![]() |
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
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Happy Dog wrote:
You fly? You couldn't do this? FSS, *any* ATC. A student should be able to fihure this out. You're right. Why didn't this student (Martin)? Why didn't Shaeffer? snip Monday Morning QBing Funny. Isn't that what you're doing? Answer carefully: Which "twit" around here is supporting it? Anyone who thinks it serves any useful purpose or that it doesn't cause unnecessary problems. Like this one. If you think I'm supporting the ADIZ, I challenge you to find a single statement I've made in favor of it. The fact remains Shaeffer screwed us all with this stunt and largely because of him (and the overreaction by DC officials), we face a *permanent* ADIZ. Now you come along and appear sympathetic to him. Let him cry on your shoulder, if you'd like. I'm too busy dealing with the consequences of his actions to be sympathetic to him in the least. -- John T http://sage1solutions.com/TknoFlyer http://pocketgear.com/products_searc...veloperid=4415 ____________________ |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
The fact remains Shaeffer screwed us all with this stunt and largely because
of him (and the overreaction by DC officials), we face a *permanent* ADIZ. Actually, I'm not convinced that the proposal for a permanent ADIZ is triggered by or even supported by this incident. Jose -- You can choose whom to befriend, but you cannot choose whom to love. for Email, make the obvious change in the address. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Jose wrote:
Actually, I'm not convinced that the proposal for a permanent ADIZ is triggered by or even supported by this incident. I am. Soon after this incident (and directly due to it) members of Congress from both parties introduced legislation to strengthen penalties for ADIZ violations. Not long after that (in bureaucratic terms), the FAA proposed to make the ADIZ permanent. I'm sure the fact that as of May 12, 2005 there were 1,682 ADIZ violations had something to do with it, too. Shaeffer's obviously isn't the only violation, but it is the most visible. The only other ADIZ violation that comes close to the visibility of Shaeffer's was Gov. Ernie Fletcher of Kentucky when his plane's transponder wasn't working correctly. Also in relatively recent memory was the incident where another pilot flew across the ADIZ and landed at Winchester. This one didn't get the notoriety because the Capitol was not evacuated, but it does reinforce the notion that we pilots can't/won't follow the rules. -- John T http://sage1solutions.com/TknoFlyer http://pocketgear.com/products_searc...veloperid=4415 ____________________ |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "John T" wrote in message m... Jose wrote: Actually, I'm not convinced that the proposal for a permanent ADIZ is triggered by or even supported by this incident. I am. Soon after this incident (and directly due to it) members of Congress from both parties introduced legislation to strengthen penalties for ADIZ violations. Not long after that (in bureaucratic terms), the FAA proposed to make the ADIZ permanent. I'm sure the fact that as of May 12, 2005 there were 1,682 ADIZ violations had something to do with it, too. ....snip... John T http://sage1solutions.com/TknoFlyer http://pocketgear.com/products_searc...veloperid=4415 ____________________ The NPRM for permanently making this airspace restricted is the FAAs way to calling the TSA or Homeland Security to the table; when this airspace was defined, the TSA (or Homeland Security, or SS) was supposed to justify it every 60 days or so which has never been done. This NPRM requires public hearings so they will have to try and justify it which should prove to be interesting.... |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
".Blueskies." wrote in message
et... The NPRM for permanently making this airspace restricted is the FAAs way to calling the TSA or Homeland Security to the table; when this airspace was defined, the TSA (or Homeland Security, or SS) was supposed to justify it every 60 days or so which has never been done. This NPRM requires public hearings so they will have to try and justify it which should prove to be interesting.... You are quite the optimist. The NPRM doesn't force anyone to justify anything. It's not the FAA's "way to calling the TSA or DHS to the table". It's their way of following the legally required steps to implement their new rules. If the NPRM were anything other than bureaucratic procedure, then all the previous NPRMs for bad ideas would have resulted in those bad ideas not being implemented. But it's not, and they didn't. Anyone who thinks that comments to a NPRM will have any real effect on the outcome just hasn't been paying attention to the way the FAA has handled them. Pete |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Thu, 5 Jan 2006 19:08:06 -0800, "Peter Duniho"
wrote in :: Anyone who thinks that comments to a NPRM will have any real effect on the outcome just hasn't been paying attention to the way the FAA has handled them. While I don't disagree with that analysis of the record, the NPRM procedure does require the FAA to justify their decision with reasoned responses to the questions/objections raised during the comment period(s). It would seem that this opens an avenue to legally challenge that rational in an effort to modify/strike-down the rule(s). |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
"Larry Dighera" wrote in message
... [...] It would seem that this opens an avenue to legally challenge that rational in an effort to modify/strike-down the rule(s). If that were true, why has no one contested any of the prior rule-making changes that have similar lack of justification? I doubt that there's any genuinely feasible way to engage a legal challenge to the FAA's analysis. If there is, I'm all ears. We've got a ridiculous *prohibited* area here in the Puget Sound that is just begging to be overturned. Pete |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Thu, 5 Jan 2006 19:08:06 -0800, "Peter Duniho"
wrote in :: Anyone who thinks that comments to a NPRM will have any real effect on the outcome just hasn't been paying attention to the way the FAA has handled them. Well, perhaps an NPRM _meeting_ with representatives from six federal agencies listening to pilots will be more effective in getting a bad idea revoked: ------------------------------------------------------------- AOPA ePilot Volume 8, Issue 2 January 13, 2006 ------------------------------------------------------------- ADIZ DRAWS IRE FROM PILOTS DURING FIRST PUBLIC MEETING More than 200 people on Thursday filled a conference room in Columbia, Maryland, and almost all were there to tell federal officials why the Washington, D.C., Air Defense Identification Zone (ADIZ) shouldn't be made permanent. "The ADIZ should be abolished," said Scott Proudfoot, one of the first speakers at the public meeting. He was speaking for the air traffic controllers union, NATCA, and added, "The ADIZ is nothing but a burden on the users and the controllers." AOPA had pushed for public meetings, arguing that regulators needed to hear directly from pilots themselves about the problems caused by the ADIZ. And there are plenty. Meanwhile, pilots didn't realize that an ADIZ clearance wasn't the same thing as "radar identification," so that even though they were talking to ATC, they weren't receiving traffic advisories. William Finagin, whose company sells Aviat aircraft, said he has lost $1 million a year in sales since the ADIZ was imposed. Another local pilot based at Montgomery County Airpark inside the ADIZ said an FBO there had closed because of lack of business. "Flights to our home in Williamsburg (Virginia) are now 50 percent longer, and I spend $50 more for fuel, because of circumnavigating the ADIZ," said Russell Madsen. The public meeting continued through Thursday evening, with representatives from six federal agencies listening to pilots. A second public meeting, where AOPA President Phil Boyer will speak, is scheduled next Wednesday in Dulles, Virginia. Nearly 20,000 people have filed written comments, mostly in opposition to the ADIZ. If you haven't done so, file your comments today. The deadline is February 6. See AOPA's Member Action Center: Operation ADIZ ( http://www.aopa.org/adizalert ) for more information. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
In article ,
Larry Dighera wrote: On Thu, 5 Jan 2006 19:08:06 -0800, "Peter Duniho" wrote in :: Anyone who thinks that comments to a NPRM will have any real effect on the outcome just hasn't been paying attention to the way the FAA has handled them. Well, perhaps an NPRM _meeting_ with representatives from six federal agencies listening to pilots will be more effective in getting a bad idea revoked: ------------------------------------------------------------- AOPA ePilot Volume 8, Issue 2 January 13, 2006 ------------------------------------------------------------- ADIZ DRAWS IRE FROM PILOTS DURING FIRST PUBLIC MEETING More than 200 people on Thursday filled a conference room in Columbia, Maryland, and almost all were there to tell federal officials why the Washington, D.C., Air Defense Identification Zone (ADIZ) shouldn't be made permanent. "The ADIZ should be abolished," said Scott Proudfoot, one of the first speakers at the public meeting. He was speaking for the air traffic controllers union, NATCA, and added, "The ADIZ is nothing but a burden on the users and the controllers." AOPA had pushed for public meetings, arguing that regulators needed to hear directly from pilots themselves about the problems caused by the ADIZ. And there are plenty. Meanwhile, pilots didn't realize that an ADIZ clearance wasn't the same thing as "radar identification," so that even though they were talking to ATC, they weren't receiving traffic advisories. William Finagin, whose company sells Aviat aircraft, said he has lost $1 million a year in sales since the ADIZ was imposed. Another local pilot based at Montgomery County Airpark inside the ADIZ said an FBO there had closed because of lack of business. "Flights to our home in Williamsburg (Virginia) are now 50 percent longer, and I spend $50 more for fuel, because of circumnavigating the ADIZ," said Russell Madsen. The public meeting continued through Thursday evening, with representatives from six federal agencies listening to pilots. A second public meeting, where AOPA President Phil Boyer will speak, is scheduled next Wednesday in Dulles, Virginia. Nearly 20,000 people have filed written comments, mostly in opposition to the ADIZ. If you haven't done so, file your comments today. The deadline is February 6. See AOPA's Member Action Center: Operation ADIZ ( http://www.aopa.org/adizalert ) for more information. Two important questions to ask of the Homeland Security people in attendance: 1. Which one of you is Chicken Little? 2. Which one is Fearless Fosdick? -- Remve "_" from email to reply to me personally. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
".Blueskies." wrote in message
et justify it which should prove to be interesting.... As Peter said, the NPRM is just the FAA dotting i's and crossing t's to make permanent airspace changes. As for justifying its existence, Congress mandated the FAA (not DHS, etc.) justify it periodically. As you say, nobody has done it and, as far as I can tell, nobody has followed through on requiring it. -- John T http://sage1solutions.com/TknoFlyer http://www.pocketgear.com/products_s...veloperid=4415 Reduce spam. Use Sender Policy Framework: http://spf.pobox.com ____________________ |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
AOPA Stall/Spin Study -- Stowell's Review (8,000 words) | Rich Stowell | Aerobatics | 28 | January 2nd 09 02:26 PM |
Another ADIZ violation? | Dan Foster | Piloting | 5 | January 4th 06 02:25 AM |
ASRS/ASAP reporting systems - how confidential? | Tim Epstein | Piloting | 7 | August 4th 05 05:20 PM |
AOPA and ATC Privatization | Chip Jones | Piloting | 133 | November 12th 03 08:26 PM |
AOPA Stall/Spin Study -- Stowell's Review (8,000 words) | Rich Stowell | Piloting | 25 | September 11th 03 01:27 PM |