Oshkosh 2021 Notam - Airventure

iamtheari said:
That’s correct in my understanding. Most IFR flights end in a visual approach, and at Oshkosh the visual approach starts at (or before, now) Ripon. So even if you go through the process and actually get an IFR arrival slot, you might still end up in a VFR hold around a lake.
Click to expand...

Captain Larry said:
It is very possible that I misheard the Webinar presenter the other night, who, I thought said....."filing instruments does not guarantee you will not have to fly the VFR procedure IF the field is VMC"....pardon my paraphrasing.....
Click to expand...

So the exact verbiage out of the NOTAM is this:
"Canceling IFR: When the KOSH ceiling is reported at or above 4,500’ and the visibility is greater than 5 miles, all IFR arrivals except turbojet and air carrier aircraft are - strongly encouraged to cancel their IFR flight plan 60 NM from Oshkosh. Piston aircraft must then execute the VFR arrival procedure from the ATC designated Transition (pages 4-8); high- performance aircraft unable to use that procedure must use the Turbine/ Warbird arrival from Fond du Lac (page 17)."

I've flown in IFR the past 3 years. One arrival was IMC, one was MVFR, and the 3rd was VFR in VMC. For all three Runway 27 was in use and for all three I was given the GPS 27 approach which I flew to a landing to include the one in VFR conditions. So my advice is nothing is absolute and you need to be prepared for anything, but with only 4 IFR arrival slots per hour due to STMP procedures being in place I'm of the opinion that ATC isn't going to tell you to cancel because I don't think they have that option. But they can put you in a vector from hell penalty box which would potentially drive you to cancel, but I don't really see that happening. Generally it seems that the IFR arrivals get sandwiched in with the warbird arrivals which for 27 has you land on the orange dot with most of the VFR arrivals getting the green dot or orange dot if its not busy with warbirds.
 
Last edited:
SixPapaCharlie said:
Question. Assuming no weather issues (I know I know) is it a cluster from start to finish on Sunday?
Every time I have flown in, it has been around noon and it has been a S**tshow. I cannot believe there are not like 5 midairs an hour.?
Click to expand...
In the absence of protracted horrible weather the vast majority of my approaches to Oshkosh have been completely without issue. The last few years the weather has played a very big role, however.
 
What is it with people not being able to maintain a fixed speed until a 1/2 mile out? Are they flying partial panel with the airspeed indicator covered?
 
EdFred said:
What is it with people not being able to maintain a fixed speed until a 1/2 mile out? Are they flying partial panel with the airspeed indicator covered?
Click to expand...

I think the bigger problem is mixing faster aircraft with aircraft that can't maintain 90 knots. It just takes one guy flying 75 knots to slow the whole length of the approach to 75 knots during busy times. The planes that can't maintain 75knots have to bail, the planes that can fill in all the spaces and you've gone from a 90 knot line to 75 knot line, where all pretty much all the 75 knot planes have to land before the line can get back to 90 knots.

I don't know what the answer is. I do agree with the webinar presenter about passing if it's safe to do so, IOW the traffic ahead of the slow airplane is maintaining 90, I suspect he understands the problem.
 
PaulS said:
I think the bigger problem is mixing faster aircraft with aircraft that can't maintain 90 knots. It just takes one guy flying 75 knots to slow the whole length of the approach to 75 knots during busy times. The planes that can't maintain 75knots have to bail, the planes that can fill in all the spaces and you've gone from a 90 knot line to 75 knot line, where all pretty much all the 75 knot planes have to land before the line can get back to 90 knots.

I don't know what the answer is. I do agree with the webinar presenter about passing if it's safe to do so, IOW the traffic ahead of the slow airplane is maintaining 90, I suspect he understands the problem.
Click to expand...

That's the problem with putting everyone in one line. So multiple lines (that only finally meet at 1 mile from the runway), or if Wx doesn't mess things up time blocks for speeds.
 
PaulS said:
I do agree with the webinar presenter about passing if it's safe to do so,
Click to expand...
I was shocked to hear him say that. I guess the FAA thinks it's to dangerous?

I was also interested to hear him say that they've requested a "slow lane", but the FAA doesn't want to do it. Hopefully that can happen in the future.

His crack about notams was pretty good, too. Thanks @baboss for posting that. Signed up for the text alerts and ordered a printed copy of the notams, neither of which I knew about previously.
 
Jim K said:
I was shocked to hear him say that. I guess the FAA thinks it's to dangerous?

I was also interested to hear him say that they've requested a "slow lane", but the FAA doesn't want to do it. Hopefully that can happen in the future.

His crack about notams was pretty good, too. Thanks @baboss for posting that. Signed up for the text alerts and ordered a printed copy of the notams, neither of which I knew about previously.
Click to expand...

I bet if you put guys from the FAA in the line a few times that would get things fixed.
 
PaulS said:
I don't know what the answer is. I do agree with the webinar presenter about passing if it's safe to do so, IOW the traffic ahead of the slow airplane is maintaining 90, I suspect he understands the problem.
Click to expand...
Regarding passing, I kind of agree but that's technically against the rules in the NOTAM. Plus you might get parked next to the dude you passed which could make for unpleasant camping neighbors...and we're not allowed to bring firearms...
Bailing out of line and going back to the start is a friggin' hard decision in the heat of battle, especially the last couple of years. It sucks hard but thems the rules.

Rule #1 in the NOTAM should be "Don't be a douche"
Rule #2, as mentioned in the webinar, should be for this thing to work we all need to follow the rules.
 
EdFred said:
That's the problem with putting everyone in one line. So multiple lines (that only finally meet at 1 mile from the runway), or if Wx doesn't mess things up time blocks for speeds.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure there's an easy answer if the traffic from each line is going to the same runway. A possible solution would be to have a slower runway and a faster runway, but I'm sure that has its complications too.
 
They should have a double decker runway.
Slower planes can fly lower and land on the bottom runway. Faster planes fly higher and land on the top runway.
its a good idea.


CBf1WXhWsAAGyZ6
 
EdFred said:
What is it with people not being able to maintain a fixed speed until a 1/2 mile out? Are they flying partial panel with the airspeed indicator covered?
Click to expand...

Youse guys are making me want to show up this year - for no other reason than to see how you do with someone screaming along at 70 knots. Pedal to the metal baby!
 
I flew in to the last osh, in 2019, and the low altitude was so clogged, and going so slow due to the guy(s) who couldn't cruise at 90kts that I just flew the upper altitude at the higher speed (130 kts?) in my Comanche 250. So there are two lanes.
 
Dustin Hawkinson said:
I flew in to the last osh, in 2019, and the low altitude was so clogged, and going so slow due to the guy(s) who couldn't cruise at 90kts that I just flew the upper altitude at the higher speed (130 kts?) in my Comanche 250. So there are two lanes.
Click to expand...

The upper arrival isn’t for those who CAN fly fast, it’s for those who CAN’T fly slow.
 
Dave Theisen said:
The upper arrival isn’t for those who CAN fly fast, it’s for those who CAN’T fly slow.
Click to expand...

So if the 90 knot line is averaging 75 knots, then the 135 arrival seems a logical choice if you can't safely maintain 75 knots, no?
 
PaulS said:
So if the 90 knot line is averaging 75 knots, then the 135 arrival seems a logical choice if you can't safely maintain 75 knots, no?
Click to expand...

No. The key fact about the 135 knot train is there should be very few aircraft using it. Which makes it possible to merge those (typically) twins with the 90 knot stream headed for the runway. Remember, both streams come together on final. If a bunch of clowns start using the 135 knot approach, it'll screw up both approaches.
 
kyleb said:
No. The key fact about the 135 knot train is there should be very few aircraft using it. Which makes it possible to merge those (typically) twins with the 90 knot stream headed for the runway. Remember, both streams come together on final. If a bunch of clowns start using the 135 knot approach, it'll screw up both approaches.
Click to expand...

Ah, you don't seem to be getting it, so I'll stop trying.
 
PaulS said:
Ah, you don't seem to be getting it, so I'll stop trying.
Click to expand...
Well for starters you can’t change altitude in the middle of the arrival. So if you are in the slow lane and they slow beyond your comfort speed your only option is to bail out and try again.
 
Grum.Man said:
Well for starters you can’t change altitude in the middle of the arrival. So if you are in the slow lane and they slow beyond your comfort speed your only option is to bail out and try again.
Click to expand...

Yup, that would be really dumb, bail and try again obviously. I've said this ten times, but I don't see how the 90 knot line can recover from a 75 knot airplane in a busy time. Hopefully that's a rarity.
 
Wonder what the bravo buster in Las Vegas is going to do with the changes this year? ( yes this is sarcasm ;))
 
Dave Theisen said:
The upper arrival isn’t for those who CAN fly fast, it’s for those who CAN’T fly slow.
Click to expand...
I rewrote the entire OSH Notam in the mid '80's (cutting it's overall size considerably... gee, that didn't last long!) Your statement quoted above is almost EXACTLY the wording I tried to include in that rewrite.

While the powers-that-be went along with most of the changes I proposed, they wouldn't go along with that one-- while they agreed that it accurately reflected our intent, some were afraid that pushing the "slow lane" as "mandatory" (for those able to comply) might cause someone who can't fly 90 knots to try and do it anyway.

And, so, the confusion continues... 40 years later.
 
flibmeister said:
I rewrote the entire OSH Notam in the mid '80's (cutting it's overall size considerably... gee, that didn't last long!) Your statement quoted above is almost EXACTLY the wording I tried to include in that rewrite.

While the powers-that-be went along with most of the changes I proposed, they wouldn't go along with that one-- while they agreed that it accurately reflected our intent, some were afraid that pushing the "slow lane" as "mandatory" (for those able to comply) might cause someone who can't fly 90 knots to try and do it anyway.

And, so, the confusion continues... 40 years later.
Click to expand...

Why wasn't there a third lane for the many airplanes that won't go 90 knots?
 
PaulS said:
Yup, that would be really dumb, bail and try again obviously. I've said this ten times, but I don't see how the 90 knot line can recover from a 75 knot airplane in a busy time. Hopefully that's a rarity.
Click to expand...

Generally, they split the stream at Fisk, landing part of the aircraft on 9/27 and others on 18/36. That gives them the opportunity to split out the slow aircraft and route them to a specific runway, while pointing the Cirri and other slick types to the other runway. So you get Champs, 150's, 172's, etc. sent one way and Cirri, Bo's, Comanche's, etc. sent to the other, which is part of the controller's discretion to "fix" these problems between Fisk and the field. That isn't always possible, but it is part of the strategy.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 5QK
PaulS said:
Why wasn't there a third lane for the many airplanes that won't go 90 knots?
Click to expand...

Because merging 2 traffic lanes is already difficult enough. Note - the EAA is acquiring property SW of the field for a third runway for low and slow types. That is still a year or two away, but they recognize the need. I'm guessing they will create another approach path for that one, but you never know.
 
PaulS said:
Why wasn't there a third lane for the many airplanes that won't go 90 knots?
Click to expand...
In those days, ultralights were just recently invented, LSA's didn't exist, and the number of airplanes that couldn't fly at least 90 knots was relatively few; consequently, a third stream wasn't even considered.

However, back in 2012 or so, I was called to consult on the idea of adding a third stream, but via a different route (IIRC, the proposal at that time was for the really slow stuff to fly a version of the Prison arrival). I thought it was a good idea and said so, but somebody in the FAA veto'd the idea. Never knew who or why.
 
baboss said:
Regarding passing, I kind of agree but that's technically against the rules in the NOTAM. Plus you might get parked next to the dude you passed which could make for unpleasant camping neighbors...and we're not allowed to bring firearms...
Bailing out of line and going back to the start is a friggin' hard decision in the heat of battle, especially the last couple of years. It sucks hard but thems the rules.

Rule #1 in the NOTAM should be "Don't be a douche"
Rule #2, as mentioned in the webinar, should be for this thing to work we all need to follow the rules.
Click to expand...

Rule #1 is the most often violated rule in the approach from what I've read in these threads in the past. Too many type-A people who "need" to get there.
Guess I got lucky the time I flew in. Wasn't an issue.
 
I’ve always wondered why they don’t ask the <90 knot crowd to use the ultralight arrival. Maybe they are worried about it overwhelming the grass strip?
 
Grum.Man said:
I’ve always wondered why they don’t ask the <90 knot crowd to use the ultralight arrival. Maybe they are worried about it overwhelming the grass strip?
Click to expand...
How about there aren't enough of them to be an issue. Oh, yes occasionally there will be a Breezy or something that can't peddle hard enough to maintain 90, but nearly all planes can go fast enough or slow enough to maintain 90. As pointed out, an additional "lane" won't help that much because everybody has to go to the same place. And most people (even in faster planes) have a propensity to slow down once they spot the airport and ATC is always admonishing them to keep the speed up as much as possible.
 
The good news is most years none of this comes into play. Most years I've flown and no no problems at all. But the last few the wx has been a huge issue, and aircraft have bunched up right before the show something fierce.
 
The ultralight field sounds like a good idea until you consider that not all planes that cruise at less than 90 knots are ultralights. The ultralight runway landing length is stated in the NOTAM as 900 feet. That is enough for most planes that fly those speeds, but it's not enough for all of their pilots' personal minimums.

It would be nice to have a slow lane arrival that gets merged in at the end. Maybe fly at lower altitude over Warbird Island, head west, and follow the tracks NNW until 36R is in sight and land on that. It wouldn't be too hard to merge those planes in for 36R because you have 36L available.

But it would be more work for the busiest tower in the world, just to accommodate a small number of planes that can't fly 90 knots. The existing arrival procedure does work when everyone follows the rules. Problems arise mostly from people cutting the line, flying over, under, or around other planes, and thinking that it's okay for just one plane to disregard the rules.

flyingron said:
How about there aren't enough of them to be an issue. Oh, yes occasionally there will be a Breezy or something that can't peddle hard enough to maintain 90, but nearly all planes can go fast enough or slow enough to maintain 90. As pointed out, an additional "lane" won't help that much because everybody has to go to the same place. And most people (even in faster planes) have a propensity to slow down once they spot the airport and ATC is always admonishing them to keep the speed up as much as possible.
Click to expand...
Thanks for that perspective. I think a lot of pilots aren't confident in landing on their designated spot if they're flying faster than usual, so the temptation to slow down early and stabilize the approach makes sense. I definitely don't get the impression that the problem is due to Cubs and other slow planes. When I was trying to get into Oshkosh on Sunday in 2018, I finally made it out of the hold and past Ripon and things were moving very slow, probably 75 knots. I didn't hear any references on the radio to Cubs or other slow types, so it had to be something else at work. (Then a Cessna dove in from above me to cut the line and Fisk told him and me to bail out and go away because we were too close in trail.)
 
Yeah but it only takes 1 dip**** to screw up the conga line.
 
flyingron said:
How about there aren't enough of them to be an issue. Oh, yes occasionally there will be a Breezy or something that can't peddle hard enough to maintain 90, but nearly all planes can go fast enough or slow enough to maintain 90. As pointed out, an additional "lane" won't help that much because everybody has to go to the same place.
Click to expand...

EdFred said:
Yeah but it only takes 1 dip**** to screw up the conga line.
Click to expand...

Agree. Most of the issues I've seen are caused by the pilots. The first year I went, a Bonanza was in front of me and decided to do a 360 for spacing. He completed the turn just in front of me. Then, he decided to do another one... this time, he was so close in front of me that he completed the 360 and ended up behind me. I was in a 170, so no back window, and I was afraid I was about to hear the crunching of metal as he chewed up my tail. We're all in a hurry to get there... drop you gear and some flaps and enjoy the experience. So many pilots refuse to fly in because of the chaos, but it's part of the adventure for me.
 
EdFred said:
Yeah but it only takes 1 dip**** to screw up the conga line.
Click to expand...
I was going to say that one guy craps his pants and the rest of us have to wear diapers, but given it's pilots we're talking about there are probably more than one crapping their pants.
 
It's problematic to have 90 knot conga line, then tell a pilot who can only fly 70 knots to get in that line while telling everyone else to not pass the guy going 70. Hopefully it's not a big issue, but I don't see how it cannot be. In heavy traffic times, once the line gets slowed to 70, I don't see how it can recover.
 
PaulS said:
It's problematic to have 90 knot conga line, then tell a pilot who can only fly 70 knots to get in that line while telling everyone else to not pass the guy going 70. Hopefully it's not a big issue, but I don't see how it cannot be. In heavy traffic times, once the line gets slowed to 70, I don't see how it can recover.
Click to expand...

It’s not really that big of an issue. I mean we’ve only been doing this for decades. It’s not perfect but generally gets the job done.
 
PaulS said:
It's problematic to have 90 knot conga line, then tell a pilot who can only fly 70 knots to get in that line while telling everyone else to not pass the guy going 70. Hopefully it's not a big issue, but I don't see how it cannot be. In heavy traffic times, once the line gets slowed to 70, I don't see how it can recover.
Click to expand...
I think it recovers by people cooperating and bailing out as needed. If everyone follows that rule, the accordion effect will disappear. In the roughly 16-mile arrival procedure from Ripon to KOSH via Fisk, a 90-knot plane will gain 3.2 miles on a 75-knot plane. With 1/2-mile spacing, that means 7 planes will have to bail out between the 90-knot conga line and the 75-knot conga line they are behind. It shouldn't be too much to ask for 7 people to follow the rules when doing so will cure the problem.

And as others have said, it isn't that big of a problem. The only time the arrival gets stupid is when the whole situation is already off the deep end, like Sunday 2018 when I was in the Green Lake hold with 3 planes abreast, stacked 3 or 4 levels high, and one guy going the wrong direction. At that point, the right answer is to divert and wait it out, regardless of how slow you are willing to fly.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top