flying to new Udvar-Hazy Smithsonian Air & Space Museum

[Dave]

I was told at one of the big shows(Oshkosh? AOPA? I forget) by reps at
the Udvar-Hazy booth (with the awesome model of the new Smithsonian
A&S museum) that 4 times per year general aviation aircraft will be
permitted to land at Dulles and then taxi back to a parking area
adjacent to the museum.

It opens 12/15 (a Monday), so I'm wondering what the deal is. Sure
would beat traffic to be able to fly in....

[Cub Driver]

It was my impression that there is no taxiway from the airport to the
museum.

There are indeed adjacent, and the ability to move aircraft from
Dulles runways to the museum was a big factor in choosing that
particular location (on the south edge of the Dulles property, I think
just to the west of the intersection of routes 28 and 50.)

There may well be a plan to open that route four times a year, as the
NASM rep told you. But I doubt they would do that at anywhere near the
opening, what with the stress of the opening / the centennial of
flight / the Christmas season approaching. Udvar=Hazy is likely to be
a zoo that week.

On 19 Nov 2003 19:25:46 -0800, (Dave) wrote:

>I was told at one of the big shows(Oshkosh? AOPA? I forget) by reps at
>the Udvar-Hazy booth (with the awesome model of the new Smithsonian
>A&S museum) that 4 times per year general aviation aircraft will be
>permitted to land at Dulles and then taxi back to a parking area
>adjacent to the museum.
>
>It opens 12/15 (a Monday), so I'm wondering what the deal is. Sure
>would beat traffic to be able to fly in....

all the best -- Dan Ford
email: (put CUB in subject line)

see the Warbird's Forum at www.warbirdforum.com
and the Piper Cub Forum at www.pipercubforum.com

[Ron Natalie]

"Dave" > wrote in message om...
> I was told at one of the big shows(Oshkosh? AOPA? I forget) by reps at
> the Udvar-Hazy booth (with the awesome model of the new Smithsonian
> A&S museum) that 4 times per year general aviation aircraft will be
> permitted to land at Dulles and then taxi back to a parking area
> adjacent to the museum.

That was what we were told originally, but Margy says that the taxiway crosses
the access road and they will not allow you to taxi to the museum. You'll have
to park at Signature or Hawthorne and get a ride over.

Margy is lobbying for a GA flyin at the museum though.

[EDR]

In article >, Ron Natalie
> wrote:

> That was what we were told originally, but Margy says that the taxiway crosses
> the access road and they will not allow you to taxi to the museum.

Yep... it sure is tough to close a road inside the airport fence.

[Peter Duniho]

"Ron Natalie" > wrote in message
. ..
> That was what we were told originally, but Margy says that the taxiway
crosses
> the access road and they will not allow you to taxi to the museum.

Hmmm. For what they are spending on the annex, the extra cost to construct
a bridge for the taxiway over the road couldn't be THAT significant, could
it?

Of course, as long as it's as hard to fly in the DC area, I suppose catering
to GA just isn't a big priority.

Pete

[Ron Natalie]

"Peter Duniho" > wrote in message ...

> Hmmm. For what they are spending on the annex, the extra cost to construct
> a bridge for the taxiway over the road couldn't be THAT significant, could
> it?
>
Frankly, something as low tech as a stop sign would probably suffice.
At the Army AIr Field I was based at we had stop lights and warning horms
to keep you from crossing the approach area of the runway while aircraft
were landing.

[John Harlow]

> Frankly, something as low tech as a stop sign would probably suffice.

Lol - do they even have those for the alaskan highway slash runways?

[Peter Duniho]

"Ron Natalie" > wrote in message
. ..
> Frankly, something as low tech as a stop sign would probably suffice.

I think that depends on whether the access road is open to the general
public or not (and I don't know whether it is or not). IMHO, if it's open
to the general public, a stop sign *should* be sufficient but probably is
not. Even a traffic signal is eventually going to result in an accident and
a lawsuit. If it went to jury, aviation would certainly get the short end
of the stick, regardless of signage.

If the access road is only for "authorized personnel", as I assume the one
at the Army base you referred to is, I think proper signaling of the
intersection would be fine and relatively immune to nitwits.

Either way, it's a shame there's no direct access to the museum right now.

Pete

[Ron Natalie]

"Peter Duniho" > wrote in message ...
> "Ron Natalie" > wrote in message
> . ..
> > Frankly, something as low tech as a stop sign would probably suffice.
>
> I think that depends on whether the access road is open to the general
> public or not (and I don't know whether it is or not).

It's the old Gate 4 access road. It's not open to the public. The public
entrance comes in via a new fly over ramp on route 28 a little farther south
and stays east of the museum ramp area.

Once you get through that gate, you are able to drive into movement areas
so you should be watching for aircraft anyhow.

[Peter Duniho]

"Ron Natalie" > wrote in message
m...
> Once you get through that gate, you are able to drive into movement areas
> so you should be watching for aircraft anyhow.

Ahh...well, then yes...I agree that not only should a stop sign suffice, it
surely would as well. We have similar intersections around Paine Field
(KPAE) and they work just fine. I suspect they are not all that rare at the
larger airports.

Pete