Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/5/84; site terak.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!bellcore!decvax!genrad!panda!talcott!harvard!seismo!hao!noao!terak!doug
From: doug@terak.UUCP (Doug Pardee)
Newsgroups: net.space
Subject: Re: DOD anti-capitalist?
Message-ID: <383@terak.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 19-Feb-85 12:49:25 EST
Article-I.D.: terak.383
Posted: Tue Feb 19 12:49:25 1985
Date-Received: Wed, 27-Feb-85 07:22:58 EST
References: <496@mordor.UUCP>
Organization: Terak Corporation, Scottsdale, AZ, USA
Lines: 26

> However, the DOD in its infinite wisdom, wants to classify any mapping that
> NOAA does....
> DOD gave their half baked and rather lame excuse (Soviet submarines could
> figure out where to hide).

Another type of "classified data":  the coverage of the U.S. Air Traffic
Control RADAR.  Although it would seem to make a lot of sense to let
instrument pilots know, ahead of time, where they can expect to be out
of RADAR contact, that information is classified.

Now in the eastern U.S. there is essentially total RADAR coverage of
all instrument flight routes.  But not in the mountainous West.  You
ought'a see the look on the face of an out-of-state pilot flying V-105
from PRC to BLD when the air traffic controller routinely intones
"Cessna Five Two Whiskey, RADAR contact lost, resume normal position
reporting, request your estimate to Peach Springs."

Many instrument pilots have *never* had to give a normal position report
before.  They don't have an estimate ready, they've forgotten what the
chart symbols for "mandatory" and "on-request" reporting points are, and
they've even forgotten the format of a "normal" position report.

But at least the Ruskies don't know about the holes in the ATC RADAR
coverage (oh, no!  I just told them about one!)
-- 
Doug Pardee -- Terak Corp. -- !{hao,ihnp4,decvax}!noao!terak!doug