Washington DC airspace closing for good?

wrote:

Am I missing something here?

Try http://www.aopa.org/whatsnew/newsite...50803adiz.html . Second sentence.

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.

I'm more concerned about the second paragraph. In part:

"AOPA recognizes the necessity to protect the national assets in the
nation's capital. The 15-nautical-mile-radius no-fly zone known as the
flight-restricted zone (FRZ) does that," said AOPA President Phil Boyer.

Jose
--
Quantum Mechanics is like this: God =does= play dice with the universe,
except there's no God, and there's no dice. And maybe there's no universe.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

wrote:
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?

Take a closer look at the fourth page of text (not counting the title page). It
states they propose to establish this area as "national defense airspace." Among
other things, that opens pilots to criminal prosecution for unauthorized entry
instead of the sanctions the FAA are allowed to use presently, as stated in
section 93.33. That section also clearly states that they may shoot you down
anywhere in the new zone. It's been assumed that they might do this if you got
into the FRZ section of the current ADIZ, but even that has not been openly
stated, AFAIK.

In section 93.49, they discuss additional costs. Just processing the new flight
plans required for traffic into and out of the airports in the area will cost
those airports an estimated additional $47,111.00. Costs for other airports are
expected to run $203,429.00. So we have the airports spending 1/4 million more
for new paperwork involving flight plans. New traffic control issues will cost
the FAA nearly $11 million more than today and flight plan processing pushes the
cost up well over $11 million for the FAA. All costs are in 2002 dollars.

Later on, they discuss other losses to the "Washington three" airports. All
things considered, this measure is expected to cost College Park alone $171,900
each year. The current ADIZ restrictions are costing College Park $1.62 million
a year.

Perhaps AOPA is technically incorrect in calling it a restricted area but, no,
they aren't just making the ADIZ permanent.

Thanks for the link to the proposal, by the way.

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.

Tony,

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20050804/...al_restricted_
airspace


Thank you, Hayden Sheaffer. NOT!
--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

Thomas Borchert wrote:

Thank you, Hayden Sheaffer. NOT!

You got that right!

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.

Please post this link so it works properly . . . I cannot get to this
page.

wrote:
Please post this link so it works properly . . . I cannot get to this
page.

http://makeashorterlink.com/?Z4E465E8B

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.

George Patterson wrote:
wrote:

Please post this link so it works properly . . . I cannot get to this
page.

http://makeashorterlink.com/?Z4E465E8B

Other news source he
http://www.avweb.com/eletter/archive...ll.html#190314

Interesting how they want the VFR pilots filing flight plans to enter
the NDA/ADIZ causing more paperwork for the agency facing a $4B deficit
by 2010...

This is clearly NOT an FAA decision, rather the Interagency Airspace
Working Group. In other words, the Secret Squirrels, Capitol Police
(responsible for the last "Godzilla Alert" - run and scream from that
terrifying Cessna 150), and DoD.

DoD already got the approval for direct shoot-down authority without
having to coordinate with DHS last month.

FAA is not in control of this thing, they are just following orders.

Darrel Toepfer wrote:

Interesting how they want the VFR pilots filing flight plans to enter
the NDA/ADIZ causing more paperwork for the agency facing a $4B deficit
by 2010...

The actual proposal contains quite a few instances of language that indicates
that the FAA doesn't really want to do this. For example, they point out that
the current ADIZ is costing various airports millions of dollars a year and that
this proposal will dramatically increase that, in addition to costing the FAA
over 11 million a year. On the other hand, what's 11 or 12 million dollars to an
agency 4 billion in the hole.

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.