FAA & DC ADIZ

inav8r

inav8r

Line Up and Wait
Joined
Feb 14, 2005
Messages
600
Location
Indiana, US
Display Name
Display name:
Mike B.
The wording used in AOPA's article from yesterday, "Pilots strongly resist ADIZ proliferation" has made me realize that the FAA and DHS don't care about the comments or what's contained in them... This thing is going to be made permanent and I do have a sick feeling in my gut that this is going to proliferate to other major MSA's around the country.

What makes me even more sad, is that a senator from my state, Indiana, Evan Bayh (who's rumored to be running for the 2008 presidential nomination) is one of the sponsors of this bill.

I've written him as well as my local representative (Mike Pence) on this and other aviation issues over the last year or so and each time I have received the *SAME* form letter in response. (Well, each of them has a different form letter, but you know what I mean)...

I don't know what else to do to protect everyone's freedom... I feel hopeless...
 
1. Keep writing to all your senators and congressional reps.
2. Keep contributing to the AOPA PAC.
3. Keep encouraging all your friends to do the same.

As you note, individual letters to the docket don't carry a whole lot of weight, but the mass of them gets Congressional attention as they know the writers vote. Also, keep in mind that even if the ADIZ does become permanent, we can still help create a workable ADIZ with appropriate changes, including:

1. Incongruent boundaries of the B-space and ADIZ. Pilots have extreme difficulty navigating around the ADIZ where it doesn't match the B-space. The lateral boundaries of the ADIZ and B-space should be aligned, and they should be based on reasonable visually perceptible landmarks.

2. Inclusion of the 4000-foot base B-space extension out over Easton in the ADIZ. This cuts off north/south VFR traffic that is well outside the 30nm arc around the national capital area, creating additional demands for ADIZ squawks on that route.

3. Lack of convenient gaps to transit around the ADIZ VFR, especially around Patuxent and Dahlgren, due to preexisting R-areas. The ADIZ presses up against closed airspace, particularly on the southeast side (R-4005/4006) and south side (Dahlgren R-areas -- R-6611 and R-6613, IIRC, and the Fort Picket MOA and R-area). There's just no way to get through these areas VFR without going through the ADIZ, and that unnecessarily adds to Potomac TRACON's workload. Going around is often impractical and sometimes impossible due to the extra distance required and altitude restrictions of the R-areas.

4. Insufficient controller assets to allow VFR traffic going all the way across to go through rather than under/around the B-space (especially virtual closure of the north/south Dulles East transition). Controllers generally deny VFR entry into the B-space due to workload, and this concentrates VFR traffic in the few spaces available to transit the ADIZ without being in the B-space. That has a negative impact on safety by increasing traffic density in "see and avoid" areas and forcing aircraft to fly head to head at the same altitude, especially at 1200-1400 MSL in the very narrow NW/SE "Fort Meade slot."

5. Insufficient controller assets and frequencies to meet demand for VFR squawks -- 126.75 isn't enough to cover 360 degrees around the ADIZ without lengthy delays while waiting one's turn to make contact, and many transmissions blocked by the multitude of aircraft attempting to call at once. They need at least three controllers handling this on a sectoral basis (say, MTN to PXT, PXT to Casanova, Casanova to FDK, and FDK to MTN) when the weather is VMC, especially on weekends.

I'm not saying we should just accept the ADIZ as a given, but we need to let folks know the problems with it that are making life impossible for everyone from pilots to controllers to the USAF folks in Huntress to the FAA inspectors investigating all the infractions of the rules. If we can fix these issues, the politicians and security folks can still have their ADIZ, but we can operate safely and easily in and around it.
 
Great post, Mr. Levy. I felt pretty hopeless too, but the increasing numbers on the NPRM has encouraged me. I'm based in NC so any time we want to fly north, we deal with the ADIZ. I wrote to my federal, state representives as well as the governor of NC. Being a border state steeped in aviation I feel it necessary for them to stand against the ADIZ.

What I'm suprised is there's not more participation from the ATC controllers, their associations and unions. I would think that controllers would be deadset against this ADIZ and the proliferation of ADIZs. I wonder if Don Brown has submitted his comments on the ADIZ.

Mike: Don't give up, it's not law yet. Keep educating without preaching. The most difficult thing is to help the non-flying public understand how it can effect them.
 
I suspect that they have been told to keep their thoughts on the subject to themselves if they want to continue to make their mortgage payments. The pure silence from their side of the fence is deafining.

jdwatson said:
What I'm suprised is there's not more participation from the ATC controllers, their associations and unions.
Click to expand...
 
And unfortunatly all of this means exactly jack squat to the folks pushing the ADIZ, and the CRIMINAL penalties that will be associated with future violations.

This is a pure and simple power play, to be "in control" of what is likely the most valuable airspace in the world. The FAA isn't the "controller", only the messenger ... and the messages only flow in one direction.


Ron Levy said:
1. Keep writing to all your senators and congressional reps.
2. Keep contributing to the AOPA PAC.
3. Keep encouraging all your friends to do the same.

As you note, individual letters to the docket don't carry a whole lot of weight, but the mass of them gets Congressional attention as they know the writers vote. Also, keep in mind that even if the ADIZ does become permanent, we can still help create a workable ADIZ with appropriate changes, including:

1. Incongruent boundaries of the B-space and ADIZ. Pilots have extreme difficulty navigating around the ADIZ where it doesn't match the B-space. The lateral boundaries of the ADIZ and B-space should be aligned, and they should be based on reasonable visually perceptible landmarks.

2. Inclusion of the 4000-foot base B-space extension out over Easton in the ADIZ. This cuts off north/south VFR traffic that is well outside the 30nm arc around the national capital area, creating additional demands for ADIZ squawks on that route.

3. Lack of convenient gaps to transit around the ADIZ VFR, especially around Patuxent and Dahlgren, due to preexisting R-areas. The ADIZ presses up against closed airspace, particularly on the southeast side (R-4005/4006) and south side (Dahlgren R-areas -- R-6611 and R-6613, IIRC, and the Fort Picket MOA and R-area). There's just no way to get through these areas VFR without going through the ADIZ, and that unnecessarily adds to Potomac TRACON's workload. Going around is often impractical and sometimes impossible due to the extra distance required and altitude restrictions of the R-areas.

4. Insufficient controller assets to allow VFR traffic going all the way across to go through rather than under/around the B-space (especially virtual closure of the north/south Dulles East transition). Controllers generally deny VFR entry into the B-space due to workload, and this concentrates VFR traffic in the few spaces available to transit the ADIZ without being in the B-space. That has a negative impact on safety by increasing traffic density in "see and avoid" areas and forcing aircraft to fly head to head at the same altitude, especially at 1200-1400 MSL in the very narrow NW/SE "Fort Meade slot."

5. Insufficient controller assets and frequencies to meet demand for VFR squawks -- 126.75 isn't enough to cover 360 degrees around the ADIZ without lengthy delays while waiting one's turn to make contact, and many transmissions blocked by the multitude of aircraft attempting to call at once. They need at least three controllers handling this on a sectoral basis (say, MTN to PXT, PXT to Casanova, Casanova to FDK, and FDK to MTN) when the weather is VMC, especially on weekends.

I'm not saying we should just accept the ADIZ as a given, but we need to let folks know the problems with it that are making life impossible for everyone from pilots to controllers to the USAF folks in Huntress to the FAA inspectors investigating all the infractions of the rules. If we can fix these issues, the politicians and security folks can still have their ADIZ, but we can operate safely and easily in and around it.
Click to expand...
 
It's way too early to throw in the towel on this one. We need more mass to the responses to docket website. Send slightly different, multiple letters.

Cap'n Ron's approach above is best.
 
I seriously doubt it. They know who is ultimatly signing their checks. And besides, more flight plans, more radar tracking, more radio work means you need more controllers, right? More controllers = more dues.


HPNPilot1200 said:
I have not seen NATCA get extremely involved yet, but I have a feeling they will...hopefully?!?

Jason
Click to expand...
 
mgkdrgn said:
I seriously doubt it. They know who is ultimatly signing their checks. And besides, more flight plans, more radar tracking, more radio work means you need more controllers, right? More controllers = more dues.
Click to expand...

We've needed more conntrollers for as many years as I can remember. Currently ARTCCs are desperate and staffing there and in TRACONs has really been an issue lately....

I think even without the ADIZ we need more controllers. Not only do we need MORE controllers, we need MORE staffing and less ADIZ restrictions that burden controllers.

Just a few opinions...
 
Oh, I agree ... but what we are going to get is neither ... plus a charge on our credit cards to pay for it, and jail time/big fines for ADIZ "violations" (with your aircraft confiscated/sold at auction, since you used it in the comission of a crime...).

Remember now well, these are the "good ol' days".

HPNPilot1200 said:
We've needed more conntrollers for as many years as I can remember. Currently ARTCCs are desperate and staffing there and in TRACONs has really been an issue lately....

I think even without the ADIZ we need more controllers. Not only do we need MORE controllers, we need MORE staffing and less ADIZ restrictions that burden controllers.

Just a few opinions...
Click to expand...
 
Got my letter and e-mails in today with my comments. Guess we'll see what effect we have.

Dave
 
Dave Siciliano said:
Got my letter and e-mails in today with my comments. Guess we'll see what effect we have.

Dave
Click to expand...

I just read a very comprehensive letter written by Beth from this board that I hope she pastes into this thread.

My multiple letters sent under different company names and my own name as well as annonymous, range from one or two short paragraphs to one liners.
 
here ya go. comments might have to be in by now though...?


To whom it may concern:

My name is Elizabeth Anderson and I am a US citizen and a student pilot. I fly out of a non-towered airport inside the ADIZ. I strongly disagree with making the ADIZ permanent. The ADIZ does not make us all safer but it does achieve a high level of economic uselessness and waste. It also punishes law abiding American citizens while doing nothing to thwart terrorists. It’s a lose-lose situation.

I have flown in and out of several airports in the local area near the ADIZ, including Frederick, MD (FDK), Martinsburg WV (MRB), Front Royal, VA (FRR), Winchester, VA (OKV), Clearview, MD (2W2), and Hanover, PA (6W6). I’ve flown in and out of other local airports as a passenger in light aircraft as well. Each and every one of my training flights have been shaped by the ADIZ. Even if I am only in the pattern I have to deal with ADIZ issues, and in turn, ATC has to keep track of me, toodling around the pattern. What a waste of resources.

Small aircraft are not the huge ominous threat they are made out to be, unless you walk into the propeller or something else similarly stupid. The payload on a typical light craft is much, much smaller than that of an SUV and last I checked we were not running out of SUVs inside the ADIZ, and certainly not inside the FRZ. A small plane hit the White House a number of years ago, and bounced. A small plane hit a tall building in Florida after 9-11 and took out a few windows and may actually have gotten stuck up there for a while. These were intentional acts that amounted to zip. Somehow it seems to me that there is more potential for loss of life if an overzealous fighter pilot shoots a small plane down for failure to maintain radio contact or failure to transmit transponder codes properly. In the case of the pilot of said aircraft it’s 100%, and very possibly innocent people on the ground.

Other reasons the ADIZ is unworkable include the fact that it takes much longer to get clearances, both on the ground prior to takeoff (a time and fuel waster) and in the air prior to re-entering the ADIZ. For example, I’ve had to circle outside the ADIZ for half an hour or more because ATC was too swamped to give me a transponder code. This is inefficient and potentially dangerous. Weather can creep up on you, there could be fuel issues, and even in nice weather you could end up dealing with several small craft circling the area waiting for clearance. It could even affect commercial flights because the overstretched ATCs have to concentrate some of their attention on the light aircraft.

Another example of how bizarre and unworkable this is: a CFI friend of mine was on a training flight with a student inside the ADIZ. He lost radio contact with ATC due to a malfunctioning radio immediately after takeoff. He immediately turned the plane around and brought it back in to land from his departure airport. He was censured for doing this and nearly got a ding on his license. In the competitive world of airline jobs, this could have cost him his livelihood. Is this fair? Is this efficient? I don’t think so.

There are other examples of economic impact. Several flight schools inside the ADIZ have been forced to close and the remaining ones have had to increase prices dramatically due to increased costs of operation. This starts a vicious cycle – less and less people can afford to fly and more schools (and maintenance shops, and fuel suppliers, and other businesses set up to serve general aviation) may have to close. It also tends to chill general aviation pilots from even trying to fly here (and spend their money on businesses here) because who wants to be on the evening news? Who wants to have a fighter jet escort them home, and then have to meet the men in suits for several hours of interrogations? Or worse yet, possibly get shot down, or, be fined several thousand dollars? You aren’t going to scare off terrorists with this, but you will scare off law abiding people. Who incidentally have money to spend on hotels, food, and other businesses in this area, or who just want to exercise their freedoms as an American citizen and travel within our borders without fear.

No light aircraft has ever been used in a terrorist attack. No violation of the ADIZ has ever been determined to be terrorist-related. It costs the FAA 11 MILLION dollars per year to operate the ADIZ. How much does it cost to scramble a fighter jet? How bad do we look to the world (and how loudly do the terrorists laugh) when we evacuate 30 some thousand people (THOUSAND) from the Capitol area because a Cessna 150 bumbled into the restricted airspace? Why are we spending so much time, effort and money on something that really isn’t helping anyone, when let’s face it, if a terrorist really wanted to blow something up he can rent a Ryder truck and drive it downtown. You don’t even need special training to do that, just a credit card.





Let’s bring back some sanity to this process. Let’s have public hearings and let’s see some real cooperation between the FAA and AOPA (and other advocacy groups) to design a truly workable solution for this issue. I also think the members of Congress who are not private pilots should go up for a few local flying lessons before actually voting on this issue. Not as a passenger, as a student pilot. It’s a whole different ballgame then and will offer some valuable perspective.

Thank you for your time.

Elizabeth Anderson
 
here ya go. comments might have to be in by now though...?
Click to expand...

I saw your letter on the 17005 gov. site. and others were still coming in... ...WAFPITN.
 
Last edited:
found my own (prior) CFI's posting - I emailed him my letter and shortly thereafter he put his up. awesome!
 
Oh! If I would have known other folks could read MY letter; I would have used a few more explitives!!

Dave
 
On 9/11/2001 a lot of people died, but so did a lot of things that we call our way of life, I am not saying that they are all wrong, but that some have gone too far.

But one part of our lives changed forever, the right to move freely about this formerly great land and travel any way that we want. I said the day after 911 that what we watched as the 2 airplanes crashed into the WTC, the Pentagon, and that Pennsylvania field, was the death sentence of GA, sure there will be years of appeals, but the execution is inevitable. We do not have the large fearsome voice of some other groups and we have to fight the paranoia spread by vote seeking autocratic sensationalists. Mr Bayh being one of the worst.

Enjoy it while you can, because i am afraid that from here on it is a steady downhill move on a greased slide.
 
Last edited:
I suspect that they have been told to keep their thoughts on the subject to themselves if they want to continue to make their mortgage payments. The pure silence from their side of the fence is deafining.
Click to expand...

Not at all. We have been told nothing of the ADIZ. We have not been told to write, and we haven't been told not to write. I recently saw the letter written by the NATCA National President in opposition to the ADIZ.
http://www.aopa.org/whatsnew/newsitems/2005/051031natca-letter.pdf
 
Very interesting update.... Secretary Mineta has been working and talking with Phil Boyer and decided to EXTEND the comment period on FAA Docket 17005 for 90 more days. After watching Part 1 of the video, Mineta seems to have an understanding of the issues and will hopefully work with AOPA in resolving these dilemas.

http://www.aopa.org/whatsnew/newsitems/2005/051103mineta.html
 
HPNPilot1200 said:
Very interesting update.... Secretary Mineta has been working and talking with Phil Boyer and decided to EXTEND the comment period on FAA Docket 17005 for 90 more days. After watching Part 1 of the video, Mineta seems to have an understanding of the issues and will hopefully work with AOPA in resolving these dilemas.

http://www.aopa.org/whatsnew/newsitems/2005/051103mineta.html
Click to expand...

Niether the AOPA nor I saw any letters FOR the DC ADIZ.
I wonder why they extended the comment period ?
 
Dave Krall CFII said:
Niether the AOPA nor I saw any letters FOR the DC ADIZ.
I wonder why they extended the comment period ?
Click to expand...

I believe Secretary Mineta saw the comment number going up and up rapidly and knew that there were more people out there that wanted to comment. That's my guess so don't quote me.
 
Secretary Mineta's actions amount to nothing more than window dressing. He is playing to the crowd while the AOPA and NBAA have their annual conventions, afterwards, he will go ahead with the ADIZ program that he has already decided upon.
 
Or do what gvmt does best, nothing at all, and the ADIZ stays anyway. Whats the difference.

wesleyj said:
Secretary Mineta's actions amount to nothing more than window dressing. He is playing to the crowd while the AOPA and NBAA have their annual conventions, afterwards, he will go ahead with the ADIZ program that he has already decided upon.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top