URGENT! - DFW CLASS BRAVO CHANGES - ADDISON AIRSPACE

SCCutler

Administrator
Management Council Member
PoA Supporter
Joined
Feb 27, 2005
Messages
17,273
Location
Dallas
Display Name

Display name:
Spike Cutler
This is a matter of GREAT URGENCY, as the proposed changes to the DFW Bravo airspace, especially the lowered floor around Addison Airport, will serve to dramatically harm the safety and efficiency of travel into and out of Addison Airport.

There is more information available (or to be made available) at: www.DFWAirspace.com
but here is the first pass; please be certain to understand what is happening, and make appropriate comments before the NPRM Comment Period ends on March 15th.
---

The FAA has been engaged in a review of the DFW Class Bravo Airspace, citing concerns over possible interaction between jet traffic inbound to the two air carrier airports in the DFW Bravo (Dallas Love Field – KDAL and DFW International Airport – KDFW) and other air traffic, for quite some time. The FAA circulated its initial proposal for changes in 2008, and at that time, conducted several meetings in the area and solicited informal comments, comments which were presumably intended to assist the FAA in formulating changes to the airspace which would help to alleviate potential conflicts between aircraft without creating new and different safety and traffic flow issues.

The FAA has now issued its Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM), and it is published in the Federal Register at Volume 78, No. 14, Pager 4356 to 4365. A copy of the NPRM is attached to the website.

In the NPRM, it is apparent that the FAA has wholly failed to recognize the profound impact of key changes to the Bravo at and around the Addison Airport (KADS), especially the lowering of the “floor” of the Bravo airspace around Addison to 2,500′ MSL (Mean Sea Level).

Lowering the base of the Bravo to 2,500′ MSL impacts Addison in several very important ways. Addison already has a constricted Class Delta area – standard a Class Delta requires 2,500′ above ground level (which, for Addison’s nominal 644′ MSL would require that the D-space go to 3,144′ MSL; Addison’s Class D now goes only to the current base of the Class B, 3,000′ MSL, meaning Addison has only 2,356′ of vertical airspace with which to work.

With the proposed change to the airspace, Addison would lose an addition 500′’, leaving one of the busiest single-runway airports in the country, located in very busy airspace, with only 1,856′ of vertical airspace. With minimum altitude over congested areas of 1,000′ AGL, Addison’s airspace would have ONLY 856′ WITH WHICH TO WORK UNDER THE NEW BRAVO SPACE.

WHAT YOU NEED TO DO:

Melissa McCaffrey, Senior Government Analyst, Air Traffic Services for AOPA, has this to say:
Below is a link to regulations.gov where you can click on comments that were already submitted on the NPRM, hopefully that will give you a good idea of what is being said and who is involved locally. The second link is to one of our articles that goes through the User Group Process for the Design of Class B and C Airspace, it is a little lengthy but provides great detail on the FAA airspace rulemaking process, which is typically what confuses folks. please feel free to share this link to others with questions on the process and I would even encourage you to maybe incorporate it onto your website. I will certainly get you a copy of our comments just as soon as I get them finalized and also a quick guide to submitting comments through the docket.

http://www.regulations.gov/#!docketBrowser;rpp=25;po=0;dct=PS;D=FAA-2012-1168

http://www.aopa.org/whatsnew/air_traffic/tcagroup.html


Link to AOPA notice: http://www.aopa.org/advocacy/articles/2 ... c_sect=adv

If this concerns you, you must submit written comment:

Pilots may submit written comments to:

U.S. Department of Transportation
Docket Operations, M–30,
1200 New Jersey Avenue SE.
West Building Ground Floor, Room W12–140
Washington, D.C. 20590–0001

Be sure that you identify FAA Docket No. FAA–2012–1168 and Airspace Docket No. 07–AWA–3, at the beginning of your comments.

Information needed to include when submitting via internet:
14 CFR Part 71
[Docket No. FAA–2012–1168; Airspace
Docket No. 07–AWA–3]
RIN 2120–AA66
Proposed Modification of the Dallas/
Fort Worth Class B Airspace Area; TX

First click to link to submit via Internet:
http://www.regulations.gov.

Internet site to tell you how to submit electronically:
http://www.regulations.gov/#!faqs;qid=6-2
 
If this happens there is a good chance I will move. It is already congested enough that it verges on dangerous now. Let's not forget we also have airpark just to the North, even though they have few operations this makes avoiding their traffic really tough.

I suppose this is a response to Southwest busting Addison airspace by ducking under. So instead of working with them so they don't do that, we just give them the airspace.
 
get an instrument rating and file a departure procedure, prob solve. DALLAS CLASS B is no place for weekend vfr spam canners.
 
get an instrument rating and file a departure procedure, prob solve. DALLAS CLASS B is no place for weekend vfr spam canners.

The problem with that is the wait times are sometimes very long for an IFR release. It sucks being number 6 for departure when they are letting one go every 10 minutes. If you are training and paying $200 plus an hour that can get really, really, expensive.

Besides the issue is more coming inbound when you mix IFR and VFR traffic around a small piece of airspace with little vertical separation as it is.
 
Years ago I got one of these notices; or should I say it was posted at our flying club at LGB, that was a proposed change to somehow include the LGB Class D into the Los Angeles Class B...

Looked to me like they were looking to build an infrastructure to handle more comerical traffic out of LGB...

Here it is a another 12 plus years later and Long Beach did get a lot more flights including a hub FedEx and UPS, the airspace is still Class D, and from what I understand the FAA had abandoned the project.
 
Last edited:
Years ago I got one of these notices; or should I say it was posted at our flying club at LGB, that was a proposed change to somehow include the LGB Class D into the Los Angeles Class B...

Looked to me like they were looking to build an infrastructure to handle more comerical traffic out of LGB...

Here it is a another 12 plus years later and Long Beach did get a lot more flights including a hub FedEx and UPS, the airspace is still Class D, and from what I understand the FAA had abandoned the project.

Atlanta did an airspace grab recently - going into effect March 1, I believe. Lowered the outer shelves down by 1000' all the way around I think.

EDIT: Looks like it's coming March 7, and the feedback during the process was useful in somewhat reducing the impact on local airports.

http://www.aopa.org/advocacy/articles/2013/130110atlanta-class-b-airspace-change.html
 
Last edited:
I expect more KADS refugees to show up at the best kept secret in the Dallas Metroplex, Dallas Executive (KRBD). It is 10 minutes from downtown Dallas and until they close the tower in April, it's a class D. Hangar space costs a fraction of ADS, it has two 100' wide runways, an ILS and two fantastic FBOs who still know how to treat us bug smashers like the royalty we are. Oh, and did I mention some of the best fuel prices in the region?
 
The FAA is reviewing all of the Class B in the US and doing another big airspace grab. Chicago, Seattle, Salt Lake and Atlanta have already changed. We've completed all the processes for Las Vegas and are just waiting on a publication/activation announcement.
 
I expect more KADS refugees to show up at the best kept secret in the Dallas Metroplex, Dallas Executive (KRBD). It is 10 minutes from downtown Dallas and until they close the tower in April, it's a class D. Hangar space costs a fraction of ADS, it has two 100' wide runways, an ILS and two fantastic FBOs who still know how to treat us bug smashers like the royalty we are. Oh, and did I mention some of the best fuel prices in the region?

In the same vein, I wonder if Denton and McKinney would gain a few.
 
The problem with that is the wait times are sometimes very long for an IFR release. It sucks being number 6 for departure when they are letting one go every 10 minutes. If you are training and paying $200 plus an hour that can get really, really, expensive.
Yup.....just take a look at DVT under the PHX Bravo. IFR doesn't help you much....you can easily find yourself waiting 45 min or more for release....in 110 F heat.
 
FWIW - Hooks (KDWH) in Houston has, for as long as I've been there at least (1999), had a 2000 MSL Delta ceiling which equates to an 8 feet lower AGL Class D area than the proposed for KADS. The airspace is next to the KIAH bravo floor airspace and anything between NE through S is essentially not an option. As far as my experience goes - this works out fine, even when KIAH is landing to the east.

I know the DFW/DAL situation is unique, but thought I'd throw out a pretty comparable situation down south.
 
Last edited:
Ellington has similar constraints, with HOU class b overlying it. And they have 3 different traffic pattern altitudes. The 1000 ft in congested areas is only if not contrary to ATC instruction. GA piston pattern at EFD is five or six hundred agl.

And. I've flown ga spam can vfr into ADS and love. Day. Night. During the push. No problem. Just be on your game.

Granted its been a while. But this isn't the tragedy it's being portrayed as.
 
:yes: two Easter baskets for KRBD. Enjoyed lunch there recently. Flew there in one of those aluminum airplanes withOUT the hd tv's. omg dallas is right there ;)
 
Last edited:
The 1000 ft in congested areas is only if not contrary to ATC instruction.

FAR 91.119 seems to apply only "when necessary for takeoff or landing". If you're in the approach or departure process, 91.119 doesn't apply...but when merely transiting the area, it does apply. ATC can't waive 91.119 for you.
 
Update:

Cogent and informative comments, drafted by ADS AOPA ASN Representative Keith Craigo have been loaded on the DFWAirspace.com website; also, you can click here:

http://www.dfwairspace.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/Craigo-AOPA-ASN-Comments-mod-E-3-4-2013.pdf

Keith has discovered that the reconfiguration, as proposed, will create a wedge of uncontrolled airspace very close to Addison, in the area to the east and north of ADS, between the lower Class Delta upper limit and the base of the overlying Bravo, thus creating a new and significant risk of conflict in very congested airspace.

PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE, read and understand what they are doing, and offer commentary to the NPRM; these proposed changes will, in the area adjacent to Addison (especially to the east) create greater conflicts, will reduce airspace capacity and will cause delays in IFR Releases.

The deadline for comments is fast approaching - they must be in by March 25, 2013 - please be heard!
 
Last edited:
Update:

Cogent and informative comments, drafted by ADS AOPA ASN Representative Keith Craigo have been loaded on the DFWAirspace.com website; also, you can click here:

http://www.dfwairspace.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/Craigo-AOPA-ASN-Comments-mod-E-3-4-2013.pdf

Keith has discovered that the reconfiguration, as proposed, will create a wedge of uncontrolled airspace very close to Addison, in the area to the east and north of ADS, between the lower Class Delta upper limit and the base of the overlying Bravo, thus creating a new and significant risk of conflict in very congested airspace.

PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE, read and understand what they are doing, and offer commentary to the NPRM; these proposed changes will, in the area adjacent to Addison (especially to the east) create greater conflicts, will reduce airspace capacity and will cause delays in IFR Releases.

The deadline for comments is fast approaching - they must be in by March 25, 2013 - please be heard!

Thanks for posting this. Hopefully reason will prevail and only the West side will be lowered.
 
Back
Top