The FAA continues it's war on General Aviation

This is completely unecessary and idiotic.
If the FAA had their way they would disallow any VFR flying in the US
period.

So what would additional ADIZ training entail? How do you implement it
and how do you verify that pilots have had the training. How is it
documented? Do you have a special code on your certificate or is it
just a log book entry? Will they create a new FAA ADIZ police force?

Can you say "Chicken Little"?

http://www.aopa.org/whatsnew/newsite...60706adiz.html

FlipSide wrote in message
...
This is completely unecessary and idiotic.
If the FAA had their way they would disallow any VFR flying in the US
period.

So what would additional ADIZ training entail? How do you implement it
and how do you verify that pilots have had the training. How is it
documented? Do you have a special code on your certificate or is it
just a log book entry? Will they create a new FAA ADIZ police force?

Can you say "Chicken Little"?

http://www.aopa.org/whatsnew/newsite...60706adiz.html

While I don't think the training is an especially good idea it would be
documented the same way all other special training is. A log book entry.

by FlipSide Jul 7, 2006 at 07:57 AM



If the FAA had their way they would disallow any VFR flying in the US
period



Bull****. Total bull****. They are the ones who pushed the stupid LSA
rules, to EXPAND VFR GA. The Destroyer always brags about how AOPA can
influence the FAA (this is certainly true).
Here is an example of how cozy AOPA and FAA a

http://www.faa.gov/region/ane/expo/keynote/

Outrageous for a taxpayer funded organization to be so clearly in the
pocket of a special interest group.

And, as you all know by now, the FAA provides tax subsidies to GA airports
all across the country to keep the cost of flying artificially low. That
is why it costs more to fly GA in every other country: they don't
subsidize GA like in the USA.

How many of us have written ( a real letter with a stamp) to our
senator and congress critter outlining the reasons that the Washington
ADIZ is insane bureaucratic excess and asking that they introduce
legislation abolishing the ADIZ for aircraft under 12,500 pounds?

For starters mention that the payload of the average Lycoming four
banger will not provide enough explosives to do real damage..
That no small GA aircraft has been implicated in an act of muslim
terrorism, whilst RYDER trucks continue to be freely available to
anyone with a drivers license, a suicide bomber in a hijacked semi can
haul 80,000 pounds of explosives right up to congressional offices,
and airliners fly over Washington passing within five seconds of the
capital buildings many times an hour...
Point out that the bureaucratically imposed restrictions upon the use
of thousands of square miles of public airspace has not been subject to
legislative review and a vote... I would expect any rules to limit the
constitutional right of the citizenry to travel through Washington DC,
would require a vote of both houses of congress... I would expect a
regulation depriving the citizenry of the use of 7,850 square miles of
public airspace to require a Constitutional Amendment...
Point out that the rules that put US citizens face down on the tarmac
with a gun in their back for crossing an invisible line in the sky
needs to be equated to doing the same thing to car drivers who might
take a 'forbidden but unmarked' ramp onto the freeway... What if
drivers had to take special training to drive within 100 miles of DC?

Those who are not a vocal part of the solution, are a part of the
problem...

denny

On Fri, 07 Jul 2006 07:57:41 -0400, FlipSide wrote in
::

So what would additional ADIZ training entail? How do you implement it
and how do you verify that pilots have had the training. How is it
documented? Do you have a special code on your certificate or is it
just a log book entry? Will they create a new FAA ADIZ police force?

http://www.aopa.org/whatsnew/newsite...60706adiz.html

Here's a distillation of facts from the above link:

The FAA is proposing to require mandatory training for any VFR
pilot flying within 100 nautical miles of the DCA Vortac. That
effectively expands the ADIZ to engulf 117 airports.
http://www.aopa.org/images/whatsnew/...060706adiz.jpg

"And the FAA is not planning on marking the 'training ring' on any
charts. It's a 'gotcha' waiting to happen."

There's another 'gotcha' for IFR pilots. Pilots flying near the
ADIZ on an IFR flight plan wouldn't be required to have the ADIZ
training. But consider someone flying IFR from Wilmington,
Delaware (ILG), to Lancaster, Pennsylvania (LNS). The weather is
good, so the pilot cancels IFR 10 nm out to expedite his arrival.

Gotcha! You're now VFR and must have the ADIZ training, even
though you're 43 nm outside the ADIZ.

if a pilot exiting the ADIZ "squawks VFR" just before crossing the
ADIZ boundary, it's counted as an incursion under the Department
of Homeland Security's "zero tolerance" policy.

Being completely untenable, this has got to be a verbatim proposal of
DHS; FAA can't possibly be so shortsighted (can they?).

To require VFR pilots within 100 miles of the DCA Vortac to have
received special training will unquestionably cause more pilots to
face certificate actions, and little else. It does nothing to prevent
DC ADIZ incursions; it only provides a five times larger area in which
to trap VFR pilots.

Presumably those pilots who have received the proposed ADIZ training,
but manage to violate the 100 nm "training ring" will fair better
during their certificate action than those who haven't received the
training. That's absurd! This is all about protecting the White
House, but a 31,400 square mile area is clearly overkill. And
requiring training for pilots of VFR flights does nothing to prevent
unauthorized ADIZ penetration, and everything to provide our nation's
military pilots additional home-front duty with the authority to
intercept many times more innocent citizens, and place them in mortal
danger of being shot down by the very military they fund!

If I recall correctly, the FAA recently received the largest response
ever (17,000) to its DC ADIZ NPRM, and this is the FAA's response,
completely counter to the input it requested. If that's how they want
to play it, we can organize a force of 100 VFR pilots who will enter
the newly proposed ring daily just enough to trigger the interceptors.
That should have them scrambling like a Chinese fire drill. :-)

When laws are absurd, they are not obeyed (remember the 55 MPH speed
limit?), they only create more "criminals" to fill our overflowing
jails. What the hell is that son of a Bush trying to do, incite a
national rebellion, in the name of homeland security?

FlipSide wrote:
This is completely unecessary and idiotic.
If the FAA had their way they would disallow any VFR flying in the US
period.

You're an idiot. The FAA has never said they want to stop VFR. They
won't say that either because they know better than most that the system
cannot handle all the aircraft that are airborne at any given time.

I am wondering what good a logbook entry would be in stopping
inadvertent incursions into this pointless ADIZ.

Several violations were made by F-16's and other military aircraft!

I have yet to see GA cause any terrorist acts, and if one wanted to
insure that GA never did, then all of us should be grounded.

The fact is, this ADIZ is "feel good" crap for the GP (general public)
since most of them are terrified of small planes and can easily imagine
a Cessna 150 or Tomahawk toting a nuclear bomb from Kansas to the Capitol.

Here is an interesting AOPA link wherein the TSA or other authority
admits that over 60% of the ADIZ violations were never identified.

http://www.aopa.org/whatsnew/newsite...a-comments.pdf

Terry

Gig 601XL Builder wrote:
FlipSide wrote in message
...
This is completely unecessary and idiotic.
If the FAA had their way they would disallow any VFR flying in the US
period.

So what would additional ADIZ training entail? How do you implement it
and how do you verify that pilots have had the training. How is it
documented? Do you have a special code on your certificate or is it
just a log book entry? Will they create a new FAA ADIZ police force?

Can you say "Chicken Little"?

http://www.aopa.org/whatsnew/newsite...60706adiz.html

While I don't think the training is an especially good idea it would be
documented the same way all other special training is. A log book entry.

That's a little harsh, don't you think?

Newps wrote:


FlipSide wrote:
This is completely unecessary and idiotic.
If the FAA had their way they would disallow any VFR flying in the US
period.

You're an idiot. The FAA has never said they want to stop VFR. They
won't say that either because they know better than most that the system
cannot handle all the aircraft that are airborne at any given time.



--
"The whole religious complexion of the modern world is due to the
absence from Jerusalem of a Lunatic Asylum."

- Havelock Ellis

In article
outaviation.com,
"Skylune" wrote:

Outrageous for a taxpayer funded organization to be so clearly in the
pocket of a special interest group.

Ohhh!!... now you are talking about the airline lobby.

FlipSide wrote in message
...
This is completely unecessary and idiotic.
If the FAA had their way they would disallow any VFR
flying in the US period.

So what would additional ADIZ training entail? How do
you implement it and how do you verify that pilots have
had the training. How is it documented? Do you have a
special code on your certificate or is it just a log book
entry? Will they create a new FAA ADIZ police force?

Can you say "Chicken Little"?

http://www.aopa.org/whatsnew/newsite...60706adiz.html

We haven't seen anything yet. Wait until the Very Light Jets have been on
the market for a few years. These things are going to be Al Queda's best
friend. And Phil Boyer is going to keep on singing his swan song that GA
has no potential for terrorism.