The Latest Military Airspace Grab: 700 Square Miles!

Does the military _ever_ return its airspace to public use?


-------------------------------------------------------------------
AVflash Volume 11, Number 7a -- February 14, 2005
-------------------------------------------------------------------

GA PILOTS TAKE ON MILITARY IN N.M.
New Mexico has some wide-open skies, but apparently there is not
enough room there for all the military and civilian pilots who want to
fly. The U.S. Air Force wants to add 700 square miles to the 2,600
square miles now used by the F-16 Falcons based at Cannon Air Force
Base. The airspace expansion would mean rerouting about 40 civilian
flights per day, and intrude onto GA routes between Albuquerque and
Roswell. "They've grabbed up so much airspace, it's going to be
dangerous for small, civilian aircraft," U.S. Pilots Association
President Steve Uslan told The Albuquerque Journal. "And that's a long
way around, and that means a lot of fuel and a lot of time wasted."
http://www.avweb.com/eletter/archive...ll.html#189168

On Mon, 14 Feb 2005 15:15:18 GMT, Larry Dighera
wrote:


Does the military _ever_ return its airspace to public use?\

Yes. It wouldn't take very long to list all of the military bases
closed in the last 25 years, which would quickly relate to a whole
bunch of no longer needed airspace and training routes.

AVflash Volume 11, Number 7a -- February 14, 2005
-------------------------------------------------------------------
GA PILOTS TAKE ON MILITARY IN N.M.
New Mexico has some wide-open skies, but apparently there is not
enough room there for all the military and civilian pilots who want to
fly. The U.S. Air Force wants to add 700 square miles to the 2,600
square miles now used by the F-16 Falcons based at Cannon Air Force
Base. The airspace expansion would mean rerouting about 40 civilian
flights per day, and intrude onto GA routes between Albuquerque and
Roswell. "They've grabbed up so much airspace, it's going to be
dangerous for small, civilian aircraft," U.S. Pilots Association
President Steve Uslan told The Albuquerque Journal. "And that's a long
way around, and that means a lot of fuel and a lot of time wasted."
http://www.avweb.com/eletter/archive...ll.html#189168

First, lets' consider how big the somewhat inflammatory number "700
square miles is in the big picture of all of New Mexico: it's a block
35 miles by 20 miles-- then consider how much airspace it might take
to run a 2-v-2 training engagement.

Then, recognize that special use airspace comes in a lot of flavors.
Some is restricted (which means don't go there without permission),
some is prohibited (which means don't go there OR ELSE!), some is
warning (which means go there, but be careful), and some is simply
advisory.

Most military training airspace is open for transit when not in use.
In other words, ATC can authorize passage if the area is not "HOT".

And, the airspace used for most military training is within positive
control, so it only effects IFR traffic on flight plans. Most GA
"small, civilian aircraft" (as opposed to corporate) is VFR and below
positive control, hence not effected.

Poor Steve, he doesn't want to be inconvenienced and he'd rather have
those guys and gals who strap their butts into the big iron go to war
to protect him without being properly trained. Maybe they need a
community relations program at Cannon in which guys like Steve get
taken for a ride so they could get a clue. About 30 minutes of
air-to-air should do the job.


Ed Rasimus
Fighter Pilot (USAF-Ret)
"When Thunder Rolled"
www.thunderchief.org
www.thundertales.blogspot.com

"Ed Rasimus" wrote in message
...

Yes. It wouldn't take very long to list all of the military bases
closed in the last 25 years, which would quickly relate to a whole
bunch of no longer needed airspace and training routes.


There used to be a Michigamee MOA just west of Sawyer AFB. The base is now
closed and the MOA no longer exists. Coincidence?



Most military training airspace is open for transit when not in use.


What SUA is nor open for transit when not in use?



In other words, ATC can authorize passage if the area is not "HOT".


ATC may be able to authorize passage if the area IS "hot", if it's not hot
authorization is not needed.

On Mon, 14 Feb 2005 20:02:28 GMT, "Steven P. McNicoll"
wrote:


"Ed Rasimus" wrote in message
.. .

Yes. It wouldn't take very long to list all of the military bases
closed in the last 25 years, which would quickly relate to a whole
bunch of no longer needed airspace and training routes.


There used to be a Michigamee MOA just west of Sawyer AFB. The base is now
closed and the MOA no longer exists. Coincidence?

My point, exactly.

Most military training airspace is open for transit when not in use.

What SUA is nor open for transit when not in use?

Restricted and prohibited. Prohibited is open never and restricted
requires you to get approval prior to filing through.

In other words, ATC can authorize passage if the area is not "HOT".


ATC may be able to authorize passage if the area IS "hot", if it's not hot
authorization is not needed.

Don't go blundering through R-18xx or whatever simply because it isn't
NOTAM'd as active.

I think we're parsing a bit here. Bottom line, responding to the
original poster, is that special use airspace is a huge range of
options and no, it doesn't simply fall into a never ending demand from
that nasty ol' military to inconvenience Joe Bagadonutz in his Cessna
enroute from Norton's Corner to Punkin Center for a donut.




Ed Rasimus
Fighter Pilot (USAF-Ret)
"When Thunder Rolled"
www.thunderchief.org
www.thundertales.blogspot.com

"Ed Rasimus" wrote in message
...

Restricted and prohibited. Prohibited is open never and restricted
requires you to get approval prior to filing through.


Approval is required only when it's hot.



Don't go blundering through R-18xx or whatever simply because it isn't
NOTAM'd as active.


Why not?

On Mon, 14 Feb 2005 23:40:45 GMT, "Steven P. McNicoll"
wrote:


"Ed Rasimus" wrote in message
.. .

Restricted and prohibited. Prohibited is open never and restricted
requires you to get approval prior to filing through.


Approval is required only when it's hot.

If you check the FLIP (or civil equivalent) you'll find that some
restricted airspace is "always active" while others are activated when
needed. Usually you can file IFR for the route around and then request
transit enroute. Bottom line is that restricted airspace can vary
considerably.



Don't go blundering through R-18xx or whatever simply because it isn't
NOTAM'd as active.


Why not?


Because those nasty folks at the FAA will take your license away if
you survive the experience. Typically the pubs will tell you the hours
of operation for a chunk of airspace. And, don't think that simply
because ATC gave you a clearance along a route that goes through an
R-xxxx that it is "cold".

I remember (long ago in a galaxy far, far away) getting an IFR cleance
at FL 180 along a route from LAS to FAT. Problem was that the route
had an MEA of FL 240 and was published in those days with the note on
the map of "breaks in radio and radar coverage along this segment".
Blundering along badly iced up, I was astonishe to break into a open
hole in the clouds and find some very significant Sierra Nevada
mountains poking their granite heads up to my altitude. ATC didn't
really catch that one.

I've been in a lot of R-xxxx space and encountered Farmer Jones
cruising along VFR, fat, dumb, happy and endangered.


Ed Rasimus
Fighter Pilot (USAF-Ret)
"When Thunder Rolled"
www.thunderchief.org
www.thundertales.blogspot.com

"Ed Rasimus" wrote in message ...

Poor Steve, he doesn't want to be inconvenienced and he'd rather have
those guys and gals who strap their butts into the big iron go to war
to protect him without being properly trained. Maybe they need a
community relations program at Cannon in which guys like Steve get
taken for a ride so they could get a clue. About 30 minutes of
air-to-air should do the job.


Ed Rasimus
Fighter Pilot (USAF-Ret)
"When Thunder Rolled"
www.thunderchief.org
www.thundertales.blogspot.com

Airspace is airspace. There are no comments about anyone not wanting our pilots to be properly trained. There should be
a big chunk set aside, say, out over the pacific or something, for all the air to air training. They would be able to
turn and burn and go mach whatever without worrying too much (oh, they do that already?). If the folks need to do the
air to ground work, there is already plenty of space out in Nevada and Calif set aside for that. Why all the airspace
grabs these days?

On Mon, 14 Feb 2005 22:50:46 GMT, "Blueskies"
wrote:


"Ed Rasimus" wrote in message ...

Poor Steve, he doesn't want to be inconvenienced and he'd rather have
those guys and gals who strap their butts into the big iron go to war
to protect him without being properly trained. Maybe they need a
community relations program at Cannon in which guys like Steve get
taken for a ride so they could get a clue. About 30 minutes of
air-to-air should do the job.


Ed Rasimus
Fighter Pilot (USAF-Ret)
"When Thunder Rolled"
www.thunderchief.org
www.thundertales.blogspot.com

Airspace is airspace. There are no comments about anyone not wanting our pilots to be properly trained. There should be
a big chunk set aside, say, out over the pacific or something, for all the air to air training. They would be able to
turn and burn and go mach whatever without worrying too much (oh, they do that already?). If the folks need to do the
air to ground work, there is already plenty of space out in Nevada and Calif set aside for that. Why all the airspace
grabs these days?

Lemme see, I'm in a fighter unit in Clovis NM. I don't get air
refueling support but twice a year. And, you want me to go out over
the pacific for training? Have you got a map handy? How long do you
think tactical jets fly?

As for A/G, same thing. Fighter stationed at Moody needs to go to NV
or CA for dropping some 25 pound blue bombs?

There aren't a lot of "airspace grabs". There are a lot fewer airbases
and units these days. There is a lot more "joint use" of airspace".

Now, listen to the jets if you can, and then ask the question, "do you
think they're ours?"


Ed Rasimus
Fighter Pilot (USAF-Ret)
"When Thunder Rolled"
www.thunderchief.org
www.thundertales.blogspot.com

"Blueskies" wrote in message
...

Airspace is airspace. There are no comments about anyone not wanting our
pilots to be properly trained. There should be a big chunk set aside, say,
out over the pacific or something, for all the air to air training. They
would be able to turn and burn and go mach whatever without worrying too
much (oh, they do that already?). If the folks need to do the air to
ground work, there is already plenty of space out in Nevada and Calif set
aside for that.

Wouldn't that be rather crowded? A bit of a haul for units not located on
the west coast as well. What do you do with all the commercial traffic
heading overseas?

Steven P. McNicoll wrote:

Wouldn't that be rather crowded? A bit of a haul for units not
located on
the west coast as well. What do you do with all the commercial
traffic
heading overseas?

For starters, I'd recommend IR flares and chaff dispensers :-)

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