Incursion statement issued

On Mon, 23 May 2005 23:31:07 -0400, "John T" wrote in
: :

"Larry Dighera" wrote in message


Without a sectional of that end of the country, I have difficulty
appreciating the diversion. Could you describe it?

DC area including ADIZ and P-40:
http://www.aopa.org/images/whatsnew/.../03-1-063x.jpg

Flight path:
http://tinyurl.com/8ow44

They weren't trying to avoid P-40 (Camp David airspace NW of Washington).
They were on a direct path to Lumberton, NC.

Thank you for the links.

The ADIZ is clearly marked on the sectional, so that it can't be
missed by any pilot using it. I wonder if the PIC was using an
expired, pre-ADIZ sectional, or any chart at all for navigation?
Given his apparent lack of recent flight experience, I wonder how long
it had been since he had flown in the area. Pitifully pathetic ...

Without more information, it's difficult to assign blame for the
inability to communicate. Certainly, your hypothesis is one possible
explanation, but I could think of others...

Larry, this is the worst baiting attempt I've seen from you. What frequency
do you think they requested first? Even if it wasn't a "standard"
frequency, what frequency *should* the pilot have tuned during an intercept
procedure? If *ALL* else fails, what frequency would you attempt to use?

Despite your protests above, two-way communication requires both
interceptor and interceptee radios to be tuned to the same frequency.
As a result, there is equal opportunity for each to cause
communications to fail.

As with your earlier analogy, the Florida MAC had *nothing* in common with
this issue.

In the military/civil mishap I mentioned, the military flight-lead
failed to correctly set his radio to the frequency he was given by
ATC, so it illustrates that military pilots are not infallible.

Of course, that's not true. If the C-150 had gotten closer to the
White House, it would have been downed.

Perhaps. The point remains the intercept pilots did not request nor were
granted permission (authority) to open fire at any point in this scenario.
Therefore, nobody had authority to shoot down the plane.

You've failed to consider government personnel positioned on the
ground.

Please cite the source of your assertion. Or is it just your guess?

Several news stories reported what I said. Show me otherwise.

Unfortunately, I am unable to provide a link to support what I heard
on the news. It was an interview with one of the F-16 pilots who
intimated that ground personnel were authorized to shoot down intruder
aircraft. Of course, the pilot couldn't explicitly reveal government
security policy, but it was clear from what he said, that if the
aircraft had come in closer proximity to the White House, it would
have been downed.

Define "worked". The inability to establish communications certainly
confirms that the system almost resulted in the death of two airmen.

No, it didn't. Their negligence almost killed them.

Absent the F-16s, nothing (but possible ground based weapons) would
have almost killed them.

Again, this should not in any way be construed as any kind of support for
the ADIZ, but I certainly wouldn't go flying around Nevada without knowing
*exactly* where I should *not* be. Likewise, if you're not familiar with
the DC area and the ADIZ procedures, do yourself (and the rest of us) a
favor and stay well clear.

Agreed.

(unfortunately, since this will probably bolster
various alphabet soup agencies around DC).

What is that supposed to mean?

It plays into the hands of various security agencies that want a much more
restrictive airspace around DC.

Oh, that alphabet soup.

I would think that it is VP Cheney who is the force behind the
repressive government stance in the name of security. Wasn't he the
principle drafter of the Patriot Act?

You have provided no evidence that the C-150 pilots were at fault for
the initial lack of communication. It's pretty clear the PIC was
negligent, but he deserves to be heard before conclusions are drawn.

Oh, please. Read their own statement:
"...our radio had been working during the flight, which we know, because we
were able to monitor other aircraft communications... [After turning
westbound] we were then able to establish two-way radio communication on the
original emergency frequency..."

Their radio suddenly worked after they turned 90 degrees and visually
verified they'd screwed the royal pooch. I'm not buying the idea that they
could not raise ANYbody on 121.5. Not in this area. Even *IF* the
Blackhawk crew had accidentally turned off that frequency, I guarantee
either the Citation, the F-16s, Potomac TRACON or one of the many aircraft
in the area listening to guard on COM2 would have heard and responded.

I see your reasoning now. I suppose any response from other aircraft
would depend on what was broadcast, but you have a point.

I doubt you're naive enough to honestly think *all* of the intercept aircrew
and everybody else in the area were not listening to 121.5.

I just try not to jump to conclusions without some supporting
evidence.

John T wrote:
At *best* they showed extremely poor judgement. At worst, they shouldn't be
flying with navigation skills so poor they had to turn 90 degrees to
visually identify their position.

They embarrassed the rest of us.


They didn't embarass me. I don't identify with them at all. I'm not without
sympathy, but they screwed the pooch and now Shaeffer has to pay.



--
Mortimer Schnerd, RN

VE

They embarrassed the rest of us.


They didn't embarass me. I don't identify with them at all. I'm not
without sympathy, but they screwed the pooch and now Shaeffer has to
pay.

Your pooch is getting it in the end as well from others flying in this
manner.

A few more of these and the Bushies will fill all our cylinders with sand.

John T wrote:

Set the frequency in COM1, but transmit on COM2?

In a Cessna 150? Maybe, but twin NAV/COMs are pretty rare.

I'm
sorry, but as much as I would like to see the ADIZ disappear and make my
flying life easier, these guys are not who I want to share my airspace with
if:
a) they can't figure out they're 15 miles inside restricted airspace;
b) they don't alter course after interception;
c) they can't figure out they set the frequency in COM1 but are transmitting
on COM2 (speculation).

In addition to that, there are several excellent VORs that keep you out of the
ADIZ *and* P-40. Just head for Westminster, then Frederick, then a dogleg to
Linden, and you're around everything.

It's difficult not to be hard on these two "pilots". They didn't realize
they were miles into restricted airspace, couldn't properly work their
radios, took great pains to avoid prohibited airspace a fraction the size of
the ADIZ, but did not opt to completely avoid the ADIZ by moving East a few
more miles.

Or West. They selected a course pretty much right in the middle of the danger arc.

At *best* they showed extremely poor judgement. At worst, they shouldn't be
flying with navigation skills so poor they had to turn 90 degrees to
visually identify their position.

The FAA agrees. Schaeffer is charged with violations of FARs 61.57(a), FAR
91.103, FAR 91.13(a), FAR 91.131(a)(1), FAR 73.83, FAR 91.133(a), FAR 91.139(c),
and FAR 99.7. They've revoked his certificate. He can try to get it back after a
year. He's appealing.

George Patterson
"Naked" means you ain't got no clothes on; "nekkid" means you ain't got
no clothes on - and are up to somethin'.

Larry Dighera wrote:

We agreed that Jim, as the pilot in command, would supervise the
flight while Troy would fly the airplane, which he did during the
entire flight.

Huh? Is 'Jim' a CFI? Thought the Troy guy was a student pilot?

--
This signature now under new management!
Reply-to address new and improved! And Valid.

"Jens Krueger" wrote in message
...
Larry Dighera wrote:

We agreed that Jim, as the pilot in command, would supervise the
flight while Troy would fly the airplane, which he did during the
entire flight.

Huh? Is 'Jim' a CFI? Thought the Troy guy was a student pilot?

Jim is not a CFI and Troy is a student pilot. What's your point?

Jens Krueger wrote:
Larry Dighera wrote:

We agreed that Jim, as the pilot in command, would supervise the
flight while Troy would fly the airplane, which he did during the
entire flight.

Huh? Is 'Jim' a CFI? Thought the Troy guy was a student pilot?

Troy is a student pilot. Schaeffer is not a CFI. Schaeffer was acting PIC (a
student cannot act as PIC). From the various articles, it appears that Schaeffer
was not attempting to provide instruction, so he doesn't have to be a CFI. The
situation is exactly the same as if I were taking my family on a trip and had my
non-rated stepson handle the controls. Note that Schaeffer apparently was *not*
current to carry passengers, however, and he's been charged on that count.

George Patterson
"Naked" means you ain't got no clothes on; "nekkid" means you ain't got
no clothes on - and are up to somethin'.

"George Patterson" wrote in message
news:y5yke.18399$4d6.16747@trndny04...
From the various articles, it appears that Schaeffer was not attempting to
provide instruction, so he doesn't have to be a CFI.

There's no requirement to be a CFI in order to attempt to give instruction.
It's just that instruction by a non-CFI doesn't count toward the training
time required for a certificate or rating.

--Gary

On 5/23/05 2:25 PM, in article ,
"Larry Dighera" spewed:


EDITOR'S NOTE:

Jim Sheaffer, 69, retired, is a licensed pilot residing with his wife,
Joyce, in Lititz, PA. Troy Martin, 36, is a local business owner and
student pilot with 30 hours of flight time who lives in Akron, PA,
with his wife Jill and two young sons.


Reads like someone trying to cover his ass.
No cheap GPS? No backup radio? No idea where Washington DC is? No idea what
a Blackhawk helicopter trying to communicate with them might mean?

I do know that as a student, I performed every aspect of pre-flight and
flight planning. My instructor would make a cursory inspection of the plane
and my plan, but usually no more. If the narrative is accurate, the student
did nothing but fly the plane. Exactly how was this student learning to do
anything but point the plane in the general direction he wanted to go?
--
Jeff 'The Wizard of Draws' Bucchino

Cartoons with a Touch of Magic�
http://www.wizardofdraws.com

More Cartoons with a Touch of Magic�
http://www.cartoonclipart.com

Reads like someone trying to cover his ass.
No cheap GPS? No backup radio? No idea where Washington DC is? No
idea what a Blackhawk helicopter trying to communicate with them
might mean?

I do know that as a student, I performed every aspect of pre-flight
and flight planning. My instructor would make a cursory inspection of
the plane and my plan, but usually no more. If the narrative is
accurate, the student did nothing but fly the plane. Exactly how was
this student learning to do anything but point the plane in the
general direction he wanted to go?

This doesn't appear to have been originally intended as a training flight.
Sadly, it was in more ways than one