[MilCom] KBAF "Unfriendly" Grounds?

[Ken]

Bill & the group:

IMHO it really places more emphasis (officer's recent conference attendance) 
on  "surveillance" type activities, which is basically what the "on scene" 
fun part of the hobby is:  Watching, scanner radio monitoring, logging 
callsigns, taking pictues (still/video), & using binoculars.  Classic poster 
boy or girl for the "Eagle Eyes" Program & appropriate reporting. Remember 
that the 104 FW will be converting to 20 F15's & also into a US air defense 
"on alert" mission under NORTHCOM http://www.northcom.mil/ & 
http://www.neads.ang.af.mil/, versus the A10's that were primarily just 
training for a combat role.

I do believe that the various bases secuity officials know the 'hobby' "on 
scene" players are in their respective areas.     At KBAF I would think that 
at the civilian side where the airport administrative offices, control 
tower,  "Flight Deck" restaurant, and FBO are located would still remain 
accessible to hobbyists.  It appears that the new administration building is 
actually going to have an observation deck, but it's unclear as to whether 
you will have to purchase food at the new "upscale" restaurant that will 
replace the "Flight Deck" type of food.

At other areas along the fence line, I'm going to assume that it will be the 
same policy as KCEF to identify & order departure from the area.

Info about Barnes Municipal Airport/ANGB can  be found at:
http://www.barnesairport.com/
http://www.mabarn.ang.af.mil/
http://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/EPA-IMPACT/2006/July/Day-21/i11594.htm


K

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Bill Jones" <wejones at megalink.net>
To: "MilCom" <milcom at mailman.qth.net>
Sent: Saturday, September 09, 2006 4:37 PM
Subject: Re: [MilCom] KBAF "Unfriendly" Grounds?


>
>
> On 9 Sep 2006 at 14:40, Ken wrote:
>
>> Hmmm...  Look at this recent article in the 104 FW "Air Scoop"
>> http://www.mabarn.ang.af.mil/airscoop/aug06/Aug_06_EagleEye's_Program.htm
>>
>> Doesn't look good for anymore "on scene" hobbyists activity in the 
>> future!!!
>
> ???  I may have missed something, but I don't see anything in the 
> referenced
> document that should in any way limit anything legal that you currently 
> do.
> All it does is suggest what might be suspicious, it doesn't say that any 
> of
> those activities will be prohibited or even questioned.  It just means 
> that
> you might be more likely to be watched, and I'd be unhappy if that wasn't 
> the
> case.
>   I say "legal" above because it may actually be that what you are doing 
> is
> already not legal, but the rules are being ignorred.  Military bases have 
> a
> habit of making lots of things illegal, but don't enforce the rules, so 
> this
> could result in them enforcing existing rules more to the letter.  But 
> that is
> nothing unusual.