by
Darryl Phillips
Atlantic City....Terrorists who want to blow up airplanes are about to receive a wonderful gift from the FAA. After decades of making it harder to destroy airliners, FAA is moving to make it easier. Much easier. Of course FAA is not admitting this to congress, or to the American people, but they're doing it anyway.
ITEM....We're all aware of the airport security measures that have affected general aviation. Once upon a time it was OK to deliver a passenger to the airline gate or to park at the terminal and go inside for lunch. Today we can't taxi anywhere near the terminal, we have fences and locked gates and security signs and restrictions. At some airports we can't get our cars to our planes anymore, someplaces we have to be accompanied on the ramp by FBO employees. At Wichita, the World Beechcraft Society had to cancel their annual aircraft beauty contest because there weren't enough FBO employees to accompany the pilots on the ramp.
In the name of security, general aviation has accepted these growing restrictions of our freedom.
ITEM....Airline passengers have likewise been subjected to all manner of search procedures and hassles. Sometimes family members can't go to the gate, the kids can never go inside the airliner to see what Daddy's flight looks like. Passengers must arrive earlier and can't check their luggage like they used to.
In the name of security, the travelling public has accepted these increasing restrictions of their freedoms.
ITEM....Airline captains have written me about the draconian restrictions they now work under. One 30 year captain told of having to beg a six-weeks-employed gate attendant to please unlock the door to the ramp, and then he is restricted as he preflights his aircraft. For instance, he is prohibited from walking over to the next plane to talk with it's captain even though both planes belong to the same carrier and are parked wingtip to wingtip.
In the name of security, the airline personnel have accepted these absurd restrictions as they try to do their jobs.
ITEM....The August 1995 issue of MILITARY & AEROSPACE ELECTRONICS reports that FAA "is establishing a new, first-of-a-kind security laboratory complex at the FAA Technical Center near Atlantic City, NJ". Six labs will be built, including weapons detection, intrusion detection, image processing, bulk explosives detection, trace explosives detection, and so on. The idea is to catch terrorists before they can blow up the plane.
In the name of security, the taxpayers are footing the bill for these laboratories. Interestingly, when we visited the FAA Technical Center as part of AOPA Expo 95, FAA officials had no comment about the new labs at all.
ITEM....Recently my wife tried to mail a package to her brother. He's an avid stamp collector so Pat wanted to use certain stamps. Post office said OK, but every package with stamps (rather than the post office tape) is now being routed to a special facility for search and inspection and delay and perhaps dunking in a barrel of water.
In the name of security, the public is willing to give up many things that used to be taken for granted. Pat said to use the post office tape.
Now, against this background of inconvenience and restriction and intrusion and overt violation of our constitutional rights, the FAA is about to provide the answer to the terrorist's prayers.
It goes by several names. ADS-B. GPS Squitter. TCAS IV. Whatever you call it, it provides exactly the information the bad guys need to blow airliners out of the sky. No longer will terrorists have to get past the fences, past the baggage screening, past the layer upon layer of security.
This is how it works: Twice every second, each aircraft will automatically report it's position on 1090 MHz. Latitude and longitude will be reported to 16 feet, and altitude to 25 feet. Part of that report will be the unique Mode S ID number. And once every 5 seconds the aircraft will automatically report it's company flight number (or N number for us little guys) and that same Mode S ID. This broadcast has a range of more than 100 miles! There is no attempt to encode it for security purposes.
The idea is good, planes need to be able to see each other. The implementation is not so good, it's typical FAA. They think of this as a SURVEILLANCE problem, and in surveillance it's important to know who you are watching. That requires identification. But from a pilot's point of view, it's not so important to know if the target is a Beechcraft or a Boeing. The important thing is to miss him.
That takes care of the FAA's point of view, and the pilot's. But what about the viewpoint of the terrorist? One can imagine all sorts of scenarios, I don't want to give the bad guys any ideas. But it's obvious that if you can lounge around Nebraska and wait for the right flight to announce itself, the problem is easier. And if it works in Nebraska it'll work in the Mideast.
To track the airliner, all a terrorist has to do is look up an equipment supplier in Trade-a-Plane. If he's on a really tight budget, he can break into a Mooney or Cessna on the ramp and steal the ADS-B receiver. This makes blowing up an airliner almost as easy as taking a truck bomb to Oklahoma City.
What is the FAA reaction to this? At AOPA I had the opportunity to talk directly with Administrator Hinson and other FAA officials. The answer was a short uncomfortable silence. Then Dr. George Donohue (he's in charge of all the R&D at Atlantic City) said that this was an angle they hadn't considered before.
HADN'T CONSIDERED BEFORE?? They've considered that a TriPacer pilot in Missoula can't go to the terminal for a hamburger because it's too big a terrorist threat. They've considered that aircraft owners at Wichita can't hold a beauty contest on the GA ramp (far removed from any airline activities) because it's too big a terrorist threat. They've considered that an airline pilot with every clearance that exists can't walk under the next plane because it's too big a terrorist threat. Yet they HAVEN'T CONSIDERED that broadcasting the exact precise location and identification of every airliner every half second is a threat?
Giving credit where credit is due, I must say that Dr. Donohue gave a straight answer. He didn't try to BS me, and I appreciate that. I believe that Administrator Hinson understood exactly what was at stake. Hopefully he will be able to take this dumb idea and file it appropriately. Flush.
******************
The deadline to comment on NPRM 95-11 is near. 95-11 is the biggest revision in the rules affecting pilots in our lifetimes. Well, most of our lifetimes. My friend from Poughkeepsie, Captain John Miller, would challenge that. At age 90, he still flies his Bonanza. At AOPA he said he isn't flying his Baron so much anymore, doesn't need the room since his wife passed on. John always carries pictures of his first Jenny, and his second Jenny, and so on down to his present aircraft. I'm sure he has seen bigger changes in pilot licensing than 95-11.
But for all of us, the proposals are significant. For three months I've tried to make sense out of it all. I wanted to write at least one column on what the FAA is doing to us in 95-11. But frankly, I give up. It's 139,743 words, 125 pages of three columns of fine print. (For comparison, the Ten Commandments is 155 words, this thing is 901 times bigger.) It totally revises Part 61, the regulations for pilot licensing. It also revises Part 141, and eliminates Part 143.
What does it accomplish? Well, a lot of titles are changed. We will have AFIs rather than CFIs. That should make the world a safer place to live. FAA isn't quite to the point of requiring a different rating for a red airplane than for a blue one, but it's getting close.
In every speech, Mr. Hinson laments the services that FAA used to provide to pilots but can no longer provide because of budget cutbacks. I would think a substantial amount of money could be saved if all the forms didn't have to be reprinted to reflect the proposed changes. It's going to take more FAA staff to process fewer pilots. Where is Newt when we need him?
There are some good changes. Recreational pilots will have expanded privileges, and pilots without medicals will be able to fly as rec pilots, but only if they never flunked a medical. So it'll become important to just let your medical lapse rather than trying to retain it. Somehow I can't see the advantage in that, from either the pilot or FAA point of view.
Should you respond to this nightmare? Yes. Even if you can't find the time to read it all (no magazine has found the pages to print it all) you should reply. The alternative is for FAA to believe that none of us care anymore. In a democracy, government functions at the consent of the governed. If you do not reply, you have given your consent.
Reply before December 11, in triplicate, to Federal Aviation Administration, Office of General Counsel, Attention: Rules Docket (AGC-10), Docket No. 25910, 800 Independence Avenue SW., Washington DC 20591
Personally, I'm going to ask them to scrap it completely and begin again. The changes in the recreational license are good, but the price is just too great. Getting government out of our lives includes getting government out of our cockpits. 139,743 words is not my idea of less government.
On the other hand, if you are a CFI (excuse me, AFI) you may want to comment in favor of 95-11. It'll be a real moneymaker for instructors.