KVUO: New draconian airspace change, effective 10/1/12

Pilawt

Pilawt

Final Approach
Joined
Sep 19, 2005
Messages
9,481
Location
Santa Rosita State Park, under the big 'W'
Display Name
Display name:
Pilawt
A meeting was held last night at Pearson Field (Vancouver WA), at which FAA announced its new airspace change for VUO, effective October 1, 2012. This change will have a serious and negative impact upon efficiency, economy and safety of operations at Pearson Field.

It should be noted at the outset that this change is being made at the direction of a regional FAA bureaucrat in Renton. Our friends at PDX ATC are against it (as are the controllers' union, the airlines, AOPA, Washington Pilots Assn., the City of Vancouver, and all other stakeholders), but they are obliged to follow orders from Renton.

Here is the letter from FAA, handed out at the meeting last night: www.pilawt.com/FAA_letter_120930.pdf

In a nutshell: FAA has established what is known as the "Pearson Box", shown in blue on the diagram below. It extends eight miles west from PDX, surface to 2,100', and 2,500 feet either side of the PDX 10L localizer (which includes the centerline of the 10R localizer as well). Pearson Field is fully within the box. The box will not appear on any chart.

When PDX is operating on east flow (10L/R, which are the calm-wind runways and favored by winds in the fall and winter), no VUO airplane will be allowed to operate anywhere within the box whenever a PDX airplane is anywhere within the box. When PDX approaches are in progress, close enough such that they might be in the box at the time of a VUO operation, the VUO operation will be prohibited. A VUO departure will be instructed to remain on the ground, and an arrival will be instructed to remain outside the VUO Class D (yellow area on diagram below).

Delays are expected to be commonplace and lengthy; the FAA's slideshow last night indicated they are contemplating delays of 20-30 minutes for VUO operations. Controllers said they will try to create "holes" in the flow of PDX arrivals to allow VUO operations, but at high-volume times that will be impossible. VUO closed-traffic operations will frequently be prohibited, as well, effectively putting the airport's lone flight training operation out of business.

Delayed VFR arrivals will be expected to "hold" outside the VUO Class D. There are no established "holding" landmarks, altitudes or procedures. Obviously, with floor of Class C at 1,800' in that area (shaded in green below), there will be numerous light airplanes milling about in an 800' block of airspace for extended times. Good luck with that.

VUO_box.jpg


The FAA "party line" emanating from Renton is that this procedure is intended to avoid wake turbulence encounters. Interestingly, however, this procedure is not limited to large aircraft -- even a Caravan or King Air or Skyhawk landing at Portland will stop Pearson operations.

In the seventy years that these airports have co-existed, there has never been a mid-air collision, near-mid-air collision, or wake turbulence event involving a PDX aircraft and a VUO aircraft. Safety Risk Management Panels have rejected the "Pearson Box" concept; rather the SRMPs, along with all other stakeholders, strongly recommended re-commissioning the control tower at Pearson that worked exceptionally well during its one year of operation between April 2011 and April 2012. FAA in Renton rammed this change through without NPRM or public comment, violating FAA's own internal orders and the Administrative Procedures Act.

Here is the Fact Sheet issued by the City of Vancouver: http://www.cityofvancouver.us/upload/contents/1074/FactSheet-FAAProceduresAtPearsonFieldFINAL.pdf

If you want to get involved, send a letter to your elected state and Federal representatives. Many of them are already alerted to this issue and are on board, but constituent input is always welcome. Here is suggested language you could use in such a message:
www.pilawt.com/Letter_of_concern.doc

Here's the first local media coverage: http://www.oregonlive.com/clark-county/index.ssf/2012/09/pearson_field_pilots_protest_n.html
 
Last edited:
MAKG1 said:
Interesting. So, they are doing away with the Class D there?
Click to expand...
Nope -- still Class D, on paper anyway.

You call Portland Tower on 119.0 inbound, as per the present procedure, and if a PDX 10L/R approach is in progress they will tell you, "Remain clear of the Class C and the Pearson Class D until advised; expect XX minute delay."

In practice it sounds more like a subset of a Class B ... in other words, Class B(S).

:mad2:
 
I'll steer clear

I think Draconia is officially off of my "fly there" list.
 
Time for a whole raft of people to start filing IFR to KVUO, when aproaches are in effect. A bunch.

Or, a class-action suit against the silly person who has unilaterally made this call.
 
Thee FAA is probably in colluding with the National Park Service, which has been trying to shut down Pearson for decades.
 
We are from the government and we are here to help.

We realize this will affect operations, however, you must realize that we are not happy until you are not happy.
 
SCCutler said:
Time for a whole raft of people to start filing IFR to KVUO, when aproaches are in effect. A bunch.

Or, a class-action suit against the silly person who has unilaterally made this call.
Click to expand...

This is an EXCELLENT idea. Pacific Northwest pilots, pay attention to this. Pearson has a long history in our region. Act.
 
kkoran said:
From the Vancouver newspaper.
http://www.columbian.com/news/2012/sep/22/pearson-pilots-fret-over-faa-proposal/
Click to expand...
Earlier today the photo accompanying the Columbian article carried a caption with a snarky comment to the effect that because of Pearson Field, the new bridge planned to replace the 95-year-old Interstate Bridge will have to be a "flat concrete slab" instead of a pretty suspension bridge. That caption was removed this morning after complaints were made to the paper. :rolleyes2:

Much fairer, more intelligent piece in the Portland Oregonian today: http://www.oregonlive.com/business/...strictions_pilots_p.html#incart_river_default
 
Last edited:
I'm in the middle of a bunch of work and have not looked at your supporting documentation, but my recommendation would be to use the ATO's SRM panel findings as one of the keys to your objections. In theory, the SRM panel's findings are supposed to be primary evidence used to produce the safety risk management document used to gather the FAA upper echelon signatures. It is very possible that the SRMD presented the SRM panel's findings in a poor, or even misleading way.

FAA is spending beaucoups bucks pushing SMS downward throughout the organization. To make decisions counter to the findings of an SRM panel undermines the entire multibillion dollar SMS process.
 
Thanks, Ken. AFAIK the SRMP (which included Port of Portland, PDX Air Traffic Controllers, Airline Pilots Association, Horizon Airlines, Alaska Airlines, Delta Airlines, City of Vancouver, et al.) did a good job and minced no words in concluding the "Pearson Box" is a bad idea, and that re-commissioning the Pearson Tower is the way to go. But it's clear that the plan announced Thursday night is what Renton intended to do from the beginning and any opinion to the contrary, from anyone, was of no interest to them.

I'll be very interested to hear your thoughts when you've had a chance to look at the links.
 
Last edited:
SCCutler said:
Time for a whole raft of people to start filing IFR to KVUO, when aproaches are in effect. A bunch.

Or, a class-action suit against the silly person who has unilaterally made this call.
Click to expand...

Threefingeredjack said:
This is an EXCELLENT idea. Pacific Northwest pilots, pay attention to this. Pearson has a long history in our region. Act.
Click to expand...

I appreciate the sentiment, but respectfully, we don't want to do anything that could sway public opinion away from GA in general and the airport in particular, more than it already is. I am grateful that the press is reporting our response as "heated but civil." Best course of action is to cooperate with ATC in a professional manner (and be nice to our friends at PDX -- they really are on our side), and send the letters!!
 
Last edited:
Pilawt said:
Thanks, Ken. AFAIK the SRMP (which included Port of Portland, PDX Air Traffic Controllers, Airline Pilots Association, Horizon Airlines, Alaska Airlines, Delta Airlines, City of Vancouver, et al.) did a good job and minced no words in concluding the "Pearson Box" is a bad idea, and that re-commissioning the Pearson Tower is the way to go. But it's clear that the plan announced Thursday night is what Renton intended to do from the beginning and any opinion to the contrary, from anyone, was of no interest to them.

I'll be very interested to hear your thoughts when you've had a chance to look at the links.
Click to expand...
See PM.
 
From today's Portland Oregonian:

New Pearson Field flight rule opposed by 5 U.S. senators

The last two paragraphs are hilarious to anyone who was at that meeting last Thursday night. Laura Schneider and Scott Speer (no relation to Vancouver Aviation Advisory Committee chairman and staunch airport supporter Paul Speer) had to do their jobs -- read the script, bite their lips and take the heat for their boss in Renton -- but Renton's spokesman does not pretend to speak for the controller's union rep who blasted the plan at Thursday night's meeting.
 
I am curious. This is a class Delta with no control tower, no? "soon as practicable" can be translated easily to "soon as I'm out of that damn box"

*grin*
 
onwards said:
I am curious. This is a class Delta with no control tower, no? "soon as practicable" can be translated easily to "soon as I'm out of that damn box"
Click to expand...
We have always been required to contact PDX Tower (on a discrete freq for Pearson traffic) before departure or before entering the Class D inbound. But heretofore that was only to get wake turbulence advisories -- ATC never restricted access to the Class D or otherwise sequenced or controlled traffic at Pearson.

Under this new rule ATC will tell departures to remain on the ground, and arrivals to remain clear of Class D, until the box is clear of PDX traffic.

When VUO had a temporary tower last year, it worked great, but FAA closed it on 4/1/2012 and moved that Pearson ATC position back to PDX. We're asking FAA to re-open the tower permanently.

VUO_250000.jpg
 
Pilawt said:
When VUO had a temporary tower last year, it worked great, but FAA closed it on 4/1/2012 and moved that Pearson ATC position back to PDX. We're asking FAA to re-open the tower permanently.
Click to expand...

Why not operate like to did before the temporary tower was even built? To much traffic with the new runway?
 
PDX's north runway (10L/28R) was extended recently, and it now accommodates heavier jets. So it could be argued there is greater wake turbulence exposure to VUO, as the ILS approach to 10L passes 1100' AGL over the Pearson runway.

But the larger issue, which was apparently the impetus behind this rule but FAA now strangely avoids talking about it, is TCAS resolution advisories. Even if VUO aircraft are fully in VUO airspace, and everybody is safe and legal, TCAS programming logic could extrapolate traffic in the VUO pattern as a threat and issue an RA, requiring a missed approach. FAA has a zero-RA goal.

The Pearson Tower was able to sequence traffic so as to avoid RAs and wake turbulence, but without unreasonable delay or inconvenience.
 
Pilawt said:
We have always been required to contact PDX Tower (on a discrete freq for Pearson traffic) before departure or before entering the Class D inbound. But heretofore that was only to get wake turbulence advisories -- ATC never restricted access to the Class D or otherwise sequenced or controlled traffic at Pearson.
Click to expand...

I assumed the reason was so that they could tell us to stay the **** out of Class C.

If you've got 5 senators on board, you've pretty much won. Elected officials are given a huge amount of deference by appointed officials. One or two would probably do it....

I don't trust algorithms to make decisions. This TCAS thing is an example of why. A box with a million lines of code and unknown and inflexible decision trees should not be PIC.
 
Last edited:
This just in:

FAA delays rule limiting Pearson Field flights
http://www.oregonlive.com/clark-county/index.ssf/2012/09/faa_delays_rule_limiting_pears.html

FAA to delay controversial airspace restrictions
http://www.columbian.com/news/2012/sep/26/faa-delay-controversial-airspace-restrictions/

There is still far to go, but we are very grateful that the City and elected officials in Washington, Oregon and elsewhere have gone to bat for the airport. Thanks also to the many groups and individuals who are supporting this cause.
 
Even better, here's an e-mail I got from the FAA Safety Team a little bit ago -

FAA Safety Team | Safer Skies Through Education
Pearson Field (VUO) New Airspace Procedures-CANCELED
Notice Number: NOTC4210
PDX-VUO Letter to Airmen (LTA) 12-03 regarding new procedures for aircraft operating in Pearson Field (VUO) Class "D" Airspace has been canceled. PDX-VUO LTA 12-03 was sent out in a FAASTeam Notice email on 9/25/12 and was to take effect on 10/1/12.
PDX-VUO Letter to Airmen 12-04 , effective 9/26/12, was issued to cancel PDX-VUO LTA 12-03.
Please checks NOTAMS and look for future FAASTeam Notices for any updates.
For more information please contact:
Dave Daum
Support Specialist, PDX ATCT
dave.c.daum@faa.gov
This notice is being sent to you because you selected "Local Air Safety Information" in your preferences on FAASafety.gov. If you wish to adjust your selections, log into https://www.faasafety.gov/Users/pub/preferences.aspx where you can update your preferences.
 
Press release from the City of Vancouver:

City of Vancouver negotiates a delay to FAA rules change at Pearson Field airport. New rule was to take effect Monday

The City of Vancouver, WA and WA Senator Patty Murray’s office negotiated an 11th hour reprieve from a sudden rules change announced by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) that was to take effect Monday at Pearson Field.

Emails received by the City from David Grizzle, Chief Operating Officer of the FAA and Roderick Hall, Assistant Administrator for Government Affairs, indicated that the “FAA will be delaying implementation of any airspace changes for at least 30 days. During this time we intend to re-engage with stakeholders to see if we can find some middle ground on this issue.”

Last Thursday (Sept. 20,) the City and local pilots were formally notified of a new FAA rule that would significantly change aircraft access to shared airspace between Vancouver’s Pearson Field and Portland International (PDX) within 10 days.

The City said the new rule created significant safety risks as access to its airspace shrinks, causing small planes to circle over Vancouver, Clark County and northwest Portland neighborhoods, while waiting for approval to land.

Implementation of this rule could have significant financial impacts to Pearson Field and loss of revenue to the City and the region. According to the Washington State Department of Transportation Aviation Division, Pearson Field and Museum attracts 39,500 visitors to Vancouver for combined annual revenue of $26,998,080 and generate roughly 458 jobs with combined wages of $7,375,786. There are over 50,000 aircraft operations each year at Pearson.

The City said the FAA did not follow proper public notification or address safety, economic and environmental impacts of the rules change.

“Our local Senators and Congressional representatives really stepped up on this to help us - in Washington, Patty Murray, Maria Cantwell and Jaime Herrera Beutler and in Oregon, Ron Wyden, Jeff Merkley and Earl Blumenauer - we can’t thank them enough,” said Vancouver Mayor Tim Leavitt. “Senator Murray in particular helped negotiate an 11th hour reprieve with the FAA before we took more drastic legal measures.”

“Support from aviation groups included the Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association, Washington Pilots Association, Pearson Advocates For General Aviation, Fort Vancouver National Trust, users of Pearson Field and others was invaluable,” the Mayor said.

At close of business last night, Senator Patty Murray’s office forwarded the City a FAA offer to delay rule implementation for at least 30 days so the issue could be more publicly addressed.

“We worked side by side with our aerospace and government colleagues to reason with the FAA, to appeal to our elected officials, both to ask the FAA for more time and to reinstate the proven solution to air safety in Vancouver- an air traffic control tower, not the unproven solution the FAA was mandating,” Pearson Airport Manager Willy Williamson said.

On October 1, the FAA intended to implement their new procedure which is unique in the country instead of an air traffic control tower which had proven effective at Pearson in the past year. Pearson Field is the only Class D airport in the country without an on-field control tower.

The City of Vancouver and the Port of Portland have safely and effectively shared airspace on both sides of the Columbia River for more than 50 years at their respective airports-- bustling Portland International and small, historic Pearson Field.

Located directly east of I-5 and just north of Highway 14, just across the Columbia River from PDX, Pearson Field is operated by the City of Vancouver and funded by the users of the airfield. In 2001, the National Air Transportation Association named it one of America's 100 "Most Needed" Airports.

Pearson Field is also one of the oldest operating airfields in the US and recently received national recognition through the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics (AIAA) as a historic aerospace site.
Click to expand...
 
Congratulations Pilawt.

It's good to see that they get it right sometimes, even if all they got right was to undo a wrong.

What happens over the next 30 days?
 
I dont think this is dead. Keep your eyes open for an NPRM. This got shot down because they wouldn't have been able to defend it in court, not because 'the FAA' decided that they didn't want it.
 
Service with a smile. Your employees. Makes ya feel all warm and fuzzy doesn't it? Keep sending those tax checks. ;)
 
nice to know what you look and sound like Jeff. You always have a suit on? :)
 
"The Federal Aviation Administration has dropped a controversial airspace restriction over Vancouver’s Pearson Field, handing a victory to the city and others who lobbied against it."

http://www.columbian.com/news/2013/feb/21/proposed-pearson-airspace-restriction-dropped/

Many thanks to all who wrote and worked to achieve this result.

This e-mail just received from the airport manager:

In case you haven’t heard, it is official … there will be no “Pearson Box” or procedures implemented over Pearson Field.

Operations and procedures will pretty much remain the same for pilots flying into and out of both PDX and Pearson Field. However, there will be some training events for Wake Turbulence and Pearson Procedures (what we are doing right). I recommend everyone come to one of these training events. The first is tentatively set for March 13 at 5:00pm and 6:30pm in the Pilots Lounge.

There will be a Letter to Airmen issued and I recommend everyone read it.

Thanks to everyone who participated in our efforts! (there were a lot of them!)
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top