Search
Notices
Military Military Aviation

VFR in active MOA's

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 07-11-2008, 03:38 AM
  #1  
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
 
Waldo11's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Jun 2008
Position: Turning off the spigot....
Posts: 329
Default VFR in active MOA's

Just saw this on AOPA, curious as to what others (both Civilian and military guys think of this). Background info is 2 civilian VFR aircraft flying through Luke AFB active MOA's. Legal to do, but smart?

If the link doesn't work just google "F-16's close call with GA aircraft"

AOPA Online: FAA releases radar video of F-16's close call with GA aircraft
Waldo11 is offline  
Old 07-11-2008, 03:56 AM
  #2  
Nothing to write
 
fiveninerzero's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Oct 2006
Position: PA28 Flight Engineer
Posts: 151
Default

Hello,

Here is a thread in the other forum on this topic: http://www.airlinepilotforums.com/ha...16-pilots.html

It's instances like these that they made http://www.seeandavoid.org for.
fiveninerzero is offline  
Old 07-11-2008, 04:40 AM
  #3  
Gets Weekends Off
 
BDGERJMN's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Nov 2006
Position: Walmart Greeter
Posts: 694
Default

While its next to impossible to extract what exactly transpired from the tapes with respect to the actions of both the Vipers and the Civilan aircraft all of us that fly pointy nose airplanes don't have the first clue why someone would want to transit an active MOA VFR. That said it's pretty common on the civilian(GENAV) side of the fence not to have the first clue what goes on in an active MOA. The experience level of the aircrew in the commercial aricraft in those tapes should have precluded flying at that altitude(heart of BFM envelope or merged engaged arena). Now if the VIPER guys joined up and were screwing around bad on them and vise versa if the commercial traffic misunderstood their actions. Either way, be thankful there wasn't a midair and loss of life.
BDGERJMN is offline  
Old 07-11-2008, 06:43 AM
  #4  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Aug 2007
Position: I pilot
Posts: 2,049
Default

I think this guy was VFR in an MOA
http://www.airlinepilotcentral.com/w...061203156.html
zondaracer is offline  
Old 07-11-2008, 08:06 AM
  #5  
Gets Weekends Off
 
trafly's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Jan 2008
Posts: 194
Default

VFR in a MOA? Two words. Bad Idea.
trafly is offline  
Old 07-11-2008, 08:28 AM
  #6  
Gets Weekends Off
 
USMCFLYR's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Mar 2008
Position: FAA 'Flight Check'
Posts: 13,837
Default

Originally Posted by zondaracer View Post
I think this guy was VFR in an MOA
Airline Pilot Central - T-38 Near Miss
Looks more like he was on a VR low level - 600+' AGL and 355 kts.
Either way - very close.

USMCFLYR
USMCFLYR is offline  
Old 07-17-2008, 05:33 PM
  #7  
Moderate Moderator
 
UAL T38 Phlyer's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Mar 2008
Position: Curator at Static Display
Posts: 5,681
Default Details on T-38 Video

I know one of the guys involved in this...he was a brand-new FAIP, going through T-38 IP school at Randolph.

They are on a dedicated low-level route, which in effect, is like a MOA for low-altitude flying. Again, this was something that was not explained to me adequately when I was a civilian flyer. The routes are typically about 5-8 miles wide, surface to 1500 ft, or even as high as 4000 ft (typical; each route and each leg is different. Only place to find the info I know of is in military publications--any civilians know of another source? AIM?) I know the centerline of the routes is usually shown on sectionals.

In the T-38, we fly these routes at 500-700 ft AGL, at a planned speed of 360 Ground. As long as you do this inside the route airspace, the speed below 10,000 rule does not apply. You fly the route to meet a time over target at the end of the route (about 25-30 minutes later), plus or minus 15 seconds. (This means the meandering route may be 200 miles long). To make timing corrections, we can go up to 400 IAS, or as slow as 300.

Of note: this occured south of San Antonio, within radar coverage of San Antonio Approach, and the T-38C has TCAS--nobody saw anything until it was real close. They missed by about 50-100 ft. It is believed the civilian never saw them (he never maneuvered).

Fast-Fighters will do them in multiples of 60 knots (makes the math easy), so most fighters fly at 420 or 480 ground. Target leg may be as fast as 540.

My point here is civilian flyers would be at an advantage if they could find the route dimensions of VR and IR low-level routes. IR routes are "owned" by an approach control or center; they could tell you if they are hot. VR routes are usually owned by a FSS, but sometimes controlled by approach controls.

Heavies sometimes fly "SR" routes. I believe it stands for Special Routes, but we tend to think of them as "Slow Routes." However, to a civilian, a C-130 barreling down on you at 200 knots, 3-500 ft AGL, would certainly get your attention, and be plenty fast.
UAL T38 Phlyer is offline  
Old 07-17-2008, 05:41 PM
  #8  
Gets Weekends Off
 
BDGERJMN's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Nov 2006
Position: Walmart Greeter
Posts: 694
Default

Great explanation. One would think this information would be drilled into the PP training since those are the genav aviators who would most likely be affected by VR/IR routes. Then again I would bet most of the CFI's out there aren't well versed on this topic either.
BDGERJMN is offline  
Old 07-17-2008, 08:06 PM
  #9  
Gets Weekends Off
 
kronan's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Nov 2005
Position: 757 Capt
Posts: 2,418
Default

don't have one with me, but the VR/IR routes used to be displayed on a sectional. Of course, they were a black line versus the actual corridor.

FWIW, an IR route is flown at low level high speed IFR. Can't be fun flying that low w/out needing the 5 miles of vis a VR route requires
kronan is offline  
Old 07-17-2008, 08:10 PM
  #10  
Moderate Moderator
 
UAL T38 Phlyer's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Mar 2008
Position: Curator at Static Display
Posts: 5,681
Default Military Low Charts

Yeah, I mentioned that (Sectionals) in the previous post. The centerlines are also shown on mil IFR low charts, but I can't remember if Jeppesen does the same--I kind of think not.
UAL T38 Phlyer is offline  
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
SongMan
Flight Schools and Training
18
06-08-2014 08:31 AM
BNUT
Military
97
10-14-2008 04:11 PM
FlyingCheap
Part 135
27
03-13-2008 12:25 AM
av8tor02
Cargo
6
10-12-2007 06:00 PM
Longbow64
Flight Schools and Training
10
07-09-2007 09:00 AM

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



Your Privacy Choices