Captain
Final Approach
You clearly won the battle of wits. I yield sir...
Sign the Petition to Save the Most Important Towered Fields
- Thread starter Jps19602002@mac.com
- Start date
You clearly won the battle of wits. I yield sir...
Dav8or
Final Approach
This may be technically true, but in order to maintain control of movement on the ground, primarily the runway in use, they need to keep track of movement in the air. I fly into a lot of class D airports and they always really seem to care about where it is I am when I enter their airspace and how I'm going to fit into their traffic flow.
Sorry, but dictating which runway is in use, what patterns are to be flown and sequencing planes in the flow of traffic going in and out of the airfield as well as having a pair of eyes to check for abnormalities like landing gear not fully down, or an open baggage door, add to the safety of all flights including VFR IMO. Class D controllers do have value. The only question in my mind in this debate is which fields need them and which don't. Many on the closure list don't.
The simplistic metric of annual operations by itself is a stupid way to decide the need for a tower. If the field has only 100 operations during the week, but a 1000 on the weekends the numbers get skewed and it makes the tower no less useful on the weekends. In this case it is a staffing issue, not a tower issue. If an airport has three runways in the old army triangle layout, a tower is useful to make sense of it and keep people from crossing paths. If the airport is smashed up against class C, or B airports, it is useful for coordination with those controllers. How many landing and take offs in a years time doesn't tell the whole story.
Then the airport should have a tower for the weekends and shouldn't pay someone to play angrybirds for 60hrs during the week.
Intersecting runways with obscured sight-lines require a tower earlier than a one-runway airport. Some of these low-traffic crossing runway airports would probably benefit more from mandatory patterns and mandatory radio use than a tower.
Agreed. And a deliberate transparent process on which towers to close could taken those factors into account. The current blood-bath is politically motivated and probably closed a number of towers that should be open and kept some towers open that should be closed.
Fearless Tower
Touchdown! Greaser!
How on earth do you enforce that???
A quick look at the online debates over traffic patterns and radio use should pretty much tell you that is a hopeless pipe dream.
How do most FARs get enforced ? By voluntary compliance and draconian punishment of violators if they come to the attention of the FAA.
A couple of old guys in their taildraggers and ercoupes will just have to get over it. 'online debates' play a remarkably small role in the rulemaking process.
Note, I dont advocate mandatory radio and pattern use at ALL uncontrollable airports. No problem with someone flying radioless straight-ins at some isolated strip in the prairie. But at those places with intersecting runways that now have a tower and wont have one come may, it would improve everyones safety.
How many mid airs have happened in D airspace?
Your definition of 'draconian' and mine are way different.
sdflyer
Pre-takeoff checklist
Very busy like Republican convention in San Diego last year.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD
pilot_dude
En-Route
- Joined
- Nov 2, 2010
- Messages
- 2,793
- Display Name
Display name:
pilot_dude
Take political "discussion" to SZ. Thank you.
sdflyer
Pre-takeoff checklist
We had once right at 45 crosswind to downwind. Classic scenario low high wing and blind spots.
We also had one in uncontrolled airfield nearby on final involving air tanker and civilian aircraft.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD
sdflyer
Pre-takeoff checklist
Not political. A lot of private jets flew in and out, plus flight training, plus schedule airlines. It was very busy and tower did help a lot.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD
Wait, are you saying that due to the occasional event that brings a bunch of traffic in they should man a tower year round? Easy enough to bring in temps for events.
Dav8or
Final Approach
So, you're saying that an accident that happens at a class D airport wouldn't have happened if it was uncontrolled? Maybe there are accidents at class D airports because there is more traffic there and perhaps it would be even worse if the tower wasn't there. I make no claim that control towers and controllers eliminate mid airs. I do believe they can reduce that risk. How it is that having people do as they please, any ol' way they want is a way to reduce mid airs is beyond me.
Nope, I'm saying that a tower at a D is no assurance against a mid air. I make no claim that uncontrolled airspace is safer, it is others that claim that towers = safety. I am just pointing out that isn't necessarily correct.
47PILOT
Pre-takeoff checklist
While i am sure there are some towers on the list that should be closed, i also believe some are justified to remain open.
I listen to ATC at my local field 5-6 hrs, five days a week. I can tell you without a doubt had there not been a controller at the field, there would have been more than a few accidents. Weather it be the english challenged pilot, or the relatively new and unfamiliar guy on his first flight into new territory,I've heard it all. "sir,i suggest you turn 10* to the south immediately. A second later you here: "sir thats 10* LEFT not right. And then theres the: "cessna XYZ, pattern altitude is 877 not 500" witch gets into conflict with helicopter traffic. there are many many more examples of this type of thing that happen on a regular basis.
So lets assume they can the controllers at these airports and god forbid there are accidents resulting in loss of life on the ground as well as pilot and passengers. What do you think thats going to do to the publics opinion regarding GA? Then when they find out the guy in the tower was recently removed, thats all the more reason to petition that the airport is unsafe and should therefore be closed. Don't think that will happen?? its already happening.
I listen to ATC at my local field 5-6 hrs, five days a week. I can tell you without a doubt had there not been a controller at the field, there would have been more than a few accidents. Weather it be the english challenged pilot, or the relatively new and unfamiliar guy on his first flight into new territory,I've heard it all. "sir,i suggest you turn 10* to the south immediately. A second later you here: "sir thats 10* LEFT not right. And then theres the: "cessna XYZ, pattern altitude is 877 not 500" witch gets into conflict with helicopter traffic. there are many many more examples of this type of thing that happen on a regular basis.
So lets assume they can the controllers at these airports and god forbid there are accidents resulting in loss of life on the ground as well as pilot and passengers. What do you think thats going to do to the publics opinion regarding GA? Then when they find out the guy in the tower was recently removed, thats all the more reason to petition that the airport is unsafe and should therefore be closed. Don't think that will happen?? its already happening.
Fearless Tower
Touchdown! Greaser!
Which airport?
Unless I missed something, the latest list only closed Brown and Ramona in the SD area. Neither of those needs a tower.
I believe he's at Carlsbad. It's been a long time since I flew out of there, but it didn't seem to need one then.
Fearless Tower
Touchdown! Greaser!
CRQ has gotten alot busier, especially since they built a terminal and have 121 cummuter service to LAX now.
But even then, CRQ is not on the closure list for the San Diego area, it is only SDM and RNM. If the corporate jet folks don't want to mix it up with the piston crowd, they still have SAN, MYF, SEE, CRQ
sdflyer
Pre-takeoff checklist
Those occasionally events happens quite often. There is saying "penny smart, dollar short."
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD
sdflyer
Pre-takeoff checklist
You should come more often. It used be just an airfield and farms. Not anymore.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD
Don't forget Jack Riley's shop lol. There was a hell of a guy.
airheadpenguin
Pre-takeoff checklist
I'm based at KASH which is much like KHFD, we'll live and are nowhere near a special case. Students fly without towers at all kinds of airports. 3-4 in the pattern with a tower has seems less than wonderful lately at KASH, yet I've been in the same position at KFIT which is untowered with no issue. Time will tell but I'm not getting out the body bags just yet.
Last edited:
SkyHog
Touchdown! Greaser!
- Joined
- Feb 23, 2005
- Messages
- 18,431
- Location
- Castle Rock, CO
- Display Name
Display name:
Everything Offends Me
6600 morons actually signed this petition?
47PILOT
Pre-takeoff checklist
Or maybe many more than 6600 morons didn't sigh. Oh wait....its opinions were debating here, never mind
Dav8or
Final Approach
That's what I love about the blue board, no know it all snap judgements over here. Nothing but love for aviation and all that pursue it. Not like the Red Board at all, no sir!
I have never seen so many pilots thrilled with the incremental destruction of the aviation infrastructure. After the towers go, the runways will follow. Now that we know the rich guy pilots are on board for tearing up the airport to save our children from crushing debt in the future, it will be easy! At the next round of sequesters, (and you know there will be more) they just have to put airports with less than xxx number of operations per year will be closed and then say it's the president's idea. They'll have pilots lined up around the block to close 'em down.
Skyscraper
Cleared for Takeoff
My sentiments exactly, well put.
roncachamp
Final Approach
Because there can be no runways without towers?
JHW
En-Route
I can't connect that. In most cases, airports don't need towers, the tower is pork for local politicians. By your logic no pork of any kind can ever be eliminated. You can't lose the bridge to nowhere because that will lead to the destruction of all paved roads in the country
Skyscraper
Cleared for Takeoff
JHW
En-Route
no problem. if you want a tower, pay for one. I decline to do so.Purely a personal opinion, and that's all this discussion will ever yield, forever moving in circles.
Skyscraper
Cleared for Takeoff
nddons
Touchdown! Greaser!
I think the reason so many (a very impressive group) are not signing this petition is because it is exactly what the lawmakers want us to do. This is not the SZ, so I want to be careful in order to keep this thread here, but most pilots identify that these random closures of 75% of the contract towers, with no closures of FAA towers with government employees (my facts here may not be precise, but I think they're close) or other FAA employees, is not a budgetary reality, but a political ploy designed to extract the most pain out of the public.
I, for one, and apparently quite a few other pilots, aren't playing along. We think we can live with this situation until a more rational approach to budgeting comes along in congress.
Pilots gripe when housing developments pop up near airports, and the NIMBY crowd starts to ***** about the noise. Yet, when sequestration begins to hit OUR passion, we think we should be excluded from it because, well, we pilots are now the NIMBY crowd?
I, for one, and apparently quite a few other pilots, aren't playing along. We think we can live with this situation until a more rational approach to budgeting comes along in congress.
Pilots gripe when housing developments pop up near airports, and the NIMBY crowd starts to ***** about the noise. Yet, when sequestration begins to hit OUR passion, we think we should be excluded from it because, well, we pilots are now the NIMBY crowd?
JHW
En-Route
no, but I try to vote for elected officials who will be better stewards of my money. That's tough to do but we can try.
Skylane81E
Final Approach
Purely a personal opinion, and that's all this discussion will ever yield, forever moving in circles.
Nope, he said most airports don't need one,
Guess what most don't!
Some do and the trick is to have them only where needed
roncachamp
Final Approach
Purely a personal opinion, and that's all this discussion will ever yield, forever moving in circles.
Well, given that most airports don't have them and get along fine without them it appears to be more than a personal opinion.
Skyscraper
Cleared for Takeoff
I'm afraid that's not a sound argument. it's like saying, "I drove all the way to San Francisco with no seatbelt on and didn't ever need it, therefore seatbelts are a not necessary."
Also, define "Getting along fine" I'm not exactly sure what you mean by that.
Skyscraper
Cleared for Takeoff
There are plenty of uncontrollable airports with traffic counts higher than a good number of the towers that are slated for closure.
Many of the towers on the list should have never been opened, or they should have been closed when the traffic they were built for disappeared.
JHW
En-Route
ok, turn it around. What is your preferred criteria for 1) opening a tower where none exists, and 2) closing a tower that is not needed. Or do you believe every airport needs a tower and no tower can ever be closed for any reason ?
Skylane81E
Final Approach
Bingo, no one is saying that ALL towers are unneeded