Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Open Military Airspace Results  
User currently offlineBooDog From United States of America, joined Nov 2007, 258 posts, RR: 0
Posted (7 years 1 month 1 week 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 2006 times:

Hey commercial pilots... how's the opening of east coast military airspace going so far? I got a bone pilot hangin' at my apartment for thanksgiving afternoon and he's curious about it. (Heck, so am I...)


B1B - best looking aircraft ever.
18 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineFlyf15 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 1, posted (7 years 1 month 1 week 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 1997 times:

From everyone I have talked to that operated into that area of the country yesterday, it made absolutely zero difference.

The problem in New York is runway and airport capacity, as well as the fact that all the airports are so close to each other. Opening up random chunks of airspace that have been purposefully designed out of the arrival/departure corridors does absolutely no good for anyone.

Sounds to me like it ended up just being a lot of BS from Bush to make it seem like he was doing something, when in reality, he did absolutely nothing to help anyone. But, like I said in another post, since yesterday went pretty smoothly across the country and there was this military airspace thing... even though the two have nothing to do with each other, Joe Public is going to think so and demand that more military airspace be opened more often and its just going to create a headache for the government, military, and airlines.

He might as well have put a "MISSION ACCOMPLISHED" banner behind him when announcing it.


User currently offlineJpax From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 1020 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (7 years 1 month 1 week 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 1983 times:

My flight was delayed an hour on the ground and did two holding patterns for 'air traffic control' at first and then 'weather' in EWR.

User currently offlineBooDog From United States of America, joined Nov 2007, 258 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (7 years 1 month 1 week 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 1983 times:

Yes... I agree it's BS, and we all know what the real solutions to the problems are; but I don't want this thread to turn into a "this is stupid/not stupid" argument.... We already have that thread on here somewhere.


B1B - best looking aircraft ever.
User currently offlineFlyf15 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (7 years 1 month 1 week 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 1955 times:

Sorry, didn't mean to send it in that direction. My point is, it was all talk and didn't do anything to help anyone. Its not where the problem lies and our airspace system isn't designed to be able to just integrate random chunks of air otherwise not available. Just more airspace to put planes into holding patterns I guess.


Its like having a 2 lane tunnel that is always backed up. Adding another lane of traffic to the tunnel isnt going to do anything.


User currently offlineBooDog From United States of America, joined Nov 2007, 258 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (7 years 1 month 1 week 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 1938 times:

Quoting Flyf15 (Reply 4):
My point is, it was all talk and didn't do anything to help anyone. Its not where the problem lies and our airspace system isn't designed to be able to just integrate random chunks of air otherwise not available. Just more airspace to put planes into holding patterns I guess.


Its like having a 2 lane tunnel that is always backed up. Adding another lane of traffic to the tunnel isnt going to do anything.

yes. I agree.

But there's no numbers, data, etc. that can back up our opinions. Only the testimonies of pilots/flight dispatchers/etc. who have the open airspace to work with. That's the info my buddy's looking for. Evidence. LOL. We must find the opening up of military airspace as either "did work" or "did not work."  

[Edited 2007-11-22 14:56:32]


B1B - best looking aircraft ever.
User currently offlineFlyDeltaJets87 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 6, posted (7 years 1 month 1 week 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 1909 times:



Quoting Flyf15 (Reply 4):
Its like having a 2 lane tunnel that is always backed up. Adding another lane of traffic to the tunnel isnt going to do anything.

Actually, I think the better analogy would be that it's like opening another lane without installing additional booths at the toll plaza to get the cars through faster.


Both my flights went well on Tuesday though. We were about 10 minutes late on both of them. After pushing back from the gate, we had to wait on the taxiway in DAB for about 15 minutes because of flow control into ATL. For ATL-RDU we were about 10-15 minutes late leaving because the plane using the gate before my flight pushed back late. All-in-all, considering the time of year, I was very pleased.

I hope I get similar luck on Sunday when I return to Florida.  Smile


User currently offlineTornado82 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 7, posted (7 years 1 month 1 week 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 1835 times:



Quoting Flyf15 (Reply 4):

Its like having a 2 lane tunnel that is always backed up. Adding another lane of traffic to the tunnel isnt going to do anything.

You must be from Pittsburgh?  Silly

Quoting Flyf15 (Reply 1):

The problem in New York is runway and airport capacity, as well as the fact that all the airports are so close to each other. Opening up random chunks of airspace that have been purposefully designed out of the arrival/departure corridors does absolutely no good for anyone.

Exactly, none of these corridors are super close to the big cities... and just because pax volumes increase mightily over this period doesn't mean the airlines suddenly added 2000 flights a day this weekend. There are simply too many planes trying to get onto too few approaches. The only way I could have seen this being an aide is if a squall line/SWAP type of deal was happening on the east coast and they needed the military areas to go around cells for flow.


User currently offlineA340Spotter From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 1983 posts, RR: 23
Reply 8, posted (7 years 1 month 1 week 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 1822 times:

Think the ability to use the airspace going northbound into EWR, LGA, etc. on Wednesday went out the window when the airports went into a Ground Delay Program. Once that occurred, the routes became an extra cost of time and fuel, much like flying from the Pacific Northwest to the New York area through Canada, like what occurred as well.

JSD



"Irregardless, it's a Cat III airplane, we don't need an alternate!"
User currently offlineSPREE34 From United States of America, joined Jun 2004, 2266 posts, RR: 9
Reply 9, posted (7 years 1 month 1 week 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 1777 times:



Quoting A340Spotter (Reply 8):
the routes became an extra cost of time and fuel,

How? Maybe I don't get it, but where's the extra cost?



I don't understand everything I don't know about this.
User currently offlineLASOctoberB6 From Japan, joined Nov 2006, 2380 posts, RR: 1
Reply 10, posted (7 years 1 month 1 week 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 1724 times:

When I took off from LAS on Monday, I did find that we were over LSV meaning that they really did open up the airspace. On our approach to EWR, the FO told us that we were put in a holding pattern and less than 5 minutes after telling us and making 2 small turns, we were out of the holding pattern and back on approach. I guess it did make a difference.


[NOT IN SERVICE] {WEStJet}
User currently offlineA340Spotter From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 1983 posts, RR: 23
Reply 11, posted (7 years 1 month 1 week 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 1693 times:



Quoting SPREE34 (Reply 9):
How? Maybe I don't get it, but where's the extra cost?

The routes that they opened up add about 15 minutes of flying time, hence more fuel and more costs...

JSD



"Irregardless, it's a Cat III airplane, we don't need an alternate!"
User currently offlineFlyf15 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 12, posted (7 years 1 month 1 week 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 1679 times:



Quoting LASOctoberB6 (Reply 10):
I did find that we were over LSV meaning that they really did open up the airspace

Airspace over military air fields is open to controllers every day unless the field is within some sort of restricted area.


User currently offlineSkyexramper From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 13, posted (7 years 1 month 1 week 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 1622 times:



Quoting Flyf15 (Reply 12):
Airspace over military air fields is open to controllers every day unless the field is within some sort of restricted area.

Exactly so does anyone know where the FAA got all this extra airspace from? We all know they didn't get Washington D.C open to the public without all the extras.


User currently offlineFlyf15 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 14, posted (7 years 1 month 1 week 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 1598 times:

Quoting Skyexramper (Reply 13):
Exactly so does anyone know where the FAA got all this extra airspace from? We all know they didn't get Washington D.C open to the public without all the extras.


As far as I know, it was restricted areas offshore that were going to be unused anyways, but still officially published as being "hot". They simply put out notams saying that airspace was temporarily cold and open for use by ATC for civilian aircraft.

Same idea as any other restricted area that goes cold during certain times.

And... therefore, it was pretty much useless to everyone. Due to being restricted areas, no published departures, arrivals, airways, or other routes go through them.

[Edited 2007-11-22 20:07:57]

User currently offlineSkyexRamper From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 15, posted (7 years 1 month 1 week 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 1516 times:



Quoting Flyf15 (Reply 14):
As far as I know, it was restricted areas offshore that were going to be unused anyways, but still officially published as being "hot". They simply put out notams saying that airspace was temporarily cold and open for use by ATC for civilian aircraft.

Same idea as any other restricted area that goes cold during certain times.

And... therefore, it was pretty much useless to everyone. Due to being restricted areas, no published departures, arrivals, airways, or other routes go through them.

So because all the military training was stopped because of the holiday, they are making a big issue about "opening" more airspace, gotcha.


User currently offlineBooDog From United States of America, joined Nov 2007, 258 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (7 years 1 month 1 week 1 day ago) and read 1496 times:

Thanks for the input everybody.


B1B - best looking aircraft ever.
User currently offlineTb727 From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 1653 posts, RR: 9
Reply 17, posted (7 years 1 month 1 week 18 hours ago) and read 1409 times:



Quoting Flyf15 (Reply 1):
He might as well have put a "MISSION ACCOMPLISHED" banner behind him when announcing it.

LOL

Quoting Flyf15 (Reply 1):

The problem in New York is runway and airport capacity, as well as the fact that all the airports are so close to each other. Opening up random chunks of airspace that have been purposefully designed out of the arrival/departure corridors does absolutely no good for anyone.

I came out of TEB Wednesday and they closed down everything over WHITE for flow which sucked because as I was started up and ready to taxi, they re-routed me over DC and the Carolinas and then down. We were told to expect about a 20 minute taxi delay and it only ended up being 10, which was a nice surprise. Then we just had the normal wait to take off delay of about 15 minutes in line for runway 24. Washington and Atlanta Center were both boasting about the open military space which didn't really help any of us because everyone over the water had to go on the AR routes which already cut through the Military airspace in corridors and that stuff isn't hot all the time anyways.

The big areas that I think maybe helped with airspace opening up was probably out west (over Nevada especially) were there are huge areas you can never cut direct through.

We'll see on Sunday, hopefully flow isn't too bad in the NYC area and I have an easy day in and out of TEB. The problem is the amount of airplanes in the air around there, all the bizjets and RJ's whereas in the good old days, there were only bigger jets flying around with some smaller stuff.



Too lazy to work, too scared to steal!
User currently offlineSPREE34 From United States of America, joined Jun 2004, 2266 posts, RR: 9
Reply 18, posted (7 years 1 month 1 week 15 hours ago) and read 1344 times:



Quoting LASOctoberB6 (Reply 10):
I did find that we were over LSV meaning that they really did open up the airspace.

I've flown over LSV so many times I can't count them. LSV is not inside a Restricted Area.

Quoting A340Spotter (Reply 11):
The routes that they opened up add about 15 minutes of flying time, hence more fuel and more costs...

Meaning if they were available 24/7, the carriers wouldn't file for or use the routes anyway.

Quoting Skyexramper (Reply 13):
Exactly so does anyone know where the FAA got all this extra airspace from?

Yeah, I know. It's the Warning Areas over the water. The Emperor has no clothes!

Quoting SkyexRamper (Reply 15):
So because all the military training was stopped because of the holiday, they are making a big issue about "opening" more airspace, gotcha.

Yes. Nothing was done differently than any other weekend or holiday. Bush didn't do anything but blow smoke up the public's skirt.



I don't understand everything I don't know about this.
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
US Military Opening Airspace For Holidays posted Thu Nov 15 2007 11:25:53 by Gregarious119
Slow Climb Rate Of A340 Results In Airspace Change posted Sun Feb 6 2005 20:33:32 by Stoney
Afghanistan's Airspace- Open Now? posted Mon Jan 14 2002 01:41:06 by Airplanetire
Is Afghanistan Airspace Still Open To Intl Flights posted Thu Sep 20 2001 03:11:57 by Ryu2
US Airspace To Re-open posted Thu Sep 13 2001 16:39:33 by Johnnybgoode
Canadian Airspace Now Open posted Wed Sep 12 2001 21:51:50 by Polaris
EU - Israel Consider Open Skies posted Tue Nov 20 2007 16:17:50 by LAXintl
EK: Door Is Still Open To Boeing Despite A350 Deal posted Sat Nov 17 2007 05:20:53 by EI321
Incentives Results In Congestion At FLL posted Tue Nov 13 2007 11:05:23 by USADreamliner
India To Pursue More Open Skies Agreement posted Mon Nov 12 2007 11:03:39 by LAXDESI