Another Intercept, but this time it's different

From what the ATC can see its more like: 17,900 or 18000 feet.. the
Mode C encodes in 100 ft increments

Dave

wrote:

According to the story, which we all know how accurate those can be, he was
"NEAR" 18000, I read that as 17,999 and not 18,001. Benefit of the doubt
to him, especially given the accuracy of the equipment.

"aluckyguess" wrote:

I thought he went above 18000 feet and not talking to approach.and that
was why they detained him. I hope they at least paid for his fuel.

Matt Barrow wrote:

at 18,027' 1", Captain."


They can also say, "The pilot is a male Caucasian, 34 years old, 5'11" tall
and 205 lbs, married with two kids...not getting any from his old lady."

I guess this is the same data gathering ability that said "Yes, Iraq had
WMD's" as well?

Not trying to flame a political debate, but yanno... there IS a limit to
capabilities.

Dave

On Fri, 27 May 2005 23:16:41 -0500, "Montblack"
wrote in
::

("Larry Dighera" wrote)
[snip]
The twin-engine Aero Commander plane was spotted flying in the
high desert north of Los Angeles for several hours during the
afternoon at about 18,000 feet and could not be identified or
contacted by the Federal Aviation Administration, agency spokesman
Donn Walker said.


Possible radio problems in a 150 - ok. Harder to swallow when it's an Aero
Commander.

There is no requirement to be monitoring the radio below 18,000' in
that area. Without more details, it's difficult to know how
appropriate this intercept may have been.

On Sat, 28 May 2005 12:27:07 GMT, Matt Whiting
wrote in ::

I'd say both. No excuse for dumb pilots, but also no excuse for many of
our "security" restrictions these days either.

That sounds like a rather balanced approach to raising our nation's
consciousness about it's lethal pseudo-security policies toward GA
pilots. If we are seen as publicly chastising errant pilots among our
ranks for their negligence, and at the same time pointing out how
arrogantly inappropriate our nation's shoot-down policy is, we may be
viewed as responsible citizens, and perhaps be able to garner some
public support to end this outrageously stupid policy. All that is
lacking is a realistic alternative policy to replace it.

All that is
lacking is a realistic alternative policy to replace it.

Freedom.

Jose
--
The price of freedom is... well... freedom.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

("Matt Barrow" wrote)
[snip]
Given that there was, overall, merely and uproar resulting from these
episodes, would you rather they over-react, or under-react? Finding the
exactly right balance is not something humans seem to gravitate to,
especially bureaucracies.


Key word is "react."

When a snake strikes, instinctive "reaction" is to jump - I think all
mammals do this (except elephants, who can't jump. Apparently hippos can
jump. Who knew?)

Then fight or flight kicks in.

Later, reason finally takes over and a well thought out plan to either avoid
the snake in the future or kill the snake is now in order.

I think our government is sill a little "jumpy."


Red next to (Mont)Black - is safe for Jack;
Red next to Yellow - will kill any fellow.
http://www.floridaorienteering.org/nature/coralking.htm

("Jose" wrote)
I remember suggesting something like this after a few beers recently. I
even suggested a location.


"Did you drink and dial?"
- Sideways (2004)

....up for Best Picture Oscar along with The Aviator. Both movies lost out to
Million Dollar Baby.


Montblack

"Mike W." wrote in message
...

There is a reason why you never hear about airliners busting the ADIZ.
Hello, my name is Mike, and I am an airplane addict....

Yes, there is a very good reason you seldom hear of an air carrier busting
the ADIZ or TFR's, .... ATC.
There is always at least two qualified folks in front, one of which has an
ATP, they are under positive control, they only fly places where they have
been route checked and they generally have better equipment.

"Franklin Newton" wrote
There is always at least two qualified folks in front, one of which
has an ATP, they are under positive control, they only fly places
where they have been route checked and they generally have better
equipment.

Can easily tell that you have never flown for an airline.
Yes, we did get "route checks", but only on a typical route.
Who could possibly afford to route check every pilot on
every route and airport in the system? Impossible for a
supplemental aircarrier and impractical for a scheduled one.

Bob Moore
ATP B-707 B-727
PanAm (retired)

"Bob Moore" wrote in message
. 121...
"Franklin Newton" wrote
There is always at least two qualified folks in front, one of which
has an ATP, they are under positive control, they only fly places
where they have been route checked and they generally have better
equipment.

Can easily tell that you have never flown for an airline.
Yes, we did get "route checks", but only on a typical route.
Who could possibly afford to route check every pilot on
every route and airport in the system? Impossible for a
supplemental aircarrier and impractical for a scheduled one.

Bob Moore
ATP B-707 B-727
PanAm (retired)

You are correct.