14 aircraft violate VIP TFR, with 7 intercepts

[masloki]

Sheesh, not a good showing by GA in Chicago today. I think this one only had 24 hours notice but that is still plenty.

Nice photo and some surprised folks commenting about a fully armed fighter over the city.

Not much else to add but do some preflight briefing before launching, okay?

 

[Learnin’ to fly…]

I was flying back into the airspace this evening when a pilot contacted approach…

“Chicago approach, N123XX, I have an F16 flying next to me dropping flares. Am I in restricted airspace?’

I’m sure it will be on YouTube soon.

The TFR was supposed to expire at 3:45; which is when it dropped off of the map on ForeFlight. I took off around 4, and my briefing advised the TFR had extended. If you just relied on the ForeFlight map - you would have been screwed.

 

[Let'sgoflying!]

So only half the violators were intercepted?
Does that reveal a useful security weakness to bad actors?

 

[baboss]

I wonder how many got caught by the TFR end time extension. The end times for both were originally 2:45pm and got extended to 7pm. Still no excuse.
We were there Saturday and parallel O'Hare arrivals were coming right over the course at about 1800ft. At one point I saw a Cessna come over and wondered if he was violating something, but I was too busy to look it up. A Midwest Helicopter S-58 came right over om Saturday as well. Fun time.

 

[flyingcheesehead]

In general, we (piston GA) absolutely suck at this. I've flown near presidential TFRs and heard WAY too many warnings going out over guard (plus an intercept).

Oh, and today I was at a high powered rocket launch event with a TFR to 10,000 feet. I was only there for about 2 hours and there was a plane that flew right through (N519ER, owned by Stick and Rudder Flying Club in Waukegan). Last year I was there for a bit longer and there were two planes that blundered right on through.

I'm guessing that the rocket that went Mach 1.7 on the way up to 10,000 probably would have done some damage had the RSO not been paying attention.

 

[JScarry]

So only half the violators were intercepted?
Does rhat reveal a useful security weakness to bad actors?

To me it indicates that the TFRs are security theater.

 

[Racerx]

In general, we (piston GA) absolutely suck at this. I've flown near presidential TFRs and heard WAY too many warnings going out over guard (plus an intercept).

Oh, and today I was at a high powered rocket launch event with a TFR to 10,000 feet. I was only there for about 2 hours and there was a plane that flew right through (N519ER, owned by Stick and Rudder Flying Club in Waukegan). Last year I was there for a bit longer and there were two planes that blundered right on through.

I'm guessing that the rocket that went Mach 1.7 on the way up to 10,000 probably would have done some damage had the RSO not been paying attention.

I saw that tfr and wondered what it was about.

Also heard some jets scramble and just assumed it was vip busters. Then my mom 15 miles north called and said she just saw a fighter jet circle. "Idiots don't look at notams, happens every weekend"

 

[M20K]

The TFR was supposed to expire at 3:45; which is when it dropped off of the map on ForeFlight. I took off around 4, and my briefing advised the TFR had extended. If you just relied on the ForeFlight map - you would have been screwed.

So did FF screw up or did the FAA? You should get pop-up TFRs through ADS-B. So the TFR should have still shown as Active if the FAA sent it out via ADS-B.

If you haven't, I'd send something off to FF Support and see what they say. Let us know when you hear back.

 

[Learnin’ to fly…]

So did FF screw up or did the FAA? You should get pop-up TFRs through ADS-B. So the TFR should have still shown as Active if the FAA sent it out via ADS-B.

If you haven't, I'd send something off to FF Support and see what they say. Let us know when you hear back.

I’m not sure where the breakdown happened, but something did not work right. In my case, it was neither showing on ForeFlight map (yes, I have TFR layer enabled) nor via ADSB on my Dynon panel. The TFR dropped from both at 3:45 and did not come back on between then and about 6:30 when I landed.

I had planned to take off around 4 and got an updated briefing in FF, which showed an active TFR. I called departure from the ground and they confirmed that it was extended (until 8, I believe). I got a squawk before takeoff and had no issues, but I’m going to guess a fair number of the busts were after 3:45. I heard the F16/flare, and two phone numbers issued for “possible deviation’s” on 128.2 between about 5:45 and 6:15.

 

[Clip4]

I was flying back into the airspace this evening when a pilot contacted approach…

“Chicago approach, N123XX, I have an F16 flying next to me dropping flares. Am I in restricted airspace?’

I’m sure it will be on YouTube soon.

The TFR was supposed to expire at 3:45; which is when it dropped off of the map on ForeFlight. I took off around 4, and my briefing advised the TFR had extended. If you just relied on the ForeFlight map - you would have been screwed.

I know of a pilot who had the same situation happen to them. TFR expired 20:00 lcl, but was extended. They took off for night flight using Fink Flight’s repackaged information. They got a call from the FSDO, but never heard the resolution. Leidos is the best source for up to date Notams.

 

[AV8R_87]

Years ago I almost got caught (after getting a briefing) by a TFR that started one hour earlier than published.

 

[Let'sgoflying!]

Maybe best practice will be to always talk to atc as they will have the most up to date info. (file, or flight following).
What I really want is a box in Foreflight that I check; "Issue a TFR for you, for your entire route which supercedes everyone else's SUA claims?"

 

[Clip4]

Maybe best practice will be to always talk to atc as they will have the most up to date info. (file, or flight following).
What I really want is a box in Foreflight that I check; "Issue a TFR for you, for your entire route which supercedes everyone else's SUA claims?"

You probably couldn’t afford that subscription level.

 

[GaryM]

So only half the violators were intercepted?
Does that reveal a useful security weakness to bad actors?

As I recall from the early days of the Bedminster TFR in New Jersey, planes that would just clip the TFR, and there were plenty, would be back out before they could be intercepted. Rather than chase them down through unrestricted airspace, they’d be tracked to landing and then held there by local law enforcement until secret service could get there for a chat.

 

[AV8R_87]

Maybe best practice will be to always talk to atc

In my case I was in the inner ring, planning to depart for my return leg before it went active. Even if I could talk to ATC on the ground I would've still been stuck there for three days.

If airborne and approaching a known potential TFR area, I agree with you, talking to ATC is the best option to cover for any surprises.

But some people never learn, though. Talking to the ATC manager for the area, he revealed that they had multiple repeat offenders and even a few triple offenders in that area.
Some people never learn.

 

[FORANE]

Talking to the ATC manager for the area, he revealed that they had multiple repeat offenders and even a few triple offenders in that area.
Some people never learn.

Repeat offenders in Chicago? No way.

 

[Learnin’ to fly…]

Here is what I heard back from ForeFlight.

We believe this was a ball-drop by the FAA or the agency issuing the TFR, because we didn't see a new/updated time for the TFR, when it changed. We verified this by checking the tfr.faa.gov website later yesterday, and there was no longer a TFR there.

There was a NOTAM issued around the same time, but it didn't come across as a TFR, just as a Graphical NOTAM "Temporary RA Activated"

Worked out fine for me, feel a bit for the folks that violated and a good reminder to all to pay attention to the NOTAM’s. We all know our responsibility - this one was maybe not as easy “to familiarize with all available info” as we’ve likely become accustomed to.

 

[francisco collazos]

Any Fighter pilots on this group want to give their opinions on scrambling to chase GA pilots violating a TFR? Is it fun or annoying to you guys?

 

[fasteddie]

Rough day for there to be any kind of confusion on the TFR around Chicago.

It was a beautiful Fall day, which always seems to drive a lot of GA traffic in the area. To add, I feel like everyone sees winter coming, and is trying to get out flying as much as they can before the snow falls.

Wonder what F-16 units were doing the intercepting, and where they were flying out of. Closest F-16 unit is Ft Wayne IN, about 170 miles away. Wonder if they staged directly out of there, or somewhere closer (Gary IN, or maybe Madison WI)?

 

[M20K]

nor via ADSB on my Dynon panel

Sounds like the FAA dropped the ball. Otherwise your Dynon should have shown it as well as FF from the ADS-B data.

 

[Lindberg]

So only half the violators were intercepted?
Does that reveal a useful security weakness to bad actors?

It reveals that half of them didn't need to be intercepted. They may have been turned away by ATC, been in-and-out, etc.

To me it indicates that the TFRs are security theater.

If the purpose of the TFR is to provide a more sterile environment where those with hostile intent can be identified early enough to get the principal off the X, how is that theater?

 

[Lindberg]

Here is what I heard back from ForeFlight.

We believe this was a ball-drop by the FAA or the agency issuing the TFR, because we didn't see a new/updated time for the TFR, when it changed. We verified this by checking the tfr.faa.gov website later yesterday, and there was no longer a TFR there.

There was a NOTAM issued around the same time, but it didn't come across as a TFR, just as a Graphical NOTAM "Temporary RA Activated"

Worked out fine for me, feel a bit for the folks that violated and a good reminder to all to pay attention to the NOTAM’s. We all know our responsibility - this one was maybe not as easy “to familiarize with all available info” as we’ve likely become accustomed to.

And some people make fun of me for actually calling 1-800-Weather-Brief and speaking to a human, while creating a verifiable record that I complied with 91.103.

 

[GLMS_NC]

Just fly IFR.

 

[dans2992]

It reveals that half of them didn't need to be intercepted. They may have been turned away by ATC, been in-and-out, etc.

If the purpose of the TFR is to provide a more sterile environment where those with hostile intent can be identified early enough to get the principal off the X, how is that theater?

Oh, is that the intent?

It’s obviously theatre. I’m not convinced they’d be fast enough to intercept a legit threat. I’m not going to be the one to test it, but given that people have landed gyrocopters and C172s on the whitebouse lawn, I don’t think these are too effective.

 

[AV8R_87]

given that people have landed gyrocopters and C172s on the whitebouse lawn

That's why Army helicopters have "ignition" keys, a guy upset because he wasn't selected for pilot training stole a Huey and landed it on the lawn.

 

[Learnin’ to fly…]

And some people make fun of me for actually calling 1-800-Weather-Brief and speaking to a human, while creating a verifiable record that I complied with 91.103.

I’m guessing that some of the folks who had issues can’t point to a briefing, and while I do feel bad for them - it is, in fact, still on them.

I had never really thought about what is verifiable record in ForeFlight of a briefing. I knew it was time stamped, but I had never really looked at what I could point to.

I definitely looked into it last night as thought about the folks who were probably having some unpleasant conversations about the TFR not showing up.

As long as you have not deleted the “flight” out of your flights tab - the complete briefing that you received is available to review as well as the time stamp for when the briefing was generated and viewed. I’m assuming ForeFlight can produce that data as well

 

[baboss]

Garmin Pilot showed the original TFR (2:45pm end time) and the updated and or new one that ended at 7pm, at least at the time I looked yesterday.

 

[Lindberg]

Oh, is that the intent?

Yes.

It’s obviously theatre. I’m not convinced they’d be fast enough to intercept a legit threat.

You'd have to define legit threat.

I’m not going to be the one to test it, but given that people have landed gyrocopters and C172s on the whitebouse lawn, I don’t think these are too effective.

The gyrocopter landed on the Mall. The C150 was in the '90s before any of today's security measures, plus it hit the wall and bounced off. And there were no protectees in the White House. Which of these was a legit threat?

If by "theater," you mean that an F16 isn't going to shoot down a Cessna over Chicago, then you're right. But as I said, that isn't the point. If the Cessna is intercepted and keeps flying toward the principal, the USSS will move him. It isn't their job to prevent plane crashes; it's their job to ensure their protectees' safety. The purpose of the TFR is to clear the airspace and enable discrimination between friend and foe.

 

[Tarheelpilot]

Oh, is that the intent?

It’s obviously theatre. I’m not convinced they’d be fast enough to intercept a legit threat. I’m not going to be the one to test it, but given that people have landed gyrocopters and C172s on the whitebouse lawn, I don’t think these are too effective.

I have tested it. As a sub contractor playing the adversary role in a king air. On an IFR flight plan we changed to 1200 and made a bee line for our target located in the center of a prohibited area without any comms to ATC.

We orbited for a while before we were told to knock it off. Not sure what they changed but on our third visit, a couple weeks later, we were “shot down” before making it to the target area without an interception.

It is all theater.

 

[M20K]

I had never really thought about what is verifiable record in ForeFlight of a briefing. I knew it was time stamped, but I had never really looked at what I could point to.

The FF servers will show if you did a briefing in the Flights page and any subsequent checks. They will also show when you Packed last.

What I don't think it shows is if you actually paged through the info or if it was just downloaded. But then that's not so different from someone calling in and "Uh huh... Uh hug... Uh huh..." through the briefing while they're reading the latest PoA posts on their phone.

 

[flyingcheesehead]

The FF servers will show if you did a briefing in the Flights page and any subsequent checks. They will also show when you Packed last.

What I don't think it shows is if you actually paged through the info or if it was just downloaded. But then that's not so different from someone calling in and "Uh huh... Uh hug... Uh huh..." through the briefing while they're reading the latest PoA posts on their phone.

They can definitely see whether you read each page... If you want to know whether your employees read each page, you can sign up for Dispatch and see.

 

[FlightmechH3]

"Splash the Cessna"

 

[Clip4]

Sounds like the FAA dropped the ball. Otherwise your Dynon should have shown it as well as FF from the ADS-B data.

It could be secret service didn’t tell FAA in a timely manor.

 

[Racerx]

I’m guessing that some of the folks who had issues can’t point to a briefing, and while I do feel bad for them - it is, in fact, still on them.

I had never really thought about what is verifiable record in ForeFlight of a briefing. I knew it was time stamped, but I had never really looked at what I could point to.

I definitely looked into it last night as thought about the folks who were probably having some unpleasant conversations about the TFR not showing up.

As long as you have not deleted the “flight” out of your flights tab - the complete briefing that you received is available to review as well as the time stamp for when the briefing was generated and viewed. I’m assuming ForeFlight can produce that data as well

But what about the local flights where you don't get a full briefing. Say going from 10c to 06c at pilot Pete's for a Sunday dinner at 4:30. 10c is out of the tfr (I think, could be wrong). Check notams on Foreflight and send it. Do you always get a full briefing for local flights?

 

[M20K]

They can definitely see whether you read each page... If you want to know whether your employees read each page, you can sign up for Dispatch and see.

Great bit if info! Thx.

 

[Learnin’ to fly…]

But what about the local flights where you don't get a full briefing. Say going from 10c to 06c at pilot Pete's for a Sunday dinner at 4:30. 10c is out of the tfr (I think, could be wrong). Check notams on Foreflight and send it. Do you always get a full briefing for local flights?

I don’t disagree with you at all. Legally, we know our requirement’s. But, do I get a full brief to go to 06C or KRPJ….um, of course I do officer

Yesterday clearly had some holes in the TFR process. I do feel bad for the people who got doinked - and I suspect for them they will have a tough time with the claim that it was not showing on ADSB or ForeFlight or even tfr.faa.gov - even though it clearly wasn’t.

In the end, the requirements for us are pretty broad with ‘all information relevant”.

 

[M20K]

Do you always get a full briefing for local flights?

I do get it. But granted, assuming we're talking VFR, on a short flight like 10C to 06C I'd probably just focus on the Wx and make sure the Runways or Airport wasn't closed AND no TFRs or other Airspace changes. And to really answer your question, although I have it, I'd really only scan over the info and wouldn't give much notice to the land Nav outages or any distant info on that short of a flight.

With the new NOTAM system, I wonder if the presentation will really be improved to bring important NOTAMs to the top of the heap.

 

[Warmi]

What a waste of money … we should do away with this imperial aura around presidents - makes Roman emperors look modest by comparison.

 

[ionel]

If you can't finish the event in the time as scheduled and you don't feel safe then get out of there. Btw there's a reason we elect a VP.

 

[Lindberg]

What a waste of money … we should do away with this imperial aura around presidents - makes Roman emperors look modest by comparison.