Powder River Training Complex Commonly Asked Questions September 15, 2010

Similar documents
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION ADOPTION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT AND FAA RECORD OF DECISION FOR

Airspace Establishment Project Frequently Asked Questions Permanent SUA and Environmental Assessment March 2019

Civil/Military Coordination Workshop Havana, Cuba April 2015

Proposed Establishment of and Modification to Restricted Areas; Fort Sill, OK

What Is The 29Palms Training Land Acquisition and Airspace Establishment Project Frequently Asked Questions Airspace Related July 2015

What Is The Proposed 29Palms Training Land Acquisition and Airspace Establishment Project? Frequently Asked Questions Airspace Related June 2014

4.2 AIRSPACE. 4.2 Airspace. Supplemental Draft Environmental Impact Statement August 2008 Military Training Activities at Mākua Military Reservation

Acronyms and Abbreviations

April 5, Dear Mr. Ready,

Fresno Area Mid-Air Collision Avoidance Program (MACA) California Air National Guard 144 th Fighter Wing, Fresno, CA

Powder River Training Complex Ellsworth Air Force Base, South Dakota Environmental Impact Statement

Windmills & Airspace Can We Work Together?

FLIGHT ADVISORY WASHINGTON D.C. SPECIAL FLIGHT RULES AREA LEESBURG MANUVERING AREA

a. Aeronautical charts DID THIS IN LESSON 2

APPENDIX F AIRSPACE INFORMATION

Air Law. Iain Darby NAPC/PH-NSIL IAEA. International Atomic Energy Agency

FLASHCARDS AIRSPACE. Courtesy of the Air Safety Institute, a Division of the AOPA Foundation, and made possible by AOPA Holdings Company.

R-2508 COMPLEX R-2515 SFC TO UNLIMITED

Pope Field, NC MID-AIR COLLISION AVOIDANCE

** DETERMINATION OF NO HAZARD TO AIR NAVIGATION **

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION WASHINGTON D.C. GRANT OF EXEMPTION

FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS. Modification of the Cheyenne Low and High military operations areas. in eastern Colorado and western Kansas

Class B Airspace. Description

CERTIFICATE OF WAIVER OR AUTHORIZATION

Public Comment on Condor MOA Proposal

UNMANNED AIRCRAFT PROVISIONS IN FAA REAUTHORIZATION BILL

Table 5-15 Special Use Airspace in the SBMR Airspace ROI

FAA FORM UAS COA Attachment FAA

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION WASHINGTON D.C. GRANT OF EXEMPTION

AIRSPACE MANAGEMENT AND COMMUNICATION

TO: Air Traffic Control System Command Center (ATCSCC) DATE: May 10, FROM: Paul McEwen, Traffic Management Officer, Anchorage ARTCC

Establish the Delta Military Operations Area Environmental Assessment

ex) & Comple nce Avoidan 1 August 2010

Effective Altitude. R-3103 To 30,000 (To 9,144 meters) Source: NACO 2002 Notes: 1 By NOTAM issued 12 hours in advance

** DETERMINATION OF NO HAZARD TO AIR NAVIGATION **

COMPLIANCE WITH THIS PUBLICATION IS MANDATORY

Powder River Training Complex Special Use Airspace General & Business Aviation Survey

R-2515 R-2508 COMPLEX

Contents. Subpart A General 91.1 Purpose... 7

Municipal Drone Operations Ben Roper City of College Station

129 th RQW/SE P.O. Box 103, MS#1 Moffett Federal Airfield, CA

** DETERMINATION OF NO HAZARD TO AIR NAVIGATION **

The NOTAM described will replace previously issued FDC NOTAMs 6/2550 and 7/7778 for the DC ADIZ/FRZ.

Letter of Agreement. Between Jacksonville ARTCC and Virtual United States Navy Effective Date: Sept 1, 2008

Amendment of Restricted Areas R-2907A and R-2907B, Lake George, FL; and R-2910, Pinecastle, FL

Fresno Area Mid-Air Collision Avoidance Program (MACA)

AOPA Air Safety Foundation

2012 Mat Su Valley Collision Avoidance Survey

AIRWORTHINESS CERTIFICATION OF AIRCRAFT AND RELATED PRODUCTS. 1. PURPOSE. This change is issued to incorporate revised operating limitations.

NOTAM. Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association (AOPA) Fly-In Colorado Springs Airport (COS) Colorado Springs, CO SPECIAL FLIGHT PROCEDURES

Report to Congress: Improving General Aviation Security

3.11 Transportation & Circulation

4.6 AIRSPACE. Approach to Analysis

Glossary. Part I Acronyms/Data Terminology. AIFSS -- Automated International Flight Service Station.

40 BEALEAFBI OCTOBER Chapter 8 RQ-4 OPERATIONS

Initiated By: AFS-400

Modification of VOR Federal Airway V-170 in the Vicinity of Devils Lake, ND

Reliever Airports: NOISE ABATEMENT PLAN Flying Cloud Airport (FCM)

DO NOT BEGIN THIS WORK UNTIL YOU HAVE COMPLETED ALL REQUIRED ASSIGNED READING AND EXERCISES.

Unmanned Aircraft Operations in the National Airspace System. AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

Consider problems and make specific recommendations concerning the provision of ATS/AIS/SAR in the Asia Pacific Region LOST COMMUNICATION PROCEDURES

Appendix K: MSP Class B Airspace

ASSEMBLY 39TH SESSION

NAVIGATION: CHARTS, PUBLICATIONS, FLIGHT COMPUTERS (chapters 7 & 8)

Class Alpha. In addition, if you fly above FL240 your aircraft must have DME or a suitable RNAV system.

Intro to Small Unmanned Aircraft Systems & Recreational Drones

[1] Gleim #: Source: PHAK Chap 15

PLAN Anoka County - Blaine Airport

From: Commanding Officer, Naval Air Station Pensacola. Subj: NAVAL AIR STATION PENSACOLA CLOSED CONTROL TOWER AIRFIELD OPERATIONS

DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FOR THE CREATION OF RESTRICTED AREA (RA) R-5601G AND R-5601H FORT SILL, OKLAHOMA

CE 563 Airport Design

1.2 An Approach Control Unit Shall Provide the following services: c) Alerting Service and assistance to organizations involved in SAR Actions;

County of San Bernardino Film Permit Information

Teaching the National Airspace System. Soaring Safety Foundation FIRC Presentation

MANAGING THE RISK TO AVIATION SAFETY OF WIND TURBINE INSTALLATIONS (WIND FARMS)/WIND MONITORING TOWERS.

FLIGHT ADVISORY NATIONAL SPECIAL SECURITY EVENT UNITED NATIONS GENERAL ASSEMBLY UNGA-67 SEPTEMBER 18, 2012 September 28, 2012

Safety Brief. February Keeping Current

California State University Long Beach Policy on Unmanned Aircraft Systems

COMPLIANCE WITH THIS PUBLICATION IS MANDATORY

Learning Objectives 7.3 Flight Performance and Planning Flight Planning & Flight Monitoring

SEATTLE AIR ROUTE TRAFFIC CONTROL CENTER SEATTLE GLIDER COUNCIL LETTER OF AGREEMENT. EFFECTIVE: June 1, 2015

DIRECCION DE PERSONAL AERONAUTICO DPTO. DE INSTRUCCION PREGUNTAS Y OPCIONES POR TEMA

MEMORANDUM FOR ALASKA AVIATORS 21 Apr 2016

Unmanned Aircraft System (Drone) Policy

FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION CENTRAL EN ROUTE AND OCEANIC AREA OPERATIONS FORT WORTH ARTC CENTER, MAJORS ATCT, AND SKYDIVE TANDEM GREENVILLE, LLC

STUDENT PILOT PRE-CROSS-COUNTRY WRITTEN EXAM

VANCE AIR FORCE BASE MIDAIR COLLISION AVOIDANCE (MACA) LET S NOT MEET BY ACCIDENT!

SMS HAZARD ANALYSIS AT A UNIVERSITY FLIGHT SCHOOL

SUMMARY: This action modifies Class E surface airspace and Class E airspace extending

Airspace. Chapter 14. Gold Seal Online Ground School. Introduction

Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) 101

TCAS RA not followed. Tzvetomir BLAJEV Stan DROZDOWSKI

GACE Flying Club Ground Review Test, 2019 NAME: DATE: SCORE: CORRECTED BY: CFI# DATE:

GENERAL INFORMATION Aircraft #1 Aircraft #2

Guidelines for NOTAM Workflow and Allocation of Responsibilities

Department of Defense DIRECTIVE

Subtitle B Unmanned Aircraft Systems

Office of the President University Policy

1.1.3 Taxiways. Figure 1-15: Taxiway Data. DRAFT Inventory TYPICAL PAVEMENT CROSS-SECTION LIGHTING TYPE LENGTH (FEET) WIDTH (FEET) LIGHTING CONDITION

SJC North and South Flow

Transcription:

Powder River Training Complex Commonly Asked Questions September 15, 2010 QUESTION: Why is this expansion needed? Answer: Realistic and effective training. Twenty years ago, enemy surface-to-air threats generally reached 20 to 30 miles and B-1s bombed targets from less than a mile away. Today, enemy threats reach hundreds of miles and B-1s shoot missiles over similar ranges. To be able to train realistically, we simply need more space to practice the kinds of engagements our Airmen expect to see in combat. This will increase the likelihood of successfully accomplishing our combat missions and help bring our aircrew home alive. QUESTION: The proposed airspace goes over an area where I currently fly general aviation aircraft. Does this mean I have to stop flying in that area? Answer: No. The proposed expansion does not include any restricted areas that ban civilian aviation. Military aircraft and general aviation aircraft will need to deconflict from one another in the same way we do today in the current airspace. QUESTION: Many counties depend upon regional air ambulance and helicopter medical evacuation (MEDEVAC) capability in order to transport patients who are in danger of losing life, limb, or eyesight. Will the USAF give these flights priority over its scheduled military training? Answer: Just like in the current airspace, the FAA gives airspace priority to emergency responders. For these types of cases, military aircraft would be notified and directed to vacate any areas needed by emergency responders. This procedure is in accordance with our existing memorandums of agreement already on file. QUESTION: Will the infrastructure exist (assigned civilian compatible frequencies, repeaters, etc.) for air ambulance and MEDEVAC operators on life-saving missions to be able to directly communicate their need for airspace with the authority (FAA, military controllers, etc.) in charge of this airspace? Answer: Infrastructure already exists for emergency communication. Air ambulance and MEDVAC pilots can contact FAA controlling agencies to ensure they receive priority access to the airspace. Additionally, pilots can obtain information via published frequencies for the airspace or prior to flight with a FAA flight briefing available 24/7 by toll-free phone (1-800-WXBRIEF (992-7433)). Real-time communication with some FAA controlling agencies is limited in some areas beneath the airspace. In these cases, or in case of an emergency where none of these options

are possible, pilots can still contact military aircraft directly via radio on Guard frequency (VHF 121.5 or UHF 243.0). Military pilots monitor guard from take off to landing. QUESTION: How can civil pilots find out when the airspace is active and who will they call real time to see if there are aircraft in the airspace and to get potential flight following (website/phone number)? Answer: The proposed airspace would follow the same procedures used today. The airspace will be scheduled in advance and any airspace scheduled outside the charted times would be published by NOTAM not less than 2 hours prior to activation. Pilots can obtain this information from FAA Flight Service by calling 1-800-WXBRIEF (992-7433). They can also access the FAA NOTAM website at www.faa.gov/pilots/flt_plan/notams/. In flight, they can use flight following for air traffic advisories or priority clearance through the airspace, if required. In an emergency, they can also call on VHF Guard Frequency (VHF 121.5 or UHF 243.0) to broadcast their intentions and deconflict their routing. All military aircraft monitor guard frequencies in flight. B-1s monitor VHF and UHF guard frequencies. These processes and procedures are normal for any licensed pilot. QUESTION: How can private pilots avoid potential wake vortices from B-1 s flying lowlevel? Just like in the current airspace, all private and military pilots are to "see and avoid" other aircraft while flying under Visual Flight Rules (or VFR). Over the last 20 years in the existing airspace, Ellsworth AFB has experienced no mid-air collisions, no hazardous air traffic reports, no Terrain Collision Avoidance System (TCAS) violations, and no airspace violations using these procedures. The proposal would utilize these proven procedures in the extended airspace. FAA Advisory Circular No. 90-23F, Aircraft Wake Turbulence, also addresses this subject and includes recommendations related to operational procedures to avoid wake vortices. QUESTION: Is chaff harmful to livestock? No. The constituents of chaff and chaff debris are either inert or already prevalent in the environment. While chaff made 10 years ago contained lead, no chaff used or manufactured today contains lead. The chemical composition of a B-1 s RR-188 training chaff is aluminum-coated glass fibers. The glass fiber dipoles are generally 1 mil (25.4 microns) in diameter, including the aluminum coating which is 0.12 mil thick. In other words, each single piece of chaff is smaller than a single strand of (short length) human hair. Chaff contains naturally occurring elements in very low concentrations and the dispersion rates of chaff falling to the earth further mitigate the effects. Based on reviews of numerous toxicological studies, the principal components of chaff

(aluminum, silica glass fibers, and stearic acid) will not pose an adverse impact to human and environmental health. Several studies were conducted on cattle and goats that showed they would avoid eating clumps of chaff that were placed directly into their food and only consumed chaff when coated with molasses and thoroughly mixed with food. Those animals that did ingest the chaff showed no signs of health effects. Additional information on Chaff will be included in the DEIS and can currently be found at www.accplanning.org/chaff_and_flares.html. QUESTION: I m concerned about fires from flare usage. How will your procedures avoid starting a forest fire? Answer: In the last 20 years of B-1 aviation in other ranges across the country, there have not been any cases of fires started by B-1 flares. Current military defensive flares are not explosive--they are magnesium pellets that when ignited, burn for a short period (approximately 5 seconds) at approximately 1,202 degrees Fahrenheit burning out after falling approximately 500 feet. To minimize the risk of a flare caused fire, the Air Force is proposing flare usage at 2000' above ground level and higher. To further minimize risk, fire danger beneath each individual MOA would be monitored using the National Fire Danger Rating System. Flare use would be suspended if an Extreme Fire Danger condition exists beneath the airspace. QUESTION: Would the proposed airspace expansion require the removal of the existing communications towers or windmills (i.e., cell, radio, microwave, etc.) which are within the confines of the proposed airspace expansion? Answer: No. The proposed action would not include removal of any towers. The Air Force would continue to avoid existing or new communications towers as they do today. QUESTION: Would the proposed airspace expansion hinder the day-to-day operation of the existing communications towers (i.e., cell, radio, microwave, etc.) which are within the confines of the proposed airspace expansion? Answer: No. The PRTC expansion would not have any anticipated impact on day-today operations of existing or new communications towers. QUESTION: Would the proposed airspace expansion require work stoppage on existing wind turbine farms which are currently under development and to be located within the confines of the proposed airspace expansion and/or would the proposed airspace expansion prohibit the development of future wind turbine farms which may be placed within the confines of the proposed airspace expansion

Answer: The process of obtaining approval for wind turbine construction would not change from what is currently required. The Air Force does not directly authorize or prohibit these items, but does participate in the FAA s Obstruction Evaluation Process. Any new structures would be evaluated on a case-by-case basis. No recommendation for FAA objection is made unless a specific unacceptable impact is identified. Present wind turbine farms would be charted and avoided. Wind turbine farms with windmills greater than 100 in height would continue to be charted on airspace maps as obstructions to flight as they are today. The Air Force will address any potential impacts in the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS). QUESTION: Would aircraft flying in the vicinity of wind turbine farms negatively impact the mechanical operation and/or electrical generating capacity of these machines? Answer: Impacts to wind turbine farms caused by B-1 and B-52 over flight will be analyzed in detail in the Environmental Impact Study (EIS). The Air Force studied the wake turbulence effects of low-level B-1 and B-52 over flights on private ranch windmills in a Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement for the Realistic Bomber Training Initiative. The study concluded that wake vortices, under normal flight operations, and in all but rare atmospheric conditions, fail to generate sufficient velocities to damage structures (RBTI FEIS, Aug 06). The use of training chaff and flares would not be expected to impact their operation. QUESTION: How often will these training missions take place? Answer: Training within the proposed PRTC would occur daily, mostly Monday through Friday, approximately 240 days per year. QUESTION: What missions are flown at low level altitudes and how many? Answer: Low level missions include low level navigation training at 500 feet above ground level and higher. Low level missions include low altitude threat reaction and avoidance training, show of force/presence training and low level attack training. Potentially, those missions could be conducted anytime the airspace is active as these missions are part of continuation training and must be routinely practiced by aircrew. For the B-1, approximately 20-30% of time in the airspace would be at low altitude between 500 feet above ground level and less than 10,000 feet, approximately 25% of that (5-6% of the total) will be at 500 feet. During large force exercises (LFEs), other aircraft such as the F-16 could spend approximately 36% of their time at altitudes between 500 AGL and 2,000 AGL. These numbers are subject to change as alternatives are refined. Detailed information will be included in the EIS.

QUESTION: Where do the B-1s do supersonic training now? Answer: Current supersonic training for the B-1 is done at remote ranges such as the Nevada Test and Training Range (NTTR) and the Utah Test and Training Range (UTTR). QUESTION: How often would supersonic flights occur and how low would they be? Answer: Supersonic flights would occur primarily during infrequent Large Force Exercises (LFE). The Air Force is proposing to fly supersonic above 10,000 feet MSL for small sized fighter aircraft and above 20,000 mean sea level (MSL) for B-1 aircraft. These altitudes reduce a sonic boom s effect, if one is sensed on the ground. Detailed information will be included in the draft EIS. QUESTION: How would the airspace be used or scheduled by Ellsworth AFB B-1 s? Answer: Airspace use would be published on the aeronautical charts depicting the military operating area as well as other DoD and FAA publications. Routine training normally would not be scheduled for the weekend. Military training use of the airspace outside the published times would be announced with a FAA Notice to Airman (NOTAM). NOTAMs would be issued no later than 2 hours prior to airspace use. Normally, the airspace would be used by one training mission at a time. Missions could be a single B- 1 or formation of two B-1s in each airspace sector. Missions normally would occupy a sector for one hour and would utilize either all high altitude (above 20,000 ) or high and low altitude airspace. If low altitude training was necessary, the mission normally would be in the low altitude environment for 15 to 20 minutes maneuvering at 500-2000 feet above the ground. All missions would operate in the airspace on a flight plan filed with the FAA and with an Instrument Flight Rules (IFR) clearance. Infrequently, all elements of the proposed airspace could be scheduled simultaneously to allow joint training with multiple aircraft types. These integrated training requirements are called Large Force Exercises (LFEs) and could occur up to once per calendar quarter or 10 days per year. QUESTION: How would the airspace be scheduled and who would control the MOAs? Answer: Just like today, the airspace would be scheduled by the Ellsworth Air Force Base scheduling office. Ellsworth will provide the scheduled times to the FAA who will in turn issue NOTAMs to inform the public when the airspace would be active. Additionally, the applicable aviation charts will include the normal airspace usage times. Control of the airspace would be retained by the designated FAA Air Route Traffic Control Center (ARTCC). The PRTC would fall under three ARTCC s airspace, Minneapolis, Denver, and Salt Lake City.

QUESTION: Is the Air Force planning to evaluate the number of airports affected by this and would such an evaluation include impacts on general aviation in addition to commercial air traffic? Answer: Yes. These studies will be accomplished by the Air Force and the FAA as part of the environmental impact analysis process and will be taken into consideration. QUESTION: Would the proposed MOA include the Minot AFB B-52 training mission? Answer: Yes QUESTION: Is the Air Force considering no-fly areas over houses, towns, near airports, etc? Answer: No-fly areas will be managed just as they are today in the existing airspace. Avoidance areas will be in accordance with FAA Order 7400.4 and 14 CFR Part 91. Areas requiring additional avoidance distance or not covered by standing guidance will be negotiated case-by-case between the 28th Bomb Wing and the organization or individual requesting temporary or permanent avoidance. QUESTION: When will the Air Force s study be complete? Answer: The Draft EIS is currently scheduled to be released for public comment in July 2010 with the Final EIS following in the late spring or early summer or 2011. QUESTION: Will there be other opportunities to comment? Answer: Yes. Once the Draft EIS is released to the public there will be a minimum of a 70 day public comment period. During that period the Air Force will hold formal public hearings. This process is currently scheduled to occur in the late summer/early fall of 2010.