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 |
#41
|
|||
|
|||
No charges are being filed.
By the FBI. Doesn't exclude FAA or others from lining up. Here's the word from FAA Spokesman William Schumann: Pilots who violate the ADIZ (so far none have been discovered to be full-fledged evil-doers, or even to harbor any ill-intent) generally get a 30- to 90-day suspension of their certificate, Shumann said, but each case is handled individually. The range of possibilities does include revocation. It might be more understandable that pilots can be tripped up by Temporary Flight Restrictions that appear with no warning (like those that follow the president), but it seems it would be tough to miss the ADIZ and the FRZ. The FRZ has been violated much less often than the ADIZ, Shumann said. This was published after the LAST incursion (remember the Mooney?) -- no telling what will happen after this most recent one. -- Jay Honeck Iowa City, IA Pathfinder N56993 www.AlexisParkInn.com "Your Aviation Destination" |
#42
|
|||
|
|||
In article ,
It's not clear where else they could come from, though (except in terms of embarrassment, as you mention). Accidentally busting an ADIZ is not a crime, as far as I'm aware; the FBI has already announced that there are no criminal charges to be pressed. Seems like a homeland security event to me. I fail to believe that there can't be exceptions to the NASA ASRS procedures in extreme cases, and I'd say busing the ADIZ and prohibited airspace is extreme. The reports so far suggest that the pilot did plan to avoid the ADIZ, so his planning was not necessarily inadequate. Looks like he just got lost. What was probably lacking was his navigational skill, though even that isn't certain--being highly skilled makes elementary errors unlikely, but not impossible. I haven't seen or heard anything that suggests that the flight planning was adequate, but even if it was, the execution was not adequate. I would say that it's quite certain that the pilot's navigational skills were not adequate, otherwise he wouldn't have busted airspace as badly as he did--remember, he didn't just clip the ADIZ and retreat, he was apparently pretty deep into the ADIZ and the prohibited area. It seems like the entire event could have been avoided had he been talking to someone. Apparently, the radio wasn't working. In my opinion, taking an airplane with an inoperative radio into or around the DC area is lunacy. JKG |
#43
|
|||
|
|||
"Jonathan Goodish" wrote in message
... I fail to believe that there can't be exceptions to the NASA ASRS procedures in extreme cases, and I'd say busing the ADIZ and prohibited airspace is extreme. The immunity promise is spelled out in the NASA link I posted earlier. It has no exception for busting ADIZs. "Extreme" cases are criminal cases rather than merely civil cases (in civil cases, the FAA can just impose fines and administrative penalties, such as license suspensions). The ASRS immunity indeed does not apply to criminal violations. But the FBI has already said that there is no crime to prosecute. So that leaves the FAA, which is bound by the ASRS immunity promise (if the spelled-out conditions apply). Look, it's not that I'm underestimating what the government could do in the name of homeland security these days. I don't deny that they could contravene due process (and other Constitutional guarantees) to disappear you, or torture you, or send you to Saudi Arabia to be tortured, if they deemed it important enough. What I doubt is that they would blatantly and publicly contravene due process (by failing to honor a binding promise of immunity, which is a staple of our legal system) just to impose a piddling penalty like suspending a pilot's license. Apparently, the radio wasn't working. In my opinion, taking an airplane with an inoperative radio into or around the DC area is lunacy. Has it been established that the radio failed *before* entering the area? --Gary |
#44
|
|||
|
|||
Gary Drescher wrote: "Jonathan Goodish" wrote in message ... Apparently, the radio wasn't working. In my opinion, taking an airplane with an inoperative radio into or around the DC area is lunacy. Has it been established that the radio failed *before* entering the area? According to one of the intercept pilots, the Cessna pilot began talking to them on 121.5 after the intercept. Sounds to me like the radio was working fine. John Galban=====N4BQ (PA28-180) |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Would a NASA form help? | Jesse Wright | Piloting | 51 | May 14th 05 07:25 PM |
NASA form use for someone else's event | Andrew Gideon | Piloting | 4 | March 31st 05 01:50 PM |
Runway Incursion and NASA form | steve mew | Piloting | 0 | November 10th 03 05:37 AM |
Moving violation..NASA form? | Nasir | Piloting | 47 | November 5th 03 07:56 PM |
USAF = US Amphetamine Fools | RT | Military Aviation | 104 | September 25th 03 03:17 PM |