aircraft operation that is the center of the request.  Without an understanding of what is really being done here one can draw all kins of nefarious conclusions.  When you get even a little information it makes perfectly reasonable sense.

      "You have attributed conditions to villainy that simply result from stupidity"

      by newfie on Thu Apr 04, 2013 at 05:13:32 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Hi Fish! (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Larsstephens, Fishgrease

      I was hoping you'd show up.

      I'm surprised you haven't run into this situation in your work.

      An example:
      I am an Engineering and Land Surveying Technician who occasionally works inside the right of way of a local public railroad. I am trained as an Employee in Charge (EIC) of safety.

      When my firm (separate from the railroad) needs to go do work near the tracks, I file a form with the railroad dispatcher telling them what I'm doing, and if I need to limit train access to the area. Because I am the person ON-SITE and I have final responsibility for my crew's safety, I have final say on whether or not a train can go through.

      My requests are thoroughly reviewed by the dispatcher  and the operating authority (a public agency) for the railroad.

      When I'm doing roadway work, I can also shut down a public street by filing an encroachment permit and a traffic control plan with the city.

      Surhoff is my equivalent in this situation. He's just a safety officer following what is a standard operating procedure for many transportation authorities.

      // Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.

      •  There's an arguable difference here. (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Mad Season

        We're talking about the air. Airspace is controlled ONLY by the government. I still say they deserve the criticism.

        They could have assigned some mid-level government flunky to be in Suhrhoff's back pocket, no problem.

        He would have been the one with the phone number.

        Easy. Accomplishes the same thing, Suhrhoff is still in control, but they don't create the needless outrage of a private company controlling airspace.

        Not cutting a break here. It's a stupid move.

        It rubs the loofah on its skin or else it gets the falafel again.

        by Fishgrease on Thu Apr 04, 2013 at 07:37:10 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  My point is: (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Mad Season

        Yes, people are taking this wrong.

        But this is something it's very easy to take wrong and it would have been ridiculously easy to fix that.

        It rubs the loofah on its skin or else it gets the falafel again.

        by Fishgrease on Thu Apr 04, 2013 at 07:41:33 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site