![]() |
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 |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
"Larry Dighera" wrote in message
On Sat, 06 Aug 2005 07:26:03 -0400, Bob Noel "Happy Dog" wrote: When you guys are done patting yourselves on the back you might address my point that there isn't any good evidence that the ADIZ was created to reduce "clutter". Define "clutter" In the case of the DC ADIZ, I believe it was created to restrict the number of targets/flights within its boundaries, so that unidentified primary radar targets will be easier to spot. Perhaps 'congestion' would have been a more accurate word than 'clutter.' Where is your evidence that this is the reason behind the ADIZ? moo |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Happy Dog wrote:
In the case of the DC ADIZ, I believe it was created to restrict the number of targets/flights within its boundaries, so that unidentified primary radar targets will be easier to spot. Perhaps 'congestion' would have been a more accurate word than 'clutter.' Where is your evidence that this is the reason behind the ADIZ? During the 9/11 investigations, several security people stated that that was the case. They wanted to reduce the number of radar targets in the area to something manageable if they had to intercept. A fair amount of the hearingd were broadcast on NPR last Spring. George Patterson Give a person a fish and you feed him for a day; teach a person to use the Internet and he won't bother you for weeks. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
"George Patterson" wrote in message
news:aNeJe.1241$lT.705@trndny05... Happy Dog wrote: In the case of the DC ADIZ, I believe it was created to restrict the number of targets/flights within its boundaries, so that unidentified primary radar targets will be easier to spot. Perhaps 'congestion' would have been a more accurate word than 'clutter.' Where is your evidence that this is the reason behind the ADIZ? During the 9/11 investigations, several security people stated that that was the case. They wanted to reduce the number of radar targets in the area to something manageable if they had to intercept. A fair amount of the hearingd were broadcast on NPR last Spring. That's it, really? "Several security people stated"? You OK with that? moo |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Happy Dog wrote:
"George Patterson" wrote in message news:aNeJe.1241$lT.705@trndny05... During the 9/11 investigations, several security people stated that that was the case. They wanted to reduce the number of radar targets in the area to something manageable if they had to intercept. A fair amount of the hearingd were broadcast on NPR last Spring. That's it, really? "Several security people stated"? You OK with that? Certainly. NPR didn't state "several security people stated", they played recordings of the hearings and identified the speakers. In other words, I heard some of the people responsible for getting the ADIZ set up state that the purpose was to reduce the number of radar targets and make sure that there were no unidentified primary radar echoes. George Patterson Give a person a fish and you feed him for a day; teach a person to use the Internet and he won't bother you for weeks. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
"George Patterson"
During the 9/11 investigations, several security people stated that that was the case. They wanted to reduce the number of radar targets in the area to something manageable if they had to intercept. A fair amount of the hearingd were broadcast on NPR last Spring. That's it, really? "Several security people stated"? You OK with that? Certainly. NPR didn't state "several security people stated", they played recordings of the hearings and identified the speakers. In other words, I heard some of the people responsible for getting the ADIZ set up state that the purpose was to reduce the number of radar targets and make sure that there were no unidentified primary radar echoes. Other ways of accomplishing this have been suggested. moo |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Happy Dog wrote:
"George Patterson" Certainly. NPR didn't state "several security people stated", they played recordings of the hearings and identified the speakers. In other words, I heard some of the people responsible for getting the ADIZ set up state that the purpose was to reduce the number of radar targets and make sure that there were no unidentified primary radar echoes. Other ways of accomplishing this have been suggested. That's as may be, but the fact is that *they* say that *they* did it for *this* reason. George Patterson Give a person a fish and you feed him for a day; teach a person to use the Internet and he won't bother you for weeks. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
"George Patterson" wrote in message
news:tVSJe.1664$lT.630@trndny05... Happy Dog wrote: "George Patterson" Certainly. NPR didn't state "several security people stated", they played recordings of the hearings and identified the speakers. In other words, I heard some of the people responsible for getting the ADIZ set up state that the purpose was to reduce the number of radar targets and make sure that there were no unidentified primary radar echoes. Other ways of accomplishing this have been suggested. That's as may be, but the fact is that *they* say that *they* did it for *this* reason. They may have said it but it still doesn't make sense. That makes it less than credible. Were these "security people" aviation experts? moo |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Sat, 6 Aug 2005 22:33:43 -0400, "Happy Dog"
wrote in :: "Larry Dighera" wrote in message On Sat, 06 Aug 2005 07:26:03 -0400, Bob Noel In the case of the DC ADIZ, I believe it was created to restrict the number of targets/flights within its boundaries, so that unidentified primary radar targets will be easier to spot. Perhaps 'congestion' would have been a more accurate word than 'clutter.' Where is your evidence that this is the reason behind the ADIZ? I have no evidence. It is purely a matter of logical deduction, a guess. The August FAA NPRM contains this information: In February 2003, FAA, in consultation with DHS and other Federal agencies, implemented a system of airspace control measures to protect against a potential threat to the Washington, DC Metropolitan Area. The dimensions of this protected airspace were determined after considering such factors as the speed of likely suspect aircraft, minimum launch time and the speed of intercept aircraft. After extensive coordination among Federal agencies, two airspace areas were implemented. The outer area, which closely mimics the current Washington Tri-area Class B airspace, is called an Air Defense Identification Zone (ADIZ) ... I suppose one could research the original FAA ADIZ NPRM and find the reason for it stated the http://www.aopa.org/whatsnew/newsitems/2002/sfar94.html or in its extension: http://www.aopa.org/whatsnew/newsite..._extension.pdf I wasn't able to find the reason for the DC ADIZ in those documents, hence the guess. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
"Larry Dighera" wrote in message
... On Sat, 6 Aug 2005 22:33:43 -0400, "Happy Dog" wrote in :: "Larry Dighera" wrote in message On Sat, 06 Aug 2005 07:26:03 -0400, Bob Noel In the case of the DC ADIZ, I believe it was created to restrict the number of targets/flights within its boundaries, so that unidentified primary radar targets will be easier to spot. Perhaps 'congestion' would have been a more accurate word than 'clutter.' Where is your evidence that this is the reason behind the ADIZ? I have no evidence. It is purely a matter of logical deduction, a guess. Thank you for your research. But, it doesnt support your claim. In fact, the paragrapgh you quote is just plain silly. "Minimun launch time"? Did you read this crap before dropping to your knees? I repost the following to invite defenders of it.: The August FAA NPRM contains this information: In February 2003, FAA, in consultation with DHS and other Federal agencies, implemented a system of airspace control measures to protect against a potential threat to the Washington, DC Metropolitan Area. The dimensions of this protected airspace were determined after considering such factors as the speed of likely suspect aircraft, minimum launch time and the speed of intercept aircraft. After extensive coordination among Federal agencies, two airspace areas were implemented. The outer area, which closely mimics the current Washington Tri-area Class B airspace, is called an Air Defense Identification Zone (ADIZ) ... I suppose one could research the original FAA ADIZ NPRM and find the reason for it stated the http://www.aopa.org/whatsnew/newsitems/2002/sfar94.html or in its extension: http://www.aopa.org/whatsnew/newsite..._extension.pdf I wasn't able to find the reason for the DC ADIZ in those documents, hence the guess. Hence shut up. moo |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Sun, 7 Aug 2005 08:46:24 -0400, "Happy Dog"
wrote in :: Hence shut up. Is it your intent to revoke my right to express an opinion on Usenet? |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
NAS and associated computer system | Newps | Instrument Flight Rules | 8 | August 12th 04 05:12 AM |
AOPA Sells-Out California Pilots in Military Airspace Grab? | Larry Dighera | Instrument Flight Rules | 12 | April 26th 04 06:12 PM |
AOPA Sells-Out California Pilots in Military Airspace Grab? | Larry Dighera | Piloting | 12 | April 26th 04 06:12 PM |
12 Dec 2003 - Today’s Military, Veteran, War and National Security News | Otis Willie | Naval Aviation | 0 | December 12th 03 11:01 PM |
USAF = US Amphetamine Fools | RT | Military Aviation | 104 | September 25th 03 03:17 PM |