MOA's

[double d]

Thanks for all the help guys.

I was looking at the chart and if I were to fly across the border at the nearest port of entry, I've got no choice but to fly through the MOA's, and it looks like they extend from ground level up to around 9000', so no ducking underneath.

I defiently don't like the idea of flying in their space when it's active, as I've watched them zoom by at a couple hundered AGL in their F-15's (pretty neat to watch) but wonder how else you can find out if they're active or not.

The mountains are pretty high around here, so it'd take some climbing to get up to ATC service, and I'd be flying for sight seeing, so I'd like to keep it reletively low. Here in Canada this kind of info would be available in the NOTAMS or with a call to the FSS or FIC (flight information centre for large areas), and wonder what you guys use down there? Is there someone you can phone?

Thanks again for all the help

 

[roncachamp]

Again, who cares? They KNOW you're there. They are REQUIRED to avoid you.

And you KNOW they're there, and you're REQUIRED to avoid them.

 

[gprellwitz]

Thanks for all the help guys.

I was looking at the chart and if I were to fly across the border at the nearest port of entry, I've got no choice but to fly through the MOA's, and it looks like they extend from ground level up to around 9000', so no ducking underneath.

I defiently don't like the idea of flying in their space when it's active, as I've watched them zoom by at a couple hundered AGL in their F-15's (pretty neat to watch) but wonder how else you can find out if they're active or not.

The mountains are pretty high around here, so it'd take some climbing to get up to ATC service, and I'd be flying for sight seeing, so I'd like to keep it reletively low. Here in Canada this kind of info would be available in the NOTAMS or with a call to the FSS or FIC (flight information centre for large areas), and wonder what you guys use down there? Is there someone you can phone?

Thanks again for all the help

Well, when you first enter US airspace you're going to have to be in radio contact or you'll be in a world of hurt. Not good. You'll also have to have an eAPIS filed with the Dept. of Homeland Security and be on a flight plan, probably a Defense VFR plan until you're IFR rated.

Call 1-800-WX-BRIEF and I think they should have or be able to get the information on any given MOA, though they may need to make a phone call. The controlling agency/contact facility is really the one who knows for sure. There are guidelines for how far ahead of using the space the military needs to notify ATC that it will be hot, but I don't know if that's only for the ones that are active only by NOTAM or all of them. Maybe Ron or one of the current military guys here know.

Also note in the example from the sectional that Marc posted that many (most?) MOA's aren't active 24x7.

 

[Doggtyred]

The panhandle of Florida is probably going to be my prime destination when I get my PPL. When I look at the airspace on my Garmin 696, I think to myself, how am I ever going to get there. Thanks for the advice.

Flight following is your friend... Learn to use it. Religiously. Not because you need it, but the same radio skills you use in flight following are the skills you will use if/when you go to get your IFR ticket.

If you are talking to Eglin approach they will help you out.. its not that bad..

 

[gprellwitz]

What do you mean expectation? Intention maybe, though I am hard pressed to think what would make the situation unhappy for the GA pilot. I suspect you are also. Charges brought under the UCMJ? FAA sanctions for following the regulations?

I have the expectation that they will do whatever they need to do as I exercize my privelege.

I have the expectation that if something happens it will be written up in the media as a stupid GA pilot causing the loss of a multi-million dollar asset.

And even if nothing happens, I have the expectation that someone will write an article about how the military needs to stop their training because some guy wants to fly where and when he wants to fly, thereby costing the taxpayers tens of thousands of dollars (which will be reported as hundreds of thousands of dollars) in wasted training time and expense.
I have the expectation that they aren't going to care one whit that you had every right to be there, and GA will have one more black eye that we need to try to recover from.

That would sure make the situation unhappy for this GA pilot!

 

[double d]

Well, when you first enter US airspace you're going to have to be in radio contact or you'll be in a world of hurt. Not good. You'll also have to have an eAPIS filed with the Dept. of Homeland Security and be on a flight plan, probably a Defense VFR plan until you're IFR rated.

Call 1-800-WX-BRIEF and I think they should have or be able to get the information on any given MOA, though they may need to make a phone call. The controlling agency/contact facility is really the one who knows for sure. There are guidelines for how far ahead of using the space the military needs to notify ATC that it will be hot, but I don't know if that's only for the ones that are active only by NOTAM or all of them. Maybe Ron or one of the current military guys here know.

Also note in the example from the sectional that Marc posted that many (most?) MOA's aren't active 24x7.

Thanks, that's the same phone # we use in Canada. I would have radio contact, but am not sure I'd be able to reach somewhere like Seattle, ect. I'm fine with the crossing the border stuff (must have a flight plan or else) as my school can teach that stuff.

 

[alaskaflyer]

I have the expectation that if something happens it will be written up in the media as a stupid GA pilot causing the loss of a multi-million dollar asset.

And even if nothing happens, I have the expectation that someone will write an article about how the military needs to stop their training because some guy wants to fly where and when he wants to fly, thereby costing the taxpayers tens of thousands of dollars (which will be reported as hundreds of thousands of dollars) in wasted training time and expense.
I have the expectation that they aren't going to care one whit that you had every right to be there, and GA will have one more black eye that we need to try to recover from.

That would sure make the situation unhappy for this GA pilot!

Well, Grant that is all well and good (and they are good points) but color me one of many on here who have to deal with MOA's constantly. And I mean constantly. You simply cannot reasonably be expected to avoid them in wide swaths of this nation of ours. And I refuse to treat them as pseudo-restricted areas. I mean, on the entire Chicago sectional there are what, two MOA complexis?

No one is talking about going out and flying acro in a MOA just to be a jerk. We are talking about the shortest distance between point a and b. As mentioned on the other thread if they are hot I will coordinate. If they have to stop playing while I'm there...well, that's the rules of their game, not mine.

 

[slowjoe]

It's become very obvious that a lot of you out there have no idea what it is like to live in a state that is as full of MOAs as this one, and filled with such mountainous terrain. Until you've lived and flown here you've really got no basis for your arguments. There a many airports here that it is all but impossible to get to without flying into a MOA. I guess you're all saying that those fields are just off-limits then?

Here are the facts, try to dispute them:

1) a MOA is NOT restricted, it is NOT prohibited. GA aircraft are NOT prohibited from entering them in ANY way when flying VFR. A military operations area (MOA) is airspace established outside Class A airspace to separate or segregate certain nonhazardous military activities from IFR Traffic and to identify for VFR traffic where theses activities are conducted.

2) Military ATC and Civilian ATC do NOT typically communicate with each other. All the civilian ATC will get is that a MOA is hot from time X to time Y. During that X to Y time frame there might actually be one military aircraft in the MOA for 15 minutes way down in one corner of the MOA.

3) They DO KNOW you are there. You show up on their radar. Don't believe me? Fly into a MOA well out of ground based ATC radar range and watch your transponder light up. (oh that's right, you probably don't fly in the mountains where there is very little radar coverage close to the ground) If they're flying at night and blacked out you show up from 60 miles away on their night vision.

4) You are more likely to have a collision near an uncontrolled airport with A LOT of traffic. My home base is Class E, 120,000 ops per year, ILS, DME, VOR and GPS approaches and is utilized by no less than 5 major commercial flight schools as well as countless small / private flight schools. You are also more likely to run into the military when crossing military VR and IR routes.

Some of you out there are so paranoid about flying I'm surprised that you ever fly at all.

 

[Exocetid]

.
If you are talking to Eglin approach they will help you out.. its not that bad..

You have a confirmation on that! Eglin routed me out over the beaches (it was great!) and kept me and the flyboys aware of where we were with respect to each other. Be courteous and do what they tell you and your flight through Uncle Sam's Wonderland will be just that.

 

[EvilEagle]

3) They DO KNOW you are there. You show up on their radar. Don't believe me? Fly into a MOA well out of ground based ATC radar range and watch your transponder light up. (oh that's right, you probably don't fly in the mountains where there is very little radar coverage close to the ground) If they're flying at night and blacked out you show up from 60 miles away on their night vision.

Well, this will be a bit of a repeat from the other post, but we may not know you are there. IF WE ARE LOOKING FOR YOU, we will find you. But, if you don't talk to anyone, why would we be looking for you? We're using our radars for lots of stuff. It's not like an ATC radar, it doesn't have 360 degree coverage or surface to the moon detection. It is very specific where it is looking. For someone who thinks they know all about military flying, you sure are misinformed about radar.

As far as our (USAF) rules about people in the MOA, we ARE NOT required to stop training - normally we don't. Depending on where and the altitude of the traffic, we may stop training or we may limit the training. Again, I'm NOT SAYING DON'T FLY THROUGH MOA's!!!!! I'm just a fan of people letting us know you are there.

Oh and remember when you are flying through a MOA - 500' is "well clear" so no HATR's on us when we go by at 1000'. We won't be inside the bubble, but we may let you know we're there.

 

[slowjoe]

Well, this will be a bit of a repeat from the other post, but we may not know you are there. IF WE ARE LOOKING FOR YOU, we will find you. But, if you don't talk to anyone, why would we be looking for you? We're using our radars for lots of stuff. It's not like an ATC radar, it doesn't have 360 degree coverage or surface to the moon detection. It is very specific where it is looking. For someone who thinks they know all about military flying, you sure are misinformed about radar.

As far as our (USAF) rules about people in the MOA, we ARE NOT required to stop training - normally we don't. Depending on where and the altitude of the traffic, we may stop training or we may limit the training. Again, I'm NOT SAYING DON'T FLY THROUGH MOA's!!!!! I'm just a fan of people letting us know you are there.

Oh and remember when you are flying through a MOA - 500' is "well clear" so no HATR's on us when we go by at 1000'. We won't be inside the bubble, but we may let you know we're there.

First of all, I don't give a crap about your radar if your flying away from me, we're no factor to each other are we? If you're flying towards me and you can't see my reflection or pick up all the radio signals that I am broadcasting well then our military aircraft are rather worthless aren't they? And explain the interrogations. They're not coming from ground based civilian radar, nor are they always there. I could fly a route today and have constant interrogations. Fly the same course and altitude tomorrow and the transponder won't get interrogated through the MOA at all.

As for stopping training, if I stated that or implied that I apologize. You do not have stop training, but you DO have to avoid me. Move to another area, hold the training, whatever. You cannot stay in the area if there is a potential conflict.

 

[EvilEagle]

First of all, I don't give a crap about your radar if your flying away from me, we're no factor to each other are we? If you're flying towards me and you can't see my reflection or pick up all the radio signals that I am broadcasting well then our military aircraft are rather worthless aren't they? And explain the interrogations. They're not coming from ground based civilian radar, nor are they always there. I could fly a route today and have constant interrogations. Fly the same course and altitude tomorrow and the transponder won't get interrogated through the MOA at all.

As for stopping training, if I stated that or implied that I apologize. You do not have stop training, but you DO have to avoid me. Move to another area, hold the training, whatever. You cannot stay in the area if there is a potential conflict.

Easy with the conflict - I'm just telling you what ACTUALLY happens, instead of your opinion of what happens. If I'm going away from you at 450, then do a split S while my radar is looking 60 degrees high - are we a conflict? Yup!

We can interrogate places that our radar isn't looking. Not to mention that every F-15A-E and many F-16's have an interrogator - how do you know which one is interrogating you? Is it the closest jet to you? No way to tell.

Yes, you are right - because we don't see a person we AREN'T looking for - we are all worthless. As I said, IF we are looking for you (like if you talk to the controlling agency) then we'll find you. If I'm locked to someone else and in the middle of a fight, we may not know you are there.

I appreciate your .02 about how much we are worth, but until you sack up, go through all the training and know WTF you are talking about, I'll just keep on informing people about what actually happens in a MOA.

 

[kkoran]

It's become very obvious that a lot of you out there have no idea what it is like to live in a state that is as full of MOAs as this one, and filled with such mountainous terrain. Until you've lived and flown here you've really got no basis for your arguments. There a many airports here that it is all but impossible to get to without flying into a MOA. I guess you're all saying that those fields are just off-limits then?

Here are the facts, try to dispute them:

1) a MOA is NOT restricted, it is NOT prohibited. GA aircraft are NOT prohibited from entering them in ANY way when flying VFR. A military operations area (MOA) is airspace established outside Class A airspace to separate or segregate certain nonhazardous military activities from IFR Traffic and to identify for VFR traffic where theses activities are conducted.

You are absolutely correct. That said, pilots should keep in mind that in this context, "nonhazardous" means that they are not dropping bombs, firing guns, launching missiles, or vaporizing things with lasers. Those things require restricted areas. MOAs may contain rapidly maneuvering, high-speed (450 kts) aircraft. The pilots of those aircraft are likely concentrating on the military mission (dog fighting, setting up for an attack on a ground target, etc.). These "non-hazardous" activities are why MOAs exist.

2) Military ATC and Civilian ATC do NOT typically communicate with each other. All the civilian ATC will get is that a MOA is hot from time X to time Y. During that X to Y time frame there might actually be one military aircraft in the MOA for 15 minutes way down in one corner of the MOA.

Military ATC coordinates with civilian ATC. The coordination requirements are the same. If a military ATC facility has been delegated the airspace that includes a MOA, then it is the facility to contact for service.

Now, a lot of MOAs might be considered "uncontrolled" in that no facility controls the military aircraft while they are in the airspace. ARTCC clears the aircraft into the MOA, and the aircraft call ARTCC when they are ready to leave the airspace. While they are in the MOA, they are on their own and ATC doesn't keep track of them. All ATC knows is that the airspace is "hot".

3) They DO KNOW you are there. You show up on their radar. Don't believe me? Fly into a MOA well out of ground based ATC radar range and watch your transponder light up. (oh that's right, you probably don't fly in the mountains where there is very little radar coverage close to the ground) If they're flying at night and blacked out you show up from 60 miles away on their night vision.

Just because the light on your transponder lights up doesn't mean the plane that could be a conflict sees you. The interrogator on an F-16, for example, has a range of around 100 nm. Maybe a guy who is 75 nm away from you (and will never get within 30 miles of you) sees you, but that doesn't mean the two guys who are mixing it up within 5 nm of you know that you are there.

You could be seeing interrogations from TCAS and other active traffic avoidance systems.

4) You are more likely to have a collision near an uncontrolled airport with A LOT of traffic. My home base is Class E, 120,000 ops per year, ILS, DME, VOR and GPS approaches and is utilized by no less than 5 major commercial flight schools as well as countless small / private flight schools. You are also more likely to run into the military when crossing military VR and IR routes.

Just because other things may be more hazardous doesn't mean we shouldn't take steps to reduce the hazard of the activity at hand. Most traffic accidents happen within 30 miles of home, but I still wear my seatbelt when driving cross country.

Some of you out there are so paranoid about flying I'm surprised that you ever fly at all.

 

[poadeleted20]

I think what we're seeing here is a conflict between those who feel they have a right to barge into a MOA regardless of what's going on in there and those who suggests that safety is a higher priority than convenience. I don't see that being resolved here.

BTW, for those asking about potential consequences, if you intentionally enter a MOA in which you know there is activity and something bad happens as a result, the FAA has the option of charging you with careless/reckless operation under 14 CFR 91.13 even if there is no reg specifically prohibiting what you did.

 

[alaskaflyer]

I think what we're seeing here is a conflict between those who feel they have a right to barge into a MOA regardless of what's going on in there and those who suggests that safety is a higher priority than convenience. I don't see that being resolved here.

By that reasoning military traffic shouldn't "barge" into a MOA without ensuring that they separate themselves from other VFR traffic who have as much if not more "right" to be there.

BTW, for those asking about potential consequences, if you intentionally enter a MOA in which you know there is activity and something bad happens as a result, the FAA has the option of charging you with careless/reckless operation under 14 CFR 91.13 even if there is no reg specifically prohibiting what you did.

Knowing that, I'm sure there are cases to be cited. I for one would like to see them so I can learn more about how the FAA considers the military to have priority in MOA airspace.

 

[kkoran]

I think what we're seeing here is a conflict between those who feel they have a right to barge into a MOA regardless of what's going on in there and those who suggests that safety is a higher priority than convenience. I don't see that being resolved here.

You're right, individuals' presonal value judgements on the risks/benefits of flying through active MOAs can't be resolved because they are value judgements with no right or wrong answer.

I don't have strong feeling either way on the subject and was merely trying to correct statements made out of apparent ingnorance.

BTW, for those asking about potential consequences, if you intentionally enter a MOA in which you know there is activity and something bad happens as a result, the FAA has the option of charging you with careless/reckless operation under 14 CFR 91.13 even if there is no reg specifically prohibiting what you did.

I don't see that happening. In doing so, the FAA would be saying that MOAs are defacto restricted areas which would bring up some serious legal issues. One could easily argue that the change in status would require rulemaking and environmental action for every MOA in the US.

 

[roncachamp]

By that reasoning military traffic shouldn't "barge" into a MOA without ensuring that they separate themselves from other VFR traffic who have as much if not more "right" to be there.

Why might other VFR traffic have more "right" to be there?

 

[NetSpeaker]

My nomination for POA Quote of the Month:

I appreciate your .02 about how much we are worth, but until you sack up, go through all the training and know WTF you are talking about, I'll just keep on informing people about what actually happens in a MOA.

 

[EdFred]

Why might other VFR traffic have more "right" to be there?

We pay more in taxes than the mil guys - ergo more right to be there.

 

[steingar]

Interesting the fact that China or Russia or somebody can send up a passel of Cub or Cherokee clones and take out our million dollar aircraft through midair collisions. Sounds like a lot of worthless junk paid for by my tax dollars the way you guys describe it.

 

[dmccormack]

Interesting the fact that China or Russia or somebody can send up a passel of Cub or Cherokee clones and take out our million dollar aircraft through midair collisions. Sounds like a lot of worthless junk paid for by my tax dollars the way you guys describe it.

Oh come on....

There's a difference in how you practice in a training area and how it is in a real fight.

We used to have to wait and let civilian traffic by on one of the roads that crossed the manuever area. Road guards out, etc etc.

That doesn't happen when the ammo isn't blue.

 

[steingar]

Oh come on....

There's a difference in how you practice in a training area and how it is in a real fight.

We used to have to wait and let civilian traffic by on one of the roads that crossed the manuever area. Road guards out, etc etc.

That doesn't happen when the ammo isn't blue.

If there is, then someone isn't training properly.

 

[dmccormack]

If there is, then someone isn't training properly.

The ideal is to train like you fight.

However, tolerance for actual bleeding casualties is low.

So some elements are simulated or adapted to accomodate reality.

 

[steingar]

Than I maintain my original sentiment. Based on the arguments presented here and elsewhere, the multizillion dollar military hardware being paid for by american citizens is fairly worthless, since it could easily be derailed by low tech aircraft. Otherwise it wouldn't be any big deal at all for the military birds to zip about in their MOAs with GA aircraft flying within them. Just another obstacle to avoid. Clearly, they can't do that.

 

[dmccormack]

Than I maintain my original sentiment. Based on the arguments presented here and elsewhere, the multizillion dollar military hardware being paid for by american citizens is fairly worthless, since it could easily be derailed by low tech aircraft. Otherwise it wouldn't be any big deal at all for the military birds to zip about in their MOAs with GA aircraft flying within them. Just another obstacle to avoid. Clearly, they can't do that.

They can -- the issue is -- should they spend valuable training time trying to lock on tiny spam cans? Or worse, fabric and tube powered kites?

 

[alaskaflyer]

They can -- the issue is -- should they spend valuable training time trying to lock on tiny spam cans? Or worse, fabric and tube powered kites?

That might be the issue in this particular discussion but I don't think that is the issue when deciding where MOA's are located and the regulatory (or even recommended) rules for civilian pilots located within them.

IMO, MOA's exist for the benefit of civilian air traffic, not the military. Just as with restricted areas, and warning areas, they function to pen military pilots into certain areas to train in certain manuevers and activities, and to show us where those areas are, so as we travel through them we know to watch out. The system doesn't function to the benefit of the military necessarily, except to further safety in general. It is this to which I was alluding in post number 55, though I probably could have phrased it better. We are not intruders.

I'm on notice, they're on notice, everyone is on notice. Now we can all go fly and be safe in whatever way the FAR's, our internal procedures and conscience allows.

If I'm all wet, so be it.

 

[dmccormack]

IMO, MOA's exist for the benefit of civilian air traffic, not the military. Just as with restricted areas, and warning areas They function to pen military pilots into certain areas to train, and to show us where those areas are, so as we travel through them we know to watch out. They don't function to the benefit of the military. It is this to which I was alluding in post number 55, though I probably could have phrased it better.

I'm on notice, they're on notice, everyone is on notice. Now we can all go fly and be safe in whatever way the FAR's, our internal procedures and conscience allows.

If I'm all wet, so be it.

The AIM ("Advisory, not regulatory") reads:

3-4-5. Military Operations Areas ​

a. MOAs consist of airspace of defined vertical and lateral limits established for the purpose of separating certain military training activities from IFR traffic. Whenever a MOA is being used, nonparticipating IFR traffic may be cleared through a MOA if IFR separation can be provided by ATC. Otherwise, ATC will reroute or restrict nonparticipating IFR traffic.
b. Examples of activities conducted in MOAs include, but are not limited to: air combat tactics, air intercepts, aerobatics, formation training, and low-altitude tactics. Military pilots flying in an active MOA are exempted from the provisions of 14 CFR Section 91.303(c) and (d) which prohibits aerobatic flight within Class D and Class E surface areas, and within Federal airways. Additionally, the Department of Defense has been issued an authorization to operate aircraft at indicated airspeeds in excess of 250 knots below 10,000 feet MSL within active MOAs.
c. Pilots operating under VFR should exercise extreme caution while flying within a MOA when military activity is being conducted. The activity status (active/inactive) of MOAs may change frequently. Therefore, pilots should contact any FSS within 100 miles of the area to obtain accurate real-time information concerning the MOA hours of operation. Prior to entering an active MOA, pilots should contact the controlling agency for traffic advisories.

(emphasis mine)

To me, that means, "Be careful and ask before flying in there."

Now, is that so hard?

 

[steingar]

They can -- the issue is -- should they spend valuable training time trying to lock on tiny spam cans? Or worse, fabric and tube powered kites?

I imagine so, since the enemy could easily employ such tactics to try and derail them.

 

[alaskaflyer]

To me, that means, "Be careful and ask before flying in there."

Now, is that so hard?

Nothing I've said conflicts with that simple rule.

Too many people say "Ask before flying in there, and go around/ over/under instead if it's active." BS.

 

[dmccormack]

I imagine so, since the enemy could easily employ such tactics to try and derail them.

So, are you arguing that simple technologies can sometimes confound complex technologies?

Thanks for playing -- but that stunning "fact" was figured out a while ago.

 

[dmccormack]

Nothing I've said conflicts with that simple rule.

Too many people say "Ask before flying in there, and go around/ over/under instead if it's active." BS.

IF you're talking to ATC, they'll tell you if it's hot and often tell you what type activity.

I've flown in plenty of MOAs, VFR and IFR, and many times been told, "They're doing some high altitude work.." or "Choppers will be below you..." and the like.

 

[steingar]

So, are you arguing that simple technologies can sometimes confound complex technologies?

Thanks for playing -- but that stunning "fact" was figured out a while ago.

No doubt, and can probably be easily accounted for during training exercises, making most of the dire warnings in this (and other threads) so much hyperbole.

 

[EvilEagle]

Than I maintain my original sentiment. Based on the arguments presented here and elsewhere, the multizillion dollar military hardware being paid for by american citizens is fairly worthless, since it could easily be derailed by low tech aircraft. Otherwise it wouldn't be any big deal at all for the military birds to zip about in their MOAs with GA aircraft flying within them. Just another obstacle to avoid. Clearly, they can't do that.

I thought about this discussion as I was flying yesterday. It was a beautiful day for flying, clear blue skies, not much haze, light winds. Based on our mission and aircraft configuration, we were only going to be in the MOA for 20-25 mins. In that time, we had 7 traffic advisories about VFR traffic going through the MOA. I expected some traffic since it was such a nice day, but was surprised that there was that much in the time I was out there - maybe just bad luck. Thankfully our mission made it easy to work around the traffic. At Tyndall, we have military ATC that lets us know about VFR traffic even if they aren't talking to anyone. (it's the only base I've ever heard of or been to that does that). As far as I could tell, none of them called to ask about mil traffic in the MOA. I'm glad that we knew they were there or it could've been a bad day.

Steingar: Sounds like you have a personal beef with the cost of military hardware. If you do some research, there are no fighter platforms in the world that can find every piece of metal in the sky. The F-22 comes pretty close, but it's still not like an ATC radar. As, I said two separate times, IF we are looking for bug smashers, we find them easily. Low-tech hardware doesn't derail us. The whole point of this thread was how to fly in/near MOA's. I never said don't fly in there, I'm just letting people know what goes on in a MOA and what the potential hazards are. If there is a controlling agency, I highly recommend talking to them since they will talk to us and THEN we'll start looking for the GA aircraft. If you are really worried about the US tax dollar at work, then you'd definitely go around the MOA, since it costs $15k+ per hour to fly an F-15. If we get delayed for 5 mins with our 2 ship, that is $2500 in tax payer dollars lost. Again, my point was not to avoid the MOA, but be informed and communicate when going through. (then we'll find and avoid you)

 

[kkoran]

I thought about this discussion as I was flying yesterday. It was a beautiful day for flying, clear blue skies, not much haze, light winds. Based on our mission and aircraft configuration, we were only going to be in the MOA for 20-25 mins. In that time, we had 7 traffic advisories about VFR traffic going through the MOA. I expected some traffic since it was such a nice day, but was surprised that there was that much in the time I was out there - maybe just bad luck. Thankfully our mission made it easy to work around the traffic. At Tyndall, we have military ATC that lets us know about VFR traffic even if they aren't talking to anyone. (it's the only base I've ever heard of or been to that does that). As far as I could tell, none of them called to ask about mil traffic in the MOA. I'm glad that we knew they were there or it could've been a bad day.

Steingar: Sounds like you have a personal beef with the cost of military hardware. If you do some research, there are no fighter platforms in the world that can find every piece of metal in the sky. The F-22 comes pretty close, but it's still not like an ATC radar. As, I said two separate times, IF we are looking for bug smashers, we find them easily. Low-tech hardware doesn't derail us. The whole point of this thread was how to fly in/near MOA's. I never said don't fly in there, I'm just letting people know what goes on in a MOA and what the potential hazards are. If there is a controlling agency, I highly recommend talking to them since they will talk to us and THEN we'll start looking for the GA aircraft. If you are really worried about the US tax dollar at work, then you'd definitely go around the MOA, since it costs $15k+ per hour to fly an F-15. If we get delayed for 5 mins with our 2 ship, that is $2500 in tax payer dollars lost. Again, my point was not to avoid the MOA, but be informed and communicate when going through. (then we'll find and avoid you)

The problem with your analysis is that his share of the $2500/hour ($2500/# of taxpayers) is a lot less than the hourly cost of the plane he flys.

 

[poadeleted20]

The problem with your analysis is that his share of the $2500/hour ($2500/# of taxpayers) is a lot less than the hourly cost of the plane he flys.

Check again -- the cost of an F-15 is $2500/5 min, not $2500/hr. But even so, your point is taken -- spread among 300,000,000 taxpayers, and it's just one piece of litter dropped by the highway, and each person figures their one piece is no big deal.

 

[steingar]

Steingar: Sounds like you have a personal beef with the cost of military hardware. If you do some research, there are no fighter platforms in the world that can find every piece of metal in the sky. The F-22 comes pretty close, but it's still not like an ATC radar. As, I said two separate times, IF we are looking for bug smashers, we find them easily. Low-tech hardware doesn't derail us. The whole point of this thread was how to fly in/near MOA's. I never said don't fly in there, I'm just letting people know what goes on in a MOA and what the potential hazards are. If there is a controlling agency, I highly recommend talking to them since they will talk to us and THEN we'll start looking for the GA aircraft. If you are really worried about the US tax dollar at work, then you'd definitely go around the MOA, since it costs $15k+ per hour to fly an F-15. If we get delayed for 5 mins with our 2 ship, that is $2500 in tax payer dollars lost. Again, my point was not to avoid the MOA, but be informed and communicate when going through. (then we'll find and avoid you)

I honestly don't have a beef with military hardware, personnel, or procedures, beyond the philosophical that it is a shame we have to pour so many resources into death and destruction. I have a huge problem with illogic, which I see in threads of this kind. You have people on one hand talking about the tremendous abilities of military aircraft, and on the other talking about the extreme danger of mid air collisions where military aircraft fly. You can't have it both ways.

I argue differently about interrupting someone's "practice'. You may be interrupted in your practice of one thing, but you get to practice another. You are not practicing something irrelevant, since the enemy could attack you this way. Besides, if I cause someone to fly his F15 that much longer, I've done him or her a favor. If that person doesn't like it I will all too happily fly the aircraft in their stead.

Of course, thank you for your service.

 

[dmccormack]

I have a huge problem with illogic, which I see in threads of this kind. You have people on one hand talking about the tremendous abilities of military aircraft, and on the other talking about the extreme danger of mid air collisions where military aircraft fly. You can't have it both ways.

It's called "tension," and it's a part of any complexity.

Reductionists tend to be appalled at stark contrasts they create.