FAA: 157 airspace violations since 9/11

Considering how restrictions pop up without warning, I'm not surpised:

WASHINGTON (CNN) --Since the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001,
and despite heightened security, 157 planes have violated airspace
over presidential residences, CNN has learned.

Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) records show that in the year
since the terrorist attacks, planes have flown into off-limits
airspace near the White House seven times.

Over the presidential retreat at Camp David, Maryland, the FAA says
there were 104 violations.

And over President Bush's ranch at Crawford, Texas, FAA-listed
violations numbered 46.
The FAA issued a warning to pilots this summer after a weekend in
which three aircraft flew into prohibited airspace over Camp David
while the Bush family was there.

One of the violators was an ultralight aircraft that the Secret
Service spotted when it was directly overhead. Military pilots
couldn't track the small plane, which doesn't show up on radar, and it
got away.

In a recent address to airline pilots, Art Cummings, chief of the
FBI's National Joint Strategic Assessment and Warning Section,
cautioned, "We've seen terrorist organizations looking at everything
as small as ultralights to deliver weapons of mass destruction ...

"That's yet another vulnerability that we have to take a look at very
strongly," he said. "We have to fill that gap."

The Secret Service would not comment on the potential threat posed by
small aircraft.

Off-limits charts posted
The FAA in July for the first time began posting charts on its Web
site showing the off-limits airspace, so pilots could see on a map
where they cannot fly. (You can view the FAA charts of
flight-restricted areas at
http://www.faa.gov/NTAP/specialnotam..._graphics_.htm)

Still, problems continued.

During Labor Day weekend, while Bush was at his Texas ranch, five
planes flew into the prohibited airspace. All were escorted down by
fighter jets.

Pilots who violate prohibited airspace can be fined or have their
licenses revoked or suspended. But the most common penalty is remedial
training, according to the FAA.

While some lawmakers have asked for tougher penalties, others,
including Rep. James Oberstar of Minnesota, say the FAA is sometimes
at fault for not giving pilots adequate or accurate information.

"FAA has to shoulder the responsibility," said Oberstar, who chaired
the House Aviation Subcommittee from 1989 through 1994, when
Republicans became the majority party.

"Pilots don't have accurate information," he said. "They don't have
consistent and recurrent training. And they ought to get that and the
FAA ought to provide it."

Tom Blank, the Transportation Security Administration's associate
undersecretary for security regulation and policy, said the new agency
is addressing the problem.

"Of course we want to see them (violations) come down. We're hard at
work trying to do that," he said. "We think we can make some progress
in the months ahead."

But Blank said measures, some of them not visible to the public, are
in place to ensure Bush's safety is not threatened.

"Suffice it to say that preparations are made to take the proper steps
to defend Washington and defend what's inside the other restricted
airspaces around the country," he said.

AJ wrote:

In a recent address to airline pilots, Art Cummings, chief of the
FBI's National Joint Strategic Assessment and Warning Section,
cautioned, "We've seen terrorist organizations looking at everything
as small as ultralights to deliver weapons of mass destruction ...

"That's yet another vulnerability that we have to take a look at very
strongly," he said. "We have to fill that gap."

Just what can an ultralight lift, and how heavy are those "suitcase" bombs?

[Wouldn't the bomb appear on RADAR in this case?]

- Andrew

"Andrew Gideon" wrote in message online.com...
AJ wrote:

In a recent address to airline pilots, Art Cummings, chief of the
FBI's National Joint Strategic Assessment and Warning Section,
cautioned, "We've seen terrorist organizations looking at everything
as small as ultralights to deliver weapons of mass destruction ...

"That's yet another vulnerability that we have to take a look at very
strongly," he said. "We have to fill that gap."

Just what can an ultralight lift, and how heavy are those "suitcase" bombs?


I think Bush's rhetoric on Iraq has completely dulled our sense of what a
"weapon of mass destruction" is. Unless that suitcase has a nuke in it,
it's not "mass" destruction. It might be enough to blow up W sitting in
his living room, but that doesn't make it WMD.

Ron Natalie wrote:

I think Bush's rhetoric on Iraq has completely dulled our sense of what a
"weapon of mass destruction" is. Unless that suitcase has a nuke in it,
it's not "mass" destruction. It might be enough to blow up W sitting in
his living room, but that doesn't make it WMD.

Sorry...I wasn't clear.

Yes, I did mean precisely a suitcase with a nuclear device. Supposedly, the
old Soviet Union had these and Russia may have lost a few...again,
"supposedly". None of the sources (on either side!) appear overly
credible.

http://www.acronym.org.uk/dd/dd19/19nukes.htm
http://www.miis.edu/offsite_press/Time Magazine Oct 29, 2001.htm

But these look pretty heavy, so I've doubts that an ultralight can carry
them.

- Andrew

Considering how restrictions pop up without warning, I'm not surpised:

WASHINGTON (CNN) --Since the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001,
and despite heightened security, 157 planes have violated airspace
over presidential residences, CNN has learned.

I know this isn't what many of you want to hear, but dang it, it's got to be
said: This sloppy aviating has GOT to stop.

Either WE, as pilots, figure this problem out, or THEY, as the government,
will "figure it out" for us. The Feds are not going to let these
violations continue forever -- if for no other reason than the general
public won't stand for it.

And THAT will mean an end to the freedom of the skies we have so long
enjoyed.

Note that these violations did NOT occur over the controversial "national
pop-up TFRs" we all know and hate. These happened over the President's
residences! It doesn't matter if it's a "pop-up" TFR -- call Flight Service
before every flight. If they tell you that there are NO TFRs along your
route of flight, and you get busted in one that *they* didn't know about,
I'll bet you the keys to the Mighty Grape you won't be violated.

Anyone who lives near the President's residences, and DOESN'T call flight
service before every flight, should have their certificate revoked for
stupidity.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

Jay Honeck wrote:

If they tell you that there are NO TFRs along your
route of flight, and you get busted in one that *they* didn't know about,
I'll bet you the keys to the Mighty Grape you won't be violated.

Even if we assume this to be true (and I don't), we don't know that these
aren't being counted.

- Andrew

"Jay Honeck" wrote in message
news:eTlJb.732811$Fm2.637066@attbi_s04

Note that these violations did NOT occur over the controversial
"national pop-up TFRs" we all know and hate. These happened over the
President's residences!

Keep in mind that even though airspace over Camp David (P40), for example,
is charted and well known, it can be expanded with little notice (i.e.,
become a "pop-up TFR"). The same goes for Crawford, TX. Just because it's
charted doesn't mean that's the size of the airspace on any particular day.

That in no way is meant to undermine your proposition regarding folks
knowingly flying in the vicinity of Washington, DC and Crawford, TX without
at least a call to FSS or a check of DUAT(S).

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

Keep in mind that even though airspace over Camp David (P40), for example,
is charted and well known, it can be expanded with little notice

I know. It's a real, *known* problem.

The problem is, it ISN'T apparently "known" by as many pilots as we would
like to believe.

I can only shake my head in disbelief that 157 pilots could make such a
mistake -- it makes us all look ridiculous. I mean, this isn't Mayor
Daley's suburban Chicago house, for chrissakes, this is the PRESIDENT'S
residence. Even us bumpkin pilots from Ioway know where THOSE are, and
surely any pilot should be able to steer a wide berth around 'em.

I fear we're heading for a huge problem with this issue... :-(
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

"Jay Honeck" wrote in message
news:PNmJb.733077$Fm2.638775@attbi_s04...
Keep in mind that even though airspace over Camp David (P40), for
example,
is charted and well known, it can be expanded with little notice

I know. It's a real, *known* problem.

The problem is, it ISN'T apparently "known" by as many pilots as we would
like to believe.

I can only shake my head in disbelief that 157 pilots could make such a
mistake -- it makes us all look ridiculous. I mean, this isn't Mayor
Daley's suburban Chicago house, for chrissakes, this is the PRESIDENT'S
residence. Even us bumpkin pilots from Ioway know where THOSE are, and
surely any pilot should be able to steer a wide berth around 'em.

I fear we're heading for a huge problem with this issue... :-(

Jay

It seems obvious to us but.......
Console yourself, these peoples vote count as much as yours, I wonder
whether they can tie their shoelaces by themselves too.

"John T" wrote in message ws.com...


Keep in mind that even though airspace over Camp David (P40), for example,
is charted and well known, it can be expanded with little notice (i.e.,
become a "pop-up TFR").

At least now both the expanded and contracted boundaries are charted. It is out in
some featureless forrest and there's even a Victor airway running through it. Even before
it started getting ridiculous in size, I steered well clear of it (I used to go from Dulles
to FDK, MRB, and HGR quite regularly).