ANOTHER AGENCY IN CHARGE OF AIRSPACE SECURITY As a result of prior Federal agencies’ ongoing confusion and inability to understand or correctly implement basic, simple airborne ‘Identify Friend or Foe’ techniques (‘IFF’), in a sudden move, today, the ADA (‘American Dental Association’) has been assigned responsibility for insuring airspace security over Washington DC.

As a starting point, the ADA will be applying its own techniques for addressing concerns with which it is familiar.

To wit, starting Monday the ADA will be dispatching ADA certified hygienists to 100 of the nearest airports within the ADIZ (Airport Dental Inspection Zone).

Prior to leaving the ground, pilots and passengers will be required to carry and present certified dental exam cards. Any out of date exam cards, blurry x-rays, extensive gingivitis, poorly maintained bridgework, or lack of regular flossing, will be disqualifying.

It is hoped by Federal authorities that these measures will be no longer than required.

NOW REALLY FOLKS The FAA has been caught in the crazy business of trying to provide, through the only tools available to it, i.e. public SFAR and NOTAM, procedural clarity on air-combat IFF procedures; which should only be disseminated on a ‘need-to-know’ basis to pilots cleared to those procedures.

It is as if the FAA has been tasked with providing ‘public clarification on the effective combat radius and target acquisition speed of an F-16.’ How can the FAA reply to such a question? Not coherently.

The result is that the FAA (and now also TSA) are compelled into responding with incomplete, inconsistent answers that make no sense, even to them. Even their best efforts leave the world’s jaws agape with incredulity.

When asked about combat procedures, there is only one reply, “If you have been cleared into that information then apply it as briefed, and have a nice day.”

End of story. It’s easy. No heavy lifting.

THE ‘PORTAL’ THING AGAIN For reasons obvious to many, this was thrown out two years ago by more knowledgeable people, from the White House down, but apparently not down far enough.

The portals were created for the US Olympics as a way to screen ‘transient’ aircraft for access to a one-time public event; ‘transient’ meaning aircraft and passengers upon which there is no prior knowledge. That’s what ‘transient’ portals are for (Hint).

Do we run the F16’s through a ‘portal’ before we allow them to fly over Washington DC? Obviously not. Why not? Because we have some confidence in who is flying them, and they have means of confirming their identity while airborne.

To certain agencies and organizations this is simple. To others, apparently it is not.

The FAA has been stuck at the same point on its learning curve for 18 months, perhaps as high as it can ever go. Now ‘various things’ have compelled the TSA to start its own long climb up from the bottom of that same curve.

Despite the seeming craziness, the mere act of starting up that climb is a very good sign.

The TSA started out making one bad mistake; it adopted a plan from the FAA that more knowledgeable people, with real world operating experience, had already abandoned.

FYI, what we’ve been doing here in the TFR for the last 18 months IS the contingency paradigm for times of high threat. While the FAA can only react, the military, (and others), prepare and exercise contingency plans. Thus, welcome to ‘Airbase Potomac.’

A POINT IN TIME To the non-flying public and the bureaucrats these airports are just some annoying little airports (3 or 23) in the middle of massive chaos. BUT, far more importantly, we’re at a cusp in history where it is critically important to set rational precedents. In other words, to ‘lead.’

Because of the magnitude and consequences of whatever precedents are now created, it is essential that we give birth to and demonstrate rational, effective, sustainable solutions that realistically address some unpleasant security realities; while also preserving freedoms that would otherwise be lost by our own government’s reaction to acts of terror.

(A bit cliché here, I know, but true nonetheless).

That’s what this is really all about.

CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK Problem: You’ve got two aircraft that have been detected inbound, N86121 and N45678. Neither offers a convenient Soviet star or has other distinguishing physical characteristics to identify Friend from Foe. Both are common civil aircraft with legitimate FAA registrations. How do you Identify Friend from Foe (‘IFF’)?

Answer: The ‘cleared pilot’ of N86121 has confidentially been given a dynamic reply to a one-time airborne challenge, unique to their time and place of arrival, which only remains valid within certain limits of time and place. In other parlance, a military ‘PPR’ clearance (‘Prior Permission Required’).

Controller to Pilot #1: “N86121, please state your PPR clearance.”

Pilot #1: “N86121, my PPR is fish, eyeball, earwax, gumdrops, snookums.”

Controller: “N86121, your PPR confirmed and correct, squawk 1234, have a nice day.”

Controller to Pilot #2: “N45678, state your PPR clearance.”

Pilot #2: “Duh, er, huh?”

Controller (To 3^rd airborne aircraft): “Okay batwing 123, we have an unidentified bogey 20 miles bearing 180 degrees from bulls-eye. Turn vector 220 degrees, descend to 2,000 to intercept; cleared hot north of tango.”

Get it yet? The first guy, a cleared pilot, has a dynamically changing tag and once identified as ‘Friend’ can go about his business in a NORMAL manner; not wasting anymore of anyone’s time. Since #1 has been identified ‘Friend,’ you don’t care what they do, they are not the (potential) threat.

The second pilot, who has no means to respond to the challenge, you approach really fast (intercept), and from there, scratch, sniff, or otherwise (engage), based on what they do from that point on.

It’s a piece of cake. It’s easy for everyone.

Be patient (or not), at the core of every hallucination is a bit of reality.

David Wartofsky – Potomac Airfield