|
What do y'all think of civilians who fly formation? Military?
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2014 02:20
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 28, 2024 19:34 |
|
|
xaarman posted:What do y'all think of civilians who fly formation? Military? No problems with the military usually. Separation standards are a little higher between the formation and other aircraft but it's not a big deal. I almost never deal with flight splits or join-ups though, they're already a formation when I get them. Sometimes the navy jet trainers here don't join up quickly on departure, and they'll delay their climbs and turns until they figure it out. If they're on an instrument flight plan, this causes us some distress if they drift into adjacent airspace or obstructions while they gently caress around trying to join up. Civilian formation flights aren't common where I work. Issues with them are lack of pilot proficiency, and the trailing aircraft keeping their transponders on, causing nuisance collision alarms with the lead aircraft. In standard formation flights, the lead aircraft is supposed to talk and use their transponder, the others should stay quiet and keep their transponders on standby or off.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2014 02:38
|
|
|
The only reason formation flights are any trouble at all is sometimes trying to get the phraseology from the aircraft that we need to hear before we can allow them to get close on IFR flight plans. Often times having them go VFR flight following solves all the paperwork problem management has with formations and still allows atc to give the information to pilots they need to make important decisions on their manuvers and formations. Working with the military pilots themselves is fairly easy aslong as they declare MARSA (military assumes responsibility for seperation of aircraft) early. Once they do that its just a matter of turning other aircraft around them which is normal every day stuff. A little bit ago we had 10 F16's fly through that wanted to break up near the end of the sector. At that point you have quite a bit of coordination with the next sector but its nothing that can't be handled. The military has put up some large areas of unusable space which in itself is fine. The problem here comes with explaining why pilots have to wait to climb/descend/turn or why their root looks like something out of a frogger machine. Formations and military operations add variety to the day to day operation.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2014 14:29
|
|
|
We have a few flight schools in the area that like to do group cross countries. The majority of their students have only a basic grasp of English, and they like to pick up individual flight following, and then essentially fly formation. 
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2014 14:48
|
|
|
MrYenko posted:We have a few flight schools in the area that like to do group cross countries. The majority of their students have only a basic grasp of English, and they like to pick up individual flight following, and then essentially fly formation. We have a flight school here that picked up IFR flight plans then tried to fly formation without telling us. I started assigning speeds and headings in order to keep them separated until they spoke up and mentioned what they wanted to do. They remain the only speeds I've ever given to a prop ever.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2014 14:55
|
|
|
MrYenko posted:We have a few flight schools in the area that like to do group cross countries. The majority of their students have only a basic grasp of English, and they like to pick up individual flight following, and then essentially fly formation. Group suppress yo. I've never seen non military formation flight request on an IFR flight plan. They sure as hell aren't gonna get that clearance from me either... VFR flight following requesting a formation join up? Maintain VFR. So we're clear to join up? MAINTAIN VFR.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2014 14:56
|
|
|
MrYenko posted:We have a few flight schools in the area that like to do group cross countries. Been there, done that. Generally we would keep about 3 miles of spacing and only the lead guy would get flight following. Everyone else would monitor ATC and we would talk amongst ourselves on a company frequency. It wasn't an "official" formation but it kept everyone safe without pissing off ATC. Of course, our system wasn't perfect: http://www.kingmandailyminer.com/main.asp?SectionID=1&subsectionID=798&articleID=46128
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2014 17:55
|
|
|
KodiakRS posted:Been there, done that. Generally we would keep about 3 miles of spacing and only the lead guy would get flight following. Everyone else would monitor ATC and we would talk amongst ourselves on a company frequency. It wasn't an "official" formation but it kept everyone safe without pissing off ATC. I wish they'd do that. Sadly... In other news, summer is coming.  
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2014 18:59
|
|
|
What if you guys had two planes that want to declare MARSA that aren't military? Are they allowed? Say my friend and I want to do a rendezvous for a formation arrival, can we?
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2014 02:25
|
|
|
Civilian pilots are able to make a formation as long as they have previously agreed to the arrangement: http://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/14/91.111
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2014 03:40
|
|
|
xaarman posted:What if you guys had two planes that want to declare MARSA that aren't military? Are they allowed? MARSA stands for Military Assumes Responsibilty for Separation of Aircraft. So... No. 
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2014 03:41
|
|
|
Yeah it definitely wouldn't be MARSA.
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2014 03:42
|
|
|
MrYenko posted:I wish they'd do that. Sadly... Hah! I flew right through that at about 1900L (in the back of a Spirit A320). Florida weather, not midwest weather.
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2014 01:29
|
|
|
MrYenko posted:MARSA stands for Military Assumes Responsibilty for Separation of Aircraft. So... we can do identical procedures... we just can't call it MARSA... that seems dumb.
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2014 01:39
|
|
|
xaarman posted:So... we can do identical procedures... we just can't call it MARSA... that seems dumb. Well you're not military, so I think it makes perfect sense. 
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2014 01:47
|
|
|
xaarman posted:So... we can do identical procedures... we just can't call it MARSA... that seems dumb. VFR operations are handled differently as was discussed. I'm not aware of any agreements allowing for civilian IFR formation flying withing the US, but someone please let me know if there's somewhere out there where it's being done.
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2014 02:06
|
|
|
JohnClark posted:Not really. MARSA is specifically for IFR operations and requires specific letters of agreement between the controlling facility and the military unit that will be utilizing it. Additionally, as far as I know it's almost always conducted in special use airspace or ATCAA (air-traffic control assigned airspace), not just wherever someone wants to do it. As an example at my place, we have an ATCAA called guard dog that the Air Force uses when they fly a CAP (combat air patrol) over DC. They're usually VFR when they're up there but they occasionally go IFR and will then invoke MARSA when they conduct aerial refueling. I don't think that's true. We've declared MARSA at random points across the US with controlling agencies nowhere near our home station. Per USAF regs, all we need are radar/radio contact, positive ID and altitude separation. So as I'm understanding it (FK can correct me...) ATC will absolutely not allow two civilian aircraft to merge as a formation on an IFR flight plan, even if they want (and are able) to, they will have to cancel IFR to do it? xaarman fucked around with this message at 03:02 on Mar 19, 2014 |
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2014 02:56
|
|
|
xaarman posted:I don't think that's true. We've declared MARSA at random points across the US with controlling agencies nowhere near our home station. Per USAF regs, all we need are radar/radio contact, positive ID and altitude separation. I can dig that, I don't work in the enroute environment so that's not something I'd experience day to day. quote:So as I'm understanding it (FK can correct me...) ATC will absolutely not allow two civilian aircraft to merge as a formation on an IFR flight plan, even if they want (and are able) to, they will have to cancel IFR to do it?
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2014 06:48
|
|
|
xaarman posted:I don't think that's true. We've declared MARSA at random points across the US with controlling agencies nowhere near our home station. Per USAF regs, all we need are radar/radio contact, positive ID and altitude separation. quote:FAA Joint Order 7110.65: Sure seems like there should be some prior coordination with the ATC facility having jurisdiction. I wouldn't know what to do if two random navy trainers I was working suddenly said "I declare MARSA." We have no procedures in place for setting up MARSA. However: quote:b. ATC facilities do not invoke or deny MARSA. So we don't invoke or deny MARSA.... But I believe this still comes under subpara a. which says agreements should be in place first. For example, when Navy Jet Trainers are departing my airport, headed for their military operations area (located in adjacent Navy Approach Control airspace) sometimes they'll ask to go MARSA before I switch them over to the Navy approach guys. They're literally seconds away from the airspace boundary so I just tell them to standby and send them over to the Navy Approach Controller, who I'm assuming knows a lot more about how to set them up for MARSA than I do. I think pilots that ask us for this are jumping the gun, I'm sure the agreements exist between their squardrons and the navy approach control authority adjacent to us, and some individual pilots think they can get a head start on thing by asking our civilian controllers for MARSA so they can do it 30 seconds earlier. quote:So as I'm understanding it (FK can correct me...) ATC will absolutely not allow two civilian aircraft to merge as a formation on an IFR flight plan, even if they want (and are able) to, they will have to cancel IFR to do it? I don't think there's anything prohibiting ATC from allowing a civilian IFR flight. Flights are controlled as a single entity, with extra separation standards. We treat a flight like it's one aircraft, and just give them a little extra room. It wouldn't be MARSA, but references to formation flights in our book don't specifically reference military aircraft. quote:FAA Joint Order 7110.65: The last sub paragraph says it all. Military AND Civil formation flights in RVSM airspace. Reduced Vertical Separation Minima airspace (RVSM) exists between 29,000 and 41,000ft (FL290-FL410) and only IFR aircraft would be operating there, by regulation. Therefore, our book seems to allow handling of instrument, civil, formation flights, no problem. It would stand out to me, to see a formation flight filed with a civilian registry callsign, but the handling wouldn't change from how I handle military formation flights already. The flight plan information would show two aircraft for the aircraft type (ex: Instead of C172/G for a Cessna 172 with GPS, it would show 2/C172/G for a flight of two Cessna 172s).
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2014 14:40
|
|
|
I seem to remember from academyland that if the aircraft are of unlike types, you file them as 2/c172/g, and then put "2nd A/C is C206" in the remarks.
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2014 14:57
|
|
|
The only time I generally deal with MARSA is on the one aerial refueling route that has a start/end point in my airspace. I'm sure we have LOA's with the units that are the main users, but there are quite a few. As far as I'm concerned, random tanker comes on with an AR request, declares MARSA with whoever his receivers are going to be, and then I can give the clearance provided they're all in my airspace or I have control with others to do so. Whether or not we have an LOA with that unit or whatever never enters my mind. They ask for MARSA, they get it. I've done a few random aerial refueling requests as well. The only real coordination is getting the block approved and letting the next sector know who is in the group and when they plan on breaking up if you know that.
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2014 15:26
|
|
|
fknlo posted:Whether or not we have an LOA with that unit or whatever never enters my mind. They ask for MARSA, they get it. Sounds like you probably do actually have the letters of agreement though, right?
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2014 15:46
|
|
|
Had a fighter come out of the top of his restricted airspace (SFC-070 at the time,) and pass within about a mile of IFR traffic, going nearly straight up. First hit was 065, next was 092, traffic was at 100, R side called it, next hit was at 127. I tried really hard not to be a dick to the range officer, but what the gently caress, guys.
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2014 20:34
|
|
|
When you say next hit do you mean radar sweep? Which is how long?
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2014 20:44
|
|
|
simble posted:When you say next hit do you mean radar sweep? Which is how long? He does. For Centers it's about 12 seconds, for Approaches it's about 5 seconds. My facility works in a hybrid predictive mode called "FUSION" which updates the target's position every second, but since the altitude information comes from the transponder we still get that only ever 5 seconds when our antenna rotates back around and pings it again. For rapidly climbing, or descending aircraft (like Yenko's fighters) we'll often get "XXX" in the altitude readout for a few sweeps until the radar can get a reliable response from its transponder. So you'll see a climbing aircraft show (in hundreds of feet) 050, 060, XXX, XXX, 100, 125, XXX etc. The Ferret King fucked around with this message at 21:05 on Mar 19, 2014 |
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2014 21:03
|
|
|
The Ferret King posted:Sure seems like there should be some prior coordination with the ATC facility having jurisdiction. I wouldn't know what to do if two random navy trainers I was working suddenly said "I declare MARSA." https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HuGIgf-ICHM This is the first thing I thought of and I heard it exactly in this voice.
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2014 21:18
|
|
|
Random AR is a perfect example of AR on the fly (or the tanker starting on the AR route but then dragging you somewhere.) Next question, How are FAA JOs set up? For example 7110.65 concerns X, 7110.70 concerns Y, etc? The closest example I can give is: 11-217: Instrument/Visual Flight Procedures 11-202v3: AF Flight Procedures 11-2MDS-1v3: Plane specific Procedures 3-1: How to do X, Each document getting more and more smaller picture. Thank you all : - )
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2014 00:14
|
|
|
There's an order for that too: http://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/media/Order/0000.1G.pdf Use Caution: It's boring.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2014 00:31
|
|
|
The Ferret King posted:Sounds like you probably do actually have the letters of agreement though, right? Probably? We have a lot of LOA's with military units that something like 3 people have actually read.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2014 00:38
|
|
|
Well, I know that there is probably a huge different between an entire Center's worth of LOAs and my terminal facility experience. But I probably would have been one of those three guys. I'm the "book guy" at work because I can't work airplanes worth a poo poo you know.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2014 00:49
|
|
|
The Ferret King posted:Well, I know that there is probably a huge different between an entire Center's worth of LOAs and my terminal facility experience. But I probably would have been one of those three guys. I'm the "book guy" at work because I can't work airplanes worth a poo poo you know. *puts headset on .65* "Trainee, can that .65 work traffic?" "..." ! It's great knowing the books back and forth so you know absolutely what crap can be absolutely ignored. The Ferret King posted:Sure seems like there should be some prior coordination with the ATC facility having jurisdiction. I wouldn't know what to do if two random navy trainers I was working suddenly said "I declare MARSA." We have no procedures in place for setting up MARSA. Depending on where you are at, you could go forever never seeing this, or see it daily. It's common enough for the whole "do not invoke or deny MARSA" bit. It's easy to deal with once you have seen it. edit: I just realized I haven't seen the situation you described in about a year now. Considering the amount of military traffic I deal with, that is surprising. Makes me wonder if procedures in house for some of our military bases we work have changed some of their in house procedures. holy poo poo i love saying redundant things today and being redundant Tommy 2.0 fucked around with this message at 01:30 on Mar 20, 2014 |
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2014 01:19
|
|
|
MrYenko posted:Had a fighter come out of the top of his restricted airspace (SFC-070 at the time,) and pass within about a mile of IFR traffic, going nearly straight up. First hit was 065, next was 092, traffic was at 100, R side called it, next hit was at 127. When you say the R-side "called it", does this consist of saying "holy poo poo, what the gently caress"/"guys I think we have a problem", or hailing the aircraft over the radio, or something else?
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2014 01:28
|
|
|
E4C85D38 posted:When you say the R-side "called it", does this consist of saying "holy poo poo, what the gently caress"/"guys I think we have a problem", or hailing the aircraft over the radio, or something else? Sorry, the R side called the traffic to our IFR aircraft.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2014 02:18
|
|
|
The Ferret King posted:Well, I know that there is probably a huge different between an entire Center's worth of LOAs and my terminal facility experience. But I probably would have been one of those three guys. I'm the "book guy" at work because I can't work airplanes worth a poo poo you know. You're never quizzed on anything that isn't a facility LOA here. At least my area isn't. Some areas with a more active military presence might get stuff like that, but I haven't heard anyone talk about it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2014 05:12
|
|
|
fknlo posted:You're never quizzed on anything that isn't a facility LOA here. At least my area isn't. Some areas with a more active military presence might get stuff like that, but I haven't heard anyone talk about it. That is how it is here where I am at too. Only questions ever asked are pretty much LOA specific. Well, that and maps. The only time .65 stuff is whipped out is when we have to do approach control crap.
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2014 00:56
|
|
|
I've found 4 steps to success with military procedures, 1) approve whatever it is they ask for "Callsign, approved as requested" 2) make airplanes miss whatever mess the military is causing "Callsign turn 15 degrees left vectors for traffic/airspace/punishment vectors/confidence maneuver" 3) ???? (top secret atc jargin) 4) laugh at the next sector as you tell them what you've approved and they are to scared to modify. These 4 steps also work for jumpers, weather requests, spinning cessnas, selling (he whos name shall not be mentioned) directly destination
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2014 04:46
|
|
|
Did a tower tour today for the first time which was fun. Amazed they were able to cycle like 200 pilots through the tour, but what I really learned is I need to fly in there with "information Giraffe" now. Towers usually start off on the same letter for the ATIS so I am likely to see G around the same time of day assuming nothing breaks the once-an-hour update cycle, right?
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2014 06:13
|
|
|
Yes and no. It's updated every hour, so if it's only updated once an hour in theory it should be the same. However, that's assuming a 24 hour tower, I dunno what part time ones do in that regard. Also, it can often times be updated way more frequently than every hour, in practice - changing winds, ceilings, etc. So I don't think you can predict it so easily.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2014 06:19
|
|
|
Part time towers generate the new ATIS the next morning and use the letter after the one used before closing the night before. It's a rolling system. Unless the closure is longer than 12 hours. Then they start over at Alpha the next day. Also facilities will skip letters when they end up matching with adjacent facilities, just to prevent any possibility of confusion. EDIT for layman clarification. The ATIS is the Automated Terminal Information Service broadcast. It's a looped recording on a designated frequency at towered airports and provides weather, approach, runway, and airport information. It's recorded at least once every hour and each recording is assigned a single letter designation. ATC must ensure pilots have certain information before allowing them to depart or land. If the pilot states they have the most current ATIS letter code, ATC may omit information contained in the ATIS broadcast. This allows flight crews to obtain the information on their own and prevents ATC from having to issue basic information to every single airplane on frequency. Ex: "Approach, Southwest 530 level 5000 ft information Alpha" Assuming information Alpha is the current ATIS broadcast for Southwest 530's departure/destination airport, the controller need not verbally inform them of the weather, approach, or airport conditions contained within that ATIS recording. The Ferret King fucked around with this message at 16:15 on Mar 23, 2014 |
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2014 07:59
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 28, 2024 19:34 |
|
|
Personally I enjoy calling up approach/tower whenever the ATIS is whiskey. "Cessna 3SP, info for OGDEN is whiskey, you picked it up yet?" "yeah we got whiskey  "In other news has anyone heard anymore about off-the-street hiring?
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2014 08:25
|
|
