On Thu, 17 Feb 2005 14:06:19 GMT, Mike Williamson
wrote in
et::

Larry Dighera wrote:
On Thu, 17 Feb 2005 07:55:51 GMT, Mike Williamson
wrote in
. net::

What is your feeling about the likely success or failure of the use of
see-and-avoid to separate 5,000' AGL supersonic military aircraft from
VFR civil aircraft within joint-use MOA airspace?


As I see it, VFR traffic is never *required* to fly through the MOA,
and I'd certainly recommend against it.

Then you are more safety conscious than those who drafted the EIS for
the USAF who specifically mention VFR transition of the proposed MOA
expansion for supersonic operations.

If you don't feel that those that would fly through it aren't capable
of exercising the required caution,

In the case of VFR transition through a MOA with ongoing supersonic
operations, it's not so much a matter of being capable; it's more
about the physical limitations of spotting the frontal profile of a
gray fighter aircraft against a gray sky in time to identify it as a
threat, making the desired control inputs, and having your aircraft
respond quickly enough to avoid the supersonic threat.

then by all means campaign to have all the MOAs turned into restricted areas...

Well, of course, that's not necessary. There is not supersonic
training occurring in _all_ the MOAs.

What I've found to be particularly useful is contacting the military
ATC, and making them aware of my position and intended route, so they
can shield me from the military operations occurring in the MOA (by
alerting nearby participating military aircraft) and providing radar
traffic advisories.

Doesn't civilian communication with military controllers just make
good sense for VFR civil aircraft transiting a hot MOA?