Is the DC ADIZ on the charts?

"EDR" wrote in message
...

It doesn't matter if a "depiction" can be found on the web. It probably
carries a "NOT FOR NAVIGATIONAL USE" notice.
If I am at an airport preparing for a flight through that airspace, I
most likely do not have access to a computer with a color printer that
is capable of accurately reproducing the chart to scale so that it can
be used for navigational purposes.
If I call Flight Service on the telephone, I will be read the NOTAM
text, not an accurate pictoral depiction.
If I have received the briefing from the FSS specialist, it is
considered that I am fully informed, when in fact I have only a fuzzy
notion of the actual boundaries.
Also consider that because of the irregularity of the airspace
boundaries, I may be able to "draw" the boundaries, given lat/lon
coordinates to create waypoints, on my VFR only, handheld GPS. Is this
acceptable for navigation? Maybe
Does the FAA consider this "official"? Probably not.
So, if they are not willing to chart the boundaries on the offical,
government produced charts, issued every six months, how are we
expected to know, in the cockpit, flying along looking for ground
references, where the boundaries are?


Nevertheless, AeroPlanner's online charts do show it.

"Snowbird" wrote in message
om

Are you saying NACO does not have the authority to depict the
DC ADIZ on the sectional charts or to include the NOTAMs in the
AF/D?

No, the NACO rep said (as Ron said) "We can't chart temporary airspace."
The next logical question posed was "when will this temporary airspace go
away". The answer, of course, is "we don't know, but we don't expect it to
disappear any time soon."

If NACO does not have the authority, who does?

NACO makes the charts. The FAA makes the airspace. Right now, at least,
the various security agencies are telling the FAA to make this airspace.
The FAA claims to be on our side which is why it's only a "temporary"
airspace change.

Are you saying the security agencies are preventing NACO from
depicting the ADIZ on the charts?

No, bureaucratic rules are preventing them from charting the ADIZ. The
security agencies are forcing the FAA to accommodate their demands for
restricted airspace. That's the role we're being told they're playing. We
were told stories about some of the changes that were demanded by these SA's
that clearly indicated they had no idea how the aviation system works.

At least Potomac Approach controllers appear to be seriously trying to make
our GA lives as easy as possible while they and we are getting squeezed by
these arbitrary rules.

--
John T
http://tknowlogy.com/tknoFlyer
__________

"G.R. Patterson III" wrote in message ...


Dave Stadt wrote:

Good grief, locals can't even figure it out. As chopped up as the airspace
is out east what chance do transients have.

Oh, we have an excellent chance at it. Just go around the entire class-B, and
you'll be safe. If you don't run into some other TFR.

Way around. The ADIZ exudes past the class B boundaries. It follows the mode C
veil on part of it's borders but sticks out farther to the east and south as well.

On 13 Nov 2003 16:46:03 -0800, (Snowbird)
wrote:

if someone could obtain contact information for the
FAA's William Shumann

From:
http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_publi...C-233115A1.pdf
Comes:
FAA Contact: William Shumann at (202) 267-3883 or

wrote in message . ..
FAA Contact: William Shumann at (202) 267-3883 or


Thanks, Larry. Hope it's the right chap. This is what I just
sent.

Dear Sir,

I write with regard to an article published by the WebZine "AvWeb"
http://www.avweb.com/eletter/archive...ll.html#186076
which quoted you as follows:
Since Feb. 10, when the ADIZ was put in place in Washington, it
has been violated more than 600 times. "Frankly, we're a bit
frustrated that pilots are still violating it, and we don't know
why," the FAA's William Shumann told AVweb yesterday. "It's on
the charts, it's on our Web site."

I would like to point out that while the FRZ (flight restricted zone)
is charted, the ADIZ is NOT, in fact, charted on the latest
VFR Sectional Charts in any way. Neither is the NOTAM creating the
ADIZ published in the Airport and Facilities Directory.

While it is useful to have graphical representations of the
ADIZ available on the internet, not all pilots use the Internet
to flight plan. Even pilots who prefer to flight plan online are
often without internet services whilst flightplanning enroute and
certainly whilst in the cockpit.

In fact, to my knowledge there is no official government publication
useable by pilots for in-cockpit navigation which depicts the DC ADIZ.

I would like to make the constructive suggestion that in order to
reduce the frustrating number of ADIZ incursions, the following
changes could be made:

1. Depict the ADIZ on the next printing of sectional and terminal area
charts of the DC area (Washington sectonal and TAC). If possible,
issue
an immediate special printing since these charts are printed on 6
month cycles.

2. Include the NOTAM plain text in the Northeast AF/D. Since these
are printed on 56 day cycles a special issuance might be superfluous.

3. Reference the NOTAM in the remarks section of every airport
inside the ADIZ/FRZ in the Northeast AF/D.

I am told by friends who have attended local DC pilot meetings and
spoken with NACO representatives regarding this issue, that NACO is
reluctant to make these changes and has refused to do so on the
grounds that they are "temporary". However, other temporary changes
such as flight restrictions for the Olympics have been charted in the
past; the FRZ iteself is "temporary" yet is charted.

If people in the FAA are indeed frustrated with the number of
incursions and wish to reduce them, I would like to suggest that the
absence of accurately charted depictions of the ADIZ on government
publications intended for navigational use by pilots is one possible
reason, and one which could readily be remedied were someone with the
appropriate authority to issue to NACO the appropriate direction.

Yours Sincerely,
Sydney Hoeltzli
PP ASEL IA

Great letter, Sydney!
I trust you sent it "overnight" to convey a sense of urgency. ;-)

"EDR" wrote in message


Great letter, Sydney!

I disagree. I would suggest rephrasing this section:

quote
I would like to make the constructive suggestion that in order to
reduce the frustrating number of ADIZ incursions, the following
changes could be made:
/quote

I would have used this language:

"I would like to make the constructive suggestion that the ADIZ be
abolished. Barring this sensible solution, perhaps these alternatives would
help:"

Don't give them the impression that you're willing to accept the ADIZ -
unless, of course, you are willing.

--
John T
http://tknowlogy.com/tknoFlyer
__________

Ron Natalie wrote:

Way around. The ADIZ exudes past the class B boundaries. It follows the mode C
veil on part of it's borders but sticks out farther to the east and south as well.

Yep. That's why I take the north route (most of my runs through the area are to
TYS).

George Patterson
If you're not part of the solution, you can make a lot of money prolonging
the problem.

John T wrote:

"I would like to make the constructive suggestion that the ADIZ be
abolished. Barring this sensible solution, perhaps these alternatives would
help:"

Yeah! In fact, the effort to do this are probably a big reason why the ADIZ is
NOT charted. I suspect we have allies in the FAA and the mapping people. Their
efforts or our behalf should not be in vain!

George Patterson
If you're not part of the solution, you can make a lot of money prolonging
the problem.

"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in message
news:Gk4tb.119|
|
| Nevertheless, AeroPlanner's online charts do show it.

When did AeroPlanner become a source of official information?