Airspeed of military planes

In article , Mary Shafer wrote:

On Fri, 23 Apr 2004 13:54:17 -0500, Greg Copeland
wrote:

On Fri, 23 Apr 2004 14:36:05 +0000, Larry Dighera wrote:

The glider was in class G airspace as far as I can tell, albeit
apparently within a Military Training Route. It is my understanding
that aircraft operating there are still governed by the see-and-avoid
mandate.

I understand that. And that was pretty much the basis of my question.
The glider had right of way. Yet, "found the glider pilot to be at
fault". To me, that says they expected a glider to get the heck out of
the way of a highspeed aircraft. Thusly, my paraphrased statement of,
"I'm crazy because I don't understand how they could expect that to happen."

I get the feeling you don't understand that a "Military Training
Route" is not ordinary see-and-avoid airspace. Rather, it's airspace
used in a special way, with military aircraft given exclusive use when
the airspace is active.


Sorry, Mary, but you are wrong. You're thinking of
an MOA. The Airman's Information Manual has this to say about Military
Training Routes:

Nonparticipating aircraft are not prohibited from flying within an
MTR; however, extreme vigilance should be exercised when conducting
flight through or near these routes.

So, in the absence of other information, I assume he was found at fault
because he didn't "exercise extreme vigilance." And my suspicious
nature assumes because the FAA can't do anything to a military pilot
anyway. It would be interesting to know the altitude, because most
MTR traffic above 1500 AGL (I think) is IFR, which kind of guarantees
they won't be looking outside much.

Mike Beede

Mary... you are WRONG... I've flown both sides of this issue.

"Mary Shafer" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 23 Apr 2004 13:54:17 -0500, Greg Copeland
wrote:

On Fri, 23 Apr 2004 14:36:05 +0000, Larry Dighera wrote:

I get the feeling you don't understand that a "Military Training
Route" is not ordinary see-and-avoid airspace. Rather, it's airspace
used in a special way, with military aircraft given exclusive use when
the airspace is active.

It is ordinary SEE AND AVOID airspace, there is not any airspace other than
possibly ClassA that is not. MTRs whether IR or VR are still see and avoid.
An IR route can be flown in IFR/IMC conditions and has ATC IFR seperation
from other IFR traffic.

If the weather in the IR is VFR, there can be VFR traffic in or crossing the
route and SEE AND AVOID applies.

A VR route can only be flown in VFR/VMC conditions and does not have ATC
seperation from IFR traffic.


Other aircraft, including gliders, are supposed to stay out of the
route when it's active. This glider pilot didn't, and so was at
fault.


B*** S***, see comments above.

He was in an airspace forbidden to him then, an airspace dedicated at
that time to the use of high-speed aircraft. He wasn't expected to
dodge the fast-mover but to stay away from the airspace reserved for

more BS, MTRs are not "forbidden airspace", the only "forbidden" airspace is
"Restricted or Prohibited". I can be VFR in a MOA if I want.. just not
smart to do it without talking to the controlling agency. We cross MOAs out
here all the time with "controllying agency" contact, and can even get
cleared through restriced airspace if it is not in use. If we did not, we
would add 100s of miles to the trip.


that fast-mover. The reason the space is reserved is that it's hard
to get out of the way of a fast-mover, because there isn't enough time
between when you see it and when it's where you are for you to be
elsewhere. And the fast-mover doesn't have any more time to maneuver.
Maybe less, as gliders are smaller and, maybe, harder to see.


I've flown IR and VR MTRs in VMC at speeds in excess of 0.9M from 200ft to
2000ft AGL. And yes, I've had to dodge a few VFR general aviation
transients.

It is every pilots responsiblility to be aware of IR and VR routes, know if
they are "active" and to be more dilligent for high speed low altitude
traffic in the area.


--
Mary Shafer Retired aerospace research engineer

"Mike Beede" wrote...

I get the feeling you don't understand that a "Military Training
Route" is not ordinary see-and-avoid airspace. Rather, it's airspace
used in a special way, with military aircraft given exclusive use when
the airspace is active.

Sorry, Mary, but you are wrong. You're thinking of
an MOA. The Airman's Information Manual has this to say about Military
Training Routes:

Nonparticipating aircraft are not prohibited from flying within an
MTR; however, extreme vigilance should be exercised when conducting
flight through or near these routes.

Actually, MOAs are not exclusive-use, either. Only active Restricted or
Prohibited areas (FAR 91.133) disallow non-participating aircraft altogether --
oh yeah... I almost forgot those "Temporary" TFRs (91.137)...

"BTIZ" wrote:

Mary... you are WRONG... I've flown both sides of this issue.

Don't expect a whole bunch of apologies from her here guys...I
once told her that she was wrong when she emphatically stated
that there was no such thing as "Pilot Error"...her answer was a
bunch of vitriol and a ride into her bit bucket (where I still am
as far as I know)
--

-Gord.

On Fri, 23 Apr 2004 18:55:33 -0700, "BTIZ"
wrote in Message-Id: mOjic.20347$432.4898@fed1read01:

It is every pilots responsiblility to be aware of IR and VR routes, know if
they are "active" and to be more dilligent for high speed low altitude
traffic in the area.

In my experience, FSS more often than not knows very little about MTR
activity despite the mandate for the military to notify them when they
plan MTR activity. Like you said, if a pilot's mission takes him into
MTR territory, it is his responsibility to contact each military
authority and coordinate transit. Less than that, and he's inviting
grim consequences. Because radio communications are difficult down
low, and it can be difficult to find the right person to talk to about
MTR activity, it is best accomplished on the ground before launch by
telephone.

On Sat, 24 Apr 2004 03:00:52 GMT, "John R Weiss"
wrote:

"Mike Beede" wrote...

I get the feeling you don't understand that a "Military Training
Route" is not ordinary see-and-avoid airspace. Rather, it's airspace
used in a special way, with military aircraft given exclusive use when
the airspace is active.

Sorry, Mary, but you are wrong. You're thinking of
an MOA. The Airman's Information Manual has this to say about Military
Training Routes:

Nonparticipating aircraft are not prohibited from flying within an
MTR; however, extreme vigilance should be exercised when conducting
flight through or near these routes.

Actually, MOAs are not exclusive-use, either. Only active Restricted or
Prohibited areas (FAR 91.133) disallow non-participating aircraft altogether --
oh yeah... I almost forgot those "Temporary" TFRs (91.137)...

Sorry, my mistake. Too many years in R-2508 and environs.

Mary

--
Mary Shafer Retired aerospace research engineer

On Fri, 23 Apr 2004 18:57:48 -0500, Mike Beede wrote:

In article , Mary Shafer wrote:

On Fri, 23 Apr 2004 13:54:17 -0500, Greg Copeland
wrote:

On Fri, 23 Apr 2004 14:36:05 +0000, Larry Dighera wrote:

The glider was in class G airspace as far as I can tell, albeit
apparently within a Military Training Route. It is my understanding
that aircraft operating there are still governed by the see-and-avoid
mandate.

I understand that. And that was pretty much the basis of my question.
The glider had right of way. Yet, "found the glider pilot to be at
fault". To me, that says they expected a glider to get the heck out of
the way of a highspeed aircraft. Thusly, my paraphrased statement of,
"I'm crazy because I don't understand how they could expect that to happen."

I get the feeling you don't understand that a "Military Training
Route" is not ordinary see-and-avoid airspace. Rather, it's airspace
used in a special way, with military aircraft given exclusive use when
the airspace is active.


Sorry, Mary, but you are wrong. You're thinking of
an MOA.

No, I was thinking of R-2508, which is a restricted area. My mistake.
I'm sorry.

Mary

--
Mary Shafer Retired aerospace research engineer

On Fri, 23 Apr 2004 16:18:47 -0700, Mary Shafer
wrote in Message-Id: :

On Fri, 23 Apr 2004 13:54:17 -0500, Greg Copeland
wrote:

On Fri, 23 Apr 2004 14:36:05 +0000, Larry Dighera wrote:

The glider was in class G airspace as far as I can tell, albeit
apparently within a Military Training Route. It is my understanding
that aircraft operating there are still governed by the see-and-avoid
mandate.

I understand that. And that was pretty much the basis of my question.
The glider had right of way. Yet, "found the glider pilot to be at
fault". To me, that says they expected a glider to get the heck out of
the way of a highspeed aircraft. Thusly, my paraphrased statement of,
"I'm crazy because I don't understand how they could expect that to happen."

I get the feeling you don't understand that a "Military Training
Route" is not ordinary see-and-avoid airspace. Rather, it's airspace
used in a special way, with military aircraft given exclusive use when
the airspace is active.

I have a feeling that the misapprehension you hold is common among
military personnel. Please inform your base safety officer of this
area of misunderstanding, so that the word gets out to the pilots who
fly MTRs.

Other aircraft, including gliders, are supposed to stay out of the
route when it's active. This glider pilot didn't, and so was at
fault.

He was in an airspace forbidden to him then, an airspace dedicated at
that time to the use of high-speed aircraft. He wasn't expected to
dodge the fast-mover but to stay away from the airspace reserved for
that fast-mover. The reason the space is reserved is that it's hard
to get out of the way of a fast-mover, because there isn't enough time
between when you see it and when it's where you are for you to be
elsewhere. And the fast-mover doesn't have any more time to maneuver.
Maybe less, as gliders are smaller and, maybe, harder to see.

Mary

I completely agree with your assessment of the impossibility of
see-and-avoid in these situations.

Sorry, Mary, but you are wrong. You're thinking of
an MOA.

No, I was thinking of R-2508, which is a restricted area. My mistake.
I'm sorry.

Mary

Mary... I fly general aviation, power and gliders, through R-2508 on regular
occasions... mostly on weekends, and while talking to the controlling
agency. Some times I get cleared through it, and some times I have to stay
clear, in the MOA and shoot the gap at Trona.

BT

On Fri, 23 Apr 2004 21:48:16 -0700, "BTIZ"
wrote:

Sorry, Mary, but you are wrong. You're thinking of
an MOA.

No, I was thinking of R-2508, which is a restricted area. My mistake.
I'm sorry.

Mary

Mary... I fly general aviation, power and gliders, through R-2508 on regular
occasions... mostly on weekends, and while talking to the controlling
agency. Some times I get cleared through it, and some times I have to stay
clear, in the MOA and shoot the gap at Trona.

That's because NASA Dryden and AFFTC don't have the money for
overtime, so they don't fly much on the weekends. Makes it convenient
for everyone else.

Actually, there's not nearly as much flying these days as there has
been in the past. I can remember when we'd have to loiter to get into
the PIRA, the spin areas, and even the supersonic corridors. These
days you can ask for them on the fly and get them, rather than
requesting them a week in advance.

Although having a restricted area doesn't always do that much good. I
can remember one Wednesday before Thanksgiving when we were flying the
F-8 DFBW and saw a GA airplane fly right in front of it on the tail
camera, downlinked to the control room. The pilot of the safety chase
promptly dashed off and got the guy's tail number for Sport (that's
the RAPCON at Edwards) and when the guy landed in Bishop the FAA was
waiting for him. The guy was just sneaking through the area, taking a
chance that no one would be out there on the day before the holiday, I
guess.

I've always wondered what the guy thought when he saw the F-104 chase
plane circling him. Actually we all wondered if he ever even saw the
zipper, as the chase pilot reported that he never turned his head.

That gap at Trona is a long way off, isn't it? I guess the airline
pilots have a real problem when the Daggett Shelf is hot, as it was
when we were flying the SR-71, because that gap on the southeast
corner gets a lot smaller, particularly when Garry Owen is hot. If it
wasn't a Blackbird you were dodging, it was an artillery shell. ATC
must have been really glad when we finally retired the SRs in '99.

Mary

--
Mary Shafer Retired aerospace research engineer