New Charts to have DC ADIZ on them

[Jake Brodsky]

I saw that item in AOPA's web site and found one other interesting
thing:

According to AOPA, Congress is requiring the *FAA* to justify the ADIZ
to them every two months. --WTF?

Shouldn't this request have been made of the Department of Homeland
Security? How did this thing get so sidetracked? Does anyone think
the FAA wants anything to do with an ADIZ over Washington DC?

Grrrrrrr... >~(


Jake Brodsky,
PP ASEL IA, Cessna Cardinal N30946, Based @ FME
Amateur Radio Station AB3A

[John T]

"Jake Brodsky" > wrote in message

>
> According to AOPA, Congress is requiring the *FAA* to justify the ADIZ
> to them every two months. --WTF?
>
> Shouldn't this request have been made of the Department of Homeland
> Security? How did this thing get so sidetracked? Does anyone think
> the FAA wants anything to do with an ADIZ over Washington DC?

The FAA still implements the airspace restrictions even if said restrictions
are at the behest of other organizations.

My question is: What will happen if the FAA says the restrictions are not
justified?

--
John T
http://tknowlogy.com/TknoFlyer
http://www.pocketgear.com/products_search.asp?developerid=4415
____________________

[Bill Denton]

Just do what Mayor Daley did to Meigs Field in Chicago when he didn't get
the restrictions he wanted...just take a backhoe out to Reagan at 3:00 in
the morning and cut big "X"'s the length of the runways!


"John T" > wrote in message
ws.com...
> "Jake Brodsky" > wrote in message
>
> >
> > According to AOPA, Congress is requiring the *FAA* to justify the ADIZ
> > to them every two months. --WTF?
> >
> > Shouldn't this request have been made of the Department of Homeland
> > Security? How did this thing get so sidetracked? Does anyone think
> > the FAA wants anything to do with an ADIZ over Washington DC?
>
> The FAA still implements the airspace restrictions even if said
restrictions
> are at the behest of other organizations.
>
> My question is: What will happen if the FAA says the restrictions are not
> justified?
>
> --
> John T
> http://tknowlogy.com/TknoFlyer
> http://www.pocketgear.com/products_search.asp?developerid=4415
> ____________________
>
>

[Jake Brodsky]

On Thu, 05 Feb 2004 16:13:01 GMT, "John T" > wrote:

>My question is: What will happen if the FAA says the restrictions are not
>justified?

And I'll pose another question right back: HOW can the FAA say the
that the restrictions are not justified? They don't even work for the
same department!

The only justification the FAA could offer is that the ADIZ is
ineffective. The appropriate response would be to tie both the FAA
and the pilot community in to even bigger knots and to jump through
even more hoops. The FAA may be inefficient, but like any government
agency, they know how to protect their own from an unwinnable battle.

I don't see how your hypothetical scenario could ever happen.


Jake Brodsky,
PP ASEL IA, Cessna Cardinal N30946, Based @ FME
Amateur Radio Station AB3A

[Jay Masino]

Jake Brodsky > wrote:
> I saw that item in AOPA's web site and found one other interesting
> thing:
> According to AOPA, Congress is requiring the *FAA* to justify the ADIZ
> to them every two months. --WTF?
> Shouldn't this request have been made of the Department of Homeland
> Security? How did this thing get so sidetracked? Does anyone think
> the FAA wants anything to do with an ADIZ over Washington DC?

Yes, and that's why it's a farce. Every 2 months, the FAA will tell
Congress "The Department of Homeland Defense, as well as the Secret
Service, is requiring it", and nothing else will happen.

--- Jay

--
__!__
Jay and Teresa Masino ___(_)___
http://www2.ari.net/jmasino/ ! ! !

Checkout http://www.oc-adolfos.com/
for the best Italian food in Ocean City, MD and...
Checkout http://www.brolow.com/ for authentic Blues music on Delmarva

[Ron Natalie]

"John T" > wrote in message ws.com...
>> My question is: What will happen if the FAA says the restrictions are not
> justified?
>
I believe the FAA already believes the restrictions aren't justified.
Unfortunately they aren't running the show.

[John T]

"Jake Brodsky" > wrote in message

>
> I don't see how your hypothetical scenario could ever happen.

"I have a dream..." :)

--
John T
http://tknowlogy.com/TknoFlyer
http://www.pocketgear.com/products_search.asp?developerid=4415
____________________

[John T]

"Ron Natalie" > wrote in message

>
> I believe the FAA already believes the restrictions aren't justified.
> Unfortunately they aren't running the show.

That's my understanding, as well, which is why I think Jay is correct in
that the FAA will continue to say:

"Other government agencies are providing 'clear and credible' evidence that
these restrictions are necessary."

--
John T
http://tknowlogy.com/TknoFlyer
http://www.pocketgear.com/products_search.asp?developerid=4415
____________________

[Andrew Gideon]

Jake Brodsky wrote:

> On Thu, 05 Feb 2004 16:13:01 GMT, "John T" > wrote:
>
>>My question is: What will happen if the FAA says the restrictions are not
>>justified?
>
> And I'll pose another question right back: HOW can the FAA say the
> that the restrictions are not justified? They don't even work for the
> same department!
>

The FAA has really only one answer: we're told to do this.

- Andrew

[aaronw]

On Thu, 05 Feb 2004 11:03:29 -0500, Jake Brodsky >
wrote:

>I saw that item in AOPA's web site and found one other interesting
>thing:
>
>According to AOPA, Congress is requiring the *FAA* to justify the ADIZ
>to them every two months. --WTF?
>
>Shouldn't this request have been made of the Department of Homeland
>Security? How did this thing get so sidetracked? Does anyone think
>the FAA wants anything to do with an ADIZ over Washington DC?

I saw the article on aopa.org as well...

I was thinking that it was a typo, that Congress is requiring DHS to
justify it, because otherwise, well, it makes no sense.

However...

http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/useftp.cgi?IPaddress=162.140.64.21&filename=h2115enr.txt&directory=/diskb/wais/data/108_cong_bills

(watch the wrap)

TITLE VI--AVIATION SECURITY
SEC. 602. JUSTIFICATION FOR AIR DEFENSE IDENTIFICATION ZONE.

(a) In General.--If the Administrator of the Federal Aviation
Administration establishes an Air Defense Identification Zone (in this
section referred as an ``ADIZ''), the Administrator shall transmit to
the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure of the House of
Representatives and the Committee on Commerce, Science, and
Transportation of the Senate, not later than 60 days after the date of
establishing the ADIZ, a report containing an explanation of the need
for the ADIZ. The Administrator also shall transmit to the Committees
updates of the report every 60 days until the ADIZ is rescinded. The
reports and updates shall be transmitted in classified form.
(b) Existing ADIZ.--If an ADIZ is in effect on the date of
enactment of this Act, the Administrator shall transmit an initial
report under subsection (a) not later than 30 days after such date of
enactment.
(c) Description of Changes To Improve Operations.--A report
transmitted by the Administrator under this section shall include a
description of any changes in procedures or requirements that could
improve operational efficiency or minimize operational impacts of the
ADIZ on pilots and controllers. This portion of the report may be
transmitted in classified or unclassified form.
(d) Definition.--In this section, the terms ``Air Defense
Identification Zone'' and ``ADIZ'' each mean a zone established by the
Administrator with respect to airspace under 18,000 feet in
approximately a 15- to 38-mile radius around Washington, District of
Columbia, for which security measures are extended beyond the existing
15-mile no-fly zone around Washington and in which general aviation
aircraft are required to adhere to certain procedures issued by the
Administrator.

So I guess it is the FAA, which is pretty dumb. Also, it looks like
the 60 day updates are classified...

Also, under TITLE VIII - Miscellaneous:

SEC. 823. GENERAL AVIATION FLIGHTS AT RONALD REAGAN WASHINGTON
NATIONAL
AIRPORT.

(a) Security Plan.--The Secretary of Homeland Security shall
develop and implement a security plan to permit general aviation
aircraft to land and take off at Ronald Reagan Washington National
Airport.
(b) Landings and Takeoffs.--The Administrator of the Federal
Aviation Administration shall allow general aviation aircraft that
comply with the requirements of the security plan to land and take off
at the Airport except during any period that the President suspends
the
plan developed under subsection (a) due to national security concerns.
(c) Report.--If the President suspends the security plan developed
under subsection (a), the President shall submit to the Senate
Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation and the House of
Representatives Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure a
report
on the reasons for the suspension not later than 30 days following the
first day of the suspension. The report may be submitted in classified
form.

Where's this plan?

aw

[Judah]

My guess is that it is all a political ploy. The FAA doesn't have to
justify the effectiveness of the security itself, just the ADIZ
implementation. They do this by saying that the ADIZ is the only way to
positively identify all aircraft within 30 NM of DC, as per the
requirement imposed upon them by the TSA, SS, Hom-a-land Security
Commission, or whomever. I would think that it is not within the scope of
the FAA's responsibility (or even their privileged knowledge) to identify
the reasons behind the request for this positive identification, only
that they have acted appropriately upon it, and will continue to do so
until the request is rescinded/cancelled/eliminated.

They probably do not have access to the so-called "sensitive chatter
transmissions" or whatever other bull**** "evidence" the buearacrats have
to justify the request. But again, in a buearacracy, it's not about sound
logic - it's about passing the buck while creating the illusion of
accountability. So when Congress gets up and asks for accountability from
a place where they know accountability is not available, the public (or
in this case, the pilots and airlines) think they are doing something
positive for them.

Now they can tell all the pilots and airline execs, "Look what we are
doing to support you, now vote for me!" And they think we are as stupid
as the rest of the public and don't know what's really going on...



"John T" > wrote in
ws.com:

> "Jake Brodsky" > wrote in message
>
>>
>> According to AOPA, Congress is requiring the *FAA* to justify the ADIZ
>> to them every two months. --WTF?
>>
>> Shouldn't this request have been made of the Department of Homeland
>> Security? How did this thing get so sidetracked? Does anyone think
>> the FAA wants anything to do with an ADIZ over Washington DC?
>
> The FAA still implements the airspace restrictions even if said
> restrictions are at the behest of other organizations.
>
> My question is: What will happen if the FAA says the restrictions are
> not justified?
>