tcj wrote:For Pilot Pete, I took these the same day near the island at the head of the lake.

Nice! Looks like there is two people in there, probably wasn't me that day, must have been a marketing flight or a customer receiving training. My flights are usually solo, return to service or phase 1 required crew only

I looked back at the dates on the photos. It Was June 5, 2015. I think I remember talking with Randy later and he said it was him.

Figured I would resurrect this. There has been a fair amount of activity here the last month or so. This C-130 is from the 109th air wing out of Scotia ( near Albany). They have a signature red stripe on the tail. These guys get outfitted with skis and travel to Greenland and Antarctica fairly often. This shot was a week or so ago. About as close as I want to get. He actually dropped down a little lower after I took this. I think they have a pretty good time.

Pete

pburns wrote:Figured I would resurrect this. There has been a fair amount of activity here the last month or so. This C-130 is from the 109th air wing out of Scotia ( near Albany). They have a signature red stripe on the tail. These guys get outfitted with skis and travel to Greenland and Antarctica fairly often. This shot was a week or so ago. About as close as I want to get. He actually dropped down a little lower after I took this. I think they have a pretty good time.

Pete

Got rocked pretty good landing behind one (think it had pen skis?) once while in a turboprop, their wake turbulence is significant especially when loaded

*seems they have a MGTOW of 155,000lbs

I flew C-130s for 16 years and we rarely went in the MOAs. C-130s don't often use MOAs or military training routes because they fly below 250 knots. In my day we flew low levels at 300 AGL or higher and about 220 knots, often in formation. It was a hell of a lot of fun. But we always had a training objective in mind.

I've been out for a while now, but here are a few tips regarding C-130 avoidance.
-- If there's a C-130 base in your area, it's worth a look to see if they post information on their training routes and when they're using them.
-- Turn your transponder on if you have one. All the C-130s I flew have TCAS. It's a big help for those crews.
-- Use the CTAF frequency that's appropriate for your area. We always tried to make CTAF calls when we were around congested areas.
-- If you see one, look for more. C-130s often fly in formation.

I see them periodically where I fly because we have a training base nearby. They're fun to watch, from a distance.

There are several MOAs near my home field in the Pacific Northwest, and also where I spend a bit of time on the Florida peninsula. Radar seems pretty good in the SE where a "mountain" is a man made pile of buried trash... but not at all reliable below 2000' to 3000' AGL in the mountains AND in the foothills of the Cascade range and east. I climb to altitudes where I can ask Center if MOA X, Y, or Z is hot. If yes, I either don't go in, or fly direct to a destination airport inside the MOA with all my lights/transponder/ADS-B and Flight Following. If Center has no contact with the boogies I stay clear and wait it out. FWIW, one of the Okanogan MOA slices has a 10k MSL "floor". Over the years, at least one GA aircraft flying at 9500 MSL got a surprise 'bump' when a boogie dropped momentarily??? below the "hard floor". I recall a couple of other GA accidents that involved ag duster pilots with MTR's in the Yakima Basin and elsewhere, and a growler that was just a bit low west of Reardan, WA when it hit a hill. Until we have robots in the cockpits flying high g I expect we'll continue to see "human error" drift in the MOAs.

Several previous comments about the widths of training routes. Lots are 5 miles either side of the centerline, but I’ve also been on some that are up to 20 miles either side of the route, so width can vary a lot. The AP-1B is the source document that describes all MTRs by defining points, widths of the legs, and altitude, should you have some nearby that you want to know the specifics of what’s allowed.

https://www.daip.jcs.mil/pdf/ap1b.pdf

fredy wrote:Several previous comments about the widths of training routes. Lots are 5 miles either side of the centerline, but I’ve also been on some that are up to 20 miles either side of the route, so width can vary a lot. The AP-1B is the source document that describes all MTRs by defining points, widths of the legs, and altitude, should you have some nearby that you want to know the specifics of what’s allowed.

https://www.daip.jcs.mil/pdf/ap1b.pdf

Thanks for posting this.
I checked it out-- it sez VR1355 is 4NM either side of centerline.
Tieton State airport 4S6 is 6NM east of VR1355 at it's closest point,
so definitely is NOT within it's boundaries.

I was the civilian co-chair of the planning committee that helped to establish the Interior Alaska MOAs, which are used frequently, and four to six times a year for "major force exercises", which typically involve over `100 military airplanes in that airspace at a time. These MOAs are huge, and there are communities within them which rely almost totally on commercial air for supplies and passenger ops. That committee demanded (all except for the military co-chair, of course) that the Air Force install and support remote communications outlets throughout the MOAs that provide comms with Eielson AFB Range Control. It is an excellent system. The Air Force, for the cost of a few remote repeaters (not an insignificant cost, mind, but compare that cost to the price of an F-16, let alone a 22, they achieved huge buy in by the fliers in the area. That system works.

Now, consider the HUGE Hays and Powder River MOA complex, which covers much of eastern Montana, Wyoming, South Dakota, etc, etc...... During the establishment of those MOAs, the Air Force totally ignored suggestions to establish remote repeaters in those MOAs, even though there are literally dozens if not hundreds of small communities that lie under those MOAs. Each community has a small exclusion, but those folks sometimes need to fly further than a couple miles.

If I fly eastbound, I HAVE TO fly through those MOAs, at least one or two of them. My plane doesnt carry enough gas to go south of them, and I'm on Basic Med, so can't go into Canada to go north of them.

So, I'm supposed to get high enough to call Center, right? That's into the fligh levels in much of those MOAs, btw. So, I fly through them. Call FSS and all they can tell you is whether they're scheduled hot, which they are most days. Which doesn't imply that there are military aircraft in them.

One day, I'm plowing along in my Cub at 300 feet agl, just below the MOA floor, and in front of me a B-1 showed me his belly, just letting me know I was in HIS airspace. Sorry, Dude, a) I wasn't in the MOA, and b) That MOA is Joint Use airspace....

Until the Air Force decides to treat this airspace as joint use by installing repeaters throughout the airspace so we can communicate with the military, I will simply fly through the airspace, any time I need to.

But, yes, as others have noted, MTRs can be scary. Somewhere there's a video of a ID National Guard A-7 Corsair blasting along through an MTR in Idaho. Those guys are NOT flying straight and level, just augering along....they are jinking, pulling up to look behind, etc. In Interior Alaska, they were required to notify FSS prior to entering the MTRs there. I asked FSS why they didn't track that info. THey reported that half those calls are calls in the blind, cause the fighters were out of range of FSS frequencies, and even if they did talk to FSS, they would only be ON the MTR for fifteen minutes or so, at the speeds they ran the MTRs (450 to 600 or so). FSS said "how are we supposed to warn the one pilot who comes through there and happens to contact us within that short time frame, when we have no idea where the fighters are on that line, or their speed, maneuvering, etc.

And, if you fly around the Mat Su Valley north of Anchorage, you've certainly met herds of C-130s, low level and below 250 knots, but not by that much. They look incredibly large coming down the Susitna River, coming around a bend just as you're taking off on floats....

The system in Interior Alaska works incredibly well, and it cost the Air Force so little.....but try and get them to do so in other remote areas with huge MOA airspace.....good luck.

MTV

BigBen wrote:I fly in an MOA just like I fly everywhere else VFR, they aren’t restricted. If the military is using it they can watch for me via ADSB or out their window, just like I’ll be watching for them.

Fast movers don't have ADSB in or out so they can't watch for you via ADSB.

stretch wrote:Interestingly sounds like if the fighters radar is active and you are squawking they will see you? Maybe.

Only if they are looking for the 1200 code AND the radar isn't being used for another reason (likely using it for training; looking for something besides 1200). Of course, fighters can get a lock on bare metal but a slow mover may be in the radar notch/clutter and a mostly fabric or fiberglass airplane may not give enough of a return to show up on radar unless they are specifically looking for that type of threat (then they wouldn't be doing their primary training mission).

BL: Radar isn't a perfect system and fighters don't have ADSB; don't assume the jet has global SA.

EvilEagle wrote:

BigBen wrote:I fly in an MOA just like I fly everywhere else VFR, they aren’t restricted. If the military is using it they can watch for me via ADSB or out their window, just like I’ll be watching for them.

Fast movers don't have ADSB in or out so they can't watch for you via ADSB.

stretch wrote:Interestingly sounds like if the fighters radar is active and you are squawking they will see you? Maybe.

Only if they are looking for the 1200 code AND the radar isn't being used for another reason (likely using it for training; looking for something besides 1200). Of course, fighters can get a lock on bare metal but a slow mover may be in the radar notch/clutter and a mostly fabric or fiberglass airplane may not give enough of a return to show up on radar unless they are specifically looking for that type of threat (then they wouldn't be doing their primary training mission).

BL: Radar isn't a perfect system and fighters don't have ADSB; don't assume the jet has global SA.

Wonder if them not running ADSB is going to change after the DC crash

NineThreeKilo wrote:

EvilEagle wrote:

BigBen wrote:I fly in an MOA just like I fly everywhere else VFR, they aren’t restricted. If the military is using it they can watch for me via ADSB or out their window, just like I’ll be watching for them.

Fast movers don't have ADSB in or out so they can't watch for you via ADSB.

stretch wrote:Interestingly sounds like if the fighters radar is active and you are squawking they will see you? Maybe.

Only if they are looking for the 1200 code AND the radar isn't being used for another reason (likely using it for training; looking for something besides 1200). Of course, fighters can get a lock on bare metal but a slow mover may be in the radar notch/clutter and a mostly fabric or fiberglass airplane may not give enough of a return to show up on radar unless they are specifically looking for that type of threat (then they wouldn't be doing their primary training mission).

BL: Radar isn't a perfect system and fighters don't have ADSB; don't assume the jet has global SA.

Wonder if them not running ADSB is going to change after the DC crash

Probably not.....the helicopter involved was ADS-B equipped, but it was apparently turned off.

mtv wrote:

NineThreeKilo wrote: Wonder if them not running ADSB is going to change after the DC crash

Probably not.....the helicopter involved was ADS-B equipped, but it was apparently turned off.

I guess the government can get away with things that you or I can't....
from FAR 91.225:
"(f) Except as prohibited in paragraph (h)(2) of this section, each person operating an aircraft equipped with ADS-B Out must operate this equipment in the transmit mode at all times unless—
(1) Otherwise authorized by the FAA when the aircraft is performing a sensitive government mission for national defense, homeland security, intelligence or law enforcement purposes and transmitting would compromise the operations security of the mission or pose a safety risk to the aircraft, crew, or people and property in the air or on the ground; or
(2) Otherwise directed by ATC when transmitting would jeopardize the safe execution of air traffic control functions."

https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-14/c ... ion-91.225

^ indeed


Being the kings men has always had benefits

Guess it’s just a power flex? I

mean I could see not turning it on when over enemy territory..

Seems to me if you’re flying on behalf of the taxpayers, over their homes, living off their tax dollars, we have a right to see what they are doing with literal tons of their money.

Nice that some of the mil don’t consider the US enemy territory lol

A couple of years ago I was flying east toward the Lake Andes MOA west of Sioux Falls. I was on flight following at 9.5, I was told I either had to go around the MOA or under it. Under I would have no flight following, if I went around I could continue flight following. I went under the MOA, I kept listening on the same frequency for center, I heard them clear someone ( I forget the call sign) for 500 agl to FL 300 their discretion.

I can see why they didn't want me in there, but last I looked flying through was still legal.

StillLearning wrote:A couple of years ago I was flying east toward the Lake Andes MOA west of Sioux Falls. I was on flight following at 9.5, I was told I either had to go around the MOA or under it. Under I would have no flight following, if I went around I could continue flight following. I went under the MOA, I kept listening on the same frequency for center, I heard them clear someone ( I forget the call sign) for 500 agl to FL 300 their discretion.

I can see why they didn't want me in there, but last I looked flying through was still legal.

If they’re looking for a cozy little bubble to hide in, they’ve got restricted airspace for that, plenty of it. Me? I’d have kept course and altitude, no apologies.


Here’s the thing, the government ought to be on VHF, loud and clear. It’s absurd that most American planes slicing through American skies can’t hear that traffic, or only catch half the damn conversation.

Our tax dollars are footing the bill for this circus, so why are we stuck with the cheap seats?

That crash in DC? Hell, I hope it lights a fire under someone’s ass to sort out this mess.

hotrod180 wrote:I guess the government can get away with things that you or I can't....

We have a large and active C-130 base in Arkansas, and deconfliction with the C-130s doing sub-250 knots at low altitudes outside of special use airspace is a concern. They also turn their ADS-B Out off, which makes it harder for me to see them.

As a retired C-130 dude I still know a few people so I asked. The problem is that military ADS-B data can be analyzed by our adversaries to determine the tactics our forces are using. This might sounds like a minor detail but it can become a huge weakness that could be used against us in combat.

I definitely think there are times and places where it military aircraft should have ABS-B Out operating, but I also concede that there are times and places where they have a legitimate need to turn it off. Some of those places are going to be outside of special use airspace.

slowmover wrote:

hotrod180 wrote:I guess the government can get away with things that you or I can't....

We have a large and active C-130 base in Arkansas, and deconfliction with the C-130s doing sub-250 knots at low altitudes outside of special use airspace is a concern. They also turn their ADS-B Out off, which makes it harder for me to see them.

As a retired C-130 dude I still know a few people so I asked. The problem is that military ADS-B data can be analyzed by our adversaries to determine the tactics our forces are using. This might sounds like a minor detail but it can become a huge weakness that could be used against us in combat.

I definitely think there are times and places where it military aircraft should have ABS-B Out operating, but I also concede that there are times and places where they have a legitimate need to turn it off. Some of those places are going to be outside of special use airspace.

That’s fine if they have need to turn ADSB out off, but there’s not much reason they shouldn’t be watching ADSB in when they’re flying in airspace where there may be civilians flying.

If they need to go “stealth mode” and turn off their ADSB, which gov forces us to buy and use for “safety”, in CONUS, and only speak on UHF, they need to do it in a restricted, one that’s above areas like area 51

I’m also not 100% sold on ADSB giving china any intel they don’t already have, or couldn’t get from just sending some chinaman on a tourist/student visa out a rental car onto the MOA to film it with a high end camera and SDR/scanner, or from paying off a politician, or just sending them a “girl friend” or “driver” lol

Like the two cops I chirped my horn at a few months ago, one was stopped in the 2 lane road to talk to the other who’s parked on the side, based on the surroundings and their hand gestures, etc they were just shooting the shit, but when honked at it was for very important “police business” oh BS, ya ain’t fooling anyone, go gossip at Starbucks


Not sure if it’s more a entitled mindset or a power play, but it’s all so tiresome

Years ago, so I don't know if its still true, but I was told during a Red Flag exercise in Alaska that tactical Navy aircraft (F/A types) do not have VHF radios. This comment was specific to FA 18s at the time. AF fighters definitely do, but they may or may not monitor civilian frequencies. We asked the question over and over of the AF for them to use VHF, but they always used UHF when talking to Range Control.....so, if someone else was in the neighborhood, they'd call Range on UHF, then Range would notify us that there was someone else in our area.....could have been a lot simpler....