The battle for Arlington Airport begins?

[Paul Adriance]

On one side of the ring: Arlington Municipal and it's associated
community:..For those of you unfamiliar with Arlington Municipal Airport in
Washington state, it is home of the third largest fly-in in the country (run
by the EAA) and the center of general aviation and experimental aircraft in
the state of Washington and, arguably, the Pacific Northwest.

On the other side of the ring: Nascar, International Speedway Corp, and
associated county, state and city political leaders. They are seeking to
install a large 30,000+ seat racetrack within 45 minutes of the Seattle
area. Snohomish county and the two adjacent cities near the airport are
recommending 3 sites, all roughly within 2 miles of the airport. There are
only 2 or 3 counties which meet the base location criteria, so our local
locations don't have a lot of competition.

The associated TFRs that come part and parcel with such a facility would
shut down Arlington for any motor sports event and probably for any other
use due to seating capacity. You can be sure "other" events will be
frequent so ISC can recoup their investment in the facility. I don't have
data to back any of this up right now, but during the intial salvos of this
conflict at an airport commision meeting tonight, someone mentioned an
airport in the Arizona area that is shut down almost 200 days a year due to
a large venue near it. Even IFR traffic is at the whim of the operating
agency which can choose to disallow overflight. Nascar and the ISC probably
will not find much concern over any of this as their pilots and aircraft get
waivers for any of their events while we would be stuck watching them fly
from the ground.

We all know the FAA has no authority over the airpsace anymore, TSA and
Homeland security run the show and don't answer to anyone. Should another
terrorist event occur, related to GA or otherwise, all bets are off on what
would happen around such facilities. They make the rules as they go and
once the facility is present, it is there to stay with any associated
restrictions, current or yet to exist.

The city and county can't be expected to support the airport, the new
track is a political feather in their cap and money in the government
coffers. Unfortunately, I can't say I don't see their side of the equation
either. It's just too bad they can't site it elsewhere. My hope is that
this fight becomes an exception to the sad disintegration of GA like those
poor airports on the east coast and Megis.

AOPA and the EAA are supposedly working the problem, but I must say this
first public forum has left me with a very sour feeling in my stomach. My
hope is that others read this and look at the issue and maybe someday,
somewhere, someone who has real influence over these decisions will realize
the load they are being fed by the cities and county and that they really
DON'T have the local public support for such a facility and the crippling
impact it would have on our airport. I believe Nascar said they would not
site a facility where it is not wanted during deliberations with the state
legislature. It remains to be seen if that is truly the case and whether
they meant it was wanted by the local populace or by the local government.

If nothing else, wish us luck, we're going to need it...

Paul Adriance

[Jay Beckman]

Paul,

In terms of mixed emotions (for me...) this may just be the ultimate case of
"My Mother In Law just went over a cliff in my new Porsche..."

I'm a freelance Sports TV Technician AND a very, very new student pilot
(4.5Hrs)

I happen to be a member of the NASCAR on FOX TV Crew. Moreover, I'm also a
resident of the metro Phoenix area and I often work at the sports venues
here as well.

Please allow me to ask some questions of both you and the group.


"Paul Adriance" > wrote in message
hlink.net...
> On one side of the ring: Arlington Municipal and it's associated
> community:..For those of you unfamiliar with Arlington Municipal Airport
in
> Washington state, it is home of the third largest fly-in in the country
(run
> by the EAA) and the center of general aviation and experimental aircraft
in
> the state of Washington and, arguably, the Pacific Northwest.
>
> On the other side of the ring: Nascar, International Speedway Corp,
and
> associated county, state and city political leaders. They are seeking to
> install a large 30,000+ seat racetrack within 45 minutes of the Seattle
> area. Snohomish county and the two adjacent cities near the airport are
> recommending 3 sites, all roughly within 2 miles of the airport. There
are
> only 2 or 3 counties which meet the base location criteria, so our local
> locations don't have a lot of competition.
>
> The associated TFRs that come part and parcel with such a facility would
> shut down Arlington for any motor sports event and probably for any other
> use due to seating capacity.

Is a capacity of 30,000+ the key to the creation of a TFR? A Nextel Cup
worthy racetrack would be more along the lines of 130,000+ in terms of
capacity.

Of how large a diameter would such a TFR be?

I ask this because (at least as far as commercial air traffic goes) the
sports arenas/stadiums near KPHX (Sky Harbor) seem to be fair game for
flying right past.
Sun Devil Stadium in Tempe (home to the pathetic NFL Cardinals) is just
barely south of the extended centerline to the east of Sky Harbor Airport
and both the baseball stadium and the basketball arena are just north of the
extended centerline to the west. If there are TFRs over these locations,
they don't seem to have much of an effect on aviation. At least not
commercial aviation, but some say that Sky Harbor is a very GA UN-friendly
airport to begin with so it may be a moot point as regards GA.

In fact, we often look for America West a/c flying past the open roof of
Bank One Ballpark (BOB) in order to superimpose AmWest sponsorship messages
as they fly by. We also look forward to the nightly British Airways 777
that roars right over us on their non-stop to Heathrow.

Are commercial carriers exempt from TFRs around sporting events?

Or are only certain events (of national significance) subject to TFRs
(Superbowls, NASCAR Races, World Series, College Bowl Games, etc...)

>
>You can be sure "other" events will be frequent so ISC can recoup their
investment >in the facility. I don't have data to back any of this up right
now, but during the intial >salvos of this conflict at an airport commision
meeting tonight, someone mentioned >an airport in the Arizona area that is
shut down almost 200 days a year due to a >large venue near it.

Seriously? I'm not aware of where that would be. Like I said, flights into
and out of Sky Harbor pass right next to over 130,000 potenital sporting
event attendees and I've never noticed a reduction in traffic when a game is
in progress at any of them.

>
> Even IFR traffic is at the whim of the operating agency which can choose
to >disallow overflight. Nascar and the ISC probably will not find much
concern over >any of this as their pilots and aircraft get waivers for any
of their events while we >would be stuck watching them fly from the ground.
>

They probably will want to attract "touring" series to race on Friday and/or
Saturday nights. They'd be lucky to draw much of a crowd for these races
however. Do there have to be 30,000+ live bodies actually at the event to
warrant a TFR? A NASCAR Nextel Cup weekend is only four days (when the
track is actually "hot" and being used.) Touring series race nights are
usually one and done.

FWIW, GA certainly has a friend in race team owner/P51 pilot Jack Roush (he
of the ultralight accident and subsequent miraculous rescue/recovery
fame...) Driver Rusty Wallace is also a pilot as is Dale Jarrett ...
perhaps a letter writing campaign to these and other Owner/Driver-Pilots
might get a positive response?

>
>We all know the FAA has no authority over the airpsace anymore, TSA and
>Homeland security run the show and don't answer to anyone. Should another
> terrorist event occur, related to GA or otherwise, all bets are off on
what would >happen around such facilities. They make the rules as they go
and
> once the facility is present, it is there to stay with any associated
restrictions, current >or yet to exist.
>
>The city and county can't be expected to support the airport, the new track
is a >political feather in their cap and money in the government
>coffers. Unfortunately, I can't say I don't see their side of the
equation either. It's >just too bad they can't site it elsewhere. My
hope is that
>this fight becomes an exception to the sad disintegration of GA like those
poor >airports on the east coast and Megis.
>
> AOPA and the EAA are supposedly working the problem, but I must say this
first >public forum has left me with a very sour feeling in my stomach. My
> hope is that others read this and look at the issue and maybe someday,
>somewhere, someone who has real influence over these decisions will realize
> the load they are being fed by the cities and county and that they really
DON'T >have the local public support for such a facility and the crippling
> impact it would have on our airport.
>

I'm afraid you are facing the 400Lb Gorilla of sports series. The amount of
revenue generated by a NASCAR weekend is mind boggling and I'm sure all
those dollar signs can have a blinding effect.

>
>I believe Nascar said they would not site a facility where it is not wanted
during >deliberations with the state legislature. It remains to be seen if
that is truly the case >and whether they meant it was wanted by the local
populace or by the local >government.
>

I don't know how much support you could garner, but I hope you can find a
way to let the poloticians know that (at least among their constiuents who
fly...) voting for the track will be the loss of said constituency.

>
> If nothing else, wish us luck, we're going to need it...
>
> Paul Adriance
>
>

Regards,

Jay Beckman
Student Pilot - KCHD
Freelance Sports TV Technician
NASCAR on FOX/NBC
NFL on FOX
Arizona DiamondBacks Home Broadcast Crew

[Jay Beckman]

"Jay Beckman" > wrote in message
news:7QB3c.4372$Nj.3268@fed1read01...

Geez...

Sorry about the sloppy quoting ... Damn Outlook...

Jay

[Continental Bill]

"Paul Adriance" > wrote in message .net>...
> On one side of the ring: Arlington Municipal and it's associated
> community:..
>
> If nothing else, wish us luck, we're going to need it...
>
> Paul Adriance

Good luck to you.

At the end of the day it's all about tax base guys. If their numbers
are going to be bigger than yours, you lose.

Anyone who says different is fooling themselves.

Bill O200

[C J Campbell]

You know, maybe you should check a few things out before panicking. NASCAR
likes airports and they like having their tracks close to an airport.

Yes, there is the stadium TFR, but those TFRs allow traffic that are landing
or departing from an airport. Boeing Field does not close when there is a
game in Seattle. Neither does Daytona close during the race there.

I think it would be better to check out what the actual effect of any TFRs
would be before going into a tizzy on this one. The track might just be one
of the best things that ever happened to Arlington.

Have you talked to the FSDO and AOPA what the effect of the track would be?

[Cy Galley]

Commercial scheduled are exempt to many TFRs

"C J Campbell" > wrote in message
...
> You know, maybe you should check a few things out before panicking. NASCAR
> likes airports and they like having their tracks close to an airport.
>
> Yes, there is the stadium TFR, but those TFRs allow traffic that are
landing
> or departing from an airport. Boeing Field does not close when there is a
> game in Seattle. Neither does Daytona close during the race there.
>
> I think it would be better to check out what the actual effect of any TFRs
> would be before going into a tizzy on this one. The track might just be
one
> of the best things that ever happened to Arlington.
>
> Have you talked to the FSDO and AOPA what the effect of the track would
be?
>
>

[Paul Adriance]

Hi Jay, here are some responses to your comments, thanks for taking your
time to read and post.

> Is a capacity of 30,000+ the key to the creation of a TFR? A Nextel Cup
> worthy racetrack would be more along the lines of 130,000+ in terms of
> capacity. Of how large a diameter would such a TFR be?

For starters, let me say I am not opposed to the track, it could be a
wonderful thing for us here. It just needs to be farther from the airport
and that isn't as convenient or cheap. The TFR over such events is 3 miles
and 3000ft to the surface, based on seating capacity and not actual
attendance, and all of these sites are 2 miles or less from the airport.

Arlington is an uncontrolled airport and probably 30% or more of all
operations there are ultralights, gliders and fixed wing/gyros with no
engine driven electrical and thus no radios or transponders. Many of these
are vintage aircraft lovingly restored to near perfect condition by their
owners.

Commercial aircaft under ATC control are exempt from TFR restrictions except
in cases where the agency controlling the TFR protected facility denies
overflight permission. Arlington is first and foremost a GA airport, there
is NO tower, and if there were, all the gliders, ultralights, and non
electrical vintage aircraft would be grounded, probably a crippling blow to
aviation in this area.

> I ask this because (at least as far as commercial air traffic goes) the
> sports arenas/stadiums near KPHX (Sky Harbor) seem to be fair game for
> flying right past.
> Sun Devil Stadium in Tempe (home to the pathetic NFL Cardinals) is just
> barely south of the extended centerline to the east of Sky Harbor Airport
> and both the baseball stadium and the basketball arena are just north of
the
> extended centerline to the west. If there are TFRs over these locations,
> they don't seem to have much of an effect on aviation. At least not
> commercial aviation, but some say that Sky Harbor is a very GA UN-friendly
> airport to begin with so it may be a moot point as regards GA.

That is the very crux of the issue, even if we are allowed to operate GA at
the airport with a track less than 2 miles away, what happens after another
orange terrorist alert or even small scale GA scare? Once the Track is in
place next to the airport we are at the every whim and fancy of Homeland
Security and the TSA, who answer to no one but the President as far as I can
tell.

Your friends at Nascar and the ISC all have free waivers, so any GA looking
traffic you do see, IFR or otherwise during, before, and after events is
probably owners, drivers, families, and associated crew coming into and
leaving the venue. The Arlington airport is great for these folks but, we
have to stand on the ground and watch them use OUR airport as a convenient
commuting option.

Again, aircraft you see at Sky KPHX is most likely commercial and under ATC
control. It is the same situation here in Seattle with KSEA, Boeing Field
and our 2 sports stadiums.

> In fact, we often look for America West a/c flying past the open roof of
> Bank One Ballpark (BOB) in order to superimpose AmWest sponsorship
messages
> as they fly by. We also look forward to the nightly British Airways 777
> that roars right over us on their non-stop to Heathrow.
>
> Are commercial carriers exempt from TFRs around sporting events?
> Or are only certain events (of national significance) subject to TFRs
> (Superbowls, NASCAR Races, World Series, College Bowl Games, etc...)

Any major event would probably shut down the airport because of the seating
capacity, not actual attendance. Again, Arlington doesn't have any
commercial carriers that I'm aware of, it's all GA and a large portion
operate w/out radios or transponders. Imagine what would happen when all
the business jets come in and helicopters start buzzing around during race
days? Especially considering the weather here is only suitable for events
3 months out of the year.

> >You can be sure "other" events will be frequent so ISC can recoup their
> investment >in the facility. I don't have data to back any of this up
right
> now, but during the intial >salvos of this conflict at an airport
commision
> meeting tonight, someone mentioned >an airport in the Arizona area that is
> shut down almost 200 days a year due to a >large venue near it.
>
> Seriously? I'm not aware of where that would be. Like I said, flights
into
> and out of Sky Harbor pass right next to over 130,000 potenital sporting
> event attendees and I've never noticed a reduction in traffic when a game
is
> in progress at any of them.

Again, that is probably commercial commercial traffic you see, that and
traffic in and out of the race for drivers, families, etc... Arlington is
a whole different situation as a non-towered airport populated by 90% GA
aircraft.

> They probably will want to attract "touring" series to race on Friday
and/or
> Saturday nights. They'd be lucky to draw much of a crowd for these races
> however. Do there have to be 30,000+ live bodies actually at the event to
> warrant a TFR? A NASCAR Nextel Cup weekend is only four days (when the
> track is actually "hot" and being used.) Touring series race nights are
> usually one and done.

No, it is seating capacity driven and event based. Practice days and other
associated days of a race are usually included, so it can mean several days
of closure for one event. But other major outdoor events are also highly
likely to generate TFRs as well.

>
> FWIW, GA certainly has a friend in race team owner/P51 pilot Jack Roush
(he
> of the ultralight accident and subsequent miraculous rescue/recovery
> fame...) Driver Rusty Wallace is also a pilot as is Dale Jarrett ...
> perhaps a letter writing campaign to these and other Owner/Driver-Pilots
> might get a positive response?

If you have contact information or other methods of passing along input to
Rusty and other guys would might be supportive of us, please pass it along.
My email is padriance(remove this . I will forward it
to an alliance of pilots that is forming to urge the city to move the sites
at least 3 miles from the airport.

> I'm afraid you are facing the 400Lb Gorilla of sports series. The amount
of
> revenue generated by a NASCAR weekend is mind boggling and I'm sure all
> those dollar signs can have a blinding effect.

Let me reiterate; a lot of us are fans ourselves, and we would love to have
a nearby NASCAR facility for major events but, we're pilots first and this
is our only home here. Hopefully, arrangments can be made to move the
facility just a mile or 2 farther and allow the airport and NASCAR/ISC to
operate and coexist together.

> I don't know how much support you could garner, but I hope you can find a
> way to let the poloticians know that (at least among their constiuents who
> fly...) voting for the track will be the loss of said constituency.

This is actually the largest problem, our local officials ARE blinded by
dollars, they see the airport TFR issue as a problem to chip away at, not as
a reason to reconsider siteing the facility there. They know where they
want it, and probably when they send their reports to the ISC it will not
mention the airport commision opposing it or the full city meeting halls
with homeowners, pilots, and neighboring businesses that don't want to see
the facility near the airport. It will probably mention some "concerns over
possible impact to the airport" but that NASCAR, ISC, and associated groups
have TFR waivers anyway, so to them it's not an issue.

Thanks again for responding Jay, it's a pleasure to hear that we have
possible aviation allies to help us here. I hope to hear back from you,

Paul Adriance

[Paul Adriance]

> You know, maybe you should check a few things out before panicking. NASCAR
> likes airports and they like having their tracks close to an airport.

They like them because the TFR is a non issue for them, they are excempt.

> Yes, there is the stadium TFR, but those TFRs allow traffic that are
landing
> or departing from an airport. Boeing Field does not close when there is a
> game in Seattle. Neither does Daytona close during the race there.

To commercial traffic under ATC control, Arlington doesn't even have a
tower, and only has a localizer IFR approach. 90% of our traffic is GA and
there are no regularly scheduled air transport operations that I'm aware of.

> I think it would be better to check out what the actual effect of any TFRs
> would be before going into a tizzy on this one. The track might just be
one
> of the best things that ever happened to Arlington.
>
> Have you talked to the FSDO and AOPA what the effect of the track would
be?

AOPA is already looking into it. The FSDO is irrelevant because it's TSA,
DoD, and Homeland Security who own the airspace now, the FAA is just another
puppet.


Paul

[John Galban]

"Paul Adriance" > wrote in message .net>...
> I don't have
> data to back any of this up right now, but during the intial salvos of this
> conflict at an airport commision meeting tonight, someone mentioned an
> airport in the Arizona area that is shut down almost 200 days a year due to
> a large venue near it.

I live in Phoenix and this would be news to me. I don't know of any
large sports venue in AZ that even operates 200 days a year.
Currently, the TFRs over sporting events exclude aircraft taking off
and landing at nearby airports under ATC control.

John Galban=====>N4BQ (PA28-180)

[Paul Adriance]

> I live in Phoenix and this would be news to me. I don't know of any
> large sports venue in AZ that even operates 200 days a year.
> Currently, the TFRs over sporting events exclude aircraft taking off
> and landing at nearby airports under ATC control.
>
> John Galban=====>N4BQ (PA28-180)

That comment is heresay and word of of mouth, so I won't attempt to support
it and would point out I mentioned the context in which it was presented.
However, even if it's only a few weeks or months out of the year, do you
think we should consider that an acceptable compromise? It is a
non-towered airport focused almost entirely on GA operations, there is
nobody who flies here that would benefit from ATC exemptions. I would also
mention that ISC affiliated individuals, NASCAR officials, drivers, their
families and associates are given automatic TFR exemptions and thus have no
vested interest in preserving our rights to the airfield.

The TSA, DoD, and Homeland Security operate in a world without
limitations. Under the auspices of national security, they can do pretty
much whatever they want. Why should we not fight a facility that gives
them an excuse to further restrict airspace and our airport operations in
the future? Sighting a major sporting venue within 2 miles of a major
uncontrolled airport is really just adding insult to injury to anybody who
relies on it for their livelihood and as a center for experimental,
non-electrical system, and unpowered aircraft.

The alliance forming to protect the field is not opposed to the track or
NASCAR moving into the county, they just need to spend a little more money
and put it another mile or 2 away from the airport. I'm afraid, however,
that our local officials will not be representing our interests.

Paul

[Jay Beckman]

"Paul Adriance" > wrote in message
link.net...
> Hi Jay, here are some responses to your comments, thanks for taking your
> time to read and post.
>

Paul,

Thank YOU for taking the time to help the newbie-pilot side of me better
understand the impact on GA that the current TSA/DoD/HS mindset is having.

Pile on the NASCAR / ISC issue and your specific plight becomes much more
clear.

>
> Thanks again for responding Jay, it's a pleasure to hear that we have
> possible aviation allies to help us here. I hope to hear back from you,
>

Please bear in mind that I am mearly a "worker bee" and low on the totem
pole, but perhaps I can find a way to pass along your message via the
friend, of a friend, of a friend pipeline.

I can't make any promises but if I get anything accomplished I will let you
know via this forum.

Kindest Regards,

Jay Beckman
Student Pilot - KCHD
4.5 Hrs ... Nowhere to go but up!

[John Galban]

"Paul Adriance" > wrote in message .net>...
> I don't have
> data to back any of this up right now, but during the intial salvos of this
> conflict at an airport commision meeting tonight, someone mentioned an
> airport in the Arizona area that is shut down almost 200 days a year due to
> a large venue near it.

I live in Phoenix and this would be news to me. I don't know of any
large sports venue in AZ that even operates 200 days a year.
Currently, the TFRs over sporting events exclude aircraft taking off
and landing at nearby airports under ATC control.

John Galban=====>N4BQ (PA28-180)

[Dude]

Here is what I want to know: When NASCAR once again becomes a poorly
attended sport that is no longer in fashion, what are they going to do with
the facility? There are still tracks lying around from old race
organizations that are not exactly making money, and some of the ones that
are making money now were eyesores from the seventies to eighties that no
one wanted to own land near.

Maybe you should try to dig up some people that were around when having a
race track nearby was a bad thing. They could support your position.

When your losing, always spread FUD - Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt

[Jay Beckman]

"Dude" > wrote in message
...
> Here is what I want to know: When NASCAR once again becomes a poorly
> attended sport that is no longer in fashion, what are they going to do
with
> the facility? There are still tracks lying around from old race
> organizations that are not exactly making money, and some of the ones that
> are making money now were eyesores from the seventies to eighties that no
> one wanted to own land near.
>
> Maybe you should try to dig up some people that were around when having a
> race track nearby was a bad thing. They could support your position.
>
> When your losing, always spread FUD - Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt
>
>

Dude,

Specifically which tracks?

IMO, there are tracks that are no longer used by the series that originally
made them famous but it's primarilly because they chose to not keep up with
safety and facilities.

There probably are as many (or more) airports which have closed for the same
reasons (as well as developmental encroachment, ignorant neighbors and
myopic politicians (there, back OT...))

Do a little Google-ing on the flap between NASCAR and the Texas Motor
Speedway or any of the other (probably half dozen or so...) tracks that want
a NASCAR date.

NASCAR isn't going away any time soon.

But, unfortunately, that doesn't mean anything to our pilot friends in the
NW.

Jay

[C J Campbell]

"Paul Adriance" > wrote in message
link.net...
> > You know, maybe you should check a few things out before panicking.
NASCAR
> > likes airports and they like having their tracks close to an airport.
>
> They like them because the TFR is a non issue for them, they are excempt.
>
> > Yes, there is the stadium TFR, but those TFRs allow traffic that are
> landing
> > or departing from an airport. Boeing Field does not close when there is
a
> > game in Seattle. Neither does Daytona close during the race there.
>
> To commercial traffic under ATC control, Arlington doesn't even have a
> tower, and only has a localizer IFR approach. 90% of our traffic is GA
and
> there are no regularly scheduled air transport operations that I'm aware
of.
>

During games Boeing Field is open to all traffic, not just commercial
traffic. The general stadium TFR notam does not specify commercial traffic,
nor does it specify that aircraft arriving at or departing from an airport
has to be under ATC control. All it says is that traffic has to be arriving
at or departing from the airport in order to go through the TFR. There are
no other requirements -- no flight plan, no ATC control, no commercial
requirement, nothing.

I am curious who told you otherwise.

[Paul Adriance]

> nor does it specify that aircraft arriving at or departing from an airport
> has to be under ATC control. All it says is that traffic has to be
arriving
> at or departing from the airport in order to go through the TFR. There are
> no other requirements -- no flight plan, no ATC control, no commercial
> requirement, nothing.

I have truncated the first portion of a stadium notam below for your
benefit, but I have left the second section intact. In that section I see
an exemption for aircraft authorized by ATC using standard procedures but,
nowhere do I see anything about operations at an uncontrolled airport or
without ATC authorization.

This is the TSA and Homeland Security we're talking about, there is no
quarter given and even something in writing is meaningless... They have
ultimate power under the auspices of national security; any gurantee from
them only illustrates the naivete of the recipient.

If the stadium is allowed to exist without a fight, we have no recourse in
the future.

I've heard several stories on what goes on at Boeing Field, but that is
irrelevant, once the stadium exists we are at the mercy of "national
security", a pandoras box that can never be closed.

Paul

SPECIAL NOTICE....ONE HOUR BEFORE THE SCHEDULED TIME OF THE EVENT UNTIL
ONE HOUR AFTER THE END OF THE EVENT, ALL AIRCRAFT AND PARACHUTE OPERATIONS
ARE PROHIBITED AT AND BELOW 3,000 FEET AGL WITHIN A THREE NAUTICAL MILE
RADIUS OF ANY STADIUM HAVING A SEATING CAPACITY OF 30,000 OR MORE
PEOPLE....MAJOR MOTOR SPEEDWAY EVENT IS OCCURING....


SPECIAL NOTICE. (B FOR BROADCAST COVERAGE FOR ANY BROADCAST RIGHTS HOLDER,
(C FOR SAFETY AND SECURITY PURPOSES OF THE EVENT, STADIUM, OR OTHER VENUE.
THIS RESTRICTION DOES NOT APPLY TO; (A THOSE AIRCRAFT AUTHORIZED BY ATC FOR
OPERATIONAL OR SAFETY PURPOSES INCLUDING AIRCRAFT ARRIVING OR DEPARTING FROM
AN AIRPORT USING STANDARD AIR TRAFFIC PROCEDURES; (B DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE,
LAW ENFORCEMENT, OR AEROMEDICAL FLIGHT OPERATIONS THAT ARE IN CONTACT WITH
ATC. STADIUM SITE LOCATIONS AND INFORMATION REGARDING WAIVER APPLICATIONS IN
ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 352 OF PUBLIC LAW 108-7 CAN BE OBTAINED FROM THE FAA
WEBSITE AT HTTP://WWW.FAA.GOV/ATS/ATA/WAIVER OR BY CALLING 571-227-1322. END
PART 2 OF 2 06 MAR 11:00 UNTIL UFN

[Jerry Springer]

C J Campbell wrote:
> "Paul Adriance" > wrote in message
> link.net...
>
>>>You know, maybe you should check a few things out before panicking.
>
> NASCAR
>
>>>likes airports and they like having their tracks close to an airport.
>>
>>They like them because the TFR is a non issue for them, they are excempt.
>>
>>
>>>Yes, there is the stadium TFR, but those TFRs allow traffic that are
>>
>>landing
>>
>>>or departing from an airport. Boeing Field does not close when there is
>
> a
>
>>>game in Seattle. Neither does Daytona close during the race there.
>>
>>To commercial traffic under ATC control, Arlington doesn't even have a
>>tower, and only has a localizer IFR approach. 90% of our traffic is GA
>
> and
>
>>there are no regularly scheduled air transport operations that I'm aware
>
> of.
>
>
> During games Boeing Field is open to all traffic, not just commercial
> traffic. The general stadium TFR notam does not specify commercial traffic,
> nor does it specify that aircraft arriving at or departing from an airport
> has to be under ATC control. All it says is that traffic has to be arriving
> at or departing from the airport in order to go through the TFR. There are
> no other requirements -- no flight plan, no ATC control, no commercial
> requirement, nothing.
>
> I am curious who told you otherwise.
>
>
It is going to work really great if they have a event scheduled at the same time
as the Arlington EAA flyin. This could be the end of one of the best flyins in
the country.

Jerry

[C J Campbell]

"Paul Adriance" > wrote in message
nk.net...

>
> This is the TSA and Homeland Security we're talking about, there is no
> quarter given and even something in writing is meaningless...

Well, I guess we all just should quit flying then. It is hopeless. All the
rules are meaningless. Even if the stadium is never built TSA will put a TFR
there because the stadium might have gone there.... We are doomed. Accept
it.

You know what I think? I think you sound like the same people who are trying
to close airports. At Tacoma Narrows, for example, people have been opposing
a much needed safety overrun for nearly 20 years, because they are convinced
that we are going to have 747s landing there every five minutes if it is
installed. Sound ridiculous? Well so does a lot of the exaggeration and
hysteria about this track.

All I am saying is, keep cool. Get the facts. Don't let panic and rumor
decide your actions for you. So far you have not found even one uncontrolled
airport that is closed by stadium TFRs. Let me know when you do find one.

[Dude]

I will have to depend on others to name the tracks, as there were none in my
neck of the woods. I believe the nineties real estate boom resulted in many
of the old unused tracks being torn up. after years of little or no use. I
could even be mistaken, but it seems that the race fanse were on tv whining
about the loss of many of the old tracks not long ago. Were they pulled up
in spite of making lots of moey for their areas? Doubt it.

There is definitely an upsurge in racing popularity, but don't be like a
government jackass and expect the trend not to change. NASCAR could be all
over with a few scandals, a gas shortage, or when people wise up and want to
watch cars turn in two directions. It wouldn't go away, but attendance
could drop drastically. NASCAR IS IN VOGUE. Fashions change.

Personally, I like watching the American LeMans if I am otherwise bored. I
am not against racing. I just recoil when the sports people get involved
with the politician people. They are always stealing together.

Another thing people in the neighborhood may be concerned about is the
noise. Those races are noisier than the noisiest airport, and not all the
races bring in lots of cash. The sheep won't like it, the gentleman farmers
won't like it, etc. Long term, its not that great a deal, but the
politicians live in the short term, and need resume stuffers.

The best thing I can say about a race track is that you can bulldoze it to
build an airport by buying a single piece of property. Then you can use it
for something useful.



"Jay Beckman" > wrote in message
news:ihT3c.4563$Nj.2885@fed1read01...
> "Dude" > wrote in message
> ...
> > Here is what I want to know: When NASCAR once again becomes a poorly
> > attended sport that is no longer in fashion, what are they going to do
> with
> > the facility? There are still tracks lying around from old race
> > organizations that are not exactly making money, and some of the ones
that
> > are making money now were eyesores from the seventies to eighties that
no
> > one wanted to own land near.
> >
> > Maybe you should try to dig up some people that were around when having
a
> > race track nearby was a bad thing. They could support your position.
> >
> > When your losing, always spread FUD - Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt
> >
> >
>
> Dude,
>
> Specifically which tracks?
>
> IMO, there are tracks that are no longer used by the series that
originally
> made them famous but it's primarilly because they chose to not keep up
with
> safety and facilities.
>
> There probably are as many (or more) airports which have closed for the
same
> reasons (as well as developmental encroachment, ignorant neighbors and
> myopic politicians (there, back OT...))
>
> Do a little Google-ing on the flap between NASCAR and the Texas Motor
> Speedway or any of the other (probably half dozen or so...) tracks that
want
> a NASCAR date.
>
> NASCAR isn't going away any time soon.
>
> But, unfortunately, that doesn't mean anything to our pilot friends in the
> NW.
>
> Jay
>
>

[Russell Kent]

Paul Adriance copied a fragment of a TFR NOTAM:

> THIS RESTRICTION DOES NOT APPLY TO; (A THOSE AIRCRAFT AUTHORIZED BY ATC FOR
> OPERATIONAL OR SAFETY PURPOSES INCLUDING AIRCRAFT ARRIVING OR DEPARTING FROM
> AN AIRPORT USING STANDARD AIR TRAFFIC PROCEDURES;

Umm, if the "standard air traffic procedure" for landing or taking off at your
airport is to self-announce on CTAF and "see & avoid", then can't you continue
to do so?

Russell Kent

[Paul Adriance]

"Those aircraft authorized by ATC for operational purposes...including
aircraft arriving or departing". It says nothing about CTAF or see and
avoid VFR. The sentance links ATC to aircraft arriving or departing as
far as I can tell, but as another poster mentioned, maybe there is a
precedent. Either way, precedents change, and that is our concern.

Paul

"Russell Kent" > wrote in message
...
> Paul Adriance copied a fragment of a TFR NOTAM:
>
> > THIS RESTRICTION DOES NOT APPLY TO; (A THOSE AIRCRAFT AUTHORIZED BY ATC
FOR
> > OPERATIONAL OR SAFETY PURPOSES INCLUDING AIRCRAFT ARRIVING OR DEPARTING
FROM
> > AN AIRPORT USING STANDARD AIR TRAFFIC PROCEDURES;
>
> Umm, if the "standard air traffic procedure" for landing or taking off at
your
> airport is to self-announce on CTAF and "see & avoid", then can't you
continue
> to do so?
>
> Russell Kent
>

[Paul Adriance]

"C J Campbell" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Paul Adriance" > wrote in message
> nk.net...
>
> >
> > This is the TSA and Homeland Security we're talking about, there is no
> > quarter given and even something in writing is meaningless...
>
> Well, I guess we all just should quit flying then. It is hopeless. All the
> rules are meaningless. Even if the stadium is never built TSA will put a
TFR
> there because the stadium might have gone there.... We are doomed. Accept
> it.

That is not the case, our concern is only that the stadium is moved farther
away from the airport so the conflict never occurs. We are not doomed, we
are taking a proactive stance to say this is about our right to use w/out
interruption a pre-existing popular general aviation airport.

> You know what I think? I think you sound like the same people who are
trying
> to close airports. At Tacoma Narrows, for example, people have been
opposing
> a much needed safety overrun for nearly 20 years, because they are
convinced
> that we are going to have 747s landing there every five minutes if it is
> installed. Sound ridiculous? Well so does a lot of the exaggeration and
> hysteria about this track.

This has nothing to do with safety changes at the airport. I doubt they
will put in a tower just because they build a stadium, there isn't enough
traffic and there certainly isn't enough money. Just look at the changes
to the movement areas at Renton due to stretched controllers.

> All I am saying is, keep cool. Get the facts. Don't let panic and rumor
> decide your actions for you. So far you have not found even one
uncontrolled
> airport that is closed by stadium TFRs. Let me know when you do find one.

I agree, however, we don't want to be the first. As far as I know, no
uncontrolled airport exists next to a motor speedway. The two airports in
close proximity to speedways are both larger towered commercial facilities
where traffic operates under ATC. This is not about a fight against a
stadium here, we are supportive of a speedway for the county and would like
to see the benefits such a facility would provide. What we are doing is
urging the local leaders and anyone else who will listen that an
uncontrolled general aviation airport is incompatible with a stadium of this
size in close proximity.

Paul

[Mike Weller]

On Thu, 11 Mar 2004 15:07:49 GMT, "Dude" > wrote:

<\ NASCAR IS IN VOGUE. Fashions change.\

DamYankee! I get the feeling that you would prefer us rednecks to
head up to Gay Head and watch yachts racing.


MW

[Dude]

"Mike Weller" > wrote in message
s.com...
> On Thu, 11 Mar 2004 15:07:49 GMT, "Dude" > wrote:
>
> <\ NASCAR IS IN VOGUE. Fashions change.\
>
> DamYankee! I get the feeling that you would prefer us rednecks to
> head up to Gay Head and watch yachts racing.
>
>
> MW
>
>

I will have you know that I live South of I-10, so watch who you are calling
yankee you son of a carpet bagger! Lee may have surrendered...

:)

I will admit that stock cars have always been popular in the south. But
around the rest of the country its a different story. This fellow we are
talk'n with is up in Washington state (that's a LONG way from Virginia, but
it does have less bureaucrats).

[Mike Rapoport]

Seems like an awefully small speedway.

Mike
MU-2

"Paul Adriance" > wrote in message
hlink.net...
> On one side of the ring: Arlington Municipal and it's associated
> community:..For those of you unfamiliar with Arlington Municipal Airport
in
> Washington state, it is home of the third largest fly-in in the country
(run
> by the EAA) and the center of general aviation and experimental aircraft
in
> the state of Washington and, arguably, the Pacific Northwest.
>
> On the other side of the ring: Nascar, International Speedway Corp,
and
> associated county, state and city political leaders. They are seeking to
> install a large 30,000+ seat racetrack within 45 minutes of the Seattle
> area. Snohomish county and the two adjacent cities near the airport are
> recommending 3 sites, all roughly within 2 miles of the airport. There
are
> only 2 or 3 counties which meet the base location criteria, so our local
> locations don't have a lot of competition.
>
> The associated TFRs that come part and parcel with such a facility
would
> shut down Arlington for any motor sports event and probably for any other
> use due to seating capacity. You can be sure "other" events will be
> frequent so ISC can recoup their investment in the facility. I don't have
> data to back any of this up right now, but during the intial salvos of
this
> conflict at an airport commision meeting tonight, someone mentioned an
> airport in the Arizona area that is shut down almost 200 days a year due
to
> a large venue near it. Even IFR traffic is at the whim of the operating
> agency which can choose to disallow overflight. Nascar and the ISC
probably
> will not find much concern over any of this as their pilots and aircraft
get
> waivers for any of their events while we would be stuck watching them fly
> from the ground.
>
> We all know the FAA has no authority over the airpsace anymore, TSA
and
> Homeland security run the show and don't answer to anyone. Should
another
> terrorist event occur, related to GA or otherwise, all bets are off on
what
> would happen around such facilities. They make the rules as they go and
> once the facility is present, it is there to stay with any associated
> restrictions, current or yet to exist.
>
> The city and county can't be expected to support the airport, the new
> track is a political feather in their cap and money in the government
> coffers. Unfortunately, I can't say I don't see their side of the
equation
> either. It's just too bad they can't site it elsewhere. My hope is
that
> this fight becomes an exception to the sad disintegration of GA like those
> poor airports on the east coast and Megis.
>
> AOPA and the EAA are supposedly working the problem, but I must say
this
> first public forum has left me with a very sour feeling in my stomach.
My
> hope is that others read this and look at the issue and maybe someday,
> somewhere, someone who has real influence over these decisions will
realize
> the load they are being fed by the cities and county and that they really
> DON'T have the local public support for such a facility and the crippling
> impact it would have on our airport. I believe Nascar said they would
not
> site a facility where it is not wanted during deliberations with the state
> legislature. It remains to be seen if that is truly the case and whether
> they meant it was wanted by the local populace or by the local government.
>
> If nothing else, wish us luck, we're going to need it...
>
> Paul Adriance
>
>

[Paul Adriance]

It will probably be much larger, but it is for sure over 30,000, the magic
number for the TFRs.

Paul

"Mike Rapoport" > wrote in message
ink.net...
> Seems like an awefully small speedway.
>
> Mike
> MU-2
>

[Ron Wanttaja]

On Sun, 14 Mar 2004 11:56:42 GMT, "Paul Adriance"
> wrote:

>"Mike Rapoport" > wrote in message
ink.net...
>>
>> Seems like an awefully small speedway.
>
>It will probably be much larger, but it is for sure over 30,000, the magic
>number for the TFRs.

Report on the news last night said 80,000. Several other Puget Sound
locations are vying for the track.

I know next to nothing about routine activity at NASCAR tracks like they're
talking about building. Do they have races at any given track weekly, or
biweekly, or....? How long is the nominal "season" (three months, six
months, etc.)?

Finally, and probably most important from the PNW perspective, how are the
races affected by rain? Moisture-intolerant outdoor activities have a poor
history, in the Seattle area. You can put a go-kart track indoors, but I
suspect that's tough to do with NASCAR....

Ron Wanttaja

[Paul Adriance]

> Report on the news last night said 80,000. Several other Puget Sound
> locations are vying for the track.
>
> I know next to nothing about routine activity at NASCAR tracks like
they're
> talking about building. Do they have races at any given track weekly, or
> biweekly, or....? How long is the nominal "season" (three months, six
> months, etc.)?

Just go to any major motor speedway website and look at the events they
have. Anything could potentially have a TFR and tracks such as Daytona and
Kansas City often have more than one event a month, and some events last
more than one day.

> Finally, and probably most important from the PNW perspective, how are the
> races affected by rain? Moisture-intolerant outdoor activities have a
poor
> history, in the Seattle area. You can put a go-kart track indoors, but I
> suspect that's tough to do with NASCAR....

Not sure on that one as I'm not really a big NASCAR guy but, wouldn't a wet
track make the races more interesting? At any rate, late spring through
late summer and early fall see us with one big high pressure system after
another; it can be quite dry and sunny. Especially the way the climate has
been slowly changing here the last 20 or 30 years.

I wonder how much their decision would be influenced by AOPA threatening
litigation.

Paul Adriance

[Mike Wanninger]

There have been a lot of replies on this subject - but maybe I can add some
info. I have been a NASCAR fansince the '60's as a kid. I live between
Birmingham and Talladega, Alabama. Talladega is the worlds largest and fastest
racetrack and owned by International Raceway. International Raceway is owned by
the France family who also owns NASCAR - so NASCAR gives the track anything they
want.
I don't fly yet but came in on a commercial flight over the track Wednesday.
Next to the track is the
nice big long paved airstrip. Before they build the backstretch seating you
could see where you could taxi from the airstrip to infield of the racetrack.
So, NASCAR and flying go together. Former driver Bobby Allison holds dozens of
STCs for Pipers and Aerostars. Years back, in a publicity event, he actually
took delivery of a new Aerostar as it was flown into the track backstretch.
Rusty Wallace put his profits in a aircraft rental firm. Owner Jack Rousch flys
dozens of planes including a P51 Mustang - and a EAA member. If you look on the
Lancair site you will see a turboprop Lancair formerly owned by Bill Elliott for
sale. (Beautiful rosewood instrument panel by the way.)

So here is what you are up against. $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$. The Atlanta GA area has
the baseball Braves, football Falcons, plus pro basketball and hockey,
University of Georgia and Georgia Tech football and basketball. The Atlanta
Raceway has two events a year for NASCAR. The economic impact to the State of
Georgia and the City of Atlanta of the two events at the Atlanta Raceway is
greater than all football, baseball, hockey and basketball in the area
COMBINED. Just to make sure you heard me - the two NASCAR race weekends are
more important to the economy of the area then every other sporting event in the
Atlanta area combined. And the racetrack is about 30-50 miles north of Atlanta,
so Atlanta does not collect on the race, but does collect on the Braves,
Falcons, etc. Yet the races are still more important to the city of Atlanta
than all the other events. The local politicians cannot ignore that - and if
they are doing what is best for the area in economic terms, they should not
ignore it.
Second, your airport would be a major advantage for the track and, unless they
choose to build a new airport at the track, NASCAR will want to move closer to
the airport - not further away. They will have a nearby GA airport or they will
not build.


Now the good news. There is a extreme shortage of racedates. NASCAR races at
probably 25 or more tracks and they all would like to have 2 or more races. But
NASCAR has limited the schedule to 36 race dates. The two major track owners are
paying millions for buy tracks - just to shutdown the track and get the racedate
for a larger track. (These two owners are now listed in the billionares club by
Fortune. Again you are fighting very very big money.) If a track does not sell
out every CUP race now, they loose the event. Two tracks, both owned by
International Raceway, were cut down to one race a year in order to move the
events to newer tracks. One of the tracks is Darlington and they have been
racing there for over 50 years. Gone.
So don't expect a lot of races. In the first year of the track, you will get
maybe one truck race weekend and one Busch race weekend. That will be 4-6 hours
on a Friday or Saturday. And most likely on tow different weekends. Once you
get a big race in another 3-4 years, a CUP event, they will combine two races
over two weekends. So you will see one weekend with a Friday or Saturday truck
race and a Saturday Busch race - and I would not except either event to draw
over 30,000 people. Then one weekend with a combined truck or Busch race and
then the CUP race on Sunday. Because of the combined weekend, the truck/Busch
race may have over 30,000 fans. AND THAT'S IT. NOTHING ELSE.
Talladega was two big weekends only. The two cup races. It is busy with
testing of races cars, passenger cars (a Honda plant is only a few miles away)
and other things. But the have 20-30 people there. There is a daily events like
driving schools, track tours, the museum etc - but nothing that would cause a
crowd over a dozen people at a time. Remember the track is owned by NASCAR and
can seat over 150,000 people.
Twice a year it becomes the 3rd largest cit in Alabama - each paying at least
$60 for tickets. They pay over $1,500 for backstretch motor home parking spot.
The more races they give this track the more money they make - yet it only has
two weekends. Four days of 4-6 hours of over 30,000 people.
The other racing series in the USA are either dying or trying to come back from
the grave. At best you would have one IRL race - but I would not expect it for
a long, long time. The busiest NASCAR track is Charlotte. They hold racing
events there 2-3 times a week. But only twice a year would they have a large
enough crowd to cause a TFR at 30,000 people. Daytona is the only track that has
NASCAR events for over 30,000 that cover more that two weekends.

To sum it up, NASCAR likes flying and may want to be close to your airport, not
away. NASCAR is currently the 800lb gorilla of $port$. Whatever they want,
they get. But don't expect to see 30,000 people
at the track but for 4-6 hours twice a year - at best.
So sit back and enjoy. You may get a new airstrip out of the track. And I
will bet you anything that Arlington will get major, major improvements.


Mike Wanninger


Ron Wanttaja wrote:
>
> On Sun, 14 Mar 2004 11:56:42 GMT, "Paul Adriance"
> > wrote:
>
> >"Mike Rapoport" > wrote in message
> ink.net...
> >>
> >> Seems like an awefully small speedway.
> >
> >It will probably be much larger, but it is for sure over 30,000, the magic
> >number for the TFRs.
>
> Report on the news last night said 80,000. Several other Puget Sound
> locations are vying for the track.
>
> I know next to nothing about routine activity at NASCAR tracks like they're
> talking about building. Do they have races at any given track weekly, or
> biweekly, or....? How long is the nominal "season" (three months, six
> months, etc.)?
>
> Finally, and probably most important from the PNW perspective, how are the
> races affected by rain? Moisture-intolerant outdoor activities have a poor
> history, in the Seattle area. You can put a go-kart track indoors, but I
> suspect that's tough to do with NASCAR....
>
> Ron Wanttaja

[Boelkowj]

I don't get it.. this is an airplane newsgroup and you keep talking about
NASCAR.. Give me a break..

Larry

[Ron Wanttaja]

On Thu, 25 Mar 2004 20:38:15 -0600, Mike Wanninger >
wrote:

> So don't expect a lot of races. In the first year of the track, you will get
>maybe one truck race weekend and one Busch race weekend. That will be 4-6 hours
>on a Friday or Saturday. And most likely on tow different weekends. Once you
>get a big race in another 3-4 years, a CUP event, they will combine two races
>over two weekends. So you will see one weekend with a Friday or Saturday truck
>race and a Saturday Busch race - and I would not except either event to draw
>over 30,000 people. Then one weekend with a combined truck or Busch race and
>then the CUP race on Sunday. Because of the combined weekend, the truck/Busch
>race may have over 30,000 fans. AND THAT'S IT. NOTHING ELSE.

Thanks for the insight, Mike. I do have a couple of additional questions:

I appreciate your comments on how NASCAR likes general aviation, and how
most tracks have a nearby airport that the drivers and crew use. The
problem is, how many of those are uncontrolled fields, like Arlington? The
TSA will allow the track to be overflown by aircraft under the control of
ATC, but that won't be the case at Arlington.

Second, does that mean these facilities are unused 50 weekends out of the
year? One comment I read (think it was on a local group) said that the
track facilities are usually rented out for other activities most weekends.
If that's the case, we must remember that a TFR isn't triggered by the
actual number people in attendance, it's triggered by the total capacity of
the venue. So if they have a zucchini festival on August 28th, Arlington
will be shut down, even if there are only 500 people at the track.

A final comment...it's all well and good that the drivers, owners, and
crews like a nearby GA airport. However, the one day they probably WON'T
need it is race day. Which, of course, is the day it'd be shut down.

Ron Wanttaja

[Dude]

So what you are saying is that the local politicians are going out of their
way to spend time and effort courting a bunch of rich guys and getting them
tax benefits and using eminent domain for them all so that MAYBE twice a
year a large number of people will swarm the area and spend money. Or MAYBE
in a few years the county will have to IMPROVE the facility to keep NASCAR
from taking their football team, err uh, I mean race to another city?

So will the local community REALLY benefit, or will it be NASCAR, a few
small businesses, and the politicians along with their cronies in
construction and services to provide facilities and get contracts with the
city for vendor rights?

If NASCAR wants to build a race track, then they should buy all the land
themselves, build it themselves, pay the proper taxes, and do what it takes
to buy off the zoning authorities (legal bribes include money for parks,
scholarships, schools, roads, etc.)

I doubt this will happen. But then, I am pretty jaded. Maybe its because I
have seen several stadium deals, along with big manufacturing deals, where
varying levels of government throw huge amounts of cash at rich guys in
order to outbid each other while forcing the little guy on the corner to go
under or at best take a margin hit.

After all, what happens to the venues that used to get paid to host all
these events that will now be at the track? When the big computer company
paid no municipal taxes for their facility, what happened to all the guys
that used custom make them at the strip center? Did they get a break to?
Mom is now at the track 2 days a year, she used to buy the kids pizza those
nights. If NASCAR can lure her away without government aid, then so be it.
Otherwise, I think the pizza guy would rather not lose the business to the
councilman's brother in law that now has the hot dog contract at the track.

Still like the idea?

In the meantime all the same groups of people will be happy to pull up your
neighborhood airport without even thinking about how it will affect the
community. They will do so to make a buck on some stupid development that
could just as easily been 3 miles sown the road.

What's amazing is that it seems most former airport areas around here are
worse than they used to be before it was closed, yet they still want to do
it to more and more airports!

Rant Complete!



"Mike Wanninger" > wrote in message
...
> There have been a lot of replies on this subject - but maybe I can add
some
> info. I have been a NASCAR fansince the '60's as a kid. I live between
> Birmingham and Talladega, Alabama. Talladega is the worlds largest and
fastest
> racetrack and owned by International Raceway. International Raceway is
owned by
> the France family who also owns NASCAR - so NASCAR gives the track
anything they
> want.
> I don't fly yet but came in on a commercial flight over the track
Wednesday.
> Next to the track is the
> nice big long paved airstrip. Before they build the backstretch seating
you
> could see where you could taxi from the airstrip to infield of the
racetrack.
> So, NASCAR and flying go together. Former driver Bobby Allison holds
dozens of
> STCs for Pipers and Aerostars. Years back, in a publicity event, he
actually
> took delivery of a new Aerostar as it was flown into the track
backstretch.
> Rusty Wallace put his profits in a aircraft rental firm. Owner Jack
Rousch flys
> dozens of planes including a P51 Mustang - and a EAA member. If you look
on the
> Lancair site you will see a turboprop Lancair formerly owned by Bill
Elliott for
> sale. (Beautiful rosewood instrument panel by the way.)
>
> So here is what you are up against. $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$. The Atlanta GA area
has
> the baseball Braves, football Falcons, plus pro basketball and hockey,
> University of Georgia and Georgia Tech football and basketball. The
Atlanta
> Raceway has two events a year for NASCAR. The economic impact to the
State of
> Georgia and the City of Atlanta of the two events at the Atlanta Raceway
is
> greater than all football, baseball, hockey and basketball in the area
> COMBINED. Just to make sure you heard me - the two NASCAR race weekends
are
> more important to the economy of the area then every other sporting event
in the
> Atlanta area combined. And the racetrack is about 30-50 miles north of
Atlanta,
> so Atlanta does not collect on the race, but does collect on the Braves,
> Falcons, etc. Yet the races are still more important to the city of
Atlanta
> than all the other events. The local politicians cannot ignore that - and
if
> they are doing what is best for the area in economic terms, they should
not
> ignore it.
> Second, your airport would be a major advantage for the track and, unless
they
> choose to build a new airport at the track, NASCAR will want to move
closer to
> the airport - not further away. They will have a nearby GA airport or
they will
> not build.
>
>
> Now the good news. There is a extreme shortage of racedates. NASCAR
races at
> probably 25 or more tracks and they all would like to have 2 or more
races. But
> NASCAR has limited the schedule to 36 race dates. The two major track
owners are
> paying millions for buy tracks - just to shutdown the track and get the
racedate
> for a larger track. (These two owners are now listed in the billionares
club by
> Fortune. Again you are fighting very very big money.) If a track does
not sell
> out every CUP race now, they loose the event. Two tracks, both owned by
> International Raceway, were cut down to one race a year in order to move
the
> events to newer tracks. One of the tracks is Darlington and they have
been
> racing there for over 50 years. Gone.
> So don't expect a lot of races. In the first year of the track, you will
get
> maybe one truck race weekend and one Busch race weekend. That will be 4-6
hours
> on a Friday or Saturday. And most likely on tow different weekends. Once
you
> get a big race in another 3-4 years, a CUP event, they will combine two
races
> over two weekends. So you will see one weekend with a Friday or Saturday
truck
> race and a Saturday Busch race - and I would not except either event to
draw
> over 30,000 people. Then one weekend with a combined truck or Busch race
and
> then the CUP race on Sunday. Because of the combined weekend, the
truck/Busch
> race may have over 30,000 fans. AND THAT'S IT. NOTHING ELSE.
> Talladega was two big weekends only. The two cup races. It is busy with
> testing of races cars, passenger cars (a Honda plant is only a few miles
away)
> and other things. But the have 20-30 people there. There is a daily
events like
> driving schools, track tours, the museum etc - but nothing that would
cause a
> crowd over a dozen people at a time. Remember the track is owned by NASCAR
and
> can seat over 150,000 people.
> Twice a year it becomes the 3rd largest cit in Alabama - each paying at
least
> $60 for tickets. They pay over $1,500 for backstretch motor home parking
spot.
> The more races they give this track the more money they make - yet it only
has
> two weekends. Four days of 4-6 hours of over 30,000 people.
> The other racing series in the USA are either dying or trying to come back
from
> the grave. At best you would have one IRL race - but I would not expect
it for
> a long, long time. The busiest NASCAR track is Charlotte. They hold
racing
> events there 2-3 times a week. But only twice a year would they have a
large
> enough crowd to cause a TFR at 30,000 people. Daytona is the only track
that has
> NASCAR events for over 30,000 that cover more that two weekends.
>
> To sum it up, NASCAR likes flying and may want to be close to your
airport, not
> away. NASCAR is currently the 800lb gorilla of $port$. Whatever they
want,
> they get. But don't expect to see 30,000 people
> at the track but for 4-6 hours twice a year - at best.
> So sit back and enjoy. You may get a new airstrip out of the track. And
I
> will bet you anything that Arlington will get major, major improvements.
>
>
> Mike Wanninger
>
>
> Ron Wanttaja wrote:
> >
> > On Sun, 14 Mar 2004 11:56:42 GMT, "Paul Adriance"
> > > wrote:
> >
> > >"Mike Rapoport" > wrote in message
> > ink.net...
> > >>
> > >> Seems like an awefully small speedway.
> > >
> > >It will probably be much larger, but it is for sure over 30,000, the
magic
> > >number for the TFRs.
> >
> > Report on the news last night said 80,000. Several other Puget Sound
> > locations are vying for the track.
> >
> > I know next to nothing about routine activity at NASCAR tracks like
they're
> > talking about building. Do they have races at any given track weekly,
or
> > biweekly, or....? How long is the nominal "season" (three months, six
> > months, etc.)?
> >
> > Finally, and probably most important from the PNW perspective, how are
the
> > races affected by rain? Moisture-intolerant outdoor activities have a
poor
> > history, in the Seattle area. You can put a go-kart track indoors, but
I
> > suspect that's tough to do with NASCAR....
> >
> > Ron Wanttaja

[Mike Wanninger]

Ron Wanttaja wrote:
>
> On Thu, 25 Mar 2004 20:38:15 -0600, Mike Wanninger >
> wrote:
>
> > So don't expect a lot of races. In the first year of the track, you will get
> >.
..
.. (Cut to save space)
..
>race may have over 30,000 fans. AND THAT'S IT. NOTHING ELSE.
>



> Thanks for the insight, Mike. I do have a couple of additional questions:
>
> I appreciate your comments on how NASCAR likes general aviation, and how
> most tracks have a nearby airport that the drivers and crew use. The
> problem is, how many of those are uncontrolled fields, like Arlington? The
> TSA will allow the track to be overflown by aircraft under the control of
> ATC, but that won't be the case at Arlington.
>
Each track is different of course. The nearest Airport to Daytona is the city
airport. But from what I have seen, most of the airports are really just
airstrips. The airfield is totally uncontrolled. I suspect there is something
on race day, but the field at Talledaga is not controlled. In a few areas, the
"city" has expanded to meet the track, so that the track field is in the area of
control of nearby large airport. But the new tracks are all built out from the
cities.


> Second, does that mean these facilities are unused 50 weekends out of the
> year? One comment I read (think it was on a local group) said that the
> track facilities are usually rented out for other activities most weekends.
> If that's the case, we must remember that a TFR isn't triggered by the
> actual number people in attendance, it's triggered by the total capacity of
> the venue. So if they have a zucchini festival on August 28th, Arlington
> will be shut down, even if there are only 500 people at the track.

Again depends on the track. Like I mentioned, some cities have expanded to
surround the track. Several California tracks are gone because the land became
to valuable. But unless the track is very close to the city, it stays idle.
I checked the web site of several tracks. Sears Point is about a hour out of
San Francisco and is booked about every weekend - all racing. Watkins Glen in
New York state is a very old, well know road course and they have events
thoughout the summer. But Sears Point and Glen are they are road courses and
SCCA, motocycles, etc will race there. The newest oval tracks on the circuit
are Chicago, Las Vegas and Kansas. They have only one or two events a year.
Texas Speedway is owned by SMI, the other big player in track events. SMI will
"push" their tracks a little harder to make money. I looked on their web site
and they have 4 weekends this year. The track is halfway between Dallas and Ft.
Worth which is now just one big city. So they have more people closer and they
have just 4 events this year.
I of course have no way of knowing, but unless your area is very close to a
major area so that an outdoor concert or wine festival is valid, it is two
weekend a year. So the people who are pushing this will act like politicians
and will lie and tell you all the things good things that the track can be used
for. In real life, usually only 2 weeks a years. The average total track
revenue for a race event is $150-$300 per person. For sold out 80,000 fans that
is $12,000,000 - $24,000.000 for the track on one weekend. For the 150,000 here
that is $24,000,000 to $48,000,000 for one weekend. I don't need a lot events
to make a big profit - plus add the TV revenue. Tax that and add hotels, car
rentals, food, etc and you can see why the politicians cannot turn it down.

>
> A final comment...it's all well and good that the drivers, owners, and
> crews like a nearby GA airport. However, the one day they probably WON'T
> need it is race day. Which, of course, is the day it'd be shut down.

Actually raceday is the day they most need the air field. The sponsorship of a
major NASCAR team cost $15-20 million a year. Plus the sponsor will add another
$15-20 million a year in it own NASCAR associated ads. So for $30-40 million
the sponsors demand a lot. What they want is the drivers time for appearances.
So drivers will spend a great deal of time in the air. Someone else drives to
each track the $150,000 motor home each driver uses so they can be at events.
They will qualify on Friday and then that night attend a sponsor event. If the
event is not at the track, they fly out to the event and then back that night.
Same for Saturday. They sometimes get to stay home on Monday but then spend
several days flying to sponsor events. So, since they get to little time at
home, each drivers and others like the major owners, will get a police escort to
the nearest airfield, get in a GA plane or now private jets and fly out while
most of the fans are still leaving the track. Many of the fans who have the
means will fly in and then will rush to fly out on Sunday for work on Monday.
And now it is so specialized, the actual "over the wall" pit crew of tire
changers and gas men fly in on Saturday night or Sunday morning to work and then
fly back for other jobs on Sunday. The nearby airfields on Sunday look like an
aircraft carrier during Desert Storm or LaGuardia in New York. As I type this, I
think this may be more of a problem then the TSA. But during the race there are
a lot of planes to look at.

>
> Ron Wanttaja

What you may want to do is go to NASCAR.COM and get a list of the racetracks.
Then go to the website of some of the tracks and look at the events. Try and
see how close are the nearest airports. I would try and find out how close the
track is to a major city. The closer the more likely it will have non-NASCAR
events. Then look then up and see if they controlled or uncontrolled. Then you
may look at the FAA site or somewhere and see how many TFR are issued each year
for each track. Either you will be less concerned - or will be better prepared
to fight.

Mike

[Jerry Springer]

Boelkowj wrote:
> I don't get it.. this is an airplane newsgroup and you keep talking about
> NASCAR.. Give me a break..
>
> Larry

Then you are a moron and have not followed the thread.

[Bruce A. Frank]

Have you actually read the thread?

Boelkowj wrote:
>
> I don't get it.. this is an airplane newsgroup and you keep talking about
> NASCAR.. Give me a break..
>
> Larry

--
Bruce A. Frank

[Boelkowj]

No I haven't. But I suspect if you count the number of homebuilts tested per
year out of Arlington Airport I suspect you don't have much clout over NASCAR
folks.

Larry

[Boelkowj]

This has nothing to do with home builders do you agree.

Larry

[Boelkowj]

Problem is you guys up north have bad weather for flying and can't support the
sport for that reason. Simple..

Larry

[Del Rawlins]

In > Boelkowj wrote:
> This has nothing to do with home builders do you agree.
>
> Larry

The site of one of the largest gatherings of homebuilt aircraft is under
threat by a proposed racetrack and you say that it has nothing to do
with homebuilders? WTF are you smoking?

----------------------------------------------------
Del Rawlins-
Remove _kills_spammers_ to reply via email.
Unofficial Bearhawk FAQ website:
http://www.rawlinsbrothers.org/bhfaq/

[Del Rawlins]

In > Boelkowj wrote:
> No I haven't. But I suspect if you count the number of homebuilts
> tested per year out of Arlington Airport I suspect you don't have much
> clout over NASCAR folks.

I suppose that makes it all right then.

----------------------------------------------------
Del Rawlins-
Remove _kills_spammers_ to reply via email.
Unofficial Bearhawk FAQ website:
http://www.rawlinsbrothers.org/bhfaq/

[Dude]

TROLL

"Boelkowj" > wrote in message
...
> Problem is you guys up north have bad weather for flying and can't support
the
> sport for that reason. Simple..
>
> Larry

[Felger Carbon]

"Del Rawlins" > wrote in
message ...
> In > Boelkowj wrote:
> > No I haven't. But I suspect if you count the number of homebuilts
> > tested per year out of Arlington Airport I suspect you don't have
much
> > clout over NASCAR folks.
>
> I suppose that makes it all right then.

In a democracy, don't the most votes usually win? ;-(

[Emerauder]

"Felger Carbon" > wrote in message
ink.net...
>
> In a democracy, don't the most votes usually win? ;-(


Yes - in a democracy.

Not in the United States of America, a constitutional republic.

Rich S.

[Del Rawlins]

In et> Felger Carbon
wrote:
>
> "Del Rawlins" > wrote in
> message ...
>> In > Boelkowj wrote:
>> > No I haven't. But I suspect if you count the number of homebuilts
>> > tested per year out of Arlington Airport I suspect you don't have
> much
>> > clout over NASCAR folks.
>>
>> I suppose that makes it all right then.
>
> In a democracy, don't the most votes usually win? ;-(

The tyranny of the majority is upon us.

----------------------------------------------------
Del Rawlins-
Remove _kills_spammers_ to reply via email.
Unofficial Bearhawk FAQ website:
http://www.rawlinsbrothers.org/bhfaq/

[Paul Adriance]

Thanks for your comments on the issue we face here, but I think you
don't realize the nature of this airport. Come out on a weekday or
weekend and what are you going to see: A lot of ultralights, gliders, and
old biplanes and warbirds, often without transponders and sometimes without
radios. How is that, the heartbeat of this airport going to survive
against a bunch of rich drivers flying in learjets and turbines?

THAT is our problem, were are we supposed to go when they put in the
tower...? And what happens when they schedule their big races for the EAA
Fly-In week. We've looked up several of the major tracks similar in size
to the proposed track here, and only 2 I've seen have nearby airports and
they are both controlled. Maybe smaller tracks have more airports nearby
but, we're looking at comparable facilities with 80,000+ seating capacity.
And I have been to several track websites for larger facilities, I see a LOT
of activity, sometimes events occur every other weekend.

Is it right that we who live here and thrive at this airport should be
watching on the ground while the rich racers fly in? Our county and local
cities will pay through the nose for this, ISC is going to build with
whoever gives them the best deal... They aren't going to be footing
capital expenditures like the massive road and highway improvements
necessary, that's going to be US, the local taxpayers. In the future we
might see some benefit from tax revenue, but that is years after track
completion...

It's just a really sad deal all around and I can't imagine ANY well off
driver flying around in his trubine or jet feeling too sorry that they
kicked away a bunch of slow ultralights and gliders and homebuilts who would
be in their way.

Paul Adriance


"Del Rawlins" > wrote in message
...
> In et> Felger Carbon
> wrote:
> >
> > "Del Rawlins" > wrote in
> > message ...
> >> In > Boelkowj wrote:
> >> > No I haven't. But I suspect if you count the number of homebuilts
> >> > tested per year out of Arlington Airport I suspect you don't have
> > much
> >> > clout over NASCAR folks.
> >>
> >> I suppose that makes it all right then.
> >
> > In a democracy, don't the most votes usually win? ;-(
>
> The tyranny of the majority is upon us.
>
> ----------------------------------------------------
> Del Rawlins-
> Remove _kills_spammers_ to reply via email.
> Unofficial Bearhawk FAQ website:
> http://www.rawlinsbrothers.org/bhfaq/

[Del Rawlins]

In et> Paul Adriance
wrote:
> Thanks for your comments on the issue we face here, but I think
> you don't realize the nature of this airport. Come out on a weekday
> or weekend and what are you going to see: A lot of ultralights,
> gliders, and old biplanes and warbirds, often without transponders and
> sometimes without radios. How is that, the heartbeat of this
> airport going to survive against a bunch of rich drivers flying in
> learjets and turbines?

I'm assuming you were referring to "Boelkowj" and not me. I got my
private ticket at Harvey's and have a lot of family in the Marysville
area. Most of what time I have spent outside of Alaska since we moved
here has been spent around there.

I hope you are successful in preserving your airport as it now exists.

----------------------------------------------------
Del Rawlins-
Remove _kills_spammers_ to reply via email.
Unofficial Bearhawk FAQ website:
http://www.rawlinsbrothers.org/bhfaq/