A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

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.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Piloting
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Washington DC airspace closing for good?



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old August 4th 05, 05:36 PM
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Yes. I saw the AOPA language. But the actual proposal contains this
language:

We believe that as part of ensuring the
security of the people, property and
institutions in the Nation's capital, and
surrounding area, it is essential to know
the intended route of flight of the
aircraft, to have the aircraft squawk a
discrete transponder code, and to have
automatic altitude reporting equipment
on board the aircraft that transmits to
ATC. Government officials believe that
some types of aircraft operations (i.e.,
those conducted under parts 91, 101,
103, 105, 125, 133, 135 and 137) should
continue to be prohibited within 15
miles of the DCA VOR/DME, unless
specifically authorized by the FAA in
consultation with the DoD and DHS.

and this language:

Who Is Potentially Affected by This
Rulemaking?
Private Sector
All aircraft would have to be
transponder equipped when entering
the proposed DC SFRA and maintain
two-way communications while flying
in the proposed area. Pilots operating in
accordance with visual flight rules
(VFR) would have to file flight plans to
fly within the proposed DC SFRA.
There are approximately 150 airports
in the proposed DC ADIZ. Given the
additional requirements that general
aviation pilots face, the FAA is
concerned that many of these airports
would have fewer operations. In some
cases, some of these pilots may elect to
use alternate nearby airports outside of
the proposed DC SFRA.

Indeed, I read through the entire proposal, and I can't find anything
that
makes the restrictions worse. Indeed, It seems to loosen the
restrictions
for "Special Egress Procedures for Fringe Airports", specifically
"Airlie,
Albrecht, Harris, Martin, Martin State, Meadows, Mylander, Stewart, St.
John,
Tilghman Whipp, Upperville, and Wolf airports", by allowing folks those
pilots
to use a specific transponder code and not require them to contact ATC.
Of
course, I've only heard of two of these airports...Upperville, which is
private
and always deserted (CIA?) and Airlie...which is a grass strip that I
and
children went on a demo flight in a 1930's era biplane several years
ago. I
digress.

I hope I'm reading this correctly. I worked three gruelling years
getting my
ticket, and shutting down GA flights out of leesburg would essentially
render
flying impractical for me.

-BC

 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
NAS and associated computer system Newps Instrument Flight Rules 8 August 12th 04 06:12 AM
AOPA Sells-Out California Pilots in Military Airspace Grab? Larry Dighera Instrument Flight Rules 12 April 26th 04 07:12 PM
AOPA Sells-Out California Pilots in Military Airspace Grab? Larry Dighera Piloting 12 April 26th 04 07:12 PM
12 Dec 2003 - Today’s Military, Veteran, War and National Security News Otis Willie Naval Aviation 0 December 13th 03 12:01 AM
USAF = US Amphetamine Fools RT Military Aviation 104 September 25th 03 04:17 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:48 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2025 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.