Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Shifting Of Air Traffic At MSP  
User currently offlineSJCMSP From United States of America, joined Aug 2012, 60 posts, RR: 0
Posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 1563 times:

I saw this article in the Star Tribune this morning about an FAA proposal to consolidate routes out of MSP rather than have aircraft fan out. The article speaks largely about the usual NIMBY/MAC conflict.

I was most curious about the system itself as I know nothing about it. Is this something that the FAA is doing (or have they already) at other airports?

http://www.startribune.com/local/west/179945681.html

9 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlinejetblueguy22 From United States of America, joined Nov 2007, 2767 posts, RR: 4
Reply 1, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 1562 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
HEAD MODERATOR

As much as it is a good idea on the FAA's part I doubt it will be implemented. Edina is just too affluent and they will fight it like crazy. They aren't going to like a huge chunk of traffic flying overhead.
Blue



You push down on that yoke, the houses get bigger, you pull back on the yoke, the houses get bigger- Ken Foltz
User currently offlineN908AW From United States of America, joined Aug 2005, 922 posts, RR: 1
Reply 2, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 1562 times:

Quite simply, this is a foolish cry for attention from a few homeowners and several power-hungry city councilmen. The FAA has been implementing RNAV and RNP (referred to right now as "Performance-Based Navigation") across the nation and now it's MSP's turn. The reason? Improving safety. ATL, LAS, LAX, and DFW just to name a few have such procedures in place and have significantly improved traffic efficiency and safety margins.

Edina isn't exactly close to the airport either. I doubt they'd have much of a claim. MAC pays homeowners for retrofitting homes with soundproofing but I'm almost certain that nobody in Edina is close enough to be eligible for it.

This is the airport that nearly had an A320/B1900 midair on its hands because of non-standard vectors and miscommunication. RNP/RNAV is the obvious fix and I doubt homeowners' concerns will be able to change the FAA's mind.


Links:
Map of homes eligible for noise mitigation: http://www.macnoise.com/sites/macnoi...917_parcelsall_allblocks_trans.pdf
Display boards from the public meetings that explain how it will work:
http://www.macnoise.com/pdf/boards_final.pdf



'Cause you're on ATA again, and on ATA, you're on vacation!
User currently offlineWA707atMSP From United States of America, joined Oct 2006, 2214 posts, RR: 8
Reply 3, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 1563 times:

Quoting jetblueguy22 (Reply 1):
As much as it is a good idea on the FAA's part I doubt it will be implemented. Edina is just too affluent and they will fight it like crazy.

In looking at the map, I think Edina as a whole will not be getting any more aircraft than in the past. However, the same # of aircraft will be concentrated in fewer parts of the city. Some homes in Edina will be quieter, while others will be louder.

The bigger change is that many of the aircraft that currently fly over Linden Hills will be shifted to routes over Edina or Kenwood. The battle between Linden Hills and Kenwood, which are traditionally Minneapolis' two most powerful neighborhoods, could be interesting.



Seaholm Maples are #1!
User currently offlineB727FA From United States of America, joined Jun 2011, 751 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 6 days 17 hours ago) and read 1562 times:

Edina will actually have a DROP in a/c traffic. The issue (in part) being debated here is the speed at which the MAC is moving on this. One person even wrote that there was "more discussion over the location of a dog park last year." I don't know if that's true, but I think people are mistaking city council for the MAC.

One MSP rep said, "There's no safety issue at MSP--they have a 100% safety record." (I'm thinking, 'tick tock') This is about people's lives and their homes." I guess the flaming wreck of a plane in their living room isn't.



My comments/opinions are my own and are not to be construed as the opinion(s) of my employer.
User currently offlineWA707atMSP From United States of America, joined Oct 2006, 2214 posts, RR: 8
Reply 5, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 1562 times:

Quoting B727FA (Reply 4):
One MSP rep said, "There's no safety issue at MSP--they have a 100% safety record." (I'm thinking, 'tick tock') This is about people's lives and their homes." I guess the flaming wreck of a plane in their living room isn't.

MSP's safety record is not 100%, but it is close. As far as I know, the only airliner to crash in Minneapolis was a Northwest Airlines Martin 202, which crashed into a house near Lyndale and 50th in 1950, killing all 13 on the Martin plus two people in the house.

A memorial to the victims was built last year. Here is a link to an article about the memorial:

http://www.startribune.com/local/minneapolis/128507073.html?refer=y



Seaholm Maples are #1!
User currently offlineB727FA From United States of America, joined Jun 2011, 751 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 1563 times:

Just stating what the rep said. And, I think you'll agree, I think the rep is being silly when he says that.


My comments/opinions are my own and are not to be construed as the opinion(s) of my employer.
User currently offlineapodino From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 4234 posts, RR: 6
Reply 7, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 1563 times:

Here is what I don't get. The FAA controls the airspace...not the local governments. While they can solicit feedback from local agencies about noise impacts...ultimately doesn't the decision lie with the FAA?

User currently offlineB727FA From United States of America, joined Jun 2011, 751 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 1562 times:

Ok, just released: MAC approves 12-1 a "partial" approval of the new routes. They did not "approve" the Edina and South Minneapolis routes.

The residents were saying things like, "why should Edina have to the guinea pig for the nation on a plan nobody knows will work?" and "there are whole cities and neighborhoods not being represented here." and "the middle-class neighborhoods I represent are tired of being pushed around and I will fight this through every step." Clearly the opposition is vocal if not well informed.

The FAA acknowledges that it's a head scratcher; how can 1/2 the airport operate under one method and not the other? They, of course, aren't obligated to get the approval, but it's good PR to have that agreement in place.

So...comment away!



My comments/opinions are my own and are not to be construed as the opinion(s) of my employer.
User currently offlineN908AW From United States of America, joined Aug 2005, 922 posts, RR: 1
Reply 9, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 1562 times:

Pretty strange development. I guess it's more or less obvious how they'll operate if the FAA goes along with this; seeing as the "Edina plan" corresponds to MSP using 30L/30R and the "Eagan plan" to 12R/12L/17, RNAV and RNP will only be used when the boat is turned that way...otherwise 30L/R departures would have to use the same SIDs we have today. Exceptionally confusing? Yes. The latest article tends to suggest that the FAA might just shelf this until 2014 though.

http://www.startribune.com/local/west/179945681.html



'Cause you're on ATA again, and on ATA, you're on vacation!
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...
Skills Of Air Traffic Controllers - Tribute posted Wed Sep 9 2009 08:09:57 by BOACVC10
Smoke Coming Out Of DC-9 Engine At MSP posted Thu Jan 11 2007 00:07:53 by Af773atmsp
Korean Air 744 At MSP Due To Blizzards posted Sat Dec 2 2006 00:13:42 by Af773atmsp
A Lot Of UA Jets At MSP - Early 08/23 posted Fri Aug 25 2006 08:36:11 by Aviationwiz
Air Traffic At Rickenbacker (LCK) Airport posted Fri Sep 16 2005 01:32:54 by September11
The Economics Of Air Traffic Control posted Wed Dec 22 2004 03:48:15 by Jfidler
Lack Of Air Traffic Controllers In US? posted Thu Jul 22 2004 21:51:49 by Jetpixx
The Levels Of Air Traffic Control Towers posted Fri Oct 31 2003 00:44:13 by Pilottim747
Decline In Air Traffic At Toledo posted Tue Jul 1 2003 00:21:39 by Rajivvyas
Resumption Of Air Traffic posted Thu Sep 13 2001 20:32:18 by Sonic99