Airline Pilot Forums

Airline Pilot Forums was designed to be a community where working airline pilots can share ideas and information about the aviation field. In the forum you will find information about major and regional airline carriers, career training, interview and job seeker help, finance, and living the airline pilot lifestyle.




SenecaDriver
11-15-2007, 12:31 PM
Wasn't aware there was "restricted military air space above the East Coast". Is He talking about talking above FL60? DC ADIZ?

http://money.cnn.com/2007/11/15/news/economy/bush_airlines/index.htm

What do you folks in the trenches think will solve the delay/Cancelation problems? Good luck over the next week.


Slice
11-15-2007, 12:43 PM
They're probably speaking of MOA's and parts of the Warning areas since you can't go through them IFR if they're hot.

SenecaDriver
11-15-2007, 01:02 PM
I guess my point of the question is that most airports are 5 Lb bags and we are trying to cram 10Lbs of "stuff" in them. If they allow more direct routing, will that ease or add to the problem?

I guess to the man on the street, all military airspace is restricted.


StripAlert
11-15-2007, 01:24 PM
Wasn't aware there was "restricted military air space above the East Coast". Is He talking about talking above FL60? DC ADIZ?

You're kidding, right? It's only wall-to-wall off the coast from Miami to Boston...

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/facility/vacapes.htm

Active Warning Areas and MOAs are restricted as far as IFR traffic is concerned. And if you're bumbling through there VFR, you're a prime candidate for a Darwin Award.

A320fumes
11-15-2007, 01:37 PM
I'm very curious about this. The un-informed American public has accepted that the airlines are the culprit. They assume that the airlines like to pay crews to wait on congested runways, hold over FAK and divert to Newberg. The lack of intelligence among the public doesn't perplex me, especially since Nov '99, but why don't airline execs counter these allegations with the truth....the ATC system is antiquated and totally unable to handle today's level of traffic. Opinions please.

Pilotpip
11-15-2007, 01:45 PM
There isn't just one problem.

The ATC system is one.

Frequency is another. Why have two RJ's go from one destination to another 20 minutes apart full when one 737 would take care of the route and probably fill up?

Why use the hub and spoke system?

Why have 150 flights scheduled to arrive and depart in an hour when the airport can only handle 140 in perfect weather?

FR8DOGG
11-15-2007, 02:44 PM
A little more pavement wouldn't hurt either. (more runways) Problem is where are you going to get the land?

ILS37R
11-15-2007, 02:49 PM
Can't say I'm fond of the proposed all-GPS all-the-time ATC system. Going to be good times when some nasty solar flares hit with limited ground-based navigation still in place...

dundem
11-15-2007, 03:04 PM
This is by no means a complete synopsis of the problem, but here goes:

-The ATC system is archaic and has not kept pace with growth

-Air traffic controllers are in short supply and the government has done little to correct for that (not flame, just fact)

-Air carriers have gone too far in their effort to connect Everytown, USA with their hubs

-Air carriers have given the public too many departure times to/from Everytown on regional sized aircraft

Onfinal
11-15-2007, 03:22 PM
Several Years ago, circa 1998, when I worked in a different part of the industry, the Airlines were begging the DoD via the DOT to just give up about a 50 mile wide swath of this airspace to reduce delays associated with Northeast operations. At the time the feeling was that it could provide one of the single biggest improvements in airborne capacity, and reduction in delay. Needless to say, DoD was not interested.

Something that has always amazed me is that after the findings on 9-11 we found out that they were only 2 fighters armed and available to protect the entire East Coast of the US. What exactly were they using all that airspace for? I guess if I knew they would have to kill me! :confused:

Onfinal

Slice
11-15-2007, 03:53 PM
Several Years ago, circa 1998, when I worked in a different part of the industry, the Airlines were begging the DoD via the DOT to just give up about a 50 mile wide swath of this airspace to reduce delays associated with Northeast operations. At the time the feeling was that it could provide one of the single biggest improvements in airborne capacity, and reduction in delay. Needless to say, DoD was not interested.

Something that has always amazed me is that after the findings on 9-11 we found out that they were only 2 fighters armed and available to protect the entire East Coast of the US. What exactly were they using all that airspace for? I guess if I knew they would have to kill me! :confused:

Onfinal

We don't normally train with live ordinance and don't need it on board to do train effectively. In fact, due to the restrictions associated with it, it's more of a hindrance in most cases. So, we use it to train and given the dynamic maneuvers we need to do, we need the airspace.

cfii2007
11-15-2007, 03:58 PM
Bush unveils plan to learn how to speak properly........

JoeyMeatballs
11-15-2007, 05:07 PM
I'm very curious about this. The un-informed American public has accepted that the airlines are the culprit. They assume that the airlines like to pay crews to wait on congested runways, hold over FAK and divert to Newberg. The lack of intelligence among the public doesn't perplex me, especially since Nov '99, but why don't airline execs counter these allegations with the truth....the ATC system is antiquated and totally unable to handle today's level of traffic. Opinions please.

Newberg ha? I wonder if thats close to Newburgh, NY :) Anybody diny like me to watch Frank TV on TBS, he does the best impression of Bush, I cant wait to watch it ;)

atpwannabe
11-15-2007, 06:30 PM
One of the "holiday fixes" is to allow simultaneous departures off of the parallel runways. Not exactly sure which or if all of the "Big 3" have parallel runways.

In terms of the Pentagon opening up airspace, my guess is that during this time frame, military a/c will operate at a higher altitudes.

Btw, if you think that only two fighters were armed and readily available to defend the entire east coast of the US.....then the government is doing it's job and doing it quite well.:p


atp

Onfinal
11-15-2007, 06:36 PM
Btw, if you think that only two fighters were armed and readily available to defend the entire east coast of the US.....then the government is doing it's job and doing it quite well.:p


atp

ATP:

Now you've done it! They will have to kill you! ;)


Onfinal

FDXLAG
11-15-2007, 06:40 PM
Btw, if you think that only two fighters were armed and readily available to defend the entire east coast of the US.....then the government is doing it's job and doing it quite well.:p atp

I guess he was not counting the F-16. Obviously a mistake.:D

vagabond
11-15-2007, 06:43 PM
Hmmm, if they are going to open up military airspace heretofore not available to commercial airlines before, why not go one step further and open up Air Force bases for people? At least for those five days in question, spread out the travelling public to more airports and fly them in and out using smaller jets. If one problem is that JFK, for example, can only handle 150 flights per day on a good day, then move 50 of those to the bases.

Hmmm, on second thought, better get back to writing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law before I get mowed down again. ;)

atpwannabe
11-15-2007, 06:46 PM
ATP:

Now you've done it! They will have to kill you! ;)


Onfinal


I'll be on the lookout (B.O.L.O.) for smoked windowed, black Crown Vics following me to work tomorrow.:D

A320fumes
11-15-2007, 07:00 PM
Newberg ha? I wonder if thats close to Newburgh, NY :) Anybody diny like me to watch Frank TV on TBS, he does the best impression of Bush, I cant wait to watch it ;)

Yeah Saab. Guess it is Newburgh.

pilotss
11-15-2007, 07:33 PM
I did see they increased the minimum dollar amount for bumping pax from 400 to 800. I assume the airlines' response will now make more fairs restricted.

What time limit or guidance does your airline have as far as a time limit to sit on the taxiways before returning to the gate?

andy171773
11-15-2007, 08:05 PM
Bush unveils plan to learn how to speak properly........

Even funnier with that avatar. I think that we should help South Africa's airspace.

Hacker15e
11-15-2007, 08:40 PM
Something that has always amazed me is that after the findings on 9-11 we found out that they were only 2 fighters armed and available to protect the entire East Coast of the US. What exactly were they using all that airspace for? I guess if I knew they would have to kill me! :confused:

That's no mystery...there is a BIG difference between normal continuation and upgrade training for fighter units and those flying/sitting alert.

Fighters are not flying around on a daily basis toting live missiles. On 9/11, I'm sure there were a ton of fighters flying around...but none of them had any ordnance on board that they could DO anything about the airliners. That's assuming that anyone had any idea what was happening anyway.

That airspace is being used to BFM, ACM, ACT, CAS, TST, BSA, and any number of three-letter initial sets that describe all the different types of training missions that military aircraft accomplish every day.

Onfinal
11-16-2007, 04:13 AM
That airspace is being used to BFM, ACM, ACT, CAS, TST, BSA, and any number of three-letter initial sets that describe all the different types of training missions that military aircraft accomplish every day.

Hacker:

For my own edification on the subject. Do you (or anyone else) believe that there are any modifications that could be made to those warning areas, that would still provide ample training space for the DoD and yet provide about three to five more north-south offshore jet-routes in the FL 200 to FL 450 range to the commercial sector?

Onfinal

FDXLAG
11-16-2007, 04:14 AM
The most amazing thing to me that day was how quickly I saw fully loaded ACFT overhead. I would have bet it would have taken hours, but it didn't.

FDXLAG
11-16-2007, 04:22 AM
Hacker:

For my own edification on the subject. Do you (or anyone else) believe that there are any modifications that could be made to those warning areas, that would still provide ample training space for the DoD and yet provide about three to five more north-south offshore jet-routes in the FL 200 to FL 450 range to the commercial sector?

Onfinal

No, closing part of the training would not do any good. You would have to close all the airspace off the east coast to have any real impact on routes.

ewrbasedpilot
11-16-2007, 04:22 AM
I did see they increased the minimum dollar amount for bumping pax from 400 to 800. I assume the airlines' response will now make more fairs restricted.

What time limit or guidance does your airline have as far as a time limit to sit on the taxiways before returning to the gate?

Typical government response.....................they cause the problem and we have to pay for it. The controllers contract was gutted by this rocket scientist, and now WE, the employees, get to pay for the damage. The pattern in EWR keeps getting bigger, and bigger and bigger, so the governments response to the problem is to allow more airlines into EWR, LGA, and JFK. Brilliant!!!! Until the controllers get a new contract, we'll be paying for this for a long time. Nothing like making our downwind legs 25 miles long. At least the oil companies aren't complaining, are they?:(

SenecaDriver
11-16-2007, 05:02 AM
You're kidding, right? It's only wall-to-wall off the coast from Miami to Boston...

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/facility/vacapes.htm

Active Warning Areas and MOAs are restricted as far as IFR traffic is concerned. And if you're bumbling through there VFR, you're a prime candidate for a Darwin Award.

Take it easy! I guess I framed the original question wrong. I know there are quite a few Warning areas off the east coast, but they are not restricted. You can , and I have quite often flown through them on an airway with a clearance (IFR), flying to and from Fla and the N.E. Check out Flightaware and folow the airline or frac. of your choice. They traverse this airspace all the time.

What I should have said is that this is lip service from the great comunicator, as I don't think this will help at all. Even if this does allow for some more direct routing, we are still trying to stuff 10LBS of #@%& in to a 5LB bag.

So back to my original question ( not the stupid one) What do you guys and gals think will solve the problem?

ewrbasedpilot
11-16-2007, 05:21 AM
........So back to my original question ( not the stupid one) What do you guys and gals think will solve the problem?

Two words for the controllers: NEW CONTRACT (That is if it's an acceptable one).

Bucking Bar
11-16-2007, 07:00 AM
Airlines do not like to be delayed either. I doubt government can bring any more pressure to a situation that most operators are already trying desperately to fix themselves.

The use of airspace in the North East is inefficient and just as pointed out by others the FAA has not modernized their capabilities and not maintained an adequate staff.

andy171773
11-16-2007, 07:04 AM
I don't think the FAA will ever be able to modernize if Congress keeps cutting their budget. That's the root of all their problems.

Onfinal
11-16-2007, 08:35 AM
No, closing part of the training would not do any good. You would have to close all the airspace off the east coast to have any real impact on routes.

Have to respectfully disagree with you. An additional handful of routes north-south that could provide flow between S.C./Florida, and the Washington to Boston corridor would provide some relief. This evidenced by the fact that they are doing it for the holiday season, and as I mentioned when I worked in that part of the industry the airlines were begging for this. What I am asking is:

Is there any way to do this, and still provide the DoD the airspace they need?

Slice
11-16-2007, 09:05 AM
Have to respectfully disagree with you. An additional handful of routes north-south that could provide flow between S.C./Florida, and the Washington to Boston corridor would provide some relief. This evidenced by the fact that they are doing it for the holiday season, and as I mentioned when I worked in that part of the industry the airlines were begging for this. What I am asking is:

Is there any way to do this, and still provide the DoD the airspace they need?

Sure, let us go supersonic over land...people would stop *****ing about delays in a hurry.

FDXLAG
11-16-2007, 09:20 AM
Have to respectfully disagree with you. An additional handful of routes north-south that could provide flow between S.C./Florida, and the Washington to Boston corridor would provide some relief. This evidenced by the fact that they are doing it for the holiday season, and as I mentioned when I worked in that part of the industry the airlines were begging for this. What I am asking is:

Is there any way to do this, and still provide the DoD the airspace they need?

The problem is SC to FL and DC to BOS cuts through most of the east coast training airspace. You can not cut a tunnel through the air space you would have to share it with guys diving from FL450 while looking over their shoulder. It works next weekend because no one is working next weekend. Or if they were the boss just told them they aren't.

Onfinal
11-16-2007, 09:22 AM
Sure, let us go supersonic over land...people would stop *****ing about delays in a hurry.

Sounds good, who do I write!

Seriously, If each warning area was shifted eastward about 25 miles what issues would that create for the DoD?

Onfinal

Slice
11-16-2007, 09:26 AM
Sounds good, who do I write!

Seriously, If each warning area was shifted eastward about 25 miles what issues would that create for the DoD?

Onfinal

It creates fuel issues for training for starters. There's other things that go on out there too with heavies, ships, etc. I already don't like fighting 100+ miles off shore in the winter and don't need to get pushed out further when it's that cold!:eek:

Onfinal
11-16-2007, 09:30 AM
Slice, FDXLAG, et al:

Thanks for the information. Very informative!

As always, thanks for your service to the American People.

Best Regards,

Onfinal

StripAlert
11-16-2007, 01:24 PM
Take it easy! I guess I framed the original question wrong. I know there are quite a few Warning areas off the east coast, but they are not restricted. You can , and I have quite often flown through them on an airway with a clearance (IFR), flying to and from Fla and the N.E. Check out Flightaware and folow the airline or frac. of your choice. They traverse this airspace all the time.

No offense meant.

Yes, plenty of folks fly through the confines of those Warning Areas IFR when they're cold, but ATC will not clear any non-participants there when they're in use. My point was that I can't honestly imagine why anyone would want to take a short cut through a hot Warning Area or MOA under VFR. There are guys in there going supersonic, practicing BFM/ACM, and occasionally firing all sorts of air-to-surface, air-to-air, surface-to-air, and surface-to-surface missiles.

We trailed 5 miles of wire in Whiskey Areas. I always wondered what we'd find if anyone ever sat down and correlated the dates and times we lost wires mysteriously to unexplained helicopter crashes...

Anyway, to address your question, I would speculate that it would help a little, as it would free up additional arrival and departure corridors, especially at LGA/JFK/EWR. The backlog, as I understand it, is more of an airborne separation and sequencing issue than one of runway utilization. Most of the traveling public (and our esteemed lawmakers) probably assume the opposite, since that's where they see throngs of airplanes lined up. What they don't see are the speed restrictions and flow control beginning at the Canadian border or airliners stacked like pancakes over FAK. As others have mentioned, the real solution is modernization of the ATC system and adequate controller staffing, which will only result when both are properly funded.

(Take, for example, ATL, where the standard call is "Airliner 1, cleared for takeoff. Airliner 2 position and hold," followed shortly thereafter by "Airliners 3, 4, 5, 6, without delay, cross." Rinse, lather, repeat. Contrast this to JFK, where it's "Hold short, awaiting IFR release.")

Another issue that I doubt if anyone crying for this in Washington has even considered is whether most of the aircraft that could potentially take advantage of this airspace are even equipped for overwater ops. I think someone once told me that JetBlue is occasionally able to cut the line at Kennedy because they carry the rafts required to depart to the east and avoid the congestion, if that route is available. I bet most of the RJ's at JFK don't.

ewrbasedpilot
11-16-2007, 01:37 PM
Funny how the airlines were the "bad guys" all summer long, when opening a few routes a couple of hours a day would have relieved a lot of the conjestion. Isn't that what NOTAMS are for???? Two years ago we were delayed for almost 2 hours and had 750 miles added to our route of flight so the military could launch a small rocket from Cape Canavral (sp). The controllers were practically crying because the launch created such a backlog along the east coast. We were going from EWR to SJU, but had to be routed over land due to the launch. Funny thing is, is that the 2 minutes or so it took to get the rocket into orbit cost us a fortune in fuel, and delays. I'm sure it cost the airlines a pretty penny.......all for 2 minutes. Safety is one thing.......stupidity is another. :rolleyes:

Hacker15e
11-16-2007, 08:38 PM
For my own edification on the subject. Do you (or anyone else) believe that there are any modifications that could be made to those warning areas, that would still provide ample training space for the DoD and yet provide about three to five more north-south offshore jet-routes in the FL 200 to FL 450 range to the commercial sector?

Onfinal

Speaking only from experience flying in W122 off the Virginia/NC coast, it would really crap on some important training to run an airway through the middle of it. Above 390 it would probably not be a problem, though.

The Whiskey areas are the only places we can do full-up no restrictions combat maneuvering. Supersonic, chaff and flare, up to FL500...that's valuable training that I can't get in the 7,000-240 standard MOA block over the CONUS. In the Whiskeys you can have big, multi aircraft air-to-air engagements with 80+ mile setups, which is also very unique.

As is, the W122 airspace is all ready shared by jets from Langley AFB, NAS Oceana, Seymour Johnson AFB, MCAS Cherry Point, MCAS Beaufort, and probably some more I'm not thinking of off hand. It's very heavily used.

So, I don't know...there is probably a tradeoff in there somewhere, it depends on how that corridoor would actually help congestion. It would be a huge tragedy to lose big chunks of airspace for 5 flights a day or something.

bluechip
11-17-2007, 07:10 PM
These measures will do NOTHING to reduce delays. No new routes are being opened, we will continue to fly the same airways we have for years. Yes... the same routes across the ocean ... BOS to ORF, ... CLB to MIA.

The delays are caused by the bottlenecks at departure and arrival! Not enough runways and not enough controllers. The rare airborne delays are caused be weather... not a lack of airspace.

And how does increasing penalties for overbooking solve anything!?

flyergurl
11-17-2007, 09:40 PM
There isn't just one problem.

The ATC system is one.

Frequency is another. Why have two RJ's go from one destination to another 20 minutes apart full when one 737 would take care of the route and probably fill up?

Why use the hub and spoke system?

Why have 150 flights scheduled to arrive and depart in an hour when the airport can only handle 140 in perfect weather?

BRAVO! BRAVO! You hit the nail on the head. I may get flamed for this but here goes... The ATC system is broken and needs fixed, but the business choices that the majority of the airlines have made also contribute greatly to the problem. The airlines don't want to admit this hence the following "blame it on the GA guys..." email I received from Delta...


Providing the highest quality service to our customers is the guiding principle in everything we do at Delta. But it is difficult for us to provide the level of service you deserve when air traffic in the United States is controlled with pre-WWII methods and technology.
Within a decade, traffic delays will cost the economy $40 billion a year, and you, the customer, a great deal of wasted time. There will be 85% more jets in the sky in the next 15 years—an increase driven largely by corporate jets, fractional jets, air-taxis and very light jets. To an air traffic controller, a jet with a celebrity or a CEO takes as much effort as a commercial flight with 250 passengers. However, the current system is funded almost entirely by the airline ticket tax, meaning that you are paying for nearly 95% of the air traffic system while corporate and private jets get a free ride!
You can help make a difference! Please contact your Congressional representatives and ask them to:

Quit forcing you to subsidize corporate jets through the current unfair ticket tax
Support a new cost-based ATC finance structure that will fund the system fairly and enable the FAA to modernize our aging ATC systemWorking in a partnership with other airlines, we will do everything we can to continue to improve upon the customer experience. For more information on this initiative, called "Smart Skies," go to smartskies.org/delta (http://e.delta.com/ct/click?q=95-XdTrQvddmr_v5eIr1yZxpWsA04E_W9RR). We can make a difference!


The ATC system needs fixed and the airlines need to man up to the decisions they have made in the past and realize when a system isn't working, it may be time to re-visit those decisions and change some things. Flame on...!

FDXLAG
11-18-2007, 04:34 AM
These measures will do NOTHING to reduce delays. No new routes are being opened, we will continue to fly the same airways we have for years. Yes... the same routes across the ocean ... BOS to ORF, ... CLB to MIA.

The delays are caused by the bottlenecks at departure and arrival! Not enough runways and not enough controllers. The rare airborne delays are caused be weather... not a lack of airspace.

And how does increasing penalties for overbooking solve anything!?

The same way the penalties for speeding discourages speeding. When it costs more to overbook than overbooking will be reduced. If not, at least there will be more volunteers to take the next flight.

ewrbasedpilot
11-18-2007, 07:48 AM
The same way the penalties for speeding discourages speeding. When it costs more to overbook than overbooking will be reduced. If not, at least there will be more volunteers to take the next flight.

Ahhhh, spoken like a true freighter!!! It appears you really know nothing about how this system works. When people use FEDEX or UPS, they bring the packages or have them picked up. You don't worry about "no shows", do you? You don't worry about misconnects, do you? And you certainly don't get caught up in the same delay mess we do every day due to the times you are most active. The airlines have histories of flights and their loadfactors. They track this stuff to the n'th degree, and book accordingly. 99.9% of the time they're right. Should we charge someone an $800 fine if they don't show up since the seat goes unfilled? Should we charge the US government a fine every time they put us in holding when their equipment goes down? See my point? Their are always plenty of these "professional bumpers" who sit around and hope to accumulate free flights and upgrades and literally RUN to the podumium when an oversold situation may occur (really kind of sad). Thing is, is that it's hurting us and not making the problem go away.............

Slice
11-18-2007, 08:10 AM
Ahhhh, spoken like a true freighter!!! It appears you really know nothing about how this system works. When people use FEDEX or UPS, they bring the packages or have them picked up. You don't worry about "no shows", do you? You don't worry about misconnects, do you? And you certainly don't get caught up in the same delay mess we do every day due to the times you are most active. The airlines have histories of flights and their loadfactors. They track this stuff to the n'th degree, and book accordingly. 99.9% of the time they're right. Should we charge someone an $800 fine if they don't show up since the seat goes unfilled? Should we charge the US government a fine every time they put us in holding when their equipment goes down? See my point? Their are always plenty of these "professional bumpers" who sit around and hope to accumulate free flights and upgrades and literally RUN to the podumium when an oversold situation may occur (really kind of sad). Thing is, is that it's hurting us and not making the problem go away.............

For the record, many of us 'freighter' guys have flown pax and get how the system works. That being said, I don't agree with the increased penalty proposal.

FDXLAG
11-18-2007, 08:33 AM
So if I make the penalty for over booking a million dollars it would have no influence on overbooking. I didn't say overbooking was wrong or right. Just like I didn't say speeding was wrong or right. Fred overbooks all the time. What will doubling the the overbooking penalties solve:

Some airlines may marginally adjust the overbooking on some flights. Assuming the cost of overbooking is one of the things they track to the Nth degree.

If not:

Some passengers will be more willing to jump at the increased goodies. I wont have to listen to the AA Eagle gate agent screeching "you are not leaving until at least two of you agree to accept a later flight". Therefore, I may be on time for my connection in DFW.

ewrbasedpilot
11-18-2007, 09:02 AM
For the record, many of us 'freighter' guys have flown pax and get how the system works. That being said, I don't agree with the increased penalty proposal.


Sorry, didn't mean to attack "everyone" with my barb. His comments were what I'd expect of someone who didn't understand the system and only see the airlines as the wrongdoers.

FDXLAG
11-18-2007, 10:01 AM
I don't see the airlines as the bad guys; they are just making a business decision. I like over booking, it means I can still get a flight on Monday morning or Friday afternoon.

But I must be the luckiest traveler in the world if the airlines are right on overbooking 99.9%. 9 segments in October and 4 of them were overbooked.