The battle for Arlington Airport begins?

"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

"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

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

"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).

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

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

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

"Mike Rapoport" wrote in message
link.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

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

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
link.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

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

Larry