FAA Cluster F^%& produced DC scare

On Sat, 14 May 2005 12:59:34 GMT, wrote:

On Sat, 14 May 2005 08:32:06 -0400, Ron Natalie
wrote:

Ted wrote:
DrunkKlingon wrote in message
.. .


Anyway some clarification ....

I did not say STOP ALL AIRCRAFT for 250 miles

I NEVER proposed a no-fly


The magic buzz word for this is a FRZ or Flight Restricted Zone which is
currently 13 to 15 miles around the VOR/DME at Reagan National Airport.


It's not measured at all from the WASHINGTON VOR. It's an irregularly
shaped blob which follows stupid-assed things like the isogonic line
from the 2001 sectional chart.


Doesn't it also follow a Maryland bike path?

Seems to me that the irregular shape is all due to the Congress mandating a
15-mile zone around the Washington Monument. This may make a great landmark
for tourists and such, but as a precision navigation aid it leaves much to
be desired. :-)

If you look at the FRZ carefully, you can see that the FAA did a pretty good
job of trying to live within the law (as written) and something that pilots
might be able to recognize.

Of course, the events of the past week show that some pilots are such good
navigators that they should never be allowed out of their own backyards, and
even then, it might be wise to fence their yards in so that they don't
accidentally get lost there too!

--
Jay.
(remove dashes for legal email address)

On Fri, 13 May 2005 15:29:46 GMT, "OtisWinslow"
wrote:


"Roger" wrote in message
.. .

However that's not going to be a problem as half the states are
refusing to go along with the new drivers license program and the feds
say people from those states won't be able to board airliners if they
don't, so ...
Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)

Well that's a new twist. So ALL the residents of any state that
don't sign on to the new program will be barred from flying on
the airlines? And you thing that's really going to happen? I'd like
to have you site a federal govt source for that statement so that
we can go read it for ourselves.

It was in the local newspaper and I don't remember who the official
quoted was. The story was out last week via AP with a title of "States
May Refuse to go along with Licensing Standard" or something similar.
The States are complaining that the federal mandate to the
standardized licensing system (with no funding) is more than they can
afford. I believe nearly half the states are saying, "no funding, no
complying", or if you want it, you pay for it.

The article made headlines on many papers and was one of the top
stories listed on the Excite news. The quote was some where around
the middle of the article.

I think the guy was using a bit of coercion, or outright
threatening/posturing with the hope that they will comply. He also
stated that such states would have to go through much more extensive
security checks before boarding (contradicting his previous statement
- if they can't board then why the additional security checks)

As it was a recent AP article it should still be available on-line if
you hit the right search string..

Do I think it'll happen? No, I don't. I think the guy was blowing
smoke as the economy could not stand even time for the extra security
checks let alone an outright ban.

Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com

"MJC" wrote in
:

To bring just a little sensibility to this thread that started
stupidly
and racist enough:
There IS something I've been wondering about. Forget the student
because
he's just a student and may not have known better. But the other guy
was an instructor from what we read. With that being the case, I have
some questions and/or comments to throw in here.
The planned trip was quite a distance away so this supposedly
knowledgeable instructor must have filed a VFR flight plan as is
accepted practice for ANY responsible pilot.

Why supposedly knowledgeable? Most instructors these days have the
minimum time required for CFI certificate. Many know little more than
their students. I don't know about this guy, but from what little I've
seen that he's pretty green.

If so, and they wandered
toward the White House, would they not have been in a discussion with
at least the FSS of the area.

FSS has no idea where you are. FSS has no radar, and is *not* an air
traffic control agency. They just take, open, and close flight plans,
and provide weather briefings.

And if they weren't talking to anyone,
and their 1200 transponder blip was seen heading toward the White
House, would it not have been a simple thing for the FSS to take a
look at all the VFR flight plans in the area for that time and figured
out who it might be and try to raise them on the radio WAY before the
150 got so close to the White House?

No, it would not have been simple. Flight plans are not required, so
anyone at all could have been there.

Additionally (and if it were me), I would have asked for Flight
Following as is MY custom for any cross country VFR flights. No, they
may not have asked for that, but I would have thought that they would
have for the purpose of getting the student more radio time which is
an important part of the pilot's learning process.

But few pilots actually do that, and it is certainly not required.

Bottom line is that I have to wonder: Weren't they talking to
ANYBODY
after they took off? Are we to think that a C150 owned by a flying
club had no radio?

I don't know, but they didn't have to talk to anyone, while VFR.

For my part, I have to think that they WERE talking to somebody
and that
we will eventually find out that some responsibility may rests with
the FAA in some capacity.

Well, maybe, but I wouldn't bet on it. Again, FSS has no responsibility
for any of this, and the pilots are not required to talk to anyone, nor
to file a flight plan. At first glance, it appears to be an
underqualified (read average) instructor and a student just tooling along
oblivious to everything. I would bet that they didn't file, didn't talk
to anyone, and the FAA had no clue as to who they were. I might turn out
to be wrong, but I doubt it.

--
Regards,

Stan

"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." B. Franklin

Ron Natalie wrote in message
.. .
Ted wrote:
DrunkKlingon wrote in message
.. .


Anyway some clarification ....

I did not say STOP ALL AIRCRAFT for 250 miles

I NEVER proposed a no-fly


The magic buzz word for this is a FRZ or Flight Restricted Zone which is
currently 13 to 15 miles around the VOR/DME at Reagan National Airport.


It's not measured at all from the WASHINGTON VOR. It's an irregularly
shaped blob which follows stupid-assed things like the isogonic line
from the 2001 sectional chart.

Hmmm.... I could have sworn that it was. Take a look at this FAA website
and see of you agree with me.

http://tfr.faa.gov/tfr_save_pages/detail_5_1254.html

....THE WASHINGTON DC METROPOLITAN AREA FLIGHT RESTRICTED ZONE (FRZ) ....

....IS DEFINED AS AN AREA BOUNDED BY A LINE BEGINNING AT THE...

....WASHINGTON /DCA/ VOR/DME 300 DEGREE RADIAL AT 15 NM ...

....THENCE CLOCKWISE ALONG THE DCA 15 NM ARC TO THE DCA 022 DEGREE RADIAL AT
15 NM

....THENCE SOUTHEAST VIA A LINE DRAWN TO THE DCA 049 DEGREE RADIAL AT 14
NM...

...THENCE SOUTH VIA A LINE DRAWN TO THE DCA 064 DEGREE RADIAL AT 13 NM...

....THENCE CLOCKWISE ALONG THE DCA 13 NM ARC TO THE DCA 282 DEGREE RADIAL AT
13 NM...

On Sun, 15 May 2005 02:02:34 GMT, "Ted" wrote:


Ron Natalie wrote in message
.. .
Ted wrote:
DrunkKlingon wrote in message
.. .


Anyway some clarification ....

I did not say STOP ALL AIRCRAFT for 250 miles

I NEVER proposed a no-fly


The magic buzz word for this is a FRZ or Flight Restricted Zone which is
currently 13 to 15 miles around the VOR/DME at Reagan National Airport.


It's not measured at all from the WASHINGTON VOR. It's an irregularly
shaped blob which follows stupid-assed things like the isogonic line
from the 2001 sectional chart.

Hmmm.... I could have sworn that it was. Take a look at this FAA website
and see of you agree with me.

http://tfr.faa.gov/tfr_save_pages/detail_5_1254.html

...THE WASHINGTON DC METROPOLITAN AREA FLIGHT RESTRICTED ZONE (FRZ) ....

...IS DEFINED AS AN AREA BOUNDED BY A LINE BEGINNING AT THE...

...WASHINGTON /DCA/ VOR/DME 300 DEGREE RADIAL AT 15 NM ...

...THENCE CLOCKWISE ALONG THE DCA 15 NM ARC TO THE DCA 022 DEGREE RADIAL AT
15 NM

...THENCE SOUTHEAST VIA A LINE DRAWN TO THE DCA 049 DEGREE RADIAL AT 14
NM...

...THENCE SOUTH VIA A LINE DRAWN TO THE DCA 064 DEGREE RADIAL AT 13 NM...

...THENCE CLOCKWISE ALONG THE DCA 13 NM ARC TO THE DCA 282 DEGREE RADIAL AT
13 NM...


The definition is 15 miles from the Washington Monument (by Congressional
decree). It has been implemented in terms of distance from the VOR, and
some bridging lines based on the Class-B boiundaries. Things that have some
meaning in terms of aircraft navigation.
--
Jay.
(remove dashes for legal email address)

Jay Somerset wrote:

The definition is 15 miles from the Washington Monument (by Congressional
decree).

Perhaps this is overkill in the current era of GPS, but would sticking
whatever ground equipment DME requires onto (or next to) the Washington
Monument be so tough?

- Andrew

the DCA VOR/DME is only 2 miles south at N38 51 34.0 W77 02 11.4.
Seems to me that the FAA made a good call to use it.


Andrew Gideon wrote in message
ine.com...
Jay Somerset wrote:

The definition is 15 miles from the Washington Monument (by Congressional
decree).

Perhaps this is overkill in the current era of GPS, but would sticking
whatever ground equipment DME requires onto (or next to) the Washington
Monument be so tough?

- Andrew

On Sat, 14 May 2005 16:01:05 -0400, Roger
wrote:
snip
Well that's a new twist. So ALL the residents of any state that
don't sign on to the new program will be barred from flying on
the airlines? And you thing that's really going to happen? I'd like
to have you site a federal govt source for that statement so that
we can go read it for ourselves.

It was in the local newspaper and I don't remember who the official
quoted was. The story was out last week via AP with a title of "States
May Refuse to go along with Licensing Standard" or something similar.
The States are complaining that the federal mandate to the
standardized licensing system (with no funding) is more than they can
afford. I believe nearly half the states are saying, "no funding, no
complying", or if you want it, you pay for it.

A bit more information:

It was part of a story on the "uniform licensing" across the states.
IOW the National ID card system, but they don't want to callit that.
To top it off they want to put machine readable chips in the licenses
which wouldn't be quite so bad, but they are going to use RFID tags.
The claim is the RFID tags only work at a distance of a few
centimeters, but tests show they work well up to about 20 meters with
the proper equipment.

Just think...you are in Malasia, or Iran, (pick a country), a
demonstration starts, and your passport which can be read up to 20
meters (60 feet) is saying...Hey, you with the reader, I'm the
American over here!.

Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com


The article made headlines on many papers and was one of the top
stories listed on the Excite news. The quote was some where around
the middle of the article.

I think the guy was using a bit of coercion, or outright
threatening/posturing with the hope that they will comply. He also
stated that such states would have to go through much more extensive
security checks before boarding (contradicting his previous statement
- if they can't board then why the additional security checks)

As it was a recent AP article it should still be available on-line if
you hit the right search string..

Do I think it'll happen? No, I don't. I think the guy was blowing
smoke as the economy could not stand even time for the extra security
checks let alone an outright ban.

Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com