Gov't shutdown - Impact on GA

StraightnLevel said:
Question: Why don't they just shut down the part time Class D towers and reassign those people?
Click to expand...
If they had the funding to pay to relocate people, they could use that funding to just pay the people they already have in place.
 
I have still been impacted 0% by the shutdown. other than takeoff/landing, I haven't spoken to a controller in weeks (shutdown or not) and to this day haven't wasted a bravo controller's time just to say I flew into a bravo. so, bidness as usual for me.
 
ORD NOTAM re: closed to GA

b5eb3b9412b4c491f0c5bdc3f1f81565.jpg


DFW is identical, down to the number to call.
 
Dropped of some pizzas at the local Charlie on Saturday and they were happy to give us a TRACON and tower tour. Surprisingly everyone was in pretty good spirits laughing and joking with us answered all of our questions invited us back anytime.

I was reading between the lines that they were treating GA no different than outside the shutdown. Awesome group of people.
 
Wasn't Martin Pauly on a quest to land at each of the Class B airports? This might make it more difficult (but NOT impossible)...
 
AvNavCom said:
It seems to be a common misconception that ATC personnel are easily interchangeable between facilities. Unfortunately, I don't think it's true. I'll defer to the actual ATCs in the community, but my impression is that it takes 12-18 months for a controller to get qualified at a different facility. There just isn't a quick fix to a shortage for a controller shortage.

Personally, I made the decision a couple of days ago to avoid cutting through the DC SFRA and go around it instead. It was an extra 10 minutes of flying (so nothing, really) that avoided the controllers needing to worry about me. Monitoring the frequency though, they were consistently clearing light GA traffic into and out of the SFRA, so perhaps they wouldn't have minded.
Click to expand...
It has been business as usual in the SFRA, though I haven't asked for any services other than those required for egress/ingress.
 
Last edited:
Doc Holliday said:
Those airports have a tiny GA presence to begin with.
Click to expand...
???

My dad worked for Pennzoil's corporate aviation department when it moved from Houston Hobby to Intercontinental back in the 80s. I would go out to his office on occasion and the Pennzoil hangars were just one set of several corporate aviation departments that operated out of IAH. I assume that is still the case today, and that other major metropolitan airports have similar local corporate aviation bases.

Those planes may make up a small fraction of daily operations, but I can't imagine the executives who are used to traveling on corporate aircraft will be happy about their fleets being grounded.

Edit: I see that "Exemptions are in place for based aircraft."
 
How is this legal? Are they not public airports?
 
Half Fast said:
Public roads get closed all the time: construction, parades, sporting events, emergencies, etc., etc. From a legality perspective, what's the difference?
Click to expand...
Airport isn’t closed. It’s blocking use to a certain type of stakeholder. It would be as if they shut your water off but still kept the public swimming pool and water park down the road open.
 
kaiser said:
Airport isn’t closed. It’s blocking use to a certain type of stakeholder. It would be as if they shut your water off but still kept the public swimming pool and water park down the road open.
Click to expand...
Kinda like what they did here with water restrictions last year.
 
kaiser said:
Airport isn’t closed. It’s blocking use to a certain type of stakeholder. It would be as if they shut your water off but still kept the public swimming pool and water park down the road open.
Click to expand...

Like when they close a road to cars but allow bicycles? Or vice versa?
 
kaiser said:
Airport isn’t closed. It’s blocking use to a certain type of stakeholder. It would be as if they shut your water off but still kept the public swimming pool and water park down the road open.
Click to expand...
How is it any different from when electric grids need to load shed they shed hospitals and the like last? When you have a reduction in resources from nominal, you have to prioritize. Getting commercial airliners in has a lot higher priority than a spam can.
 
AKiss20 said:
How is it any different from when electric grids need to load shed they shed hospitals and the like last? When you have a reduction in resources from nominal, you have to prioritize. Getting commercial airliners in has a lot higher priority than a spam can.
Click to expand...
And if we move to the argument of “first come, first served,” most of the airlines had those flight plans filed years ago.
 
I was supposed to go PHX this week. At least I have the option of telling my passengers we are switching the trip to SDL. Delta not so much.
 
SFO escaped the notam if you need to get your theoretical Class B Ops jollies off somewhere.
 
kaiser said:
How is this legal?
Click to expand...
49 U.S.C. It happens on a regular basis with TFRs, airshows, etc. No different than airports being closed to non-scheduled GA traffic as it is quite common at major airport hubs even before the shutdown.
 
Dave Theisen said:
I was supposed to go PHX this week. At least I have the option of telling my passengers we are switching the trip to SDL. Delta not so much.
Click to expand...
If they want to pay. I frequently fly into PHX because SDL is so bloody expensive.
 
Anyone received a new plastic certificate during the shutdown? I figured all those people processing new certs were furloughed, but was talking to an ASI at the Monroe airshow this weekend and when I showed him my temporary, he mentioned that they are still working and cranking out new plastic certs.
 
kaiser said:
Airport isn’t closed. It’s blocking use to a certain type of stakeholder. It would be as if they shut your water off but still kept the public swimming pool and water park down the road open.
Click to expand...
I don’t agree with your analysis.

The airport can no longer support full operations. They had to prioritize who gets access under the limited ability to operate. While the priority chosen is debatable, the act of limiting access is not inherently wrong or illegal. Even during normal operations access to class B airspace is on an as available basis for VFR traffic. Making additional limits to allow continued safe operation of the airspace is reasonable. There’s a reason why the development of class B airspace often includes the development of new reliever airports. The airport I learned to fly at in the 90’s was built for exactly that reason. Hard to get to picky about access to the big airspace when they built a fancy new airport for me to use.
 
Fearless Tower said:
Anyone received a new plastic certificate during the shutdown? I figured all those people processing new certs were furloughed, but was talking to an ASI at the Monroe airshow this weekend and when I showed him my temporary, he mentioned that they are still working and cranking out new plastic certs.
Click to expand...
As it happens, I passed the check ride for my ASEL Instrument Rating on October 3rd and just got my new plastic certificate in the mail this past Saturday (November 8th). Not bad!
 
kaiser said:
Airport isn’t closed. It’s blocking use to a certain type of stakeholder. It would be as if they shut your water off but still kept the public swimming pool and water park down the road open.
Click to expand...
As an adult, nothing is legally stopping you from going in the kiddie pool, but you are going to be socially shamed and viewed suspiciously by all the parents wondering why a grown man is splashing around with four-year-olds when there is a normal pool fifteen feet to the right. Not apples to apples, I get it - but really, why would anyone be that upset about closures to transient GA aircraft at big class B fields? They aren't meant for you and me.

Any major metro that has a B or even a C has at least one if not multiple local relievers geared much more toward GA, often in much more convenient locations to the metro. Further, United 123 can't land or depart from Exec's 5,000 x 100' runway, can't deplane to a jet bridge at Exec, and its pax can't connect to their next flight at Exec. Let the big metal have their big metal airports, and enjoy the fact you can stay out of that mess. Isn't that why we got into flying ourselves in the first place? I just really don't see the practical issue here beyond some people having their ego bruised that (in the interest of safety during a national crisis) they have temporarily lost the theoretical ability to land at a field they would rarely choose to land at in the first place.
 
StraightnLevel said:
Question: Why don't they just shut down the part time Class D towers and reassign those people?

Note: The Senate passed a measure last night that would end this mess. It's now up to the House to do their job and pass it.
Click to expand...

It takes a year or more training to swap sectors.
 
traumamed said:
…Any major metro that has a B or even a C has at least one if not multiple local relievers geared much more toward GA, often in much more convenient locations to the metro. ….
Click to expand...

GA isn’t just a piston powered fleet and to be fair, many F100 companies operate transient GA aircraft. Many of them can operate from reliever fields, but it can be hard for some of the larger jets. I expect those operations would likely be calling for the exemption.
 
The formal order reducing services was published in today’s Federal Reguster. Most of it involves the 10% reduction in 121 and scheduled 135. This is the portion that applies primarily to GA.

c. Termination of ATC Service Due to Staffing Levels​
Accordingly, with respect to ATC services, under the authority provided to the FAA Administrator by 49 U.S.C. 40103, 40113, and 46105(c), it is hereby ordered that:​
1. When an FAA owned and operated facility does not have adequate staffing levels, ATC may elect not to provide the following services:​
a. Radar Traffic Information Service;​
b. Radar Assistance to visual flight rule (VFR) aircraft;​
c. Terminal Radar Services for VFR aircraft;​
d. VFR Traffic Pattern Operations;​
e. Practice Approaches to VFR aircraft;​
f. Flight checks services to restore inoperable equipment and approaches;​
g. ATC services to parachute operations; or,​
h. ATC services to certain special or unusual operations.​
2. When an Air Traffic Control Assigned Airspace (ATCAA) or Military Operating Area (MOA) is located within a geographical area served by an FAA owned and operated facility that does not have adequate staffing levels, ATO may elect not to activate the ATCAA or MOA.​

Full Order https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2025-11-12/pdf/2025-19850.pdf
 
Where is NATCA on this?
 
TCABM said:
GA isn’t just a piston powered fleet and to be fair, many F100 companies operate transient GA aircraft. Many of them can operate from reliever fields, but it can be hard for some of the larger jets. I expect those operations would likely be calling for the exemption.
Click to expand...
Even something as big as a small airliner like the CRJ700 can operate from typical runway lengths found at "Exec-" style reliever fields (5-6,000 x100). Can you give examples of companies flying bigger metal than that *and* doing it under Part 91?
 
traumamed said:
Even something as big as a small airliner like the CRJ700 can operate from typical runway lengths found at "Exec-" style reliever fields (5-6,000 x100). Can you give examples of companies flying bigger metal than that *and* doing it under Part 91?
Click to expand...
GA isnt just part 91. BBJs are GA.
 
NJP_MAN said:
GA isnt just part 91. BBJs are GA.
Click to expand...
Okay, let's be real here. Part 125 ops are not what these "GA bans" are about. Part 125 would be minimally impacted because they are almost certainly pre-coordinating their arrival in advance, anyway - so the "exception" is de facto.

Remember that these GA bans are operational actions at the discretion of the airport proprietor and are not regulatory in the strictest since. They are not intended to ensnare Part 125 ops or meaningfully restrict an aircraft's ability to gain access to a general geographic area.
 
traumamed said:
Even something as big as a small airliner like the CRJ700 can operate from typical runway lengths found at "Exec-" style reliever fields (5-6,000 x100). Can you give examples of companies flying bigger metal than that *and* doing it under Part 91?
Click to expand...

N1KE is top of mind. G650s can’t always make it into/out of a 6K’ field.

As to your later comment, the NOTAM says what the NOTAM says and that’s different than what the order states.

What that really comes down to is there’s enough gray area that anything can happen. But again, I’m not seeing a ton of 172s flying into/out of TEB, which is on the list of 40 impacted airports. Ironically, TEB is named in the order, bot doesn’t have the NOTAM, neither do several others on the list.

So, TEB and some others are not NOTAM’d closed to GA, but can throttle services per the order while LGA, NYC, and others are both closed to GA and able to throttle services.
 
Our
traumamed said:
Okay, let's be real here. Part 125 ops are not what these "GA bans" are about. Part 125 would be minimally impacted because they are almost certainly pre-coordinating their arrival in advance, anyway - so the "exception" is de facto.

Remember that these GA bans are operational actions at the discretion of the airport proprietor and are not regulatory in the strictest since. They are not intended to ensnare Part 125 ops or meaningfully restrict an aircraft's ability to gain access to a general geographic area.
Click to expand...
This is exactly what has been banned. People arent flying 172 in to LAX. They routinely fly bizjets in there and a BBJ with the founder of Snapchat on board is no different than a Gulfstream with Oprah on board.
 
TCABM said:
So, TEB and some others are not NOTAM’d closed to GA, but can throttle services per the order while LGA, NYC, and others are both closed to GA and able to throttle services.
Click to expand...
Edit, I slowly re-read your comment and found my response to be a result of my lack of reading comprehension.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top