Incursion statement issued

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'.

"Jay Beckman" wrote in message
news:Bzxke.1093$rr.88@fed1read01

Somone over on r.a.student posted that there may have been an ELT
inerfering with 121.5 in the area at the time.

Fair enough. I still don't find it credible that they failed on the second
frequency. Beyond that, even "gubment employees" can think to hold up a
"Follow Me" sign.

None of this detracts from Shaeffer's negligence.

--
John T
http://tknowlogy.com/TknoFlyer
http://www.pocketgear.com/products_s...veloperid=4415
____________________

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.

"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

"Larry Dighera" wrote in message

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

No, I haven't. Let me clarify, though. Nobody had "authorization" even if
they had the authority.

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

Semantics, perhaps, but negligently straying where bullets are threatened to
be loosed is the fault of the pilot. Doggedly continuing on a flight path
directly over downtown DC with military/interceptor aircraft in formation or
circling is the fault of the pilot.

"Duh, dem's purdy planes, Homer. Ya think they give this show to all the
visitors?"

All The Powers That Be have made great efforts to inform pilots of the rules
of this airspace. Beyond dismantling it (which I want), I don't know what
else they can do to educate pilots. The Visual Warning System is a step in
the right direction, but even after they publish it in the AIM as they've
indicated, the pilots have to read/hear about it to know what to do.

Otherwise, the cockpit conversation will be "Duh, dem's purdy
red-greenlights. I didn't know it was Christmas, already."

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?

I thought you don't jump to conclusions? Even *if* Cheney is the
powermonger you seem to think he is, do you honestly think there are no
other bureaucracies (regardless of political leanings) with the same goal?

--
John T
http://tknowlogy.com/TknoFlyer
http://www.pocketgear.com/products_s...veloperid=4415
____________________

Larry Dighera wrote:

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.

Jay Honeck posted an AP article that contains "As a wayward Cessna flew deep in
restricted airspace, national security officials were on the phone discussing
whether to implement the last line of defense: shooting it down." It continues
to state that Rumsfeld and the president have the authority to order a shootdown
and that Rumsfeld was in the loop at the time. The thread is entitled "It was
really close..." and Jay's post is the initial one.

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'.

"Grumman-581" wrote in message
news:KNxke.2683$Is4.2073@attbi_s21...
"John T" wrote in message
...
It plays into the hands of various security agencies that want a much
more
restrictive airspace around DC.

Then let 'em have it... Pick a particular distance -- say 20 miles -- and
put a ring of lasers or search lights pointing straight up... ALL aircraft
are prohibited from this area... No Congress-critters coming into there,
no
presidential helicopters, NOTHING... Make EVERYONE have to land somewhere
outside of this 20 mile radius... While we're at it, let's ban ALL motor
vehicular traffic within this 20 mile radius also... Some might say that
the
government would grind to a hault... AND THIS WOULD BE A BAD THING???

Maybe even build a wall around the city to keep all the crooks inside the
city?

They would just tunnel under it. They'd hire a bunch of illegal aliens to
dig it.

On Tue, 24 May 2005 07:33:20 -0400, "John T" wrote in
: :

"Larry Dighera" wrote in message

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

No, I haven't. Let me clarify, though. Nobody had "authorization" even if
they had the authority.

According to this report, the order to shoot down the hapless little
Cessna 150 was only 15 to 20 seconds away from occurring, because the
policy relies on unreliable radio communications:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7972808/
washingtonpost.com Highlights
Military was set to down Cessna
Authority granted as plane strayed deep into capital
Updated: 5:19 a.m. ET May 25, 2005

WASHINGTON - Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld gave military
officials the authority to shoot down, if necessary, a small plane
that wandered into restricted airspace over the nation's capital
May 11, according to two senior federal officials.

For 11 intense minutes, customs aircraft and military fighter jets
tried to intercept the Cessna 150 and determine whether the pilots
were confused and lost or were targeting Washington. Military
officials never deemed the aircraft to be hostile, but White House
and U.S. Capitol officials grew more concerned as it flew within
three miles of the executive mansion.

The plane, one of the federal officials said, came within "15 to
20 seconds" of being downed before its pilots finally heeded
repeated orders to turn away from the city.

The new details, also corroborated yesterday by a senior federal
law enforcement official briefed on events, came as U.S. military
and homeland security officials review the effectiveness of an air
defense system established for the Washington area after the 2001
terrorist attacks. The officials spoke on the condition of
anonymity because much of the air defense system is classified.

As authorities piece together the lessons of the scare --
described by some officials as the closest the government has come
to downing a civilian plane over Washington since Sept. 11, 2001
-- they are confronting sensitive issues involving split-second
decisions, communications and the federal chain of command.

Against a light aircraft moving at a relatively slow 100 mph, with
two evidently confused pilots, authorities were able to order the
evacuation of the White House and Capitol complex only two to
three minutes before the plane would have reached either. Outside
analysts said it remains unknown what might happen against a
larger, faster aircraft intending to evade defenders.

"The question is, if it were a faster plane . . . whether or not
the system would have been as responsive," said Rep. Bennie
Thompson (Miss.), senior Democrat on the Homeland Security
Committee.

Based on a Homeland Security Department chronology, it is unclear
whether jet fighters would have been in position to take action
against the Cessna before it reached the White House or Capitol.
The Cessna penetrated a 16-mile-radius no-fly zone at 11:50 a.m.;
F-16 fighters were scrambled from nearby Andrews Air Force Base
two minutes later.

The White House and Capitol were evacuated just after noon, as the
plane continued to approach. The fighters fired warning flares at
the Cessna at 12:04 p.m., and it was diverted.

Pentagon and Homeland Security officials have said the air defense
system worked effectively during the crisis. But in a statement
released Friday, the pilots said they had trouble communicating on
the radio frequency that a customs helicopter crew signaled for
them to use.

Officials from the Federal Aviation Administration and Customs and
Border Protection confirmed the communications problems cited by
the Cessna pilots, Hayden "Jim" Sheaffer, 69, and Troy Martin, 36,
both of Pennsylvania. The frequency was unavailable in that patch
of airspace, the officials said.
CONTINUED: Emergency locator beacon ...


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

Semantics, perhaps, but negligently straying where bullets are threatened to
be loosed is the fault of the pilot. Doggedly continuing on a flight path
directly over downtown DC with military/interceptor aircraft in formation or
circling is the fault of the pilot.

There is little doubt that the Sheaffer made many mistakes, but that's
no excuse for our government's implementation of a flawed security
policy.

All The Powers That Be have made great efforts to inform pilots of the rules
of this airspace. Beyond dismantling it (which I want), I don't know what
else they can do to educate pilots. The Visual Warning System is a step in
the right direction, but even after they publish it in the AIM as they've
indicated, the pilots have to read/hear about it to know what to do.

Because the ADIZ does nothing to protect the White House except create
the public perception that something is being done at the expense of
unnecessarily placing pilots in mortal danger, a responsible
government would dismantle it.

"Larry Dighera" wrote in message
news

According to this report, the order to shoot down the hapless little
Cessna 150 was only 15 to 20 seconds away from occurring, because the
policy relies on unreliable radio communications:

The policy does not rely on "unreliable radio communications". If the
policy were dependent on radio, then the Cessna 340 (?) that violated the
ADIZ a week later would not have survived since its radios were fried by
lightning. It essentially relies on air-to-air intercepts by government
aircraft which do not depend on radio comms.

Let's not forget these guys were WAY into restricted airspace by this point.
They'd had WAY more than enough time to realize, "Oh, there's Baltimore and
this big road beneath us is I-95 and, oh, that must be Washington up ahead."
The fact that one of two radio frequencies attempted was unusable does not
in any way convince me that was why they were "15-20 seconds away" from
being shot down.

What was the deal with the second frequency, anyway? I haven't seen any
mention of the actual frequency, but I'm confident it wasn't the same 121.5
they'd just heard the ELT on.

Listen. They *knew* they'd be dealing with the ADIZ. They should have
known what to do when a military aircraft comes alongside on a standard
intercept, yet they continued on essentially a beeline to downtown DC.
*They* were the ones in the wrong here. Not the government crews doing
everything but lasso the plane to get them to alter course.

There is little doubt that the Sheaffer made many mistakes, but that's
no excuse for our government's implementation of a flawed security
policy.

The "flawed policy" has been in place for years. Shaeffer knew it, screwed
it and is now trying to play "country bumpkin". It's insulting.

I do agree the ADIZ is nothing but a "Do Something" reaction of bureaucrats.

--
John T
http://tknowlogy.com/TknoFlyer
http://www.pocketgear.com/products_s...veloperid=4415
____________________

John T wrote:

Listen. They *knew* they'd be dealing with the ADIZ.

There's a fair amount of evidence that they didn't know but won't admit it.
There was a post in the last two days to the effect that the FAA found a
pre-9-11 chart in the aircraft and that the pilots intended to fly the old VFR
exclusion through the class-B. I'm looking forward to AOPA's analysis of the
hearings, once those are done. The FAA isn't going to tell what it knows until
the hearings, and the PIC isn't ever going to tell what he knows.

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'.