Erik Reuter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
One possible solution I came up with is to have a 50-100 mile
radius "no-fly zone" around all major cities.
The current solution is a a variation on this.
Right now, in the US, all airplanes are banned from "enhanced Class B
airspace", except for those airplanes that are on a flight plan, under
ATC radio control, and showing an assigned radar transponder code.
This means that airline flights and such are flying into and out of
big city airports.
It looks to me that the goal is to make it easier for ATC and the
military to identify airplanes that are acting `strangely', on the
principle that kind of action is the best indicator that the airplane
has been hijacked. Aircraft may be intercepted by fighter jets.
"Class B airspace" is the kind of airspace that covers major airports
in the US, which means major cities. The radius is often 20 miles.
The `enhanced' means you cannot fly under a `shelf' or over the top;
the airspace goes from the "surface to infinity".
In addition, planes like mine are forbidden from a 25 mile region
around New York and Washington under any circumstance, even if they
match the other requirements. Only airliners, police, military, and
medical flights are permitted over those cities.
This effects me because I am now forbidden from flying to the airport
closest to my sister near New York. I don't think the government is
much worried by airplanes like mine, which are too small to cause a
huge amount of damage when they crash; but corporate jets, some of
which are quite large, come under the same legal category as mine; and
such aircraft could be dangerous.
Pilots are being asked by the FAA to review interception procedures:
what to do when an armed fighter jet pulls up beside your aircraft.
(Section 5-6-2 subsection b2: "Intercepted aircraft personnel may
observe the use of different drag devices to allow for speed and
position stabilization....")
Also, all pilots are asked to monitor the 121.5 MHz emergency
frequency when flying. This radio frequency is used for intercepts,
for announcements from ATC, and of course, for emergencies.
This is all specified in new `notices to airmen' or NOTAMs from the
Federal Aviation Administration.
Incidentally, according to the Sydney Morning Herald, Sydney,
Australia, at least one Australian pilot is flying armed combat
patrols over the US -- he is in the RAAF on an exchange with the US
Air Force and doing what his US counterpart would have been doing were
he here. What this means is that the US government thinks that if
given the order, he would shoot down an airliner; and if not given the
order, he would not.
--
Robert J. Chassell [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Rattlesnake Enterprises http://www.rattlesnake.com
