Gliders, transponders, and MOAs

[Greg Arnold]

This is what a current USAF fighter pilot says:

"Some fighters can "see" transponders. I'd recommend Mode 3-1200, just
like other VFR traffic. However, we don't always go around
interrogating them, especially in a MOA where there is usually less
civilian traffic. The military radar controllers can definitely see
them--that is a great way to be seen and then they will point the
traffic out to the fighters, usually. Sometimes we work quite
autonomous and it might be of only marginal benefit, though.

"If I had to choose to fly in a MOA or not in one during "duty hours", I
wouldn't be in one as a civilian without talking to a controller to know
if it was "busy" at the time. Sometimes you might not have any choice,
I realize. Sailplanes are quite difficult to see in a fighter depending
upon aspect, and they don't always give a nice radar return, either."

[Mike the Strike]

Practice varies. I can only report what I was told - that military
aircraft training in MOAs near Phoenix are either not equipped with any
transponder-sensing electronics or do not use them and that flights are
primarily visual. Military controllers do not actively monitor
aircraft in our MOAs, merely handling exit from and return to the
airport.

We have no choice of where to fly from our home field - high ground to
the north, controlled airspace to the east and south forces us into the
MOAs, which cover huge areas of all western states. If we don't fly in
the MOAs, we don't fly anywhere.

Mike

[[email protected]]

Not all F-16s are equipped with transponder interrogators (although I
think most a Luke are). F-16 radars can detect gliders at useful
ranges - I've seen HUD tapes showing a lock-on to a G-102 that was not
seen by the pilot.

The problem is that if civilian traffic is detected in a MOA, the
fighters have to stop their training and either move to a clear part of
the MOA, or knock it off and wait for the civilian traffic to leave the
MOA. If the traffic it at low altitude, they may be able to change to
a backup plan (level intercepts in the high MOA, for example), but if
the training schedule calls for full-up air combat maneuvering, they
have to have sterile airspace (to their knowledge).

I've been there, on both sides, and remember how frustrating it was to
have to knock off an engagement when someone spotted a lightplane - but
it is just too dangerous to continue.

>From the AF's perspective, gliders pose a particularly difficult
problem - we are relatively slow and may not be travelling in a
straight line across the MOA, so holding until the glider(s) leaves
becomes problematical. So concern on their side is justified.

However, in the Region 9 situation at Turf, the times and parts of the
MOAs that could be affected were coordinated between ASA and the Air
Force weeks ago. The same was done for the 2002 Region 9 contest using
the same MOAs and we didn't have any problems - some F-16s even checked
in on 123.3 as they were transiting to the MOAs to see if gliders were
present.

Finally, in all probability, only 3 days would probably be affected,
since Monday is a holiday, and typically Luke doesn't fly on Friday
afternoons. So this whole thing is more politics than airspace - Luke
is trying to build their case for more special use airspace west of
Phoenix, so couldn't let a contest happen (especially with Air Force
Academy participation!) unchallenged, regardless of the actual safety
issues.

Kirk
66