SoCal Practice Approaches to Military Bases

A

apr911

Pre-takeoff checklist
Joined
Feb 22, 2015
Messages
459
Display Name
Display name:
apr911
Hey all,

Is it possible to get practice approaches to any of the military bases in Southern California? Any ideas on who to contact or reach out to for approvals?

I know landing is out but when I was in San Antonio, the Air Force controllers at Lackland/Kelly and Randolph often seemed to love having a change of pace in terms of both airspeed and workload. While they didn't mind us showing up unannounced if they weren't busy, they would turn you away if they were busy and I found if you called ahead they could tell you the best time to come when things were slow and the controller would be most appreciative of something to do and they were generally appreciative of the heads up call before hand anyway...

A couple people I've talked to have had similar results elsewhere in the country but have no idea what bases might permit it in Socal.

Given the large amount of traffic in the area Im guessing they might be less open about it but none of the bases have the "Practice Approaches Prohibited" line in their remarks section and the airport information, frequencies and approaches are all published information.

I'm trying to get the most variety of approaches both in training and eventually to maintain currency while avoiding having to go all over creation to shoot a variety of approaches and the military airports in the area would seem to be a good viable alternate.

I'd also really like to do a PAR and besides, who wouldn't want to shoot at least 1 approach into Miramar (though that thinking may be exactly why they dont allow it)?
 
apr911 said:
Hey all,

Is it possible to get practice approaches to any of the military bases in Southern California? Any ideas on who to contact or reach out to for approvals?

I know landing is out but when I was in San Antonio, the Air Force controllers at Lackland/Kelly and Randolph often seemed to love having a change of pace in terms of both airspeed and workload. While they didn't mind us showing up unannounced if they weren't busy, they would turn you away if they were busy and I found if you called ahead they could tell you the best time to come when things were slow and the controller would be most appreciative of something to do and they were generally appreciative of the heads up call before hand anyway...

A couple people I've talked to have had similar results elsewhere in the country but have no idea what bases might permit it in Socal.

Given the large amount of traffic in the area Im guessing they might be less open about it but none of the bases have the "Practice Approaches Prohibited" line in their remarks section and the airport information, frequencies and approaches are all published information.

I'm trying to get the most variety of approaches both in training and eventually to maintain currency while avoiding having to go all over creation to shoot a variety of approaches and the military airports in the area would seem to be a good viable alternate.

I'd also really like to do a PAR and besides, who wouldn't want to shoot at least 1 approach into Miramar (though that thinking may be exactly why they dont allow it)?
Click to expand...
The Air Force bases will typically allow practice approaches as long as you don't land. No prior coordination required, just tell SoCal you would like to do practice approaches to the base in question and they will coordinate or tell you it is not possible at the time (busy period).

I don't know if any of the Navy/Marine Corps bases will allow it. You can always ask.
 
Fearless Tower said:
The Air Force bases will typically allow practice approaches as long as you don't land. No prior coordination required, just tell SoCal you would like to do practice approaches to the base in question and they will coordinate or tell you it is not possible at the time (busy period).

I don't know if any of the Navy/Marine Corps bases will allow it. You can always ask.
Click to expand...

This. As a retired AF controller it's allowed unless in the rare case something is going on, training, etc. Hard to find the PARs these days but they're at some bases. Ask for a Surveillance Approach which is good knowledge if you became IMC and had to get down. It's not as precise as a PAR but all approach controls should be able to provide it, FAA controlled fields as well as far I know .
 
Doesn't hurt to ask. Some military bases have unique approaches for their region. When I was training I would fly the Briggs Army base approaches just to mix things up from the El Paso ones. But where I live now, Travis Air Force base has the only DME arc (I can think of off the top of my head) in the area.
Military base approaches can also be used to access airports nearby that don't have an approach (or approach that you can use). File to to the Military base and put the destination identifier in the remarks. When in VMC, cancel, share your intentions, and mozy over to your destination. They may still ask you what you are doing but sometimes you get a smart controller that figures it out.
 
Walboy said:
The Yuma MCAS allows practice approaches, but technically the airport is joint use military/civilian although ATC is run by USMC.
Click to expand...
Correct - Yuma is a great place to go if you want to practice a PAR.
 
MCAS Pendleton, MCAS Miramar and NAS North Island and AAF Los Alamitos all have PARs....

Also NAS San Clemente Island though dont know that Im going to go flying 70 miles off-shore just to do that approach, kind of defeats the intent of not going all over the place to get variety... This is especially true since the closest non-emergency landing point is Catalina 25NM away from San Clemente and still 60 miles off-shore itself and neither San Clemente or Catalina have any services on the field.

From what I've read, the Navy really likes PARs. According to what I read, a localizer signal can be used by enemy missiles to track inbound to an aircraft carrier as where a PAR offers no direct guidance information. As a result most Navy bases have PARs for training purposes for carrier landings.

Definitely good to know about the approaches though; I'll have to make some inquiries with SoCal.
 
Last edited:
Generally Navy / Marine non joint bases won't allow a practice approaches without a CALP. Just depends on how the facility interprets the regs and what they have in their facility SOP. Cherry Point for instance doesn't even allow class D transitions in most cases. Army and AF? Never had a problem there as long as I didn't touch down.

Really if you want to try one to Miramar, just ask SOCAL. I can tell you when I was stationed there it wasn't allowed and I worked GCA. Good luck.
 
Last edited:
Navy / Marines like PARs because most of their fighters don't have ILS capability. Same reason why the Army has kept them around for OH-58s and AH-64s.
 
apr911 said:
From what I've read, the Navy really likes PARs. According to what I read, a localizer signal can be used by enemy missiles to track inbound to an aircraft carrier as where a PAR offers no direct guidance information. As a result most Navy bases have PARs for training purposes for carrier landings.
Click to expand...
That doesn't sound right.

A missile can lock onto a PAR signal just as easily as a localizer. Any electronic signal coming from the boat can be exploited. Radar is one of the easiest to exploit. The missile is seeking the source and a PAR radar sends out a pretty strong radar emitter.

We like PARs because it gives you an additional option to get back to the boat if the aircraft avionics are damaged. As long as the aircraft still has a working radio, we can recover them with a PAR.
 
Velocity173 said:
Generally Navy / Marine no joint based won't allow a practice approaches without a CALP. Just depends on how the facility interprets the regs and what they have in their facility SOP. Cherry Point for instance doesn't even allow class D transitions in most cases. Army and AF? Never had a problem there as long as I didn't touch down.

Really if you want to try one to Miramar, just ask SOCAL. I can tell you when I was stationed there it wasn't allowed and I worked GCA. Good luck.
Click to expand...

Well if I cant get into any of the nearby bases on account of the Navy/Marines not allowing it then maybe I can still do the PAR at AAF Los Alamitos (KSLI). It's only 55NM away and was already on my list as it has the only published NDB approach inside 100NM from me with the next closest being at Fox (KWJF) on the other side of LA at 110 NM. Not that Fox isn't an option but its hard to get practice approaches for training or in general when you have to fly 100+ NM to get there; a great place to stop and economical if you're already up that way to put a practice approach in but not so great/economical if the sole purpose of the trip is to shoot the NDB.

KSLI might also let me get both the NDB, the PAR and even an ASR and it is not nearly as encumbered by the LAX Bravo as North Island nor is it a Bravo like Miramar or within a regularly operational restricted area like Pendleton.
 
Velocity173 said:
Navy / Marines like PARs because most of their fighters don't have ILS capability.
Click to expand...
I think most of the fixed wing aircraft these days have some sort of ILS equipment.

When we did PARs on the LHD, it was more for currency than necessity.
 
Velocity173 said:
Cherry Point for instance doesn't even allow class D transitions in most cases.
Click to expand...
Interesting. Never tried Cherry Point. Wonder if that is due to the high volume of MV-22 and rotor wing stuff?

I transition the NAS Chambers Delta all the time flying and have never been denied, but it is usually on the weekends when the E-2s aren't doing pattern work.
 
Fearless Tower said:
That doesn't sound right.

A missile can lock onto a PAR signal just as easily as a localizer. Any electronic signal coming from the boat can be exploited. Radar is one of the easiest to exploit. The missile is seeking the source and a PAR radar sends out a pretty strong radar emitter.

We like PARs because it gives you an additional option to get back to the boat if the aircraft avionics are damaged. As long as the aircraft still has a working radio, we can recover them with a PAR.
Click to expand...


Hmm. Interesting and a good point... Admittedly it's an unsourced paragraph in wikipedia for "Precision Approach Radar" and we all know how accurate wikipedia is right?

In the United States PAR are used mostly by The Navy. This is because they present a more covert type of precision approach for use on Aircraft carriers. An ILS installed on a ship could provide guidance to enemy missiles but a PAR does not provide accurate guidance without controller instruction.
Click to expand...

Admittedly if the plane isn't equipped for an instrument approach than a PAR really is one of the only options but the paragraph seemed to at least make sense and seemed plausible as to why the Navy seems to be the service really invested in PAR.
 
apr911 said:
Hmm. Interesting and a good point... Admittedly it's an unsourced paragraph in wikipedia for "Precision Approach Radar" and we all know how accurate wikipedia is right?



Admittedly if the plane isn't equipped for an instrument approach than a PAR really is one of the only options but the paragraph seemed to at least make sense and seemed plausible as to why the Navy seems to be the service really invested in PAR.
Click to expand...
It may have been that in the old days....like the 60's or so, that it was easier to conduct covert flight ops with PARs vs localizer guidance because you would only turn on the PAR radar equipment when you specifically needed it for recovery.
 
In general, yes you can get practice approaches at military bases, but quite a number in SoCal are in restricted airspace. Not all, though.
 
Fearless Tower said:
It may have been that in the old days....like the 60's or so, that it was easier to conduct covert flight ops with PARs vs localizer guidance because you would only turn on the PAR radar equipment when you specifically needed it for recovery.
Click to expand...

Yeah didn't really think much about modern missile guidance system. In my head when I first read it, I thought of a missile tracking a PAR like tracking a highpowered NDB with the the added difficult of an intermittent moving signal. Plus it'd likely be higher on the antenna array mast where it'd likely do superficial damage.

Thinking of an ILS it's like painting a target and all it has to do is lock on to that signal and then fly the vertical glideslope and lateral course to the flight deck..
 
march arb in moreno valley allows them. just get on with socal and theyll get you in. not sure where youre located though, so it may be out of your way
 
Verifiable on MCAS CamPen. Not only did I work there for 7 years, I flew in many, many times. NEVER landed though. They will give you a low approach only. Chirp them mains and your ass is grass.

And since CamPen and OCN runways are parallel AND very close, there has been many a time where bugs mashers have landed on the MCAS and got an M4 escort to the ramp. The dead give away was all the grey helos that dheys wiz in sem troooooble!!!:eek:

apr911 said:
MCAS Pendleton, MCAS Miramar and NAS North Island and AAF Los Alamitos all have PARs....

Also NAS San Clemente Island though dont know that Im going to go flying 70 miles off-shore just to do that approach, kind of defeats the intent of not going all over the place to get variety... This is especially true since the closest non-emergency landing point is Catalina 25NM away from San Clemente and still 60 miles off-shore itself and neither San Clemente or Catalina have any services on the field.

From what I've read, the Navy really likes PARs. According to what I read, a localizer signal can be used by enemy missiles to track inbound to an aircraft carrier as where a PAR offers no direct guidance information. As a result most Navy bases have PARs for training purposes for carrier landings.

Definitely good to know about the approaches though; I'll have to make some inquiries with SoCal.
Click to expand...
 
Fearless Tower said:
I think most of the fixed wing aircraft these days have some sort of ILS equipment.
Click to expand...

negative, at least for the USN. A handful of EA-18G's have them but those are all exped squadrons, and no love for the F/A-18. You have to replace the boat ICLS box with a civilian compatible ILS box to use ILS (which is what they have done for a few VAQ squadrons and a few RAG jets). In VFA, we are PAR or TACAN only, as we also can't fly any GPS approaches……though Super Hornets are getting RNAV capability very soon.
 
Last edited:
35 AoA said:
negative, at least for the USN. A handful of EA-18G's have them but those are all exped squadrons, and no love for the F/A-18. You have to replace the boat ICLS box with a civilian compatible ILS box to use ILS (which is what they have done for a few VAQ squadrons and a few RAG jets). In VFA, we are PAR or TACAN only, as we also can't fly any GPS approaches……though Super Hornets are getting RNAV capability very soon.
Click to expand...

You guys really don't get any love.

I'm surprised the Hornets don't have it. The E-2Cs which are an older airframe do, but they have had a lot of upgrades including glass panel displays and even GNS 530s.
 
Don't forget Palmdale. AF Plant 42. Nice ILS and VOR/DME approaches. All to a low approach (missed approach).
 
Fearless Tower said:
You guys really don't get any love.

I'm surprised the Hornets don't have it. The E-2Cs which are an older airframe do, but they have had a lot of upgrades including glass panel displays and even GNS 530s.
Click to expand...

Yeah, it is always on the NARG wish list, but I guess they have decided that we have more important things to spend money on than the ability to shoot precision approaches willy nilly in CONUS. Normally not an issue, but when you are on a cross country, it can potentially get dicey if the weather gets bad. The irony is also not lost that a GPS/INS certified to drop GPS guided weapons is not also certified to shoot an approach…….though I realize there are hard and fast hardware regs when it comes to that, which the system was never originally designed to meet. Still funny though.
 
I've heard that Los Alamitos gives them to a low approach only. I hadn't heard that Pendleton does but I'm in San Diego for another month and will give it a try and get back with what I find out.
 
TheGolfPilot said:
Doesn't hurt to ask. Some military bases have unique approaches for their region. When I was training I would fly the Briggs Army base approaches just to mix things up from the El Paso ones. But where I live now, Travis Air Force base has the only DME arc (I can think of off the top of my head) in the area.
Military base approaches can also be used to access airports nearby that don't have an approach (or approach that you can use). File to to the Military base and put the destination identifier in the remarks. When in VMC, cancel, share your intentions, and mozy over to your destination. They may still ask you what you are doing but sometimes you get a smart controller that figures it out.
Click to expand...

I remember reading about using NUQ to get underneath and then get over to RHV. Was that you?
 
luvflyin said:
Looks like there all going to be gone soon. If ya want a RADAR Approach in your log book don't put it off to long.
Click to expand...

Miramar PAR isn't going anywhere, at least until they no longer have Hornets. Same could probably be said for North Island, as it is a primary divert for Miramar jets.
 
luvflyin said:
Looks like there all going to be gone soon. If ya want a RADAR Approach in your log book don't put it off to long.
Click to expand...

JPALS won't be full up until 2030 so I'd say you have at least up until then for Navy / Marine bases. Army has no plans on getting rid of theirs anytime soon so that should be an option for awhile...even if their controllers aren't quite up to Navy / Marine standards.:rofl:

On the tactical side, the ATNAVICS PAR is now replacing the old MATCALS for USMC use, so I'm sure they'll use it for awhile. Having instrument recovery options in wartime, especially when satellites can be taken out, is critical.
 
Last edited:
35 AoA said:
Miramar PAR isn't going anywhere, at least until they no longer have Hornets. Same could probably be said for North Island, as it is a primary divert for Miramar jets.
Click to expand...
True. As long as the ship's have them, the air stations will for practice purposes at a minimum I would think and we are still putting PAR radars on new construction.
 
35 AoA said:
..The irony is also not lost that a GPS/INS certified to drop GPS guided weapons is not also certified to shoot an approach….
Click to expand...

The obvious solution is to drop a GPS guided weapon targeting the approach end of the runway and follow the weapon until runway in sight? :eek:
 
Velocity173 said:
Army has no plans on getting rid of theirs anytime soon so that should be an option for awhile...even if their controllers are quite up to Navy / Marine standards.:rofl:.
Click to expand...

Who aren't up to Air Force standards! :rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:

Hey you left yourself open! Next will be AF not up to FAA standards....:rolleyes2:
 
mscard88 said:
Who aren't up to Air Force standards! :rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:

Hey you left yourself open! Next will be AF not up to FAA standards....:rolleyes2:
Click to expand...

Lol! Well my brother was an AF controller. He said their standards were higher than the FAA so????:dunno:
 
I did em all the time to Los Al when I was IR training a couple years ago. Nothing special just ask for whatever approach to the airport you want. JUST DON'T LAND. You will do a low approach followed by the published missed.
 
Fatpat3 said:
march arb in moreno valley allows them. just get on with socal and theyll get you in. not sure where youre located though, so it may be out of your way
Click to expand...

Im out of Carlsbad so March isn't too far. March is open to the public though so it'd be surprising if they didnt allow an instrument approach since you are allowed to land there, no permission needed. March however only has VOR/LOC/ILS/RNAV approaches (and TACAN but I dont have TACAN equpment) and it does not have a PAR or an NDB which was the primary reason I am asking about the military bases.

Thomas R. said:
I did em all the time to Los Al when I was IR training a couple years ago. Nothing special just ask for whatever approach to the airport you want. JUST DON'T LAND. You will do a low approach followed by the published missed.
Click to expand...

Good to know, especially since I just read the NOTAM the other day that the NDB up at KWJF has been out of service for a few months now so there's no telling when it might be back up. Though I did find out that El Monte (KEMT) has a NDB approach as well, KSLI is still closer.

Unit74 said:
Verifiable on MCAS CamPen. Not only did I work there for 7 years, I flew in many, many times. NEVER landed though. They will give you a low approach only. Chirp them mains and your ass is grass.

And since CamPen and OCN runways are parallel AND very close, there has been many a time where bugs mashers have landed on the MCAS and got an M4 escort to the ramp. The dead give away was all the grey helos that dheys wiz in sem troooooble!!!:eek:
Click to expand...

How long ago was this? I talked to 2 other instructors who indicated they've been denied every time they ask and claimed it therefore was impossible...

Of course 1 of those 2 instructors also said they've never been able to get approval from North Island to round Point Loma transit up the inlet down into the bay and have always had to do the shoreline transition to the bay south of North Islands airspace; yet, every time I've asked to transit the bay, I've been approved through the inlet and one time, there were multiple carriers in port.

Speaking of "trouble" with Camp Pendleton, I hate the way their D is set up so that it extends outside the restricted area. I always feel like Im going to bust it or the Restricted area whenever I fly in/out of OKB or Fallbrook.


35 AoA said:
The irony is also not lost that a GPS/INS certified to drop GPS guided weapons is not also certified to shoot an approach…….though I realize there are hard and fast hardware regs when it comes to that, which the system was never originally designed to meet. Still funny though.
Click to expand...

I thought the regs require RAIMS or WAAS to account for the marginally limited accuracy available to civilians of the GPS system. I thought you military guys could get significantly better position reports.

So the FAA has certified a work around to solve for error that does not exist in military units.

MAKG1 said:
In general, yes you can get practice approaches at military bases, but quite a number in SoCal are in restricted airspace. Not all, though.
Click to expand...

Well out of the 5 bases I listed (North Island, Miramar, Pendleton, Los Al, San Clemente), only Pendleton is restricted and even that zone isn't 24/7. The other 4 are in Class D or higher airspace.

About the highest "constant" "restricted" airspace military airport in my neck of the woods is probably Miramar on account of the Class B airspace but that's not really restricted just more difficult (relatively speaking) to get into than an airport with C/D/E or G airspace.

luvflyin said:
I've heard that Los Alamitos gives them to a low approach only. I hadn't heard that Pendleton does but I'm in San Diego for another month and will give it a try and get back with what I find out.
Click to expand...

It does seem most people have had good success with KSLI so it's definitely one I'll be keeping in mind for the PAR and NDB if not others. Do let us know if you're able to shoot a low approach to the any of the other bases in the San Diego area (Pendleton, North Island or Miramar) though as KSLI at 55NM it still isn't quite as close as Pendleton at 10NM or Miramar's 15NM.
 
Last edited:
apr911 said:
I thought the regs require RAIMS or WAAS to account for the marginally limited accuracy available to civilians of the GPS system. I thought you military guys could get significantly better position reports.

So the FAA has certified a work around to sole for error that does not exist in military units.
Click to expand...

There are a couple things in play……..the F/A-18 doesn't hold nearly enough programmable waypoints to include everything in the US GPS database, though you can certainly dump the ones needed for an approach to a specific place. Secondly, our GPS aided INS doesn't have FAA certified fault monitoring logic. That doesn't mean I can't tell if GPS isn't working, but it doesn't meet their standards, whatever those may be. Somewhat similar discussion as why F/A-18A-D (and low lot F/A-18E/F) are not certified for RVSM flight.
 
35 AoA said:
There are a couple things in play……..the F/A-18 doesn't hold nearly enough programmable waypoints to include everything in the US GPS database, though you can certainly dump the ones needed for an approach to a specific place. Secondly, our GPS aided INS doesn't have FAA certified fault monitoring logic. That doesn't mean I can't tell if GPS isn't working, but it doesn't meet their standards, whatever those may be. Somewhat similar discussion as why F/A-18A-D (and low lot F/A-18E/F) are not certified for RVSM flight.
Click to expand...


Same for us in the Eagle


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 
So I can confirm Los Alamitos will allow approaches I got to fly 2 PAR's today during my IFR XC. They'll allow them basically all the way down to the runway as long as your wheels dont touch, in fact the final approach PAR operator will probably talk you all the way down to touch down if you dont break it off; although I briefed going missed at DA (282 ft and 0.75 NM from threshold), the guy kept right on going so when I switched to visual at DA I figured why not and got down inside 100-150 ft (field elevation is 32 ft so I was 50-100ft above the runway) before he advised I was over the threshold lights and slightly above glideslope (I leveled out to avoid getting too close) before breaking it off.

My PAR Experience:
As I said, I got to do 2 PAR's, both conducted full panel under full simulated instrument. Looking back, I probably should have considered conducting the first approach visually to get a feel for what the approach is like while receiving visual cues but I also understand it can be exceedingly difficult to follow the controller's instructions while flying visually as the instructions can and do contradict what you might be looking at visually and it's difficult to disregard what your eyes say to follow the controller. I also wanted to do a no-gyro PAR but my first PAR wasn't so great so we decided to do the 2nd one with a full panel as well and time became an issue for me and my instructor so we couldnt do a 3rd with a partial panel.
(it's a bit weird at first) as I was quite off center (good glide slope though)

It's a bit weird at first and it took some getting used to...

I did ok with the glide slope on the both attempts but it is hard not to chase it some degree since the closest thing you have to a visual reference of the glideslope is the VSI which doesnt really respond quick enough to keep you from chasing it a bit unless you can get your descent rate to near perfectly match your ground speed which can be difficult to get in smooth conditions let alone in the late afternoon on a warm day when conditions at low altitude are a bit bumpier as a result.

Laterally, I was further off. On attempt 1, I hit DA and was offset close to 0.25-0.30NM left of the runway center line. With 0.75 NM to go to threshold, it was close to 20-25 degrees of correction and it would have been well outside a localizer/ILS's range though it was still within the PARs tolerance. My second attempt was much better as I hit DA at approx. 0.05-0.1 NM right of the runway centerline needing close to 5 degrees of correction. Still off but if it were a LOC/ILS, I would have been some where near full scale deflection and potentially just inside of it. It's easier not to chase it in the lateral plane but its also harder (impossible) to estimate where you are on the course and even a slight delay between the operator's instruction and the execution adds significant error up close, even in slow planes. This is due to the inherent delays in the operator observing the course, calculating correction, verbally communicating that correction and then the pilot receiving, interpreting and executing the correction. When on an ILS, you literally cut out the middle man so there's no radio/readback delay and less delay interpreting, calculating correction and acting on what you see the CDI needle doing.

When I was all finished up with my approaches the guys thanked me for coming through and shooting the approach which was the first time I've been thanked in the ATC system for creating work for the controller (not that I've ever been given a hard time for creating work, just dont usually get thanked for it; usually only get thanked when I reduce the workload). I guess as someone else pointed out the controller's need approaches for currency too and Los Al seems to be a rather quiet military base.
I might also consider a PAR with gyros and pick my head up out of the cockpit to help visualize it

Since Los Alamitos also has the only operational NDB approach in the area (found out El Monte is also inoperative), I'll definitely head back up that way in an NDB equipped airplane to shoot that approach and maybe shoot the PAR again both visually and under instruments with no-gyros.

Recommendations:
I recommend you call ahead and ask before heading all the way out there though. They will only allow the PAR in visual conditions and although it was published in TERPS as being available 0600-0000z Mon, 1500-0600Z Tues-Thu and 2200-0600z Fri, on my Northbound leg at 10am PST this morning SoCal informed me the PAR was unavailable until 2 pm LCL. Although its a Wednesday, it seems they were operating on Friday hours and there was no discernible reason why. I was fortunate that ATC changed by requested IFR route as the assigned route took me back through the area in the afternoon so I was able to make the request again.

Since I got turned away in the morning heading North, I asked NAS Point Mugu control if I could do a PAR there (a military guy had requested it right before me and it jogged my memory to ask). They turned me away saying something about licensing and needing a reason for being there, even if its a low approach to missed with no landing which seems the story with North Island, Pendleton and is consistent with the anecdotal evidence of others in the area and online talking about their experience with naval bases. I still might try to ask for an approach into Miramar at some point because, well it's Miramar... Even if I cant get a low approach, maybe they'll let me do a high(er) one.

Bottomline:
Naval bases seem to be out but Army & Airforce seem ok with low approaches. Particular for Southern California, Los Alamitos will allow the approach. The PAR is a novel and fun experience so give it a try if you can... Just keep in mind you cant land, the bases are military first so military has priority and dont muck it up for the next civilian pilot by being overly demanding and/or a harda**... Also, dont all go bum rush Los Al as Im sure they'll have no choice but to turn you away and of course with as busy as SoCal is in general they might decide it's easier to close their approaches to civilians except in emergencies.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top