|
-
POSTING RULES

-
Donate yearly (please).
-
Advertise in here!
-
Today's Posts
|
Insert Pics
|

11-16-2018, 11:15 PM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Foley, Al
Posts: 563
|
|
No Joy
The proposed fix is about what I expected. They're just going to move the problem. I agree with the post above.... there fixing something that's not broke. The chaos at OSH happened for a few very specific and easily identifiable reasons.
1. Weather was definitely a factor. It helped place lots of airplanes in the same
airspace.
2. The controllers were asking for 1 mile in trail spacing. Did nothing but slow
the already bottlenecked traffic further.
3. Notam wasn't being followed by everyone. Simply.... there were pilots trying
to muscle their way in. I include the false emergencies here.
4. The biggest single contributing factor was ATC not letting Fisk traffic in.
Doesn't matter if they were holding out for mass arrivals or military flybys!
They closed the field to arrivals and that falls squarely in their laps. The result
is very predictable.... congestion at Ripon/Fisk.
The proposed fix dosen't address the problems that caused this. Funny that the "conga line" from Ripon to Fisk failed miserably.... BECAUSE ATC WAS NOT LETTING FISK ARRIVALS IN..... and the answer is to extend that conga line!
Like what has already been mentioned, the current procedure has worked for many many years. Had ATC NOT shut down the Fisk arrivals it would have worked this year too.
Only one thing needs to be addressed. They perhaps do need a Plan B just in case there is an unexpected delay. It could be published in the NOTAM and only put into use by the controllers letting everyone know that plan B is in effect. And for those aircraft a ways out, use of the ATIS would notify them before they ever get close to Ripon.
Mass arrivals should have a time slot. Nothing should be able to change it including weather. If for some reason they can't make the slot then they fly the published approach like everyone else. No military flybys either.... remember the movie Top Gun..... "Negative Ghostrider, the pattern is full!"
The powers that be need to remember something...... It's these thousands of airplanes coming from all over that make OSHKOSH what it is.
This year those few hundred caught at Ripon/Fisk, (which were a representation of all of us!), were treated as stepchildren which created an extremely dangerous situation out at Ripon/Fisk while who knows what was going on at the field.
OH, and I had to EDIT my post to add this comment. Their thought of letting aircraft that's landed at FDL back into the approach procedure FIRST is just laughable. Imagine you have many aircraft inbound and now ATC is going to announce they have to hold someplace while aircraft from FDL are allowed in first. A "first come first in" fly in that now at times could be metered/controlled who comes in first.... and OH YES.... reservations!!!! You've got to be kidding. Just thinking about all this is causing me to lose interest.
__________________
Paul Gray
Foley, Alabama
N729PG..... 450+ hrs
RV 7A, Lycoming 0 320 D1A, Sensenich FP propeller
pilotforfun2001@yahoo.com
VAF supporter $$$
Last edited by Paul 5r4 : 11-16-2018 at 11:33 PM.
|

11-16-2018, 11:38 PM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 120
|
|
I can appreciate the sentiment but it looks like this was overthought
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kyle Boatright
Someone is creating problems where none existed before. Bring back the experienced controllers and maximize the runway utilization for inbounds. That's the fix. That would have eliminated the 2018 train wreck.
|
+1 on that.
With no disrespect to those that were asked to review this and come up with a solution, bring back the experienced controllers, stick to the 1/2 mile in-trail separation, restrict the mass arrivals to a slot (good job on this one EAA) and focus heavily on training via YouTube and other means i.e. bring back the pilots who know how to follow the NOTAM (good job on this one too) and most of this goes away.
Dealing with soggy ground that prevents early turnoffs into the grass (eg. some type of well marked marston mats for temporary taxiways for use when soft ground exists) would help increase the number of landings as well.
Last edited by Flybipe : 11-16-2018 at 11:42 PM.
|

11-17-2018, 04:13 AM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Southeast
Posts: 569
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Walt
My only suggestion, do whatever it takes (pay them bonuses) to get the Osh experienced controllers back, IMO much of the havoc last year was due to the controllers at Fisk/tower.
|
In years past, working Airventure was a plum assignment for controllers. I understood that there was so much competition for it that controllers were limited to a maximum number of years working it so others (new to Oshkosh) could have a chance to do it.
Maybe the controllers' enthusiasm for working Airventure has waned and needs to be rekindled.
|

11-17-2018, 05:00 AM
|
 |
|
|
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Defiance, MO
Posts: 1,674
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by vic syracuse
Everybody is working real hard to prevent it from happening again--the FAA, EAA flight/ground Ops, and the various Councils.
Vic
|
Since I have not read in this thread anyone do it yet, I want to thank all those working very hard to help improve the arrival procedures in order to avoid last year?s perfect storm of problems.
Also thankful to have Vic, one of our own community, to be involved. Thanks Vic.
Fixing the problems is a thankless job that will probably only satisfy a small percent of us but I am confident that it is being handled by the very best that have more info than us and are trying their best to improve safety. It is everyone?s best interest to solve the problem and this healthy debate is great. Oshkosh is a grand adventure and these potential new arrive procedures are part of it.
__________________
Philip
RV-6A - 14+ years, 950+ hours
Based at 1H0 (Creve Coeur)
Paid dues yearly since 2007
|

11-17-2018, 05:13 AM
|
|
Super Moderator
|
|
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Locust Grove, GA
Posts: 2,626
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by alcladrv
In years past, working Airventure was a plum assignment for controllers. I understood that there was so much competition for it that controllers were limited to a maximum number of years working it so others (new to Oshkosh) could have a chance to do it.
Maybe the controllers' enthusiasm for working Airventure has waned and needs to be rekindled.
|
Team, I am trying to communicate everything here and sometimes I guess it isn't getting through. There was a very good reason why some of the experienced controllers weren't there last year and it had nothgin to do with fees or burnout. Not unlike any other "company" in the world where good people get promoted, that happens a lot within the FAA. Many good, even great, controllers have been promoted to jobs that for one reason or another left them "non-current" for controlling, so they were excluded from OSH this past year. The FAA is working inside, and with the Union, to correct this. Again, EVERYONE is working thier pillars to fix this.
As for this comment: Mass arrivals should have a time slot. Nothing should be able to change it including weather. If for some reason they can't make the slot then they fly the published approach like everyone else. No military flybys either.... remember the movie Top Gun..... "Negative Ghostrider, the pattern is full!"
I really wish some of you would take the time to read the whole thread before you post. I already addressed this. The mass arrivals will get one time slot, and if weather impedes it then they have to follow the procedure at a later date just like everyone else. I also addressed the military effect---they are being worked with as well.
I really appreciate all of the thoughts and inputs by everyone. But I am also asking for your patience and willingess to accept change. I can't emphasize enough how much time every week since OSH was spent on this, with lots of scenarios playing out. For those of you who continue to think that the current NOTAM works and it was only due to weather this time, I assure you that you are not correct in your thinking. This wasn't the only bad year we've had at OSH. This change is long overdue, and it was not just a knee-jerk reaction. Please don't forget that it is now a "proposal" to the FAA. We are also waiting to see what they come back with, as the FAA owns the NOTAM. However, they were very much a part of the planning process, and I assure you that they have a really god view into things that work and don't work at high-traffic events. They brought that experience to the table.
The current NOTAM has been in place for almost 30 years. OSH has grown substantially, and what worked then will not continue to work for the current growth along with projected future growth. This new procedure is a combination of new routes along with the initial use of new technology. As I mentioned, it is not set in stone and most likely will continue to morph over the next few years. Heck, we may not even see a repeat of the weather situation we had this past year for a long time, and that would be good.
We as pilots also need to think about our own arrival plans so that we all don't enbd up there at the same time. There just isn't enough concrete and airspace to make it all work. Plans are being created to incent pilots to arrive earlier and later, and those will be communicated once they are finished.
We are being told the NOTAM should be out by end of Q1 in order to meet some timelines for publication.
Again, thanks, and please trust that LOTS of people were involved in this for an inordinate amount of time, with the paramount theme being the safety of our members. Let's all work together and give it a success, with the attitude that everyone is primed for changes if needed. Nobody thinks it is perfect, but we have a lot of constraints to work with.
Step back, take a breath, and know we are all on the same team.
Vic
__________________
 Vic Syracuse
Built RV-4, RV-6, 2-RV-10's, RV-7A, RV-8, Prescott Pusher, Kitfox Model II, Kitfox Speedster, Kitfox 7 Super Sport, Just Superstol, DAR, A&P/IA, EAA Tech Counselor/Flight Advisor, CFII-ASMEL/ASES
Kitplanes "Unairworthy" monthly feature
EAA Sport Aviation "Checkpoints" column
EAA Homebuilt Council Chair/member EAA BOD
Author "Pre-Buy Guide for Amateur-Built Aircraft"
www.Baselegaviation.com
|

11-17-2018, 06:06 AM
|
 |
|
|
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Ottawa , Canada
Posts: 224
|
|
Weather windows.....
Hi All,
I have flown in to the show only twice in the last seven years, so take that into consideration in my comments....
It's hard to put my thoughts into words, so take this as a debrief of what I did last year.
I believe our arrival into OSH is controlled by us, as pilot in command.
Being a VFR pilot, I plan an arrival window that is 3-4 days wide with a higher abort weight towards the Sunday before the show.
Weather models have improved significantly over the years and probability maps gave me the opportunity to watch the ten day weather forecast approaching the show. https://www.wunderground.com/forecas...=localwx_10day
You could see the weather window closing on the weekend, and opening for the Thursday of the week before the show.
The predicted Sunday afternoon improvement of weather also told me that a Sunday arrival was out for me.(A good decision in hindsight)
That decision was made on Tuesday before the show...so if Thursday (the best day) deteriorated, I was in for a long drive instead.
I departed early Thursday morning for a noon arrival at OSH. I was concerned about traffic because the NOTAM was not yet in effect, and I was figuring there would be a lot of pilots who made the same weather decisions I did. (Except for those to the West of OSH, who of course were on the other side of the weather mess.) I decided to follow the FISK procedures anyway, assuming others would as well.
To my surprise, the pattern was quiet, and I parked beside four other RVs who arrived before me.
So this leads me to two questions:
Oshkosh occurs the same week every year. Most of us can plan a little extra time off from work to give us more arrival time options. Why didn't this happen?
I know that the NOTAM can't have its effective days changed easily, and its impossible to predict that. Is it possible to add a recommendation that pilots follow the FISK arrival outside of the NOTAM effective dates so that they don't wonder where the traffic might be if they arrive outside of the normal arrival times?
Just my two cents.
__________________
Chris Hepburn
Ottawa, ON
RV-8 C-GOGO FLYING
Renew 12/20
|

11-17-2018, 08:56 AM
|
 |
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: MKE
Posts: 1,519
|
|
Vic,
A big thanks to you and everyone else who worked on this. I'm sure a lot of work went into it. However, it has the look and feel of something designed by a committee. There are aspects of it that are no-brainers, like the mass arrival and military flyover restrictions. There are also parts that are head scratchers, like the whole bail-out procedure to Fond du Lac. I'm anxious to see more details about how this will work, because I am very skeptical that it will do more good than harm.
As for the ADSB/ increased weather requirements- this looks to me like nothing more than another way to incentivize folks to equip with ADSB out, rather than an attempt to really make things safer and more efficient on the arrival. In so doing, we've effectively shut out a large segment of the Antique/ Classic folks from even trying to make it to Oshkosh.
This might serve as a good first draft, but since it is already being sent to the FAA I'm afraid it's well past that point.
__________________
Jeff Point
RV-6, RLU-1 built & flying
Tech Counselor, Flight Advisor & President, EAA Chapter 18
Milwaukee
|

11-17-2018, 10:02 AM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 4,218
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by chepburn
Most of us can plan a little extra time off from work to give us more arrival time options. Why didn't this happen?
|
I'm sure it happens frequently. The issue this year was that people made it to the vicinity of Oshkosh and were not allowed to land despite available runway capacity and weather conditions within bounds for the arrival procedure. If 200 aircraft arrive at Ripon every hour and they only allow 100 aircraft to land, you get a backlog of holding aircraft.
That's what happened.
__________________
Kyle Boatright
Marietta, GA
2001 RV-6 N46KB
2019(?) RV-10
|

11-17-2018, 11:29 AM
|
 |
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Hubbard Oregon
Posts: 9,035
|
|
Vic,
I know you and many others likely spent a lot of personal time on this. Thank you for your efforts.
It is a complicated issue because of so many variable factors.
Hopefully no one on the committee gets discourage by the feedback. As has been said something had to change. I am also skeptical of some of the proposed details but as you said, it will be a work in progress. I am glad to see change happening.
I have flown the arrival into OSH nearly every year for the past 25 years. Every time I think I have seen it all I am proven wrong. In 2016, I was #2 to land on 27 behind the gear up Mooney. What I saw when I was forced to return to Ripon was nothing short of unbelievable.
No one thought it could be any worse but it apparently was this year. Because of One Week Wonder obligations I arrived earlier than usual (on Friday) but I have heard from colleagues and many of you, how crazy it was.
There are a couple of issues I have not seen addressed in the proposal.
1. Every year there are many instances that indicate a total breakdown in communication between the EAA people on the ground, and the FAA. I can't even count the times that Fisk controllers have been telling inbound traffic that the airport is closed to Gen Av, or home builts, or (fill in the blank) because parking is full, only to hear from reliable sources once the ground (Jeff in home built parking/camping being one of them), that they weren't closed. In 2017 I was only able to get past Fisk after convincing the controller I was a factory display aircraft. Once on the ground the homebuilt parking guys told us, "we aren't closed", and that they had no idea why Fisk was telling people that.
This in itself causes a jamb up because pilots in the air get frustrated, the freq. gets saturated with all of the back and forth that ensues, and any sense of organized flow begins to deteriorate quickly.
2. I think a procedure needs to be developed to deal with pilots that do not follow the arrival procedures. I have personally seen countless times over the years, pilots totally disrupting the arrival process. I have seen a mix of those that arrive clueless of the procedures or existence of an arrival NOTAM, and those that feel entitled above everyone else and just push their way into line. One year recently, I was on crosswind for the pattern to 18, just crossing the SW boundary of the airport when a Piper Saratoga blasted into the downwind, straight in from the south. At a high rate of speed that caused him to pass a couple of airplanes already in the downwind. This happened to occur exactly at the same time the tower was trying to merge in two war birds from the war bird arrival. It screwed up the flow so badly that 3 airplanes ended up going around, but the Saratoga was not one of them. He happily completed his mission, his passengers were likely clueless of the danger the pilot had put them in, and they got the obligatory (in a cheerful friendly voice) "welcome to OSH", while three other pilots are now exposed to additional risk needing to try and reenter the traffic flow. I was in the back and watched all of this unfold in front of me. I was truly convinced I would soon be filing an accident witness report.
And don't get me started about the times I have seen airplanes flying in the reverse direction on the Fisk/Ripon arrival corridor, with the pilot jambing up the freq. trying to find out what he is supposed to do to be allowed to land at OSH.
I think this type of thing causes a lot of the traffic flow degradation. I fail to understand why it has been tolerated for so long. Most likely because of the difficulty in tracking down the offenders, but I think if there was a desire to do so, a plan could be put in place. I bet after a couple of years, word would get around and people would think twice. Without some type of plan in place, my fear is the new procedures will just push more people to the dark side.
__________________
Opinions, information and comments are my own unless stated otherwise. They do not necessarily represent the direction/opinions of my employer.
Scott McDaniels
Van's Aircraft Engineering Prototype Shop Manager
Hubbard, Oregon
RV-6A (aka "Junkyard Special ")
|

11-17-2018, 01:12 PM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 4,218
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by sprucemoose
.
This might serve as a good first draft, but since it is already being sent to the FAA I'm afraid it's well past that point.
|
It took 3 months to get to this proposal. Maybe another 3 months listening to and incorporating the pilot feedback from here and elsewhere would be beneficial.
It is fine that someone is looking at how to relieve things when too many aircraft are holding. But that misses the main issue which is how to get more of those aircraft to the runway.
__________________
Kyle Boatright
Marietta, GA
2001 RV-6 N46KB
2019(?) RV-10
|
| Thread Tools |
Search this Thread |
|
|
|
| Display Modes |
Linear Mode
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 02:58 AM.
|