causeitflies

OK Doc but my main point was that this would affect ALL public airports. This would be a bad turn of events for Heart of Ohio which just moved from a private venue, which wouldn't be affected, to a county airport which would be affected.

It would also affect the Giant Scale Air Races at Ashtabula. These are just two off the top of my head that are near me which I attend so multiply that by about a hundred?? and we are getting serious implications as far as meets go.

Normal flying at airports should not be affected as mentioned.

DocYates

My Feedback: (102)

CauseItFLies,
That statement did not come from me. I agree that all public airports who recieve money, and most do, would be affected.
Tommy

causeitflies

Sorry Doc, I have a slow computer at work and am just trying to keep up

DocYates

My Feedback: (102)

No problem......have a good day. Lets hope this is all a big misunderstanding on someone's part.
Tommy

aparchment

Folks, I have been checking into this because I was afraid it would affect my event, and our hobby in general. This is looking more like an isolated issue than a national campaign by the FAA.

It's really important to have facts in hand before posting here. On that note I am going to finish my fact finding before I post more.

Antony

mr_matt

My Feedback: (10)

Nice work, Anthony. Let us know what you find out

DocYates

My Feedback: (102)

I think it could be resolved by contacting the FAA Airport Compliance Officer. I beleive her name is ************************, if someone wants to do it. How bout it Antony? She might be able to resolve some of these issues and give you the information you are looking for.
Tommy

Name removed, since there is not reason for me to post it here.

aparchment

Okay guys, this is really starting to unfold; and I am getting to the bottom of what is going on. I will fill you in more after my meeting. Gotta run for an hour or so.

Antony

DocYates

My Feedback: (102)

Keep us posted, thanks for the all the effort to get to the bottom of this.
TOmmy

hornet driver

My Feedback: (7)

lee

>>>>I hope you are mistaken about the 500 foot proximity and the SS knowledge of your presence!

no i can assure you i know exactly how much 500 feet is and it was 500 feet....secondly...the ss did come to see us and find out what we were doing...i talked to them personally...there were other pilots there at their " visit "....also i have friends who are ss agents right now....also is from texas...senior lives 10 miles from me right now...also junior appointed our appelet judges in texas while he was the gov and one of my friends was appointed by him and she still is there ( sherry radack ..look her up...and btw is 2 deaths away from being the governor...and i can assure you george picked her for a reason ...her husband steve and i have been in biz before and also a local power broker in houston)

hope this helps

gregg

hornet driver

My Feedback: (7)

easytiger

>>>And the Marine One story, I dunno about that. When Ronald Reagan came into Teterboro airport back in the eighties, and model flying was prohibited for the day at a model field down the road, someone flew anyway, and the model field ended up being closed for years. The SS did not find it particularly funny, the SS is not known for their sense of humor, and I just tend to doubt that a model coming within 500 yards of Marine one with the president aboard, post 911, would not have some ramifications. But, hey, could be.


there were several texas pilots at the field when marine 1 flew right over head with our planes in the air....and flying the race track pattern we all fly.... i can assure you it only takes about 20 seconds to make a circuit and more than twice that for a chopper to clear our space....also marine 1 has only a short hop from crawford to waco ( 20 miles ) so george can get on airforce 1 ...so his altitude is very low the whole hop.....also the ss did not come then ...they came before ( a year ago )...and there were other pilots there talking to the ss in the black suburbans as well as me

all this was viewed by several other pilots and its no secret

gregg

diceman

My Feedback: (10)

I have been following this thread since last evening with considerable interest. I am involved with three major events at full scale airports, and participate in several more. I got on the phone early this morning with some friends at the FAA in Washington, and shortly after noon today I got a return call. The only report was that there is nothing to report.

However, given the "bureaucratic mentality", if a person in charge of permitting R/C activities at an airport is given a choice between saying yes and creating a mountain of paperwork, or saying no with little or no paperwork - I believe that we all know what the answer might be.

All flying site opportunities for club or events are precious, and can't afford to be undermined. My suggestion is that we guard our contact and sharing of information very closely. You never know how they will take it, or who they will tell next.

I have worked very diligently for over fifteen years building relationships with airport operators with great success. Generally the less they know the better - for everyone. Don't forget what happened at Florida Jets a few years ago. The airport manager changed, he didn't care for what we were doing so he made it so difficult Frank moved the event. That is what those if us who deal in this regularly have to put up with. On the other hand there are those relationships that have lasted for years with tremendous community involvement which are assets to all parties.

There are always those looking for an excuse to say no. I like the folks who look for a reason to say yes.

ghost_rider

My Feedback: (20)

Bingo Tommy........you must have been reading the same memo I received yesterday.

BTW, part of her memo stated that " we are working to achieve national consistency" so guys the sky has fallen.

Also according to FAA: “Aeronautical use of airport facilities includes services provided by air carriers related directly and substantially to the movement of passengers, luggage, mail and cargo. Model airplanes do not fit this definition. The radio-controlled miniature airplane is a nonaeronautical event�


Call me Chicken Little but the effect of this will be felt in the RC community.

Liberator

I am sure that they would be happy to reimburse every cent to you, if you could show them exactly how much of you're money was earmarked for the R/C Hobby side of the full scale airport.

Tom

diceman

My Feedback: (10)

As far as Federal money for municipal airports............unless you have a hub for a major airline, that airport probably isn't getting any Federal money. The $7 billion airport fund was wiped out by Pena and the new Denver airport. (the man loves marble) Since then many hub cities have been upgraded. That well is oh so dry. So this threat lacks credibility completely.

************************************************** *********
Correction:

This is part of a post regarding airport funding which is inaccurate. Actually the vast majority of airports throughout the US receive some federal funding. It may be as small as a $50,000 grant to pay for airport managment or upkeep, minor repairs and improvements. It can also go to any extreme. Some private airports also receive federal funding.

It's all about keeping the home folks happy with some pork cooked up Washington style.

DocYates

My Feedback: (102)

You are correct. I will not say anything else here about this matter, except that what I have seen this appears to be very real and not a perceived threat.
Tommy

ghost_rider

My Feedback: (20)

Same here Tommy. I am going to take the fifth from now henceforth.

Gordon Mc

My Feedback: (11)

Neither do full-scale airshows.

aparchment

Here are the facts as I have them thus far. There may be further clarification at a later time, but I believe what I have does a good job of filling out the situation at this point in time.

By way of background, last year as a result of the Ozark Mountain Jets event a full scale pilot complained to the FAA about not being able to use the facility. I don't know if he complained directly, or through channels, and I don't know what caused him to complain; but at this point that is irrelevant. As a result, this year the event coordinators are having trouble securing FAA permission to use the facility. In addition, as a result of the complaint certain FAA officials have voiced a desire to examine more closely the use of airports for non aviation and model aviation activities. I am not yet aware of the degree to which the FAA intends to look into this issue on a nationwide basis.

Currently model aviation events are allowed to take place at federally funded airports (most municipal airports receive some sort of federal funding), provided the events meet certain guidelines. These guidelines are set forth in FAA Order 5190.6A titled "Airport Compliance Handbook" and dated 10/1/89. I have attached the relevant section of this document below.

Essentially it boils down to this -- complete closure of an airport for an extended period of time is prohibited without FAA approval. If a model aviation event is going to be held at an airport, the event must receive FAA approval and the airport must either remain open to air traffic or be closed for a brief period of time. If the event takes place while the airport remains open the event must not interfere with the "normal" use of the airport.

So my read on this is that if we want to continue to use federally funded airports for our events, we need to comply with these restrictions, and even more importantly ensure that we establish and maintain good relations with the FAA, Airport Manager AND the general aviation community, particularly those based at the airport. We also need to bring some benefit to the airport and the community with the event.

I am working to find out how actively the FAA is reexamining the use of airports for model events, and I will let you know what I learn. I want you all to know that the AMA is aware of the Ozark situation and the FAA concern, and are handling the matter delicately. In fact, I was impressed with their knowledge, diplomacy and concern.

Personally I am pleased to hear that our events are allowed as long as we meet the restrictions and benefit the airport and the community. At least we are starting any discussions with the FAA on this subject from the position that certain events are worth having at federally funded airports.

Antony


Here is the portion of FAA Order 5190.6A that concerns our activities:

Part 4-8 (Restrictions), Section E, subsections 2-3:

(2) Closing for Special Events. Section 511 (a) (3) of the AAIA requires that any proposal to temporarily close the airport for nonaeronautical purposes must be approved by the FAA. For example, an airport developed or improved with Federal funds may not be closed for the purpose of using the airport facilities for special outdoor events, such as sports car races, county fairs, parades, etc., without FAA approval. However, in certain circumstances where promoting aviation awareness through such activities as model airplane flying, etc., the FAA does support the limited use of airport facilities so long as there is not total closure of the airport. In these cases safeguards need to be established to protect the aeronautical use of the airport while the nonaeronautical activities are in progress. There will be occasions when airports may be closed for brief periods of time for aeronautical purposes. Examples are: an air show designed to promote a particular segment of aviation; to celebrate an official occasion held in connection with an aviation activity such as exhibits; or annual fly-ins and aviation conventions. In such cases, airport management should be encouraged to limit the period the airport will be closed to the minimum time consistent with the activity. Such closing should be well publicized in advance including issuance of NOTAM to minimize any inconvenience to the flying public.

(3) Closing of a Part of an Airport. In some instances, reasons may be presented to justify the temporary use of a part of an airport for an unusual event of local significance which does not involve closing the entire airport. In such cases, all the following conditions must be met:
(a) The event is to be held in an area of the airport which is not required for the normal operation of aircraft and where the event would not interfere with the airport's normal use; or in a limited operational area of an airport having a relatively small traffic volume and where it has been determined that the event can be conducted in the area without interference with aeronautical use of the airport.
(b) Adequate facilities for the landing and takeoff of aircraft will remain open to air traffic and satisfactory arrangements are made by the owner to ensure the safe use of the facilities remaining open.
(c) Proper NOTAMS are issued in advance.
(d) Necessary steps are taken by the airport owner to ensure the proper marking of the portion of the airport to be temporarily closed to aeronautical use.
(e) The airport owner notifies in advance the appropriate Flight Standards office and any air carrier using the airport.
(f) The airport owner agrees to remove all markings and repair all damage, if any, within 24 hours after the termination of the event, or issues such additional NOTAMS as may be appropriate.
(g) The airport owner coordinates beforehand the special activities planned for the event with local users of the airport and with the Department of Defense (DOD) if there are any military activities at the airport.
(h) No obstructions determined by FAA to be hazards, such as roads, timing poles, or barricades, will be constructed for the remaining operational area of the airport.

ghost_rider

My Feedback: (20)

Hmmmmmmmmm!!!!!!!!!!. A quick Google search just sent me to another site of interest. See part in red:
.

Key Issues and FAA Standards
Any proposal to temporarily close an airport for non-aeronautical purposes must first be approved by the FAA. The standards listed in FAA Order 5190.6A Section 2, Paragraph 4-8e, "Temporary Closing of an Airport" emphasize:
• promoting aviation events,
• issuance of NOTAMs,
• minimizing the closure period,
• and the non interference with normal airport operations.
FAA supports the limited non-aeronautical use of airport facilities as long as there is not total closure of the airport. Safeguards must be in place to protect the aeronautical use of the airport. However, should the FAA decide to allow this activity on the airport, any revenue derived from this purpose must revert to the airport fund itself. Existing federal law prohibits the diversion of any airport revenue to a city or county general fund.
See: http://www.aopa.org/whatsnew/region/closure.html

Adil Nasim

My Feedback: (61)

Interesting thread ! I have a lot of interest as do other people so my question is purely for my understanding:

If I'm reading it right, the items in red above should have nothing to do with this issue, no? I mean, the airport is not putting up any money to pay for the event, typically? Its not like the airport is taking money out of the Federal (or other) funds given to it and paying for "non aeronautical activity". I could be wrong.

Thanks - Adil

diceman

My Feedback: (10)

Here is the generic version:

Under existing FAA rules which were previously not enforced and will now be enforced, airports may not be closed for R/C events. For airports that are not closed yet used for R/C events NPR's are not acceptable alternatives during operations. The set-back line (250' or 275') for active runway is another problem.

Good news - Events held at airports with more than one active runway will not have to request airport closure. This is providing that only one runway is used and traffic does not interfere with operations.

The envelope got pushed, and this is the result. Now, we can *****, complain, scream, yell or, act appropriately and send your represenatives and senators along with our friends at the FAA well throughout letters about why you feel this is wrong. Be sure to give alternatives. They are not looking for negatives. Maybe in the future this will change.

For those who don't understand the need for all aspects of aviation to co-exhist, and how lucky we are to have had the opportunities we have had, the perverable load of bricks has just landed on your head.

TexasAirBoss

My Feedback: (22)

Oops, earlier I said that most airports don't receive federal money. I was thinking of the Trust Fund. But when I looked into the AIP grants, boy howdy, many many airports do. The FAA site states that 90% of eligible airports participate. Eligiblity requirements do exclude a good number of airports, but not as many as I thought. I'm having difficulty getting my hands on the actual numbers. There are 3 airports of 6 that are within 35 minutes of my house which do not recieve federal money. 2 are grass and 1 is pot holes.

J. Campbell

My Feedback: (31)

I dont see the connection to "Federal funds" The FAA has authority and can probably do what it well pleases, funds or not... Russ

aparchment

This is getting off subject, but the connection to federal funds is that's part of what give the feds jurisdiction. If they contribute money, they have a say in what the facility is used for. By the same token, if it's a private facility -- no jurisdiction.

Adil, in the case of many events the event organizers pay to use the facility. Ray and I paid the Sanford Airport $500 to use the airport last year, and one of our vendors paid another $150. We have been told that they expect at least that much this year.