Towers & Colorado

murphey

murphey

Touchdown! Greaser!
Joined
Aug 21, 2008
Messages
11,664
Location
Colorado
Display Name
Display name:
murphey
The airport director at Front Range Airport sent the attached letter to David Grizzle, the COO of the FAA regarding the closure (April 1) of the FTG Tower. Since this letter was distributed widely, to airport tenants, to visitors to the airport, in fact to anyone that signed up for email notices, and has been re-distributed by any number of individuals and organizations who received it, I have no qualms posting it here. At the bottom of the letter is the canned response from the FAA.

Personally, I think whoever wrote this letter, and whoever proof-read the letter, should be required to attend Remedial English Composition as well as an Introductory Course in Logic.:mad2:

1) DIA is high-value target and FTG is 5 nm away. So what?

2) Buckley AFB is 10 nm away. So what? BAFB has the the F-16s.

3) Aircraft launched from FTG can reach either in less than 5 minutes. Frankly, this is a good reason not just to shut down the tower but to close the airport. This isn't a security benefit, it's a security hazard.

4) FTG ATCS doesn't track anything except with binoculars. All radar comes from the DIA tower by microwave link. In fact FTG tower doesn't even see aircraft taking off from FTG (except by eyeball) until the aircraft is at least 500 AGL when DIA radar can see it.

5) FTG is a critical diversionary airport to DIA? Get real. Yes, FTG can handle a B737 (and has) as well as some of the heavy USAF haulers, but that's about it. There's no infrastructure to handle any quantity of passengers from a commercial flight.

6) Blended airspace? Whazzat? FTG, BJC and APA are all inside the 30 nm Mode C veil.

7) The Spaceport. Now we come to the real reason...


But that's only my opinion, one that really isn't worth much and usually ignored.
 

Attachments

  • ftg letter.pdf
    349 KB · Views: 46
Sequester is going to give the FAA the excuse to do some things they've wanted to do anyway, is my guess.
 
I don't see the need for a tower at KFTG. The security issues he raised are bravo sierra.

There are well under 200 operations a day there IIRC, mostly single engine piston aircraft. I've been there quite a few times and it is never that busy. KFNL and KGXY are busier and for some reason everyone gets along just fine.

One thing I've never understood -- I've flown to several controlled fields where tower gives quick taxi instructions upon landing "next left, alpha to parking." At KFTG they've always required a frequency change to ground.
 
Last edited:
The controllers at FTG seem to get all excited too when there are more than 3 aircraft in the pattern. They could obviously never handle the level of traffic at APA. ;)

The FTG tower can go. The tower at BJC is a different story IMHO.
 
There will always be good reasons for and against the closure of a particular tower (or program or benefit, aviation or non-aviation.). Sequester doesn't and I don't think can be expected to take those into account.
 
Agreed, bizarre argument.

N1234 heavy departing 17 with 300,000 lbs. of TNT. Allah Ackbar!
With tower: N1234 cancel takeoff clearance taxi to ramp. Plot foiled.
Without tower: Uuummm... Front range traffic Cessna 2345 leaving the pattern. Plot unaffected!

Sounds like they need a tower to stop things like that.
 
Alexb2000 said:
Agreed, bizarre argument.

N1234 heavy departing 17 with 300,000 lbs. of TNT. Allah Ackbar!
With tower: N1234 cancel takeoff clearance taxi to ramp. Plot foiled.
Without tower: Uuummm... Front range traffic Cessna 2345 leaving the pattern. Plot unaffected!

Sounds like they need a tower to stop things like that.
Click to expand...


If the airplane is on the runway being piloted by a criminal, how is the tower going to prevent them from leaving the airport? Shout through the radio? Blow a rape whistle? Send the slow airport fire truck out and block the runway?:goofy:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top