Operations Threshold to Establish a Tower

Allan Cobb

Allan Cobb

Pre-Flight
Joined
Apr 2, 2023
Messages
41
Location
North Potomac, Maryland
Display Name
Display name:
cobbU2
Lately I've been flying a lot out of Montgomery County Airpark (GAI) north of DC and deal with a lot of traffic each time; there are four flight schools, a CAP Wing, a Coast Guard element, and over 155 based aircraft. As of 2022, estimates put total operations at GAI close to 80,000 (a 12% sampling error makes the range nearly 70,000 to over 89,000 operations).

Just curious, what are the criteria that the FAA deems a tower is appropriate for a given location? It's almost a sure bet that in mid morning/mid afternoon hours the pattern congestion is such that I'll need to break out and re-enter, sometimes repeatedly. I've seen as many as six or seven aircraft lined up waiting to takeoff (reminds me of trying to get out of Newark during my working days).

By comparison, Leesburg Virginia has about the same number of operations (about 80k) and they have a tower (it was remote, but now reverting to a mobile control), established in 2014. Both airports have single runways.

I can't help but feel the inevitability of a mishap, especially with some of the pattern craziness I've witnessed and the sheer congestion. At what point does the FAA say enough is enough and a tower is needed in the interests of safety? Is it just the operations count, or are there other factors (yes, I assume cost is a huge driver)?

I tried finding the answer online but came up short, just wondering if anyone has any insight.

Cheers, Allan
 
To really screw things up, throw the FAA in to the mix. Messed up JYO and FDK pretty badly. JYO is particularly badly affected by cramming an oversized "effective" class D in what is already tight airspace. GAI would be a similar disaster. At least FDK meets the requirement for a control zone. Neither JYO or GAI do.
 
Allan Cobb said:
Lately I've been flying a lot out of Montgomery County Airpark (GAI) north of DC and deal with a lot of traffic each time; there are four flight schools, a CAP Wing, a Coast Guard element, and over 155 based aircraft. As of 2022, estimates put total operations at GAI close to 80,000 (a 12% sampling error makes the range nearly 70,000 to over 89,000 operations).

Just curious, what are the criteria that the FAA deems a tower is appropriate for a given location? It's almost a sure bet that in mid morning/mid afternoon hours the pattern congestion is such that I'll need to break out and re-enter, sometimes repeatedly. I've seen as many as six or seven aircraft lined up waiting to takeoff (reminds me of trying to get out of Newark during my working days).

By comparison, Leesburg Virginia has about the same number of operations (about 80k) and they have a tower (it was remote, but now reverting to a mobile control), established in 2014. Both airports have single runways.

I can't help but feel the inevitability of a mishap, especially with some of the pattern craziness I've witnessed and the sheer congestion. At what point does the FAA say enough is enough and a tower is needed in the interests of safety? Is it just the operations count, or are there other factors (yes, I assume cost is a huge driver)?

I tried finding the answer online but came up short, just wondering if anyone has any insight.

Cheers, Allan
Click to expand...
Is there scheduled airline service there? That’s often the determining factor. Look around. Find slow airports with a Tower and busy ones without. I think you’ll find that’s the difference. Some of those slow ones with Towers are partially, maybe fully funded by the airport owner, a city/county/state wanting scheduled service. Some scheduled operations will not fly into uncontrolled airports. Peel away another layer and you get down to insurance.
 
Last edited:
flyingron said:
To really screw things up, throw the FAA in to the mix. Messed up JYO and FDK pretty badly. JYO is particularly badly affected by cramming an oversized "effective" class D in what is already tight airspace. GAI would be a similar disaster. At least FDK meets the requirement for a control zone. Neither JYO or GAI do.
Click to expand...
This is weird. WTF is W-LMA? The AF/D doesn’t even have an Airspace entry. Look at the Chart and it’s a Class G Towered Airport. For those wondering, Control Zone is an old fashioned way of saying Surface Area.

upload_2023-6-29_20-46-27.png
 
Money. The funds for Class D towers are coming from local authorities no uncle sugar.
 
luvflyin said:
This is weird. WTF is W-LMA? The AF/D doesn’t even have an Airspace entry. Look at the Chart and it’s a Class G Towered Airport. For those wondering, Control Zone is an old fashioned way of saying Surface Area.

View attachment 118559
Click to expand...
91.126 Operating on or in the vicinity of an airport in Class G airspace.
(a) General. Unless otherwise authorized or required, each personoperating an aircraft on or in the vicinity of an airport in a Class G airspace area must comply with the requirements of this section.

(b) Direction of turns. When approaching to land at an airport without an operating control tower in Class G airspace—

(1) Each pilot of an airplane must make all turns of that airplane to the left unless the airport displays approved light signals or visual markings indicating that turns should be made to the right, in which case the pilot must make all turns to the right; and

(2) Each pilot of a helicopter or a powered parachute must avoid the flow of fixed-wing aircraft.

(c) Flap settings. Except when necessary for training or certification, the pilot in command of a civil turbojet-powered aircraft must use, as a final flap setting, the minimum certificated landing flap setting set forth in the approved performance information in the Airplane Flight Manual for the applicable conditions. However, each pilot in command has the final authority and responsibility for the safe operation of the pilot's airplane, and may use a different flap setting for that airplane if the pilot determines that it is necessary in the interest of safety.

(d) Communications with control towers. Unless otherwise authorized or required by ATC, no person may operate an aircraft to, from, through, or on an airport having an operational control tower unless two-way radio communications are maintained between that aircraft and the control tower. Communications must be established prior to 4 nautical miles from the airport, up to and including 2,500 feet AGL. However, if the aircraft radio fails in flight, the pilot in command may operate that aircraft and land if weather conditions are at or above basic VFR weather minimums, visual contact with the tower is maintained, and a clearance to land is received. If the aircraft radio fails while in flight under IFR, the pilot must comply with § 91.185.
 
Clip4 said:
91.126 Operating on or in the vicinity of an airport in Class G airspace.
(a) General. Unless otherwise authorized or required, each personoperating an aircraft on or in the vicinity of an airport in a Class G airspace area must comply with the requirements of this section.

(b) Direction of turns. When approaching to land at an airport without an operating control tower in Class G airspace—

(1) Each pilot of an airplane must make all turns of that airplane to the left unless the airport displays approved light signals or visual markings indicating that turns should be made to the right, in which case the pilot must make all turns to the right; and

(2) Each pilot of a helicopter or a powered parachute must avoid the flow of fixed-wing aircraft.

(c) Flap settings. Except when necessary for training or certification, the pilot in command of a civil turbojet-powered aircraft must use, as a final flap setting, the minimum certificated landing flap setting set forth in the approved performance information in the Airplane Flight Manual for the applicable conditions. However, each pilot in command has the final authority and responsibility for the safe operation of the pilot's airplane, and may use a different flap setting for that airplane if the pilot determines that it is necessary in the interest of safety.

(d) Communications with control towers. Unless otherwise authorized or required by ATC, no person may operate an aircraft to, from, through, or on an airport having an operational control tower unless two-way radio communications are maintained between that aircraft and the control tower. Communications must be established prior to 4 nautical miles from the airport, up to and including 2,500 feet AGL. However, if the aircraft radio fails in flight, the pilot in command may operate that aircraft and land if weather conditions are at or above basic VFR weather minimums, visual contact with the tower is maintained, and a clearance to land is received. If the aircraft radio fails while in flight under IFR, the pilot must comply with § 91.185.
Click to expand...
Yeah. I get all that. Do you have any idea what W-LMA is? And why there is no Airspace line in the AF/D of the Chart Supplement?
 
Leesburg maneuvering area-as I recall it says to read about it in box in Atlantic Ocean

eta-just looked at FF, says look in flyway (south of purcellville)
 
luvflyin said:
Is there scheduled airline service there? That’s often the determining factor. Look around. Find slow airports with a Tower and busy ones without. I think you’ll find that’s the difference. Some of those slow ones with Towers are partially, maybe fully funded by the airport owner, a city/county/state wanting scheduled service. Some scheduled operations will not fly into uncontrolled airports. Peel away another layer and you get down to insurance.
Click to expand...

Nearly every towered airports near my home doesn't have any part 121 service. OSU, TZR, MIE, LUK, ILN to name a few. But there are other factors, such as heavy corporate traffic, Amazon distribution, and training. The number of IFR arrivals and departures may have something to do with it.
 
sarangan said:
Nearly every towered airports near my home doesn't have any part 121 service. OSU, TZR, MIE, LUK, ILN to name a few. But there are other factors, such as heavy corporate traffic, Amazon distribution, and training. The number of IFR arrivals and departures may have something to do with it.
Click to expand...
Yeah. Corporate/Amazon etc as well as scheduled service. Things that generate money. Enough that spending some to build and staff a Tower are worth it.
 
The LMA is a special procedure to allow JYO traffic to bug out of the SFRA without going through the full Flight Plan/Transponder Observed nonsense.

The problem is that the Leesburg tower doesn't coordinate with either PCT regular controllers or the transponder observer so you just get directed away from there on transits.
 
Clip4 said:
Money. The funds for Class D towers are coming from local authorities no uncle sugar.
Click to expand...
Sometimes it's a "If you build it, they will come arrangement." HEF got their tower by the city buying a used one on the open market (it had previously been installed at APA). Amusingly, I have been in the cab in both locations that tower lived.
 
flyingron said:
Sometimes it's a "If you build it, they will come arrangement." HEF got their tower by the city buying a used one on the open market (it had previously been installed at APA). Amusingly, I have been in the cab in both locations that tower lived.
Click to expand...
The FAA will pay to build it, the staffing is what they don’t want to pay for.
 
flyingron said:
Sometimes it's a "If you build it, they will come arrangement." HEF got their tower by the city buying a used one on the open market (it had previously been installed at APA). Amusingly, I have been in the cab in both locations that tower lived.
Click to expand...
upload_2023-6-30_5-19-32.jpeg
 
Clip4 said:
The FAA will pay to build it, the staffing is what they don’t want to pay for.
Click to expand...
Nope, the FAA told the city that if the airport built the tower, the FAA would staff it. As I pointed out, the city bought the tower from Arapahoe County and put it up themselves.

Of course, there are places where there are towers that are completely silly. HKY is one. It hardly has any traffic and it lost it's only air carrier traffic decades ago.
Of course, there's also a bunch of Senator Byrd pork barrel towers in West Virginia as well. All these places have well under 100 operations a day.
 
luvflyin said:
I’m pretty sure sometimes there is funds sharing. Feds will give a grant to the City or whatever to help or vice versa. Here’s an interesting one. The Local Airport Authority paid to have Radar there. https://www.montanarightnow.com/new...cle_cc30dc93-a349-59a3-8736-ab961781c197.html
Click to expand...

The article discusses radar approach control, which isn’t a simple control tower. The radar there is needed to aid ATC. The final product is likely to be a TRSA.

Totally different than a tower in the flat lands.
 
Iirc: There were some paywalled local articles (post, Loudoun times) which basically said the town had to pay out a qtr million to get the project started (plus an amount that would be refunded in a couple years) and the state would contribute x toward the construction and the faa would staff.

somehow need 4 or 5 years for approvals and construction and the total was something like 15 million. I hope that’s mostly the aviation related equipment and not just the shell.
 
Clip4 said:
The article discusses radar approach control, which isn’t a simple control tower. The radar there is needed to aid ATC. The final product is likely to be a TRSA.

Totally different than a tower in the flat lands.
Click to expand...
Big Sky Approach TRACON is in Boise. Having Radar covering the Bozeman area helps make things move faster. But it's not 'needed.' The point, in the context of what we've been talking about, where does the money come from to have and staff a Tower, is that Local Money was used to install Radar there. I know of no other place where that has happened.
 
flyingron said:
...Of course, there are places where there are towers that are completely silly. HKY is one. It hardly has any traffic and it lost it's only air carrier traffic decades ago.
Of course, there's also a bunch of Senator Byrd pork barrel towers in West Virginia as well. All these places have well under 100 operations a day.
Click to expand...
KAID, Anderson Indiana is another...privately funded (I've heard). I was at the field one time early, before the tower opened, and I watched a car pull up to the control tower...a guy and his dog got out and went inside. My friend local to the field said the controller took his dog to work with him every day...maybe he takes a hand-held with him to let the dog out....a quick check of Anderson IN shows 53 operations...PER DAY!
 
Country Flier said:
KAID, Anderson Indiana is another...privately funded (I've heard). I was at the field one time early, before the tower opened, and I watched a car pull up to the control tower...a guy and his dog got out and went inside. My friend local to the field said the controller took his dog to work with him every day...maybe he takes a hand-held with him to let the dog out....a quick check of Anderson IN shows 53 operations...PER DAY!
Click to expand...
The dog is there to bite him if he falls asleep.
 
A lot of great points mentioned here; I hadn't really considered the impact of a Class D airspace zone deep within the SFRA and how all that would interact. Maybe it's one of those "be careful what you ask for" scenarios. But as of this morning I was up to do some pattern work elsewhere but had to return due to low vis; GAI was up to 6 miles. I was finally able to enter the pattern after making two 360s to get into a slot on downwind. There were five of us in the pattern either airborne or rolling on the runway (mostly student activity), another 10 miles out inbound on an approach, with three waiting at the hold line.

Add to the mix the airport is completely engulfed now by suburbia with the county drowning in noise complaints. I don't see the county springing for a tower as that may have an adverse political affect. There is no airline traffic, but a fair amount of corporate activity. It's amazing there are towered airports with so little traffic and still keep them open. I just checked Airnav, GAI averages 191 operations per day. I can't say a tower would help or not, but sometimes I feel it's a ticking incendiary device as it stands now.
 
Representative Lapinski (now retired) put a line item in an omnibus bill and "voila!" KLOT has a tower. And C90 will have NOTHING to do with it. It didn't meet traffic specs.....
 
bbchien said:
Representative Lapinski (now retired) put a line item in an omnibus bill and "voila!" KLOT has a tower. And C90 will have NOTHING to do with it. It didn't meet traffic specs.....
Click to expand...
What do you mean by Chicago Approach will have nothing to do with it?
 
Mongoose Aviator said:
Similar to HEF ?
Click to expand...

Good point, HEF is within the DC SFRA, the only difference might be that any Class D airspace around GAI would overlap into the FRZ, but that might not make much difference.

bbchien said:
Representative Lapinski (now retired) put a line item in an omnibus bill and "voila!" KLOT has a tower. And C90 will have NOTHING to do with it. It didn't meet traffic specs.....
Click to expand...

Interesting, since LOT estimates 285 operations per day, well above others that have a tower.
 
HEF isn't in the way. GAI and JYO are in an area of serious VFR traffic trying to navigate the class B and SFRA/FRZ. It wasn't bad before 911, but the FRZ took a big bite out of the gaps between IAD, BWI, and DCA.
 
HTO for years never had a tower, then about 10 years ago they went to seasonal Class D. Even during the summer they were not extremely busy, just more of the rich folk coming on jets and helicopters.

Now there is a whole battle to make it a private airport.
 
TommyG said:
HTO for years never had a tower, then about 10 years ago they went to seasonal Class D. Even during the summer they were not extremely busy, just more of the rich folk coming on jets and helicopters.

Now there is a whole battle to make it a private airport.
Click to expand...
HTO ??
 
Any cases where a tower got removed, and the airspace reverted to Class G or E? I’ve landed a couple of times in Hickory NC and can’t figure out why they have a tower with such little traffic.
 
AlleyCat67 said:
Any cases where a tower got removed, and the airspace reverted to Class G or E? I’ve landed a couple of times in Hickory NC and can’t figure out why they have a tower with such little traffic.
Click to expand...
Sheridan Wyoming about 5 or so years ago. It was a Non Federal Tower. There were a lot that closed in 1981.

EDIT: Not Sheridan, it was Gillette, KGCC. 3 years ago.
 
Last edited:
AlleyCat67 said:
Any cases where a tower got removed, and the airspace reverted to Class G or E? I’ve landed a couple of times in Hickory NC and can’t figure out why they have a tower with such little traffic.
Click to expand...
I wonder the same thing. They lost what little air service they had there more than two decades ago (I kind of liked the Hickory Hop down to CLT. I'd use it today if it was still around). There's tons of these underutilized towers in WV (thank you, Senator Byrd) as well. The only ones I can think of as decommissioned were military towers where the FAA didn't pick it up after the military moved out.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top