ADIZ Violation Explained in AOPA Magazine

"Larry Dighera" wrote in message
...
[...]
It would seem that this opens an avenue to legally
challenge that rational in an effort to modify/strike-down the
rule(s).

If that were true, why has no one contested any of the prior rule-making
changes that have similar lack of justification?

I doubt that there's any genuinely feasible way to engage a legal challenge
to the FAA's analysis. If there is, I'm all ears. We've got a ridiculous
*prohibited* area here in the Puget Sound that is just begging to be
overturned.

Pete

On Fri, 6 Jan 2006 00:14:21 -0800, "Peter Duniho"
wrote in
::

"Larry Dighera" wrote in message
.. .
[...]
It would seem that this opens an avenue to legally
challenge that rational in an effort to modify/strike-down the
rule(s).

If that were true, why has no one contested any of the prior rule-making
changes that have similar lack of justification?

Perhaps, because it would require exposing the fallacy in FAA's
reasoning used to justify their rule making?

Can you provide your source, that supports your assertion of there
never having been a contest?

I doubt that there's any genuinely feasible way to engage a legal challenge
to the FAA's analysis. If there is, I'm all ears. We've got a ridiculous
*prohibited* area here in the Puget Sound that is just begging to be
overturned.


Have you studied the FAA's rationale in issuing that Prohibited Area?
If you are able to show how their logic is flawed, I would think you
would have grounds to petition your representatives for redress.

If that were true, why has no one contested any of the prior rule-making
changes that have similar lack of justification?

Maybe because the effect of those other changes was not as onerous for
as many people? Even here we have people in the midwest who think the
ADIZ is "no big deal".

Jose
--
You can choose whom to befriend, but you cannot choose whom to love.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

"Larry Dighera" wrote in message
...
Perhaps, because it would require exposing the fallacy in FAA's
reasoning used to justify their rule making?

How is that an impediment?

Can you provide your source, that supports your assertion of there
never having been a contest?

You want me to prove a negative?

[...]
Have you studied the FAA's rationale in issuing that Prohibited Area?

Yes. You are free to read my comments regarding the matter on the federal
docket for the issue. They are a matter of public record.

If you are able to show how their logic is flawed, I would think you
would have grounds to petition your representatives for redress.

Yes, it's clear that's what you think. In a perfect world, it's what I'd
think too.

Pete

Maybe because the effect of those other changes was not as onerous for as
many people? Even here we have people in the midwest who think the ADIZ
is "no big deal".

I resemble that remark.

However, my stating that flying is unchanged in most of the nation since
9/11 is a far cry from saying that the D.C. ADIZ is "no big deal". Having
flown inside that ADIZ, I know it's a VERY big deal, and it's a shame that
we have such an abomination in our country.

But it's there. We can fight it, we can complain about it, but -- in the
end -- we must deal with it.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

"Skywise" wrote in message ...
".Blueskies." wrote in news:STjvf.63153
:

Governmentium
Snipola

HAHAHAH...that's too funny....where did you find that?

Brian
--


One of the government inspector guys at work. I suppose it is a part of their manual...

;-)

Jay Honeck wrote:
However, my stating that flying is unchanged in most of the nation since
9/11 is a far cry from saying that the D.C. ADIZ is "no big deal". Having
flown inside that ADIZ, I know it's a VERY big deal, and it's a shame that
we have such an abomination in our country.

But it's there. We can fight it, we can complain about it, but -- in the
end -- we must deal with it.

The thing that upsets me is that, even though almost 20,000 people have
submitted comments to the FAA on the NPR for making the ADIZ permanent,
there are something like 400,000 AOPA members. Where the hell are the
other 380,000 AOPA members/pilots? Why aren't they submiting
comments? The unfortunate thruth is that the aviation community is *far*
from the close knit community that some people like to pretend it is.

--- Jay



--
__!__
Jay and Teresa Masino ___(_)___
http://www.JayMasino.com ! ! !
http://www.OceanCityAirport.com
http://www.oc-Adolfos.com

It isn't a plebiscite so it matters not how many comments are received.
By statute, they are looking for new or different ideas.

"Jay Masino" wrote in message
...
Jay Honeck wrote:
However, my stating that flying is unchanged in most of the nation
since
9/11 is a far cry from saying that the D.C. ADIZ is "no big deal".
Having
flown inside that ADIZ, I know it's a VERY big deal, and it's a shame
that
we have such an abomination in our country.

But it's there. We can fight it, we can complain about it, but -- in
the
end -- we must deal with it.

The thing that upsets me is that, even though almost 20,000 people
have
submitted comments to the FAA on the NPR for making the ADIZ
permanent,
there are something like 400,000 AOPA members. Where the hell are the
other 380,000 AOPA members/pilots? Why aren't they submiting
comments? The unfortunate thruth is that the aviation community is
*far*
from the close knit community that some people like to pretend it is.

--- Jay



--
__!__
Jay and Teresa Masino ___(_)___
http://www.JayMasino.com ! ! !
http://www.OceanCityAirport.com
http://www.oc-Adolfos.com

Real nice Honeck, some of us over 70's people actually do know how to
get from here to there, and amazingly enough, with just a sectional.



On Tue, 03 Jan 2006 14:08:27 GMT, "Jay Honeck"
wrote:

The current issue of AOPA Pilot has a fascinating article about the two
pilots (one certificated, one student) who penetrated the Washington ADIZ
last spring, and brought the wrath of the government down upon us all.


[ deleted crap about 70+ pilots who are ignorant and can't find their
ass with both hands ]

My 1961 license does, and it's because I didn't give them (whoever
made out the certificate) a number so they put my SSN number down.


On Thu, 05 Jan 2006 00:34:07 GMT, Bob Moore
wrote:

Jose wrote

Until recently the pilot certificate had the SSN on it. For
many people it still does.

My 1959 pilot certificate doesn't bear my SSN and for some
time after that, they didn't.

Bob Moore