Authorities force pilot to make emergency landing

So, I did a little more investigation on this alert area dealeo. the FAA describes it thusly via the AIM(non-reg, as we know):

3-4-6. Alert Areas

Alert areas are depicted on aeronautical charts to inform nonparticipating pilots of areas that may contain a high volume of pilot training or an unusual type of aerial activity. Pilots should be particularly alert when flying in these areas. All activity within an alert area must be conducted in accordance with CFRs, without waiver, and pilots of participating aircraft as well as pilots transiting the area must be equally responsible for collision avoidance.
###############################################
If I may summarize, be alert, avoid collisions with others, and fly according to the CFRs(duh). There is that codicil about it being on the chart, and one should know the regs of the chart, even though the chart says right on it that alert area A-381 has "no air to ground communication, contact FSS for further info."

Add to that the box on the chart which says to "monitor indicated freqs". Well ok then, that's clear enough(not), but if we are to take it logically, and literally, to "monitor" does not require, or even indicate that a response or reply be given to any transmission:

Monitor:
verb (used with object)
1.
Radio and Television.
a.
to listen to (transmitted signals) on a receiving set in order to check the quality of the transmission.
b.
to view or listen to (television or radio transmissions) in order to check the quality of the video or audio.
c.
to listen to (a radio conversation or channel); keep tuned to.

So, there is no requirement for anyone to reply, or respond to any transmission simply that one keep a radio tuned in. In the event of someone in 'authority' calling on the monitor freq: "Piper flying xxxx bound in A-381 at yyyy altitude, please identify". What Piper are they talking about? Can't assume the calling 'authority' means them. So - an intercept is ordered for: no violation, no reply on radio, no indication of anything wrong. Of course, it's always possible that when asked, the dipspit pilot admitted under questioning that he wasn't 'monitoring' the freq in question.

DON'T TALK TO POLICE!
 
A lot of the military alert areas the freqs used aren't even published. In some cases the freqs used (FM band) a civilian pilot wouldn't have the capability to monitor anyway.
 
Is the alert area really the issue? I was under the impression it was entering an ADIZ without a flight plan.
 
Fort pierce seems the turning point for this tragedy as Ron mentioned. After that , then thru a restricted zone, the stage was set.
 
timwinters said:
Assuming "the facts" as presented by "the government" are really "facts."

I have first hand knowledge of two NTSB reports that are pure fiction.
Click to expand...

Make it three the supposed witnesses who were not even there all lied to cover their butts at my airport after a fatal crash
 
Tris_Tiffany said:
And for those of you who happen to question his character due to an incident in Haiti - he was completely cleared of any wrong doing. So don't even go there...
Click to expand...

Don't know about it and don't care whether he's guilty or not. There aren't too many character flaws for which mid-air impact are the appropriate response.

And, no matter how or why Ron may have been briefed on this, I doubt that anything in his briefing claimed that the Phantom pilot was ordered to hit the Beechcraft. Absent such orders, we can assume that the impact was neither justified nor caused by anything other than the guy flying the F4. Whatever other actual factors may have been causative, the fact is that the F4 pilot violated the most basic rule of aviation, that being to not run into things that you didn't intend to run into.

Your father made a mistake in judgment, but not one which warranted what happened to him.
 
alaskaflyer said:
Is the alert area really the issue? I was under the impression it was entering an ADIZ without a flight plan.
Click to expand...

There are two different conversations going here. The original deals with an alert area in the GoM. The second, which should probably be dropped, deals with an ADIZ violation on an inactive flight plan
 
Adventure Dave is here. How's it going? Still having fun feeding the mosquitoes?
 
Nothing's illegal if you don't get caught, David!

Well, at least that was always our motto in our younger days.

:)
 
Re: Cool.. brief us!

N801BH said:
I still find it downright disgusting the military counter sued your family for the expense of washing the blood and hair off the F-4's wing..

That is the ultimate in arrogence...:mad2::mad2::mad2:....:(
Click to expand...


Agree 100%

Also the F4 did the aircraft equlivent to rear ending someone on the road, and we all know how that turns out.

If the military truely valued "honor" and "service" they would have made right by that mans family.
 
Facts like Alert areas and where someone is in relation to the coast, the ADIZ or anywhere else are not relevant any longer. It is whatever CBP says it is - end of story.

Until that changes we can chat until we are blue in the face but absent statutory change in authorization - nothing will change. . .
 
Jimmy cooper said:
So why didn't he simply go into Florida, clear customs as he was supposed to? As was said, it never would have happened. I don't get it. I agree, they certainly should not have died but can't understand why the beech pilot didn't do as he was told. You people who fly instruments a lot in this type aircraft, please explain.
Click to expand...

Mabe he elected to go to another port of entry closer to his destination?
Fact is that there are many ports of entry on the east coast, and some further inland. IIRC you can go from the bahamas -> ATL If you can make the trip non-stop. ATL is a port of entry.
You can go from China all the way accross the U.S. Bypassing several ports of entry along the way to JFK, as long as you can do it non-stop. JFK is a port of entry. (happens all the time)
 
Last edited:
Many of you appear very confused about the 5 frequencies box on the sectional. They have nothing to do with the alert area. There is no frequency to monitor for the alert area. The frequencies relate to 5 distinct congested areas on the map (not the alert area in question) for which it is RECOMMENDED, not MANDATED, that pilots monitor a specific frequency for the relevant area.

There is no requirement to talk to anyone in an alert area.
 
frcabot said:
Many of you appear very confused about the 5 frequencies box on the sectional. They have nothing to do with the alert area. There is no frequency to monitor for the alert area. The frequencies relate to 5 distinct congested areas on the map (not the alert area in question) for which it is RECOMMENDED, not MANDATED, that pilots monitor a specific frequency for the relevant area.
Click to expand...

Gosh, that does make more sense from a charting perspective. But - less sense regarding the intercept where the 'authorities' chided the pilot for flying NORDO...?
 
docmirror said:
Gosh, that does make more sense from a charting perspective. But - less sense regarding the intercept where the 'authorities' chided the pilot for flying NORDO...?
Click to expand...
probably just idiots. Never look for a rational explanation when idiocy explains everything. Especially where the government, and especially local/state government or law enforcement are involved.
 
Dave Siciliano said:
...Just not good for us...
Click to expand...

Perhaps, but it should be noted that this was an airline pilot who was a passenger on an airline flight, not a GA flight.

That having been said, I don't think anyone can reasonably claim that there are no pilots who smuggle drugs. The issue is whether the percentages rise to the level of probable cause or reasonable suspicion, or whatever the heck the standard is.
 
Dave Siciliano said:
Just not good for us.
Click to expand...

Only because we make it that way. Had the fellow delivered his cargo some folks would have received their recreational chemicals and it would have harmed me and mine not one little bit. But we've decided it's some human tragedy, and put lots and lots of money into interdiction efforts. We've empowered those doing to interdiction to the point where they feel justified stopping an aircraft because it's going west to east.
 
Excuse me if this has been posted elsewhere.
This sounds positive, but others may have more details.

Best,

Dave
=======================================================
Federal border security agents have sharply reduced intercepts of general aviation aircraft, following complaints by pilots that excessive police action at small airports is restricting the freedom to fly.

An official with U.S. Customs and Border Protection's Office of Air and Marine Operations told NPR his agency has heard pilots' grievances and the program is being altered so as not to needlessly affront law-abiding pilots.

In recent years, more and more pilots have reported their aircraft stopped for warrantless searches by aggressive officers.

http://www.npr.org/2014/05/28/316319441/after-private-pilots-complain-customs-rethinks-intercept-policy
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top