Interesting MOA encounter with Viper

[Rez O. Lewshun]

No they can’t. Civilians will b!#$% and moan too much.

Damm those tax payers who buy your jets, pay for your gas and salary.

He should have been scared. He could have caused a midair. Talk to the controlling agency before you go wandering through a hot MOA.

Doesn't it take two to cause a mid-air?

You really think that we don’t bitch about this? Nothing gets done because AOPA/Airlines/FAA/whoever always wins. In the last 20 years we have lost a lot of MOAs. We can’t even keep what we have, let alone get new airspace. Any idea how long it took the Navy to get a new MOA over NAS Lemoore? Answer: Decades.

Maybe you should go fly for the Chinese Air Force! (not really... but you get my point?)

It is a real shame that you defend the US constitution only to be subjected to it!

Damm democracy!

 

[Bjammin]

If they are VFR, chances are that there was no flight plan filed, so how are you going to find out where they came from and where they are going?

If you call my FBO and tell them to leave a message on the windshield, they are going to tell you to go pack sand!

We've done this a couple of times. We have controllers on our base that are good at finding where and when guys took off from or where they are going.

I never heard of an FBO refusing to leave a message on an aircraft when our squadron asked them to. If they actually did or not, who knows, but it is a big enough of a concern to try.

MOA's are joint use airspace. Its not your place to tell someone that they do not belong there. If your mission requires you to maneuver with careless abandon, then you need to take your games to a restricted area.

Maneuver with careless abandon? I didn't invent the tactics, i'm just a flight instructor. I clear my area as best I can, but I HAVE to divide my attention.

Games? Teaching students air to air tactics, formation flying, stalls, and intercepts are not games, but required training.


ONCE AGAIN, I have no problem trying to find a seperate corner or different MOA to work in away from you if you are going to transit the MOA. If you let us know you are going to be there then, at the very least, I will expect you and can brief the flight. Some sorties I can even avoid your altitude.

Why is no one willing to help us out? You want respect from us, give a little here and call prior to entry.


It should be becoming clear that almost ALL military pilots on this board see this as a risk. It is important to safety, not a mil vs. civilian thing, not a macho thing, just a safety thing. I have offered a minor solution and not one civie guy has stated they would help out.

Please, let's have a descent dialog here.

 

[Bjammin]

Doesn't it take two to cause a mid-air?

Yes, and there is increased risk in a MOA, please stay out or call prior.

It is legal to drive a boat through a sail boat race, but you would be thought of as an A$$ if you did so and risk safety. Why don't you see this applies here?

 

[avbug]

Lots of hot feeling flying around. The fact is that a MOA isn't restricted airspace. Where that level of exclusion is required, the military, or any other user agency for that matter, needs to seek flight restrictions.

A MOA is advertised as unrestricted. It's airspace in which one should use caution. It doesn't authorize anybody, military civillian, to operate with abandon, nor to assume the airspace is theirs. It's not.

A MOA can go hot at any time. It often isn't advertised. A civillian pilot can ask a controller if a MOA is in use...but even if it's reported not in use, it may be, or it may go hot after entry without any warning. Many civillian pilots don't understand this, and most military pilots aren't aware that the civillian pilot wouldn't know it's hot.

Some years ago I had a multi-casualty incident out of Tonopah, with victims that needed to go to Las Vegas. I contacted Nellis Range Control and was vectored at night through the range. It was during Red Flag and was very active. We had aircraft passing down both sides, flashes on the ground, all sorts of activity. We were advised of the hazard, asked if we were wiling to accept vectors through, and Nellis was as professional as anybody could expect in helping us help those victims. Time was saved, most likely lives were saved, and everybody used that airspace just like we had a right to do.

On a return trip for another victim later that same night, activity on the range increased, and after discussing it with Nellis, I elected to go around the MOA. Best judgement, and coordination with the controlling agency made it a good night for everyone.

Simply blasting through the MOA is never a good idea, for civillian or military.

 

[JimNtexas]

I think that even pilots with thousands of hours in civilian airplanes often can not really conceive of how dynamic and violent fighter training really is.

For example, air combat maneuvering is far more dynamic than what you see when the Thunderbirds fly their demos.

This lawyer seemed to freak out when he saw his TCAS go crazy. If he had the slightest clue of what the military does in MOAs he would have understood that TCAS just isn't design to track airplanes pulling 9 g's, climbing and descending in the near vertical, and varying their speeds from less than 250 knots to over .9M in a matter of seconds.

And as other have pointed out, it is common for only the leader to squawk at all, so there may be 3 non-squawking airplanes for each one TCAS sees.

The civil pilots should call the fighter base and thank the pilots who did see and avoid him.

 

[Bjammin]

A number of years ago a photography guy called and said he was going to be in our MOA doing survey work for a couple of days. He gave us his route and altitiude and we flexed to accommodate him. When used different MOA's or avoided his altitude. Safety prevailed and everyone was happy.

 

[Future SNA]

Out of curiosity, how close do MC-130s fly when they're doing close trail on the gogs at 500' AGL?

The question isn't whether or not I know, the question is whether or not I care about anything that goes on in asscot land. I know the answer.

 

[stonewall]

The question isn't whether or not I know, the question is whether or not I care about anything that goes on in asscot land. I know the answer.

You commented on it so you must care on some level. Or it could be you're just another Navy pilot who spouts sh*t like he knows what he's talking about, which usually isn't the case. Sort of like thinking we still wear ascots. Kinda like y'all wear golf shirts under your flight suits.

What's the answer?

 

[Bjammin]

You commented on it so you must care on some level. Or it could be you're just another Navy pilot who spouts sh*t like he knows what he's talking about, which usually isn't the case. Sort of like thinking we still wear ascots. Kinda like y'all wear golf shirts under your flight suits.

What's the answer?

Guys, FOCUS!!!

This is not a Navy vs. Air Force thing. We, as military pilots that use MOA's, have to unite against the attitude that some civilians have about MOA's.

It is NOT a macho thing at all. It's important we keep the safety aspect in the fore ground.

If we want civilans to respect our concerns we need to respect them and each other, not be idiots and attack each other's platforms or experiences.

 

[transpac]

The reason MOAs have not been designated as restricted areas is the negative affect that would have on civilian aircraft operations. The negative effect would result from aircraft being excluded from airspace they now are allowed to use. The FAA regulations do not require and civilian pilots are not taught to always avoid MOAs, just to be super-vigilant when within them. And, contrary to an earlier post, it is legal to transit a MOA under IFR although ATC usually won't clear an aircraft through one due to workload. There seem to be a huge misunderstanding on the part of some military pilots and maybe some operations types about the purpose of MOAs and the operational responsibilities associated with them. Bottom line is maneuvers that make it impossible to see and avoid should be limited to restricted areas.

 

[Bjammin]

Bottom line is maneuvers that make it impossible to see and avoid should be limited to restricted areas.

Then we would never get any training done. NAS Kingsville, NAF El Centro, MCAS Yuma, Randolph AFB and many others would have to close.

It is never impossible to see and avoid, just EXTREAMLY difficult.

Better idea, CALL THE SQUADRONS BEFORE ENTERING THE MOA!! Why is this so hard to do??

We are NOT confused about how MOA's work. We use them more then you and are taught FAR's every year. We HAVE to know that civilians can transit and their restrictions.

Many civilians don't seem to understand the difficulties of tactical training operations and the real risk involved in transiting an active MOA.

PLEASE, let us know when you will be there so we can prepare and flex if needed. Or we may tell you, "Today is not a good day to be transiting the MOA." Would you listlen, or just put pilots in danger?

 

[ExAF]

Wrong (partially)

And, contrary to an earlier post, it is legal to transit a MOA under IFR although ATC usually won't clear an aircraft through one due to workload. There seem to be a huge misunderstanding on the part of some military pilots and maybe some operations types about the purpose of MOAs and the operational responsibilities associated with them. Bottom line is maneuvers that make it impossible to see and avoid should be limited to restricted areas.

No, even though it IS legal, the reason controllers usually won't clear you through an active MOA is not because of workload, it is because they CANNOT provide IFR separation with the type of maneuvering that is usually going on in the MOA. If they do clear someone through IFR, they will often end up temporarily restricting the airspace (usually by altitue) so they can ensure separation during the transit. There is no misunderstanding on the mil side; it is pounded into their heads from day one of pilot training. See and avoid is required and complied with, it is just more difficult when the maneuvering is more dynamic. The restricted vs MOA airspace issue has been beat to death so I won't go into that any more.

 

[bagasticks]

The question isn't whether or not I know, the question is whether or not I care about anything that goes on in asscot land. I know the answer.

I hand crafted asscots for my whole squadron with one pair of your mom's skivvies. .

 

[Bjammin]

I hand crafted asscots for my whole squadron with one pair of your mom's skivvies. .

:laugh: OK, That was pretty funny.:laugh:

 

[The_Russian]

Simply blasting through the MOA is never a good idea, for civillian or military.

I think everyone on page eight missed this one. Good point Avbug.

 

[Future SNA]

Arguing on the internet is gay.

 

[transpac]

No, even though it IS legal, the reason controllers usually won't clear you through an active MOA is not because of workload, it is because they CANNOT provide IFR separation with the type of maneuvering that is usually going on in the MOA. If they do clear someone through IFR, they will often end up temporarily restricting the airspace (usually by altitue) so they can ensure separation during the transit. There is no misunderstanding on the mil side; it is pounded into their heads from day one of pilot training. See and avoid is required and complied with, it is just more difficult when the maneuvering is more dynamic. The restricted vs MOA airspace issue has been beat to death so I won't go into that any more.

ATC is only responsible for separating IFR traffic from other IFR traffic. But, they advise of conflicting VFR traffic when workload permits. Unless you're maneuvering in a MOA under an IFR clearance, ATC can clear civilian IFR traffic to transit the area. They usually choose not to do so because of the hassle factor they'd be exposing themselves to and because they'd be busier than a one armed paper hanger pointing out VFR traffic to the IFR folks. Personally I wish the FAA and military would agree to do away with MOAs altogether and establish additional restricted areas to meet military needs.

 

[Diesel]

Just because its an MOA doesn't make it your (military) personal playground to do anything (unsafe tail number check on a non military plane) you feel like doing.

As someone who lives under an MOA and flies through it for most of my life I enjoy watching the f16's operate professionally. Every once and a while we have a f16 that decides he should have been in the movie top gun and ruins it for everyone.

While flying floats in the area we had several close calls with f16's, they have since moved their low level run area. Its pretty common for us to be climbing through or descending through a MOA because it covers 1/4 of the state.

Maybe those who operate in it "get it" that its shared use and understand how to operate safely through it and in it.

Its shared use. Period.

 

[stonewall]

Arguing on the internet is gay.

Copy...all you have to do is admit you don't the answer.

 

[Bjammin]

When using our MOA in Texas we are under and IFR clearance with the MOA being the clearance limit so know other IFR traffic can be cleared through the MOA.

I think any civilian would consider 2 v 1 BFM unsafe maneuvering.

AGAIN, please call the squadrons before operating in the MOA. The duty officer will make a note and we can all brief your MOA penetration or move to another MOA. NOT ONE has said they would do this, sad.