A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

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.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Piloting
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Security in the USA



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
  #19  
Old May 16th 05, 12:22 AM
Hank Rausch
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

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

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
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


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:46 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2025 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.