Huh?

[tonycondon]

I think AOPA might be stretching it a little, or I just dont understand, but how is requiring that all pilots within 100 miles of DCA get TRAINING on ADIZ procedures "effectively expand the ADIZ to include 117 airports"? God forbid that the pilots living around the ADIZ might actually have to know how to use it.

Once again, im just a flatlander midwesterner who can still fly pretty much anywhere anytime without talking to anyone. Maybe im missing something, if so please let me know...

 

[poadeleted3]

AOPA seems to me to be engaging in a bit of hysteria to get people stirred up. A painless online course hardly equates to "expanding the ADIZ." Unfortunately, pilots have proven that they cannot operate in the area without further training of some sort. We should be glad the FAA has chosen such a mild approach. I can't help but wonder how many violations of the Class B space there was before anyone was paying attention.

 

[poadeleted20]

I agree that AOPA is overreacting with their rhetoric. I've had the little card in my wallet for many months now, it only took about 20 minutes to get, and that's the end of it as an issue for me.

 

[ggroves]

God forbid that the pilots living around the ADIZ might actually have to know how to use it.

Getting in and out of the ADIZ is actually pretty painless...but it does give people something to b$tch about.

Greg
182RG

 

[flyingcheesehead]

I think AOPA might be stretching it a little, or I just dont understand, but how is requiring that all pilots within 100 miles of DCA get TRAINING on ADIZ procedures "effectively expand the ADIZ to include 117 airports"?

They will effectively have to have a TFR of that size saying "no pilot may fly within an area bounded by ... unless xxx training has been completed." So, if I live 125nm west of the ADIZ and I'm figuring out where I'm going to go for a $100 burger, it's probably not gonna be to that nice little airport that's only 30nm from me but 95nm from the ADIZ any more. That will hurt businesses at the outlying fields, though not nearly to the degree of those within the ADIZ itself.

So, I do see their point.

 

[poadeleted3]

They will effectively have to have a TFR of that size saying "no pilot may fly within an area bounded by ... unless xxx training has been completed." So, if I live 125nm west of the ADIZ and I'm figuring out where I'm going to go for a $100 burger, it's probably not gonna be to that nice little airport that's only 30nm from me but 95nm from the ADIZ any more. That will hurt businesses at the outlying fields, though not nearly to the degree of those within the ADIZ itself.

So, I do see their point.

I can't imagine why a pilot would be so averse to training that they would avoid an airport. Those who are so averse are no doubt the same type of pilots we can thank for this NPRM in the first place. Like it or not, this wouldn't be an issue if there weren't more than a few sub-standard pilots buzzing around embarrasing us all.

 

[wesleyj]

i try to see it from both sides, quite frankly i have to agree with AOPA on this one, albeit no necessarily for the same reason., If we quietly go along with this, I see the Feds saying well everyone within 100 miles doesnt have a problem with this, so lets go ahead and expand it out to that point, I can also see them saying, Well lets set up a few more since they are so well received. Like maybe Cleveland and Chicago, then may LA and San Fran.

I gotta go with AOPA on this, but I think they need to expand their retoric to include putting a stop to the ADIZ thing completely.

 

[JRitt]

I think this should have been included in everybodys BFR so that in the course of 2 years everybody would have the training to know how to cope with TFR's

 

[flyersfan31]

There are definitely two sides to this one. I agree with the folks who have experience with the ADIZ: it ain't that hard, and it ain't that much training. Still, setting aside alarmist rhetoric, the AOPA is (IMHO) on the side of the right. There is a tendency to let our civil rights erode through inertia. If you aren't going to fly INTO the ADIZ, regardless of where you're home base is located, why should you need training? Awareness of ADIZ procedures is nice, but as (I think) Kent asked, at what point does it stop? Sometimes civil liberties issues seem kind of silly (if I'm not smoking crack in my bedroom, I don't really care if the police have the right to smash down my door after a perfunctory knock and come looking for crack) but, well, you probably get the point. A stitch in time saves nine......

 

[Dave Krall CFII]

I think this should have been included in everybodys BFR so that in the course of 2 years everybody would have the training to know how to cope with TFR's

That's what I was thinking too. The online course is fine too, and should be for all pilots. These things can pop up anywhere, not just DC, -like if when somebody shoots missles at the USA.

 

[silver-eagle]

I believe AOPA is correct in challenging this. Some pilots will avoid the ADIZ like many avoid the radio. And this will adversely affect airports in the area since, if I don't have the training, I'm not going to fly to one of those 117 airports.
What happens when ADIZ training expands to nation-wide, and costs $1,000. Is that when you'll object?
Don't give up all your rights without a fight.

 

[MauleSkinner]

I don't have a problem with training on it...and as a couple of others posted, it should be (have been) included in flight reviews for ALL pilots. Personally, though, I don't think it's an "ADIZ" or "TFR" issue...it's a VFR navigation skills issue.

I can personally vouch for the fact that the last time my VFR navigation skills were evaluated was in 1988...on the checkride for my Limited Commercial certificate. Had I gotten my instrument rating prior to the commercial, I would probably be saying 1983. Just like any other skill, VFR navigation skills can improve or deteriorate over time, and bad habits can creep in. It really should be evaluated periodically on flight reviews.

Also, if they're going to require training for a particular operation, it should involve ground and flight training, and an endorsement in the logbook...not a certificate stating that you paged through the requisite number of pages on the internet.

Fly safe!

David

 

[Dave Krall CFII]

I don't have a problem with training on it...and as a couple of others posted, it should be (have been) included in flight reviews for ALL pilots. Personally, though, I don't think it's an "ADIZ" or "TFR" issue...it's a VFR navigation skills issue.

I can personally vouch for the fact that the last time my VFR navigation skills were evaluated was in 1988...on the checkride for my Limited Commercial certificate. Had I gotten my instrument rating prior to the commercial, I would probably be saying 1983. Just like any other skill, VFR navigation skills can improve or deteriorate over time, and bad habits can creep in. It really should be evaluated periodically on flight reviews.

Also, if they're going to require training for a particular operation, it should involve ground and flight training, and an endorsement in the logbook...not a certificate stating that you paged through the requisite number of pages on the internet.

Fly safe!

David

I don't see any need for in flight training for a purly academic subject such as this, beside the BFR flying if incorporated in that requirement. BTW: CFIs already have to do TSA security training nationwide, since 911. It's free, takes about 20 minutes to an hour online, a test must be taken to get certified, and it must be renewed every 12 to 18 months at this time.

ADIZ and other retricted airspace of all kinds is going to increase in the next few years or even sooner, as hostilities that the USA deals with from different enemies in all directions materialize. A system already in place will allow the most freedom possible for all pilots but in addition, IFR rated GA pilots will be given priority after the airlines, just as in the weeks after 911.

 

[MauleSkinner]

I don't see any need for in flight training for a purly academic subject such as this, beside the BFR flying if incorporated in that requirement. BTW: CFIs already have to do TSA security training nationwide, since 911. It's free, takes about 20 minutes to an hour online, a test must be taken to get certified, and it must be renewed every 12 to 18 months at this time.

As I said, I don't see it as a "purely academic" TFR/ADIZ issue...I don't have any statistics, but the fact of the matter is that the most widely-publicized violator(s) simply had no clue where they were. That's a VFR navigation issue, and must be resolved in the cockpit.

I'm also aware of the TSA security training (got mine done), and I do my CFI renewals online...the fact that I can (a) read, and (b) answer multiple choice questions by finding a nearly verbatim passage from the course material is no indication that I understand and can apply the material. It takes some effort in both of these BEYOND the actual online instruction/renewal process to truly become the master of the material.

In fact, an argument could be made that the reason the TSA extended their first renewal term to 18 months is a lack of understanding when the flight instructors/AOPA/EAA/NAFI/whoever read the part in the initial training program that said the TSA would not develop a recurrent program...it would be the responsibility of the flight schools (as defined by the TSA).

Fly safe!

David

 

[Dave Krall CFII]

As I said, I don't see it as a "purely academic" TFR/ADIZ issue...I don't have any statistics, but the fact of the matter is that the most widely-publicized violator(s) simply had no clue where they were. That's a VFR navigation issue, and must be resolved in the cockpit.

I'm also aware of the TSA security training (got mine done), and I do my CFI renewals online...the fact that I can (a) read, and (b) answer multiple choice questions by finding a nearly verbatim passage from the course material is no indication that I understand and can apply the material. It takes some effort in both of these BEYOND the actual online instruction/renewal process to truly become the master of the material.

In fact, an argument could be made that the reason the TSA extended their first renewal term to 18 months is a lack of understanding when the flight instructors/AOPA/EAA/NAFI/whoever read the part in the initial training program that said the TSA would not develop a recurrent program...it would be the responsibility of the flight schools (as defined by the TSA).

Fly safe!

David

There's no doubt that your way would produce more and better ADIZ avoidance pilots, albeit at a higher cost and those other PICs that are up to the relatively simple academic tasks of transposing their book learning up to navigating in the air theoretically shouldn't have to pay for the air time they don't need. It's the same-o same-o, how much do we need to spend for a certain average level of result.

 

[MauleSkinner]

There's no doubt that your way would produce more and better ADIZ avoidance pilots, albeit at a higher cost and those other PICs that are up to the relatively simple academic tasks of transposing their book learning up to navigating in the air theoretically shouldn't have to pay for the air time they don't need. It's the same-o same-o, how much do we need to spend for a certain average level of result.

I guess we're on the same page there...btw, I'm not saying one way or another about the need for the training that the FAA proposed, as I feel strongly both ways about it, but I would venture that the potential violators are the ones who wouldn't get what they need from an internet course (especially since there's already so much information available, and we still have violators).

Fly safe!

David

 

[flyersfan31]

That's a VFR navigation issue, and must be resolved in the cockpit.

I agree. Honestly, how can you miss the ADIZ on a VFR chart? Even if you live under a rock and don't know about the DC ADIZ, any pilot should at least have the curiosity to dig deeper and find out when they see it on the map.

 

[ScottM]

I agree. Honestly, how can you miss the ADIZ on a VFR chart? Even if you live under a rock and don't know about the DC ADIZ, any pilot should at least have the curiosity to dig deeper and find out when they see it on the map.

I saw a guy looking at a chart for the Chicago area once that still showed the O'Hare Class B as the O'Hare TCS.

Unfortunetly there are pilots out there who do not keep current and this training will not change their attitude at all. Do you think mandatory training would have stopped Schaffer and Troy from making their blunder?

 

[Dave Krall CFII]

I saw a guy looking at a chart for the Chicago area once that still showed the O'Hare Class B as the O'Hare TCS.

Unfortunetly there are pilots out there who do not keep current and this training will not change their attitude at all. Do you think mandatory training would have stopped Schaffer and Troy from making their blunder?

Some are beyond help and should be culled from the pilot ranks for the benefit of all decent pilots. I had a "commercial" rated pilot show up for a checkout recently with a TAC over a year out of date, and worse, he was aspiring towards the CFI. Wouldn't do full stalls/recoveries either. Pathetic.

 

[wsuffa]

The real problem is not "training" on the ADIZ rules, it's that a lot of pilots don't have a clue how to navigate. I'll bet if you looked at the reported ADIZ incursions you'd find that the top two categories are navigation errors and unintentional (or untimely) changes of squawk code (such as hitting the 1200 button after canceling IFR, or being told you're outside the ADIZ when you're really not).

The training rule strike me as a "don't run with scissors" rule. It won't cure the problem of pilots who don't know what "run" means. Zero tolerance. One strike and you're out.

 

[ScottM]

Some are beyond help and should be culled from the pilot ranks for the benefit of all decent pilots. I had a "commercial" rated pilot show up for a checkout recently with a TAC over a year out of date, and worse, he was aspiring towards the CFI. Wouldn't do full stalls/recoveries either. Pathetic.

maybe we could 'cull' them by sending them on a VFR XC to Washington Reagan?

 

[Cap'n Jack]

Unfortunately, it seems that at times an unreasonable approach needs to be taken to get reasonable action. We're dealing in politics, and I think Abe Lincoln said that "when politics comes in the door, truth flies out the window"

The training isn't that hard, but I have no reason to go there, I'll just stay on my side of the Chesapeake Bay. I would prefer the ADIZ go away, but woe to the courageous politico that suggests such a thing- CNN and others would be all over them saying they are making the country less safe. I support AOPA's attitude.

 

[poadeleted20]

The training isn't that hard, but I have no reason to go there, I'll just stay on my side of the Chesapeake Bay.

I don't think there's much area on the east side of the Chesapeake Bay which isn't within 100nm of the DCA VORTAC, so mind where you go.