![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
He should have listed the airspace by name.. did he? A Restricted area or
MOA? He cannot clear non participating IFR aircraft through an active MOA. Non Participating means that you are not part of those that are reserving the MOA. I'm surprised he offered traffic advisories while you were in the MOA. Perhaps he knew that those reserving it were not there yet, but it had "gone hot" and he could not sued it for IFR traffic. Maybe he did not offer lower because he already had enough traffic ducking under the MOA. BT "Mike Granby" wrote in message ... Near Seymour Johnson, so I did consider that it was the MOA north of there, but then why wouldn't he offer me a descent to 6000 instead to go under it, since I was only at 8000. (I've flown this route several times in the last few months, including in the week, and never had this issue before, but I've typically been at 6000, so the MOA does make sense.) |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]() He should have listed the airspace by name.. did he? A Restricted area or MOA? Nope. Just "airspace closure". He cannot clear non participating IFR aircraft through an active MOA. Non Participating means that you are not part of those that are reserving the MOA. My understanding is that IFR traffic can be cleared through a MOA if ATC can ensure separation, so presumably there are some cases when they can, and some cases when they can't. I wonder what defines which case it is? I'm surprised he offered traffic advisories while you were in the MOA. Yep. Perhaps he knew that those reserving it were not there yet, but it had "gone hot" and he could not sued it for IFR traffic. Would make sense. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Yes.. IFR traffic can be cleared through the MOA if IFR separation can be
assured. He can do it if he is controlling the MOA users and ask them to either stay in one corner while you blast through, or give them a "hard deck" above your altitude while you transition. If the MOA is being controlled by a military controller running intercepts with the active players, the military controller most likely did not want to bother with you, did not want you on frequency and told the Civil ATC to keep you. BT "Mike Granby" wrote in message ... He should have listed the airspace by name.. did he? A Restricted area or MOA? Nope. Just "airspace closure". He cannot clear non participating IFR aircraft through an active MOA. Non Participating means that you are not part of those that are reserving the MOA. My understanding is that IFR traffic can be cleared through a MOA if ATC can ensure separation, so presumably there are some cases when they can, and some cases when they can't. I wonder what defines which case it is? I'm surprised he offered traffic advisories while you were in the MOA. Yep. Perhaps he knew that those reserving it were not there yet, but it had "gone hot" and he could not sued it for IFR traffic. Would make sense. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Wichita Airspace Question and overlapping airspace | Owen[_4_] | Piloting | 1 | February 14th 07 09:35 PM |
behind closed doors | 5-BG | Soaring | 8 | October 1st 06 02:51 AM |
Two airspace classes for one airspace? (KOQU) | John R | Piloting | 8 | June 30th 04 04:46 AM |
most of eastern Massachussetts airspace closed in July | Christopher C. Stacy | Instrument Flight Rules | 29 | June 19th 04 12:47 AM |
CGX closed (WHY!) | Tlewis95 | Piloting | 28 | March 5th 04 09:45 PM |