MOA??

[Mitty]

I have to try to KBCK next week for a funeral. It is inside a MOA.

Filing IFR seems safer than going in VFR, but if I file and the MOA is hot, what
is ATC going to do?

[[email protected]]

Mitty wrote:

> I have to try to KBCK next week for a funeral. It is inside a MOA.
>
> Filing IFR seems safer than going in VFR, but if I file and the MOA is hot, what
> is ATC going to do?

They won't clear you into a hot MOA unless they can provide separation. Usually,
they cannot so your only option is to cancel when they refuse to provide an IFR
clearance. Having said that, file and see what happens.

[Steven P. McNicoll]

"Mitty" > wrote in message
...
>
> I have to try to KBCK next week for a funeral. It is inside a MOA.
>
> Filing IFR seems safer than going in VFR, but if I file and the MOA is
> hot, what is ATC going to do?
>

One way or another they'll keep you out of it. Assuming you're traveling
some distance they'll probably do nothing at departure. The departure
controller may have no knowledge of the MOA and issue a clearance that
enters it. But if it's hot as you approach it you'll get a new clearance
limit.

[Maule Driver]

I'd agree that IFR is safer or at least provides more utility.

Passing thru various MOAs flying from RDU to LAL last weekend, some of
the MOAs were hot but apparently the hot parts were smaller than the
published limits. The controllers cleared me and others thru parts that
must have been cool. At the same time, they kept traffic out of certain
sections of the same MOA. We were all trying to avoid storms.


Mitty wrote:
> I have to try to KBCK next week for a funeral. It is inside a MOA.
>
> Filing IFR seems safer than going in VFR, but if I file and the MOA is
> hot, what is ATC going to do?

[John Doe]

"Mitty" > wrote in message
...
>I have to try to KBCK next week for a funeral. It is inside a MOA.
>
> Filing IFR seems safer than going in VFR, but if I file and the MOA is
> hot, what is ATC going to do?

ATC owns the MOA. If need be, they can block the military aircraft in the
MOA to altitude deconflict from you under you're through. File IFR and
follow their instructions. If that doesn't work for you, file VFR and go
anyway. Military pilots are well trained that MOA are not exclusive use
airspace and civilian traffic may transit the airspace at any time. ATC
will likely give them point outs of your location and they will avoid you
even if you're VFR (as long as you're transponder is working).

Which MOA is it?

[Steven P. McNicoll]

"John Doe" > wrote in message
link.net...
>
> ATC owns the MOA.
>

In what way?


>
> If need be, they can block the military aircraft in the MOA to altitude
> deconflict from you under you're through.
>

No they can't. They don't work the traffic in the MOA.


>
> File IFR and follow their instructions. If that doesn't work for you,
> file VFR and go anyway. Military pilots are well trained that MOA are not
> exclusive use airspace and civilian traffic may transit the airspace at
> any time.
>

Not under IFR.


>
> ATC will likely give them point outs of your location and they will avoid
> you even if you're VFR (as long as you're transponder is working).
>

They're not on ATC frequency.


>
> Which MOA is it?
>

Falls 1.

[Mitty]

Airport is KBCK, Falls 1 MOA. Central Wisconsin, Green Bay sectional.

Actually, the advice I previously received here (from a couple of controllers
IIRC) was correct: If the MOA is hot, ATC will not let you in IFR. If you
can't cancel and go in VFR, you are SOL. In the KBCK case, I would consider
going in VFR because it is very close to the edge of the MOA at one point.

To double check, I called Center on the phone. The admin phone for both Chicago
and Minneapolis centers is the same, so I ended up talking to a controller at
Chicago. He said the same thing as above.

Re the rest of your thoughts, that is all new to me. I have flown near a few
hot MOAs while on an IFR clearance and have never heard Center talking to the
military guys. I have also never read any idea that ATC would be working with
the military guys. Is this just your theory?

I have read a couple of articles on MOAs from the military viewpoint and the
gist was that they are really scared of civilian traffic because they are moving
so fast relative to us. In fact, I think in some cases we are such slow movers
that their targeting radar suppresses our returns.

On 7/5/2005 7:36 PM, John Doe wrote the following:
> "Mitty" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>>I have to try to KBCK next week for a funeral. It is inside a MOA.
>>
>>Filing IFR seems safer than going in VFR, but if I file and the MOA is
>>hot, what is ATC going to do?
>
>
> ATC owns the MOA. If need be, they can block the military aircraft in the
> MOA to altitude deconflict from you under you're through. File IFR and
> follow their instructions. If that doesn't work for you, file VFR and go
> anyway. Military pilots are well trained that MOA are not exclusive use
> airspace and civilian traffic may transit the airspace at any time. ATC
> will likely give them point outs of your location and they will avoid you
> even if you're VFR (as long as you're transponder is working).
>
> Which MOA is it?
>
>
>

[Dave Butler]

Steven P. McNicoll wrote:
> "John Doe" > wrote
>>ATC owns the MOA.
>
> In what way?
>
>>If need be, they can block the military aircraft in the MOA to altitude
>>deconflict from you under you're through.
>
> No they can't. They don't work the traffic in the MOA.
>
>>File IFR and follow their instructions. If that doesn't work for you,
>>file VFR and go anyway. Military pilots are well trained that MOA are not
>>exclusive use airspace and civilian traffic may transit the airspace at
>>any time.
>
> Not under IFR.
>
>>ATC will likely give them point outs of your location and they will avoid
>>you even if you're VFR (as long as you're transponder is working).
>
> They're not on ATC frequency.
>
>>Which MOA is it?
>
> Falls 1.

Hi Steven, are your answers specific to the Falls 1 MOA, or true for MOAs in
general? I thought ATC sometimes worked the military traffic inside the MOA. Is
that never true? Thanks.

Dave

[Steven P. McNicoll]

"Dave Butler" > wrote in message
news:1120654012.820341@sj-nntpcache-5...
>
> Hi Steven, are your answers specific to the Falls 1 MOA, or true for MOAs
> in general? I thought ATC sometimes worked the military traffic inside the
> MOA. Is that never true? Thanks.
>

My answers apply to Falls 1 and the nearby Volk MOAs.

[Mitty]

ok, I'll bite.

Does civilian ATC sometimes work a hot MOA? How/why/when ?

On 7/6/2005 7:56 AM, Steven P. McNicoll wrote the following:
> "Dave Butler" > wrote in message
> news:1120654012.820341@sj-nntpcache-5...
>
>>Hi Steven, are your answers specific to the Falls 1 MOA, or true for MOAs
>>in general? I thought ATC sometimes worked the military traffic inside the
>>MOA. Is that never true? Thanks.
>>
>
>
> My answers apply to Falls 1 and the nearby Volk MOAs.
>
>

[Peter R.]

Mitty > wrote:

> Does civilian ATC sometimes work a hot MOA? How/why/when ?

While flying IFR in the Northeast US, I have overheard Boston Center
controlling the MOAs located in North-Central NY state. Usually it is
along the lines of "you are cleared into Falcon 1" or "block altitude
approved," but it is obvious Center is communicating with them.

One time I even overheard a military pilot receive a terse call from ATC
related to a block altitude to which the pilot was apparently not adhering.


--
Peter
























----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

[Steven P. McNicoll]

"Mitty" > wrote in message
...
>
> Does civilian ATC sometimes work a hot MOA? How/why/when ?
>

I'm not aware of any but there are provisions for it in FAAO 7110.65.

[Dave Butler]

Mitty wrote:
> ok, I'll bite.
>
> Does civilian ATC sometimes work a hot MOA? How/why/when ?
>
> On 7/6/2005 7:56 AM, Steven P. McNicoll wrote the following:
>
>> "Dave Butler" > wrote in message
>> news:1120654012.820341@sj-nntpcache-5...
>>
>>> Hi Steven, are your answers specific to the Falls 1 MOA, or true for
>>> MOAs in general? I thought ATC sometimes worked the military traffic
>>> inside the MOA. Is that never true? Thanks.
>>>
>>
>>
>> My answers apply to Falls 1 and the nearby Volk MOAs.

I'm obviously no expert, or I wouldn't have asked the question, but...

I seem to remember from a presentation by a military guy at a civilian fly-in at
Pope AFB (pre-9/11, obviously) that MOAs are not a cookie cutter arrangement,
there is a sort of contract between the military and civilian authorites on an
MOA by MOA basis, kind of like the letters of agreement among civilian ATCs.
Sometimes the military ATC will work the civilian traffic and provide separation
in the MOA and sometimes the separation service is delegated to the civilian
ATC, and sometimes no separation is provided. Perhaps someone can confirm or
refute my recollection.

Dave

[KP]

"Mitty" > wrote in message
...
> ok, I'll bite.
>
> Does civilian ATC sometimes work a hot MOA? How/why/when ?

The closest thing to "working" a MOA ATC (civil or military - the US NAS is
a single system) does is turn it on or off and watch for spillouts.

This may be done by an air traffic controller if there is no MRU responsible
for the MOA (fairly common around USAF UPT bases).

Who "owns" any particular MOA at any given time and what can or cannot be
done in them depends on the LOA between the facility whose airspace the MOA
is in and the agency responsible for it.

Sometimes, it may be possible to coordinate passage of IFR aircraft through
a "hot" MOA, sometimes the MOA may go cold and sometimes the MOA
*can't/won't* go cold and IFR traffic has to go around. Depends on the
situation, location, and procedures.

In the old days of fighters with one UHF radio, aircraft in a MOA were on
the MRU MOA freq monitoring Guard. These days they've got way too many
radios and can be on multiple freqs simultaneously. Sometimes those
multiple freqs include ATC; sometimes they don't.

[John Doe]

I would say that is fairly accurate.


"Dave Butler" > wrote in message
news:1120658821.996008@sj-nntpcache-5...
> Mitty wrote:
>> ok, I'll bite.
>>
>> Does civilian ATC sometimes work a hot MOA? How/why/when ?
>>
>> On 7/6/2005 7:56 AM, Steven P. McNicoll wrote the following:
>>
>>> "Dave Butler" > wrote in message
>>> news:1120654012.820341@sj-nntpcache-5...
>>>
>>>> Hi Steven, are your answers specific to the Falls 1 MOA, or true for
>>>> MOAs in general? I thought ATC sometimes worked the military traffic
>>>> inside the MOA. Is that never true? Thanks.
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> My answers apply to Falls 1 and the nearby Volk MOAs.
>
> I'm obviously no expert, or I wouldn't have asked the question, but...
>
> I seem to remember from a presentation by a military guy at a civilian
> fly-in at Pope AFB (pre-9/11, obviously) that MOAs are not a cookie cutter
> arrangement, there is a sort of contract between the military and civilian
> authorites on an MOA by MOA basis, kind of like the letters of agreement
> among civilian ATCs. Sometimes the military ATC will work the civilian
> traffic and provide separation in the MOA and sometimes the separation
> service is delegated to the civilian ATC, and sometimes no separation is
> provided. Perhaps someone can confirm or refute my recollection.
>
> Dave

[John Doe]

"Mitty" > wrote in message
...
> Airport is KBCK, Falls 1 MOA. Central Wisconsin, Green Bay sectional.
>
> Actually, the advice I previously received here (from a couple of
> controllers IIRC) was correct: If the MOA is hot, ATC will not let you in
> IFR. If you can't cancel and go in VFR, you are SOL. In the KBCK case, I
> would consider going in VFR because it is very close to the edge of the
> MOA at one point.
>

I would agree with that to a point. If it's IFR conditions and you're
trying to get in to land, you might have to hold as ATC tries to work you
into the approach. As you hold, ATC will be contacting the military
aircraft in the MOA to try and deconflict to get you IFR seperation. You
will hold outside the MOA until ATC can work that.

> To double check, I called Center on the phone. The admin phone for both
> Chicago and Minneapolis centers is the same, so I ended up talking to a
> controller at Chicago. He said the same thing as above.
>
> Re the rest of your thoughts, that is all new to me. I have flown near a
> few hot MOAs while on an IFR clearance and have never heard Center talking
> to the military guys. I have also never read any idea that ATC would be
> working with the military guys. Is this just your theory?
>

I am not an ATC controller, but most military talks on UHF on their primary
radio and VHF by exception. Some jets don't even have VHF. The controller
might not be simulcasting his transmissions to the military pilots on VHF,
that's probably why you're not hearing them. But I can promise you, ATC is
working with them.

> I have read a couple of articles on MOAs from the military viewpoint and
> the gist was that they are really scared of civilian traffic because they
> are moving so fast relative to us. In fact, I think in some cases we are
> such slow movers that their targeting radar suppresses our returns.
>

For the most part this is true. Most GA traffic are like very large birds
to military jets. Imagine passing cars on the freeway that are only going
20mph when you're trying to do 70mph. While the military radars are tuned
to detect fast movers at long ranges, they are capable of detecting civilian
traffic, just at much shorter ranges. With that being said, a Cessna flying
at 90kts on a perpendicular flight path might not show until very late on
radar.

[John Doe]

"Steven P. McNicoll" > wrote in message
link.net...
>
> "John Doe" > wrote in message
> link.net...
>>
>> ATC owns the MOA.
>>
>
> In what way?
>

MILITARY OPERATIONS AREA (MOA): Airspace established outside the Positive
Control Area (PCA) to separate/segregate certain military activities from
IFR traffic and to identify for VFR traffic where these activities are
conducted. Whenever a MOA is active, nonparticipating IFR traffic may be
cleared through the area provided ATC can ensure IFR separation; otherwise,
ATC will reroute or restrict nonparticipating IFR traffic.

Military does not get exclusive use of a MOA, just because it's identified
as a MOA. A MOA is just a chunk of VFR airspace that's been identified by
ATC as an area used by military traffic. Each MOA might have specific
arrangments made between the local ATC and the miliary on altitudes, types
of use, etc.

>
>>
>> If need be, they can block the military aircraft in the MOA to altitude
>> deconflict from you under you're through.
>>
>
> No they can't. They don't work the traffic in the MOA.
>

Yea, actually they do. I have over 2000 hours flying military jets in MOAs
and every single time I have been in contact with ATC. They normally have a
UHF working freq assigned to the MOA that military aircraft will monitor.
While not actively receiving any services from ATC while in the MOA, ATC
always has a freq to contact them on if needed, Guard being the last resort.
I have recieved countless changes to my clearance while in a MOA, effecting
my block altitudes, traffic advisories, etc from ATC while working in MOAs.

>

>>
>> ATC will likely give them point outs of your location and they will avoid
>> you even if you're VFR (as long as you're transponder is working).
>>
>
> They're not on ATC frequency.
>

Already commented on this. Yes they are, just not the one you're listening
to. They are not on same VHF freq as civilian traffic. ATC is talking to
them on a seperate UHF freq, specific to that MOA.

[Steven P. McNicoll]

"John Doe" > wrote in message
link.net...
>
> I would agree with that to a point. If it's IFR conditions and you're
> trying to get in to land, you might have to hold as ATC tries to work you
> into the approach. As you hold, ATC will be contacting the military
> aircraft in the MOA to try and deconflict to get you IFR seperation. You
> will hold outside the MOA until ATC can work that.
>

What do you base that on?


>
> I am not an ATC controller, but most military talks on UHF on their
> primary radio and VHF by exception. Some jets don't even have VHF. The
> controller might not be simulcasting his transmissions to the military
> pilots on VHF, that's probably why you're not hearing them. But I can
> promise you, ATC is working with them.
>

What puts you in a position to make that promise?

[Steven P. McNicoll]

"John Doe" > wrote in message
ink.net...
>
> MILITARY OPERATIONS AREA (MOA): Airspace established outside the Positive
> Control Area (PCA) to separate/segregate certain military activities from
> IFR traffic and to identify for VFR traffic where these activities are
> conducted. Whenever a MOA is active, nonparticipating IFR traffic may be
> cleared through the area provided ATC can ensure IFR separation;
> otherwise, ATC will reroute or restrict nonparticipating IFR traffic.
>
> Military does not get exclusive use of a MOA, just because it's identified
> as a MOA.
>

Nobody said otherwise.


>
> A MOA is just a chunk of VFR airspace that's been identified by ATC as an
> area used by military traffic.
>

It's a bit more than that. You're essentially describing an Alert Area.
But the FAR restrictions on speed and aerobatics apply in Alert Areas, not
so in MOAs.


>
> Yea, actually they do. I have over 2000 hours flying military jets in
> MOAs and every single time I have been in contact with ATC. They normally
> have a UHF working freq assigned to the MOA that military aircraft will
> monitor. While not actively receiving any services from ATC while in the
> MOA, ATC always has a freq to contact them on if needed, Guard being the
> last resort. I have recieved countless changes to my clearance while in a
> MOA, effecting my block altitudes, traffic advisories, etc from ATC while
> working in MOAs.
>

I have over twenty years experience as an air traffic controller. I've
worked airspace that contained or was adjacent to MOAs, ATCAAs, Restricted
Areas, MTRs, and aerial refueling tracks. That includes the Falls 1 MOA,
which is the one under discussion here. Your limited experience with a few
MOAs does not apply to all of them, what you wrote about the Falls 1 MOA is
incorrect.


>
> Already commented on this. Yes they are, just not the one you're
> listening to. They are not on same VHF freq as civilian traffic. ATC is
> talking to them on a seperate UHF freq, specific to that MOA.
>

Again, you're assuming all MOAs are consistent with your experience. They
are not. I've worked many military aircraft into MOAs and out of them. It
was common for them to file flight plans to a point just inside the MOA and
cancel IFR and leave the frequency just before entering the airspace.
They'd also file a return flight plan from the same point, the only time
they were on ATC frequency while within the active MOA was to pick up their
return clearance.

[John Doe]

Fair enough. Not all MOAs are the same. And you're right, I have not flown
in all of them.