Secret No Fly Zone?

A glider pilot was arrested for flying near a Nuke Plant. There is nothing on the charts or other warnings about the area.

http://www.aopa.org/aircraft/articles/2013/130110secret-no-fly-zone.html?WT.mc_id=130111epilot&WT.mc_sect=gan

That's wrong on so many levels it isn't even funny. You would thing that at least one officer would have been able to turn on a brain cell.

Hartsville? Not surprised. That whole area is loaded with Buford T. Justice types. Reminds me of the time I was threatened with arrest for having a dirt bike in a pickup truck in the State Forest not far from there... by a cop with an ATV in his state issued pickup.

Sounds like some over zealousness. I guess they do care, so that is a positive. Wonder if they chased him on the tarmac because they were afraid he might take off again.

I understand in theory about why you want to watch who's flying around a power plant, any power plant, but at what point does your brain kick in and say, this ain't logical?

Common sense isn't so common any more.

Now he's on double secret probation

But the fuel tanks in that glider could have made the aircraft a makeshift bomb!

Big Brother can't even watch himself effectively.

sachilles wrote: Sounds like some over zealousness. I guess they do care, so that is a positive. Wonder if they chased him on the tarmac because they were afraid he might take off again.

They only cared because they thought they were going to get to shoot something. Got to love law enforcement officials who don't even know the law or their own jurisdiction .

everything is a secret no fly zone if they want it to be these days.

There's another one over Groom Lake, Nevada I think

GameboyRMH wrote: There's another one over Groom Lake, Nevada I think

It's moved. Google Dugway and Sheep.

“Police officers here are asking you to land, but the FAA says you do not have to land. I’m leaving this up to you.”

I bet he was wishing for a motor glider so he could leave.

Nuclear powerplants have been restricted airspace for as long as I've been in aviation. Late 70's for those that want to know. And it applies to all aircraft, even military helicopters. Back in the early 80's I was a army CH-47 flight engineer in WA state. During a training exercise a couple helicopters got a little misdirected and landed outside a nuclear powerplant to get their bearings. Was greated by locked and loaded M-16 bearing security officers that didn't have a sense of humor. Went up to state then over to army and down the chain of command. Mission commander got a severe chewing out over that. Fortunately I was flying a different mission the other direction and didn't get caught up in it.

Understand the issue here is it isn't written in sectionals or NOTAMS. I do think it is written someplace more permanant as sectionals and NOTAMS are updated and revised periodically. And the article did mention he knew about the no-fly but didn't think a quick pass would matter. Guess it does matter. I've heard of several incidents like that but most aren't taken to court. Usually just wrung through the wringer and released if accidental.

He should have just told them he was a drone and kept going.

wlkelley3 wrote: . I do think it is written someplace more permanant as sectionals and NOTAMS are updated and revised periodically.

As a newbie pilot I'd be interested in knowing where it is written.

Thanks, Dan

I've seen aircraft fly over the plant I work at. I've asked and been told that there are no restrictions against it, but I didn't ask security.

914Driver wrote:

wlkelley3 wrote: . I do think it is written someplace more permanant as sectionals and NOTAMS are updated and revised periodically.

As a newbie pilot I'd be interested in knowing where it is written. Thanks, Dan

Seems like these excerpts are important:

from the article: On the Charlotte sectional chart, the nuclear power plant is marked with nothing more than a group obstruction symbol. Fleming was familiar with the post-9/11 notam that advises pilots to avoid flying near facilities such as power plants “to the extent practicable,” but he thought nothing of a single pass over the Robinson facility on the west side of the lake as he headed toward where he thought there would be lift at the lake. If he couldn’t find a thermal there, he thought, he might have to land at Hartsville.

from the article: From flying competitions in the area, he knew that the Savannah River Site, a 310-square-mile Department of Energy industrial complex that handles nuclear materials in support of national defense, is marked on sectionals with a notice requesting—not requiring—that pilots avoid flight at and below 2,000 feet msl in the area. If a nuclear site as large as Savannah River didn’t prohibit overflight, how could the area around the Robinson plant be restricted—especially if nothing said so on the charts? Facilities such as the Robinson plant are addressed in an FDC notam issued following 9/11: “In the interest of national security and to the extent practicable, pilots are strongly advised to avoid the airspace above, or in proximity to such sites as power plants … . Pilots should not circle as to loiter in the vicinity over these types of facilities.” Because gliders routinely circle to gain altitude in thermals, the Soaring Society of America sought a clarification from the FAA, posting on its website on March 7, 2002, that the FAA did not consider this behavior loitering. “The key is to spend only as much time as needed to gain lift and move on beyond the facility,” the association wrote. Fleming had made a single pass over the plant, and his circling had been mostly on the opposite side of the lake. The FAA looked into the overflight and later confirmed to AOPA that it found no violation of the federal aviation regulations—but Fleming was transported to the Darlington County Detention Center. The Federal Bureau of Investigation and Department of Homeland Security would interview him the next day, and Fleming said an officer read the arrest warrant to him around 3:30 p.m. July 27.

One conclusion: local LEOs dodged a lawsuit when the pilot chose to not legally confront a group of over-ethusiastic clowns who don't know the laws they are supposed to enforce.

HappyAndy wrote:

sachilles wrote: Sounds like some over zealousness. I guess they do care, so that is a positive. Wonder if they chased him on the tarmac because they were afraid he might take off again.

They only cared because they thought they were going to get to shoot something. Got to love law enforcement officials who don't even know the law or their own jurisdiction .

From the article.. they were looking fowards to "shooting him down"

A better knowledge of aviation issues among law enforcement officials may have produced a better result for Fleming. Griffin said she had to tell the officers on the scene to clear out the runway, and one officer talked about commandeering the airport. “He was running around, the one guy that was commandeering everything, saying, ‘We were going to shoot him down,’” she said.

The stupid Nuclear station is near the airport. I think somebody let the little head do the thinking for the big head.

Good thing they haven't built a new plant in the last 25 years, so those zones can't sneak up on people and all.

A lot of this scenario reminds me of Super Troopers for some reason. Chasing a glider down a runway with the lights flashing is a bit comical.

it's interesting that the police cannot order a plane to land.. I wonder what would have happened if he had stayed up and continued on to the airport he wanted to go to originally?

They'd have probably started shooting at it......I hear you just have to be the Sherriff's cousin's sister's, aunt's, neice's, mother's husband down there to get on the department.....

There's a quote - can't remember who it's from - basically goes "I have never seen a situation so dismal that a policeman couldn't make it worse."