![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
I would vote for (a), modified, as follows:
Even though as a pilot in the DC area, I am as inconvenienced and frustrated by the ADIZ as everyone else, I can understand its rationale--a buffer zone to qualify/charcterize traffic around the DC area. But the last incursion brought to light 2 flaws: (1) It barely worked for a C-150 doing 95 mph-- I mean, they were at 3 miles from the White House before the shooters were in place with launch authorization--many previous posts to this newsgroup have highlighted the fact that a faster platform could have been on target well before a response could have been brought to bear (2) it responds best to platforms that pose the least threat--lost light singles with crappy navigation/comms--kind of like the all the news stories of the TSA beating up on old ladies with tweezers and sewing pins and letting the guns through If the ADIZ is going to really protect us then it has to expanded for faster aircraft, in other words a "time on target" envelope rather than a fixed radius for all aircraft. Light planes would have an ADIZ at the current radius; faster ones at an expanded envelope. In order to implement this, some means of characterization needs to be in place to enforce it. I think current sensor technology allows this. As a submarine driver during the cold war, I used a combination of electromagnetic, infrared, and acoustic sensors that (I think) could accomplish this--ID the target at point of incursion. To get an idea: The acoustic sensors could tell you not only that the plane was a C-150, but that the #3 cylinder was not going to make it to TBO The infrared sensors would allow you to see the structural girders of the aircraft internally, because they are at a slightly different temperature than the skin The EM sensors were truly magic, without going into a lot of detail they would provide you with every possible bit of information about an emitter, down to its place of manufacture As it stands now the ADIZ is like a lot of the "feel good, look good, not really do anything" meausures post-911. Like the non-Title 10 National Guardsmen standing around airports immediately afterwards--pure eye candy. Hank Rausch |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Pilots Group Grades U.S. Aviation Security an 'F' | George Patterson | Piloting | 33 | March 13th 05 12:58 PM |
ramifications of new TSA rules on all non-US and US citizen pilots | paul k. sanchez | Piloting | 19 | September 27th 04 11:49 PM |
27 Apr 2004 - Today’s Military, Veteran, War and National Security News | Otis Willie | Naval Aviation | 0 | April 27th 04 11:54 PM |
TSA's General Aviation Airport Security Recommendations Might Become Requirements | Larry Dighera | Piloting | 1 | February 25th 04 05:11 PM |
another "either you are with us ..." story | Jeff Franks | Piloting | 2 | December 31st 03 12:04 AM |