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. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Washington DC airspace closing for good?
|
#2
|
|||
|
|||
tony roberts wrote:
Looks like it. http://www.aopa.org/whatsnew/newsite...50803adiz.html George Patterson Give a person a fish and you feed him for a day; teach a person to use the Internet and he won't bother you for weeks. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
It's incredibly stupid, but it is not, as the topic suggests, a proposal to
close DC airspace. I assume it is a proposal to make the ADIZ permanent. Michael |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Michael 182 wrote:
It's incredibly stupid, but it is not, as the topic suggests, a proposal to close DC airspace. I assume it is a proposal to make the ADIZ permanent. Not exactly. It's a proposal to turn the ADIZ into restricted airspace. That effectively closes it to many of us. George Patterson Give a person a fish and you feed him for a day; teach a person to use the Internet and he won't bother you for weeks. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
On Thu, 04 Aug 2005 03:12:06 GMT, George Patterson
wrote in aIfIe.12003$W72.2040@trndny05:: Not exactly. It's a proposal to turn the ADIZ into restricted airspace. That effectively closes it to many of us. The FAA proposal to change the DC ADIZ into Restricted airspace with a ceiling of 18,000' is likely an effort to further de-clutter it. Perhaps there are so many authorized flights using the airspace now, that it is too congested to permit effective radar tracking of primary targets. If so, perhaps a new radar installation might be more effective. One wonders how flights originating within the airspace, and congressional commuters will be handled when it becomes Restricted. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
"Larry Dighera" wrote in message
... On Thu, 04 Aug 2005 03:12:06 GMT, George Patterson wrote in aIfIe.12003$W72.2040@trndny05:: Not exactly. It's a proposal to turn the ADIZ into restricted airspace. That effectively closes it to many of us. The FAA proposal to change the DC ADIZ into Restricted airspace with a ceiling of 18,000' is likely an effort to further de-clutter it. Crap. http://www.aopa.org/ Join if you already haven't. moo |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
On Thu, 4 Aug 2005 05:34:59 -0400, "Happy Dog"
wrote in :: "Larry Dighera" wrote in message .. . On Thu, 04 Aug 2005 03:12:06 GMT, George Patterson wrote in aIfIe.12003$W72.2040@trndny05:: Not exactly. It's a proposal to turn the ADIZ into restricted airspace. That effectively closes it to many of us. The FAA proposal to change the DC ADIZ into Restricted airspace with a ceiling of 18,000' is likely an effort to further de-clutter it. Crap. Oh, no thank you. http://www.aopa.org/ Join if you already haven't. While I've been an AOPA member for decades, I completely fail to understand how that relates to your outburst. moo Oh. And here I expected to be debating with a non bovine airman. Oh well... |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Hm...I just read the proposed changes and I don't see that:
http://www.aopa.org/whatsnew/newsite...4adiz-nprm.pdf Am I missing something here? What I read is that the current adiz requirements would be made permanent. Where does it deviate from that? This PDF hadn't been linked to the AOPA article last night, so I went to bed thinking my flying days were effectively over after reading your post. Now, after reading it, I think its what Michael said it is, a proposal to make the ADIZ permanent. I fly out of leesburg. The proceedures are really not that dificult or time consuming for a plane with mode C: -Call Flight service and file an ADIZ FP prior to flight. Five minutes and can be done while driving to airport. -Call CD prior to takeing off to get a code and departure freq. -Call ATC and remain in contact after leaving the pattern (no need to call if you are staying in the pattern) -BC |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
On 4 Aug 2005 06:56:26 -0700, wrote in
.com:: What I read is that the current adiz requirements would be made permanent. Where does it deviate from that? AOPA says it will be a restricted area: http://www.aopa.org/whatsnew/newsite...50803adiz.html AOPA will oppose an FAA proposal scheduled for release tomorrow that would codify flight restrictions in the Washington, D.C., metropolitan area. The restricted area would replace the current air defense identification zone (ADIZ). It would receive a brand-new designation, "National Defense Airspace," and cover nearly 2,000 square miles around Washington, D.C., extending to an altitude of 18,000 feet. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
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 | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
NAS and associated computer system | Newps | Instrument Flight Rules | 8 | August 12th 04 05:12 AM |
AOPA Sells-Out California Pilots in Military Airspace Grab? | Larry Dighera | Instrument Flight Rules | 12 | April 26th 04 06:12 PM |
AOPA Sells-Out California Pilots in Military Airspace Grab? | Larry Dighera | Piloting | 12 | April 26th 04 06:12 PM |
12 Dec 2003 - Today’s Military, Veteran, War and National Security News | Otis Willie | Naval Aviation | 0 | December 12th 03 11:01 PM |
USAF = US Amphetamine Fools | RT | Military Aviation | 104 | September 25th 03 03:17 PM |