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

Discussion on dealing with future ADIZ Incursions by light A/C



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old May 12th 05, 05:20 PM
Hank Rausch
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Discussion on dealing with future ADIZ Incursions by light A/C

I would like to start a thread on what I see as the most pertinent
take-away from yesterday's incursion: How can the current responses be
modified to make the response more relevant to the threat, when the
inevitable occurs again and a pilot gets lost? Assuming pilots won't
get lost in the future doesn't seem very realistic (how many of us can
say that we were never lost?). And there seems to be general consensus
that the images on CNN of F-16's cavorting while the Cessna put-putted
its merry way, interspersed with shots of people fleeing the Capitol,
were faintly ridiculous and put the US in a bad light. So what's the
solution? CNN showed a red-green laser system they want to use to
signal pilots, but it's not clear how this would have addressed the
most recent incursion.

One of the issues is that there is no easy way to distinguish a 1200
sqawk from an L-4 (no, or minimum, threat) from the same squawk from a
G-4, which I think all of can agree could do significant damage.
Consequently, we adopt a one-resposne fits all policy to any incursion.
Are there any technological tricks which would help tailor the response
to the type of ariplane involved?

Hank Rausch
N8806T

  #2  
Old May 12th 05, 05:32 PM
Larry Dighera
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On 12 May 2005 09:20:01 -0700, "Hank Rausch"
wrote in
.com::

How can the current responses be
modified to make the response more relevant to the threat, when the
inevitable occurs again and a pilot gets lost?



Your premise for your proposed discussion presupposes that an ADIZ or
Prohibited Area are effective security measures. Until that is proven
true, talk of responses to incursions into them is moot, IMHO.


  #3  
Old May 12th 05, 05:45 PM
Hank Rausch
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Good possible topic for another thread, but in light of what happened
yesterday, do you realistically see the ADIZ going away any time soon?
There was a fellow on the tube last night talking about expanding to
100nm.

  #4  
Old May 12th 05, 07:16 PM
Dudley Henriques
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Hank Rausch" wrote in message
oups.com...
Good possible topic for another thread, but in light of what happened
yesterday, do you realistically see the ADIZ going away any time soon?
There was a fellow on the tube last night talking about expanding to
100nm.


I can tell you one thing for sure, and the equation doesn't require a bomb
to go off either.
You can take it to the bank that the government has considered the sheer
propaganda value to the terrorist movement of a single aircraft, GA or
otherwise, managing to slip through these restricted areas and crash as a
simple suicide into ANY valuable American target. The effect of this
happening would be like an adrenalin shot for the terrorist world.
The government absolutely can NOT allow this to happen and will most likely
take every conceivable precaution to prevent just such an occurrence from
taking place.
I'm afraid it's not going to be a very "happy time" for General Aviation as
these threat options are considered and acted upon.
Personally, I think what's out there now is just the tip of a very big
"government control"iceberg.
Dudley Henriques


  #5  
Old May 12th 05, 07:51 PM
Larry Dighera
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Thu, 12 May 2005 18:16:37 GMT, "Dudley Henriques"
dhenriques@noware .net wrote in
et::

Personally, I think what's out there now is just the tip of a very big
"government control"iceberg.


I think you're correct. The government is running scared of a
potential domestic insurrection as a result of population growth, and
taking this opportunity to put into place the (il)legal basis for
responding to any hint of it.


  #6  
Old May 13th 05, 01:41 AM
Bob Noel
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In article ,
Larry Dighera wrote:

I think you're correct. The government is running scared of a
potential domestic insurrection as a result of population growth, and
taking this opportunity to put into place the (il)legal basis for
responding to any hint of it.


are we going just a bit over the top here?

--
Bob Noel
no one likes an educated mule

  #7  
Old May 13th 05, 11:37 AM
Dylan Smith
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In article , Larry Dighera wrote:
I think you're correct. The government is running scared of a
potential domestic insurrection as a result of population growth, and
taking this opportunity to put into place the (il)legal basis for
responding to any hint of it.


Whilst the vast majority of Americans enjoy a good, at least middle
class lifestyle, there will be no revolt or insurrection. Can you
imagine any typical middle class person sacrificing their nice
comfortable life for civil war? No, neither can I. It ain't gonna happen
unless the standard of living in the US collapses (and by collapse, I
mean to near famine levels - countries like Mexico which are endemic
with grinding poverty aren't in danger of insurrection).

--
Dylan Smith, Castletown, Isle of Man
Flying: http://www.dylansmith.net
Frontier Elite Universe: http://www.alioth.net
"Maintain thine airspeed, lest the ground come up and smite thee"
  #8  
Old May 13th 05, 01:14 AM
Blueskies
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Dudley Henriques" dhenriques@noware .net wrote in message nk.net...


I can tell you one thing for sure, and the equation doesn't require a bomb to go off either.
You can take it to the bank that the government has considered the sheer propaganda value to the terrorist movement of
a single aircraft, GA or otherwise, managing to slip through these restricted areas and crash as a simple suicide into
ANY valuable American target. The effect of this happening would be like an adrenalin shot for the terrorist world.
The government absolutely can NOT allow this to happen and will most likely take every conceivable precaution to
prevent just such an occurrence from taking place.
I'm afraid it's not going to be a very "happy time" for General Aviation as these threat options are considered and
acted upon.
Personally, I think what's out there now is just the tip of a very big "government control"iceberg.
Dudley Henriques


No, if an aircraft managed to crash in to something, then the folks in gov'ment would spin it into some deranged
individual acting alone or similar; they would be absolutely sure to make it a non-terrorist event...


  #9  
Old May 13th 05, 03:27 AM
Dudley Henriques
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Blueskies" wrote in message
...

"Dudley Henriques" dhenriques@noware .net wrote in message
nk.net...


I can tell you one thing for sure, and the equation doesn't require a
bomb to go off either.
You can take it to the bank that the government has considered the sheer
propaganda value to the terrorist movement of a single aircraft, GA or
otherwise, managing to slip through these restricted areas and crash as a
simple suicide into ANY valuable American target. The effect of this
happening would be like an adrenalin shot for the terrorist world.
The government absolutely can NOT allow this to happen and will most
likely take every conceivable precaution to prevent just such an
occurrence from taking place.
I'm afraid it's not going to be a very "happy time" for General Aviation
as these threat options are considered and acted upon.
Personally, I think what's out there now is just the tip of a very big
"government control"iceberg.
Dudley Henriques


No, if an aircraft managed to crash in to something, then the folks in
gov'ment would spin it into some deranged individual acting alone or
similar; they would be absolutely sure to make it a non-terrorist event...


In this case the answer would be "yes" wouldn't it? :-) No doubt the
government would spin it. In fact, they would do everything in their power
to negate the terrorist's mission.
Spinning it is just one possible option the government would use to take the
sting out of the propaganda value terrorists would most certainly be present
if the pilot of such a mission was indeed a terrorist.
I honestly believe these last two in that 150 came within a hair's breath of
being shot down. The next one to wander into one of these areas might not be
so lucky!
Dudley Henriques


  #10  
Old May 12th 05, 06:05 PM
Jay Honeck
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

I would like to start a thread on what I see as the most pertinent
take-away from yesterday's incursion: How can the current responses be
modified to make the response more relevant to the threat, when the
inevitable occurs again and a pilot gets lost? Assuming pilots won't
get lost in the future doesn't seem very realistic


You've already lost the argument by pre-supposing that pilots will continue
to be idiots.

CNN showed a red-green laser system they want to use to
signal pilots, but it's not clear how this would have addressed the
most recent incursion.


Anyone stupid enough to fly over Washington, D.C.'s most sensitive areas
would probably wonder what all the pretty lights were for...

No, the solution was EDUCATION of pilots, BY PILOTS. Peer pressure can be a
wonderfully effective thing, and we should be doing our best to either
educate or eliminate "pilots" such as these.

Unfortunately, I fear that the time for education may have passed us by, and
the Feds will be forced to assume that we are all morons.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"


 




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


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:47 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.