ADIZ Violation Explained in AOPA Magazine

As I recall the article, they were planning on flying under the Class B near
its edge. Of course that's now the ADIZ that goes all the way down to the
surface, so they were actually expecting to be in what is now ADIZ.

--
Bob (Chief Pilot, White Knuckle Airways)


"Ron Natalie" wrote in message
m...
Mike Schumann wrote:
I have 0 sympathy for either of these guys. Since when is a GPS required
for VFR navigation? What happened to learning how to read a map and
looking out the window? Makes you really question a system where you get
your pilots license and you are good to go for life. Maybe there should
be some periodic retest to make sure people still have the skills they
need or have learned about new stuff that didn't exist when they first
got their license.

If they'd drawn a straight line between Smoketown and Lumberton, they
would have pretty much missed the entire ADIZ mess (and the class B as
well). The straight line path if I recall runs right down the east
edge of the ADIZ. If they'd have tracked down the eastern shore until
past DC, they wouldn't have come close and the visual landmark (the
Chesapeake bay) is pretty hard to miss. Yes, it does mean that they would
have had to cross the water however.

Jose wrote:

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

For many people it never did.


Jack

John T wrote:

Both aircraft had functioning
radios and the initial instruction from the Blackhawk was to tune to 121.5.
However, there was other traffic (I've never understood exactly what, but
the consensus is it was an ELT) on that frequency that prevented its use.
More valuable time was lost trying to figure out a) a new frequency and b)
how to communicate that to the errant 150.

Was the ELT in either the Blackhawk or in the C-150?

Must have been a real _strong_ ELT to have disabled the freq for two
aircraft that were relatively close to one another.


Jack

Skywise wrote:

My understanding is that of those four listed, only the
IRS has a legal right to the number.

that was my understanding too, but it seems that the
DMV can indeed require it, at least here in California
(I can dig it up if you'd like, it's probably buried in
my privacy related doc);

oh I forgot another bunch of folks who demand (and
use rather casually SSN#): anything to do with the
military it seems whether directly or indirectly (e.g.,
you wont be able to register for a high altitude training
without it, the CAP for some reason demand it, etc.)

--Sylvain

"Ron Lee" wrote in message
...
"Jay Honeck" wrote:

Yessssss.... More regulations. More draconian enforcement. Listen
bub,
weekly testing and the death penalty wouldn't prevent this **** from
ever
happening. The root cause rests in stupidity; which is incurable.

Amen, brother.
--

Unfortunately that is correct. The FAA can mandate all the black
boxes that can be imagined at huge cost to GA or comercial pilots but
at the end of the day human failure will continue to be a major cause
of aircraft accidents, incidents and fatalities.

And insane measures will make such fallibility appear far more dangerous
than it is. Homeland Insecurity with a billion dollars couldn't talk one
lost pilot down or even identify what he was. This was failure at all
levels. It's crap. It's shoot to kill at any cost crap. Sky marshals on
GA flights crap. The radios didn't work crap. The cigarette lighter didn't
work crap. F16s trying to slow to 110KTS crap. CIs (commanding idiots)
wondering if this is the one to make an example of crap. ARRARAGHHH.. Ok.
Not tonight.

moo

"Jay Honeck" wrote in message
news:3sRuf.704951$xm3.340008@attbi_s21...
To be fair, we didn't get the intercepting pilots' stories.

Actually, the article mentions that one of the F-16 pilots was quoted as
saying that "They knew the C-150 wasn't a threat" -- which is why
(apparently) they didn't shoot him down.

That's not a story. A C150 is never a real threat to an F16. A real story
would be "We're making this situation worse. LET'S GET THIS GUY ON THE
TARMAC PRONTO." whAT'S A THREAT?

MOO

"George Patterson" wrote in message
news:wlTuf.6643$If.5052@trnddc05...
Happy Dog wrote:

To be fair, we didn't get the intercepting pilots' stories.

It's not for lack of trying. The department of HSA has refused to comment.

That's not the pilots fault.

moo

"John T" wrote in message news:
"Happy Dog" wrote in message
news

A frigging *radio* would have made sense.
...
But you probably would have remembered to try 121.5.

You may be unaware of a couple key facts. Both aircraft had functioning
radios and the initial instruction from the Blackhawk was to tune to
121.5. However, there was other traffic (I've never understood exactly
what, but the consensus is it was an ELT) on that frequency that prevented
its use. More valuable time was lost trying to figure out a) a new
frequency and b) how to communicate that to the errant 150.

Crap. Read the report and try again.

Homeland insecurity at its best. Imagine if they'd killed these
guys. Nah. They're not *that* stupid...

Yeah, it's real stupid to risk getting shot by not knowing where you are.
DoD and DHS claim to have learned valuable lessons, but I can only hope
other pilots have learned there is an ADIZ around here with special rules
and special penalties.

Every violation hurts our chances of getting the damned thing dismantled.

Especially when it's almost a given that there will be some innocuous
violations.

More info and opinion:
http://sage1solutions.com/TknoFlyer/PermaLink,guid,4ebaf403-5dbd-479f-8514-355334db4275.aspx

There are substantial differences between this account and AOPA. Explain
them.

moo

"Jack" wrote in message
m...
John T wrote:

Both aircraft had functioning
radios and the initial instruction from the Blackhawk was to tune to
121.5. However, there was other traffic (I've never understood exactly
what, but the consensus is it was an ELT) on that frequency that
prevented its use. More valuable time was lost trying to figure out a) a
new frequency and b) how to communicate that to the errant 150.

Was the ELT in either the Blackhawk or in the C-150?

Must have been a real _strong_ ELT to have disabled the freq for two
aircraft that were relatively close to one another.

Exactly. In fact, it's crap unless new of them had an operating 121.5
beacon. People talk over these things all the time.

moo

"John T" wrote in message news:
"Happy Dog" wrote in message
news

A frigging *radio* would have made sense.
...
But you probably would have remembered to try 121.5.

You may be unaware of a couple key facts. Both aircraft had functioning
radios and the initial instruction from the Blackhawk was to tune to
121.5. However, there was other traffic (I've never understood exactly
what, but the consensus is it was an ELT) on that frequency that prevented
its use. More valuable time was lost trying to figure out a) a new
frequency and b) how to communicate that to the errant 150.

Crap. Student pilots can figure this out. The radcio doesn't work on
121.5, try another frequency. This brought the who intercept procedure
down? Get a grip!

Homeland insecurity at its best. Imagine if they'd killed these
guys. Nah. They're not *that* stupid...

Yeah, it's real stupid to risk getting shot by not knowing where you are.
DoD and DHS claim to have learned valuable lessons, but I can only hope
other pilots have learned there is an ADIZ around here with special rules
and special penalties.

More rules. More penalties. That's it. Read the ****ing AOPA report.
This was a 6 out of 10 for stupid pilot tricks. There's no risk
commeseurate with the defence effort. m Get it?

Every violation hurts our chances of getting the damned thing dismantled.

As does every twit who goes on record supporting it.


moo