JWN (John Tune) to add Control Tower

Mooney Fan

Mooney Fan

Cleared for Takeoff
Joined
Sep 17, 2017
Messages
1,039
Location
Indian Mound, TN
Display Name
Display name:
Mooney Fan
This is much needed. Tune is a popular BNA reliever with a host of aircraft from LSA’s to G550’s mixed in. Below is some info on 5 June NOTAM.

Good morning,

As discussed at the Tune tenant meeting, the Tune control tower has narrowed to 3 sites, 2 on the west side of the airport, one on the east side.

· FAA review and approval of the final site is required.

· MNAA must provide the “view” that future controllers would see from the tower at each site.

· The consultant will utilize drones to take panoramic pictures at the tower cab height, during daylight and evening hours.
 
Wow that’s exciting news!

So it’ll now be a Class D?
 
Ryanb said:
Wow that’s exciting news!

So it’ll now be a Class D?
Click to expand...
Almost certainly, though the establishment of airspace is distinct from putting the tower in operation. It's not atypical for the tower to be turned on (which only takes a NOTAM) before the airspace is established (which takes a formal rulemaking). This wasn't supposed to happen when they went to the ICAO-ish airspace, but the FAA realized they were competent enough to actually implement it that way and had to revise the rules to allow control tower authority in class E and G airspace.
 
Tune does get busy for a non towered field. Just was at Vanderbilt yesterday and usually get gas at JWN but we skipped it. Nice little airport.
 
Mooney Fan said:
This is much needed. Tune is a popular BNA reliever with a host of aircraft from LSA’s to G550’s mixed in. Below is some info on 5 June NOTAM.

Good morning,

As discussed at the Tune tenant meeting, the Tune control tower has narrowed to 3 sites, 2 on the west side of the airport, one on the east side.

· FAA review and approval of the final site is required.

· MNAA must provide the “view” that future controllers would see from the tower at each site.

· The consultant will utilize drones to take panoramic pictures at the tower cab height, during daylight and evening hours.
Click to expand...

Do you know who is going to operate it? Do you recall hearing anything like Serco, Midwest ATC, Robinson Aviation or CI2, might have been CI squared?
 
Ryanb said:
Wow that’s exciting news!

So it’ll now be a Class D?
Click to expand...

Most likely. With this much lead time the Controllers will almost certainly be Certified Weather Observers when it opens so Surface Area would be established
 
flyingron said:
Almost certainly, though the establishment of airspace is distinct from putting the tower in operation. It's not atypical for the tower to be turned on (which only takes a NOTAM) before the airspace is established (which takes a formal rulemaking). This wasn't supposed to happen when they went to the ICAO-ish airspace, but the FAA realized they were competent enough to actually implement it that way and had to revise the rules to allow control tower authority in class E and G airspace.
Click to expand...

Do you remember the date that Alphabet Airspace started and the date 91.126 (d) and 91.127 (c) were published?
 
September 1993
 
This seems like an opportunity to go with a remote tower (like Leesburg) and operate it from BNA. Infrastructure costs would be lower, as well as, sharing personnel with BNA
 
Little, flat airport like that, wheel one of these in.
86560145-5B1F-4ECA-9FC2-099B5C6C68C3.jpeg
 
This is good news. Tune is my airport of choice when I visit my daughter in Nashville.
 
Now if only they decommissioned the tower at KAEG.
 
Timbeck2 said:
Been there, done that, more than once. Once with three people crammed in there in chem suits. We had two mounted together on another deployment, called it a TSW-14.
Click to expand...

Like this?

AN-TSW7%20at%20March%20AFB%2075%20-%2001-L.jpg
 
Timbeck2 said:
Been there, done that, more than once. Once with three people crammed in there in chem suits. We had two mounted together on another deployment, called it a TSW-14.
Click to expand...

Fortunately never had to do MOPP suits in ATC. Our radar trailer had NBC filters. Flying though, yes. Ugh. :(
 
We had to wear the suits but the mask mics were like the cone of silence on Get Smart, they never worked so they made the decision that if you're in position, you don't wear a mask. Of course then everyone wanted to work in position. In Korea, it seemed like every other month we were in chem suits.

It's good to be a civilian now.
 
cgrab said:
This seems like an opportunity to go with a remote tower (like Leesburg) and operate it from BNA. Infrastructure costs would be lower, as well as, sharing personnel with BNA
Click to expand...

FAA is still a little slow on remote towers. They are in operation in Europe already with several countries now. UK just went live with one a couple weeks ago. I would imagine, the money is already allocated for them to build the tower and staff it with Federal Contract Tower money.

Saab has the Leesburg case study.

Searidge has one in Colorado.

The other big player is Frequentis, who has 4 systems with the Air Force.

Wouldn't be crazy for some interested local parties to reach out to those three and see if they can manage something.
 
I'd be happy if they'd just put an antennae on the field in small airports so I can call Clearance/Departure/Center instead of the phone call, or worse a GCO. :eek:

I like it much better when I can get my clearance and get cleared to depart over the radio.
 
luvflyin said:
Do you know who is going to operate it? Do you recall hearing anything like Serco, Midwest ATC, Robinson Aviation or CI2, might have been CI squared?
Click to expand...

Who operates the tower at MQY? Same people maybe...? Either that or BNA may just pay for the controllers directly since they are all one big happy family...lol.
 
BGF_Yankee said:
Who operates the tower at MQY? Same people maybe...? Either that or BNA may just pay for the controllers directly since they are all one big happy family...lol.
Click to expand...

Yeah, probably the same company, Robinson Aviation. I looked it up, they have most of the Southeast and Southwest Region. I suppose the FAA may staff it themselves, but I doubt that, they'll probably contract it
 
luvflyin said:
Most likely. With this much lead time the Controllers will almost certainly be Certified Weather Observers when it opens so Surface Area would be established
Click to expand...
Since JWN already has weather observations (from the AWOS), the current lack of a Class E surface area is likely because ATC doesn't have radio coverage to the surface. If that's the case, and nothing else changes but the tower, it will be Class D when the tower is open and Class G when the tower is closed.
 
kkoran said:
Since JWN already has weather observations (from the AWOS), the current lack of a Class E surface area is likely because ATC doesn't have radio coverage to the surface. If that's the case, and nothing else changes but the tower, it will be Class D when the tower is open and Class G when the tower is closed.
Click to expand...

Could be. I'm not sure if Automated systems can be used to satisfy the requirement. AWOS-3 does give cloud bases but it may not be able determine percentage of coverage of the horizon to determine if it's scattered, broken, overcast or just something small directly overhead which could amount to Few or just hole in a broken layer where it would show clear if just looking straight up. @aterpster , does AWOS-3 meet the weather reporting requirement for establishing a Surface Area?

EDIT: Looks like it can:
"...
A federally certified
weather observer or a federally commissioned
automated weather observing system (this includes
all FAA and NWS approved and certified weather
reporting systems) can take the weather observation..."

Somewhere it said AWOS-3 has "cloud/ceiling data" so that should cover it if the one at JWN is 'approved and certified.' I'd guess it would have to be to be charted, but I dunno
 
Last edited:
I’ve flow into Tune several times on trips to Nashville and it didn’t seem that busy. It may have just been the times I was there but I never had more than 3 or 4 planes in the process on landing or taking off when I was. On one occasion a jet was in the mix but everyone played well and it went fine.

Does it get busier than that? Just curious if the tower is for traffic separation or if it’s like Galveston, KGLS, where they had to have a tower to meet the requirements of most of the corporate jets they were trying to attract.

Gary
 
An AWOS will suffice if there is sufficient voice radio coverage (though I suspect given the proximity to BNA that there is).
 
luvflyin said:
Yeah, probably the same company, Robinson Aviation. I looked it up, they have most of the Southeast and Southwest Region. I suppose the FAA may staff it themselves, but I doubt that, they'll probably contract it
Click to expand...

To my knowledge, the FAA hasn't opened any new federal facilities in years. Everything new has been contracted out. This gives me a chuckle as everyone is always up in arms about the privatization of ATC, yet it's been slowly happening for years.

We've been trying to get a tower in HOT for several years. However, the FAA wants the city to support the cost of operating it as a contract tower.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top