Changes in ATL airspace could affect Lance, 9A1
- Thread starter TangoWhiskey
- Start date
Glad you're reading my local paper
. This airspace grab is strictly an ATC convenience thing. It will compress VFR traffic under the outer shelves, hardly a safety improvement. We are 29 DME from ATL which is a heck of a long final.
Because they have to, the FAA has had and continues to have a lot of public meeings and "opportunity" for comments. However, I question their sincerity.
kyleb
Final Approach
- Joined
- Jun 13, 2008
- Messages
- 7,565
- Location
- Marietta, GA
- Display Name
Display name:
Drake the Outlaw
Glad you're reading my local paper
This airspace grab is strictly an ATC convenience thing. It will compress VFR traffic under the outer shelves, hardly a safety improvement. We are 29 DME from ATL which is a heck of a long final.
Because they have to, the FAA has had and continues to have a lot of public meeings and "opportunity" for comments. However, I question their sincerity.
One of the claims for extending the airspace floors is that some aircraft leaving Hartsfield lack the climb performance to stay within the current airspace. Really? Something is leaving Hartsfield that can't climb to 2500' AGL in 15 or so miles?
I must have missed the announcement when Delta exchanged its Boeings for Bleriots.
gismo
Touchdown! Greaser!
How well does a fully loaded stretch 737 climb on one engine on a hot summer day? 2500 ft in 15 nm at 150 kt GS is a bit over 400 FPM.
Last edited:
kyleb
Final Approach
- Joined
- Jun 13, 2008
- Messages
- 7,565
- Location
- Marietta, GA
- Display Name
Display name:
Drake the Outlaw
Oh, heck, if we're building the airspace for all contingiencies, we should just pave the world and convert everything to Class C... That way 7x7's with both (all) engines out would never have traffic conflicts and would always have somewhere to land.
THAT's the solution. Someone should have come up with it sooner!