Great video! I recognize many of the landmarks form my local flying but they are in view much longer at 130 MPH in the Maule as opposed to 250-300+ in a jet fighter!

mtv wrote:in your previous post you noted being pissed because you were routed over a seaplane Fly In, with no notice in your brief. So, the domestic infrastructure is “designed to provide sanitized airspace with deconfliction procedures where there is a chance of traffic conflict”?

We were pissed because we encountered a significant threat that could have been mitigated with better coordination. The fly in coordinators could have posted a NOTAM for the event and we would’ve gotten the info during the route brief. And we would have modified our route or flown another one entirely. We had no interest in posing a flight safety risk to anyone or in disrupting a great event. The system works but it requires cooperation from all who share the airspace.

As it worked out two of the aircraft in the flight had radar and began calling the contacts. The picture initially looked confusing though due to the density of the hits, definitely not what you’d normally see. So we deconflicted, but that put us on a back foot, not where we liked to be. In hindsight an ASRS report would have been appropriate.

mtv wrote:I can show you where regularly used MTRs cross major and heavily used mountain passes perpendicular to the flow of GA traffic, and there is no way for GA pilots to know whether these routes are hot or not. Other than see and avoid, there’s no way for the military aviators to know if a GA airplane is coming through the pass. And there are similar examples on many MTRs.

The “deconfliction procedures” are in fact largely “little airplane, big sky”. And, that works most of the time.....

Only if you consider the special use airspace network big sky, little airplane. Restricted areas and MOAs are very effective for deconfliction, Alert areas less so but they tend to be associated with busy bases that most here would either avoid entirely or check in with radar for advisories.

For MTRs, GA pilots can find out if a route is scheduled for use or active from FSS (crews check on and off the route with FSS). I’d wager that almost no one ever does but the information is there for the asking. From the fact that you don’t know that we can infer that none of your students have been taught so. At a minimum identifying where a desired route of flight encounters an MTR means a GA pilot knows where to be extra vigilant for military traffic. It’s true that military crews don’t know where they’ll encounter civilian traffic, but many aircraft have radar and can identify traffic well before it’s a threat and ensure safe separation.

Like most areas of aviation the infrastructure hasn’t kept up with technology. Rather than make a call for a flight brief many now just plug it all into Foreflight and go fly. ADS-B will help but the benefits will only be fully realized if everyone participates. Most MTRs traverse airspace that won’t require ADS-B out, so we can’t assume that all the traffic out there will appear.

Beyond that the best thing a GA pilot can do is study the charts, especially if they’re flying in unfamiliar airspace, and make sure they’re familiar will all SUA along their route. Then give FSS a call in flight for added assurance.

Vick wrote:

mtv wrote:I can show you where regularly used MTRs cross major and heavily used mountain passes perpendicular to the flow of GA traffic, and there is no way for GA pilots to know whether these routes are hot or not. Other than see and avoid, there’s no way for the military aviators to know if a GA airplane is coming through the pass. And there are similar examples on many MTRs.

The “deconfliction procedures” are in fact largely “little airplane, big sky”. And, that works most of the time.....

For MTRs, GA pilots can find out if a route is scheduled for use or active from FSS (crews check on and off the route with FSS). I’d wager that almost no one ever does but the information is there for the asking. From the fact that you don’t know that we can infer that none of your students have been taught so. At a minimum identifying where a desired route of flight encounters an MTR means a GA pilot knows where to be extra vigilant for military traffic. It’s true that military crews don’t know where they’ll encounter civilian traffic, but many aircraft have radar and can identify traffic well before it’s a threat and ensure safe separation.

Like most areas of aviation the infrastructure hasn’t kept up with technology. Rather than make a call for a flight brief many now just plug it all into Foreflight and go fly. ADS-B will help but the benefits will only be fully realized if everyone participates. Most MTRs traverse airspace that won’t require ADS-B out, so we can’t assume that all the traffic out there will appear.

Beyond that the best thing a GA pilot can do is study the charts, especially if they’re flying in unfamiliar airspace, and make sure they’re familiar will all SUA along their route. Then give FSS a call in flight for added assurance.

Vick,

You need to have a conversation with FSS about that notification thing. In Fairbanks, I asked FSS how we could find out when the MTRs north of the Alaska Range were in use. FSS said there's no way they can tell a pilot that information. I explained, as you just said, that the military aviators are required to inform FSS as they enter a route.....so what happens with that information? FSS Chief said that, first of all, out where the military aircraft enter the route, there's no VHF relay....so essentially, while the military folks may be announcing they're entering the route, only another airplane fairly close to the entry point would hear it.....FSS typically doesn't hear them.

FSS Chief went on to point out that even when they (FSS) do hear a military jet entering a route, they don't do anything with that information. They don't record it, nothing. I asked why? His response was that within a very few minutes, those jets will be off the route, so the information would only be valid for a short time. Etc.

I spoke to a good friend who was at the time the CO of the F-16 squadron there about this same thing. He verified everything the FSS folks told me. And shrugged.

Seeing a 600 knot grey jet coming at you from the side is pretty tough to accomplish, by the way. Easy to say, a little less easy to accomplish. And, while many military aircraft do have radars, as my friend pointed out "What would you be looking at as you blast along at 500 agl in terrain at the speed of heat.....radar, or dirt?" I could certainly identify with that. And, a Cub on radar is a pretty small target at best.

I'm not tossing rocks at military aviation here. The FAA has as much or more culpability in this stuff, and has really dropped the ball in many ways. And as you noted earlier, very few civilian aviators even know what an MTR is, or what goes on there.

The civilian aviator has a distinct disadvantage in these games, however.....no ejection seat in a Cub.

MTV

While heat and bumps are definitely worse really low, it is truely a big sky at 200' AGL and below. Ultralight, crop duster, and pipeline patrols are few in number. In 17,000 hours, I had very few encounters with other military or civilian aircraft. I expect drones will change that for pipeline in built up areas.

contactflying wrote:While heat and bumps are definitely worse really low, it is truely a big sky at 200' AGL and below. Ultralight, crop duster, and pipeline patrols are few in number. In 17,000 hours, I had very few encounters with other military or civilian aircraft. I expect drones will change that for pipeline in built up areas.

Perhaps, Jim, but fixed wing military aviators are not supposed to be operating that low either. Not saying they don't on occasion......

And, I spent a LOT of time down there, and so do a lot of other folks. If you want a religious experience sometime, try a takeoff from a remote river gravel bar and meet a C-130 blasting along at very low altitude. Oh, and then the second, the third, and the fourth.....

MTV

I worked at GE's test operation in southern Ohio for a few years and the F-16s and A-10s like to use the facility for training missions. Every time they flew over or around all I could think is man am I glad they are on our side!

mtv wrote:

contactflying wrote:While heat and bumps are definitely worse really low, it is truely a big sky at 200' AGL and below. Ultralight, crop duster, and pipeline patrols are few in number. In 17,000 hours, I had very few encounters with other military or civilian aircraft. I expect drones will change that for pipeline in built up areas.

Perhaps, Jim, but fixed wing military aviators are not supposed to be operating that low either. Not saying they don't on occasion......

And, I spent a LOT of time down there, and so do a lot of other folks. If you want a religious experience sometime, try a takeoff from a remote river gravel bar and meet a C-130 blasting along at very low altitude. Oh, and then the second, the third, and the fourth.....

MTV

MTV, I respect your views and your opinion, but what has given you the impression that military fixed-wing aviators aren’t supposed to be operating that low? For military aviators, two things determine how low they’re allowed to fly, the airspace they are flying in and their own personal qual based on flight hours and experience. Many IR and VR routes go down to 100’ AGL. AF pilot low altitude minimums are 100’, 300’, and 500’ (in fighters). When flying these routes, military pilots mission plan to avoid known (published) airports by 1500’ and 3 miles, unless published to avoid by a greater distance. It is bad to assume that all fighters can see you all the time, though some have IFF interrogators and the ability to get radar locks down low (auto acquisition modes and back seaters;). I promise they are looking for you, but things happen fast at 300-500 kts ground speed down low. The training is critical as others have pointed out, but I wouldn’t consider it a primary option all the time like it was used in the days of recce fighters.

Being on both sides of this fence, I make position reports on the applicable freqs whether I’m flying for work or not. Most fighters have VHF capability now days, but this wasn’t always the case. Many mil pilots make an entry call on 255.4 (FSS) with no response and stay on that freq as that’s how they were trained. It’s also good for us to remember that those tiny lines on sectionals that depict MTRs merely represent the centerline, but can be several miles wide depending on the specific route. Paying attention to the flow arrows helps to know where to look! No jabs meant, just sharing experience to promote understanding!

All well and good when they stay on the VR or IR rte or where ever they are supposed to be and I understand the importance of the training mission but when they stray that is when I have a problem with it. I don't think its common but it does happen.

Kurt

Apollo,

My information came from an AF bird colonel who was an F-16 pilot, as well as a half dozen other AF fighter guys in Alaska. I was roped into being the civilian Co-chair of the Civilian/Military Aviation Counsel, which was formed to work out as many bugs as possible during the creation of the Eastern Alaska MOA Complex.

Those aviators (and this was ~ 2000 or a bit earlier, so could be dated info) told me that most AF aviators are limited to 500 agl. A few were authorized down to 300. They said at the time the only military fixed wing pilots that played in that airspace authorized to fly lower were the Brits in their Tornados, and everybody rolled their eyes at that. The subject came up because some of the MOA airspace has a floor of 100 feet, so since these guys were saying nobody could operate below 300, why do we need aMOA with a floor that low. The answer was the Brits.

All of this may have been exclusive to Alaska, and it is obviously dated, but this was told to me and others during meetings Co-chaired by a very stand up Colonel, who I respect.

Anyway, I am very concerned about the proliferation of military airspace these days. And in the lower 48, we have huge MOA airspace, and no way to communicate with the operators. One of the best things that came out of the CMAC program was making Range Control available to civil aviators. I could call Range as I approached the MOA, and they’d tell me what operators were in the MOAs, and where they headed. They’d clear us into and through the restricted area when they weren’t occupied, and I mean like: “ N792, can you be through the Range in 15 minutes?” I reply affirmative, and Range clears me through the bombing Range, and advises he’s got two pairs of F-16s inbound in 20.

Major force excercise going on? Call Range on the phone, and they suggest waiting 30 minutes, and all airspace will be clear.

Great service and really improves safety. But, convince them to try that in eastern MT? Uh, nope.

The FAA could be a lot more helpful in this, but they sit back and quiet till public input is over.

Whatever, I’m just glad I don’t have to attend those meetings any more.....

MTV

MTV,

You bring up some great points.

Most AF fighter guys/gals are 500’ types in the F-16/F-15. You usually have a few 300’ and below types around in a given squadron depending on the times. A-10s are a different deal entirely, about 50/50 in a squadron between 100’ and 300’ is my experience. I really just wanted to throw out that it’s not bad or illegal if you see them that low, it just all depends. I have zero experience with Navy regs/quals, maybe someone can pipe up. In Idaho as most know, you’ve got F-15Es and A-10s based in the state, so expect to see them low out there, likely lower than you, and that’s ok.

Similar to what you had in Alaska above, regarding flight in active MOAs, the Mt Home Range Complex, the Utah Test and Training Range, and the Nellis Test and Training Range encourage you to call the controlling agency when active on the published freqs when transiting. Unfortunately the MTR system has no such coverage unless by chance where the two coincide. For Idaho, good position reports for all players on 122.9 helps, as many mil pilots (at least the locals) monitor and make calls as well. For MTRs, some are published/activated via NOTAM and have to be booked in advance. No simple solutions for MTRs, but keep looking outside!

I’m a Navy dude up here at NAS Whidbey Island. Our regs are 500’ over land and 200’ over water. Super hornets are a little different if I’m not mistaken. I’ve flown the VR1350/1355 dozens of times. We are constantly on the lookout for GA traffic with various sensors and of course the MKI eyeball. If you’re in the air, I’ll see you well before you see me. I can understand the frustration though, being a GA pilot myself. With that said, the training is valuable and dudes like me flying gray jets take pride in being professional, adhering to the published restrictions and being good stewards of the airspace we have.

Great posts Apollo & Paddles

MTV - you’re mixing terms, MOAs and restricted areas aren’t the same thing and have different implications for VFR traffic. There’s nothing that stops a VFR aircraft from flying through a MOA without talking to anyone - may not be prudent but it is legal. We routinely had to knock off training in MOAs after a call from center that there was traffic, we’d find them and then wait until they were clear before resuming. No hard feelings, I wouldn’t want to burn the gas to go around either. Restricted Areas of course you have to get a clearance through and I’ve generally had good luck getting cleared provided it wasn’t it use.

It’s very likely that your Ak example is unique and their range complex may have had some nuances but it couldn’t be anything more than an arrangement of MOAs and restricted areas. So your range control was doing exactly what they should have been doing for civilian traffic. FWIW, we often couldn’t do much with MOAs as their floors were too high for much of our maneuvers.

I have a call in to Flight Service, I want to verify what their procedures are for recording MTR use reported by military users. I’ve spoke to a number of military buddies and all recounted making the same reports to FSS that I’ve described. If FSS isn’t making that info available to civilian inquiries they’re missing a big opportunity to bolster procedural deconfliction. As I said before, the system works best when everyone participates.

Range control as you explain, Vick, has always been my experience in lower 48. My complaint as a civilian, when ATC was in control, is that they prefer "open" or "closed." For who? It irritated some, but I made them say, " hot " or "cold." I explained that I am the kind of guy who will get it wrong 100 percent of the time where there is a 50-50 chance.

Right way, wrong way, or Army way is often a pain. And sometimes it is very clear and helpful.

Vick wrote:Great posts Apollo & Paddles

MTV - you’re mixing terms, MOAs and restricted areas aren’t the same thing and have different implications for VFR traffic. There’s nothing that stops a VFR aircraft from flying through a MOA without talking to anyone - may not be prudent but it is legal. We routinely had to knock off training in MOAs after a call from center that there was traffic, we’d find them and then wait until they were clear before resuming. No hard feelings, I wouldn’t want to burn the gas to go around either. Restricted Areas of course you have to get a clearance through and I’ve generally had good luck getting cleared provided it wasn’t it use.

It’s very likely that your Ak example is unique and their range complex may have had some nuances but it couldn’t be anything more than an arrangement of MOAs and restricted areas. So your range control was doing exactly what they should have been doing for civilian traffic. FWIW, we often couldn’t do much with MOAs as their floors were too high for much of our maneuvers.

I have a call in to Flight Service, I want to verify what their procedures are for recording MTR use reported by military users. I’ve spoke to a number of military buddies and all recounted making the same reports to FSS that I’ve described. If FSS isn’t making that info available to civilian inquiries they’re missing a big opportunity to bolster procedural deconfliction. As I said before, the system works best when everyone participates.

Vick,

Trust me, after sitting through literally dozens of meetings that lasted well into the night, I totally understand the differences between MOA airspace and restricted airspace. My point was simply that a Range Control function can significantly improve safety for all concerned, AND, since they own the restricted airspace when it’s published active (hot for contact) they can also facilitate civil aircraft transit through restricted airspace as well, during times when ATC can’t (ie: when the range is cold).

Your point of Center telling military to knock it off for civil traffic in a MOA is fine......with a significant problem: Most civil traffic in these huge MOAs in Alaska and eastern MT and ND/SD aren’t talking to Center, nor are they high enough to be visible on ATC Radar. My point was that in Eastern Alaska, the AF has installed radio repeaters out in the airspace, where civil aviators can contact the military folks managing the airspace.

I am also fully aware that civilian aviators have as much right to operate in MOA airspace as do military types. That said, if the military types don’t know we’re there......and finding high speed gray jets visually is a bitch, which of course was the point of their paint schemes.

So, again, in my opinion, the military and the FAA could make operations in MOA airspace a lot safer by ensuring some mechanism to communicate activity by both sides.

As to MTRs, let us know what you find from FSS. What I reported was from Alaska AFSS, so may be different here. BUT, I can just about guarantee that there won’t be a handy RCO available for every MTR start point, but who knows? Trust me, when I was told this by the FSS folks, I was pretty shocked, and so were several members of the military contingent of the CMAC group. As you know, military aviators are required to announce their entry onto an MTR. Seemed pretty dumb to me that nobody was listening......

MTV

Paddles wrote:I’m a Navy dude up here at NAS Whidbey Island. ...the training is valuable and dudes like me flying gray jets take pride in being professional, adhering to the published restrictions and being good stewards of the airspace we have.

I fly my C180 out of Jefferson County, and am in, under, and/or around your airspace all the time.
Sounds like you're a Growler pilot, a lot of folks on Whidbey and even over here on the Peninsula gripe a lot about the noise they make.
I can see it if you live next door to the air station or OLF Coupeville, but the noise really isn't that bad over here--
it's mainly just a way for people to air their anti-military feelings.
I always tell them "that's the sound of freedom".
Anyways, thanks for your service, and maybe I'll see you around some time.