What's new
Van's Air Force

Don't miss anything! Register now for full access to the definitive RV support community.

Bridgeport (XBP) advisory -- no formation flying

chrispratt

chrispratt

Well Known Member
It's been a few weeks since I've flown to Bridgeport, Texas but I noticed a new message on the AWOS Saturday (Feb 14) that states Formation Flying and Aerobatics are prohibited in the Bridgeport traffic area. (That's not an exact quote).

I know that some of the local RVers like to fly formation and use Bridgeport to refuel because the prices are usually the lowest around ($2.44/gal on Saturday). Could the notice be referring to formation breaks over the field? I'm assuming so. So if this is the first you've heard of it and you fly formation into XBP, you might want to be sure to check AWOS on your next arrival.

Chris
 
We have Geese

I was wondering if with would get a anouncement on our asos that we dont want formations of geese flying in our traffic pattern also. BRL


Jim Knight
Burlington Iowa
RV-6 350 hours
 
Interesting. I wonder what authority they believe that they have to issue this kind of restriction. I assume it is a publicly owned, public use airport.
 
sprucemoose said:
Interesting. I wonder what authority they believe that they have to issue this kind of restriction. I assume it is a publicly owned, public use airport.
Click to expand...
For the aerobatic portion, FAR part 91.303(c)and (e).
 
Last edited:
Mel said:
FAR part 91.303(c)and (e).
Click to expand...

Interesting. 91.303 covers aerobatic flight (yes I had to look it up too.) While we could debate all day whether an overhead break constitutes aerobatic flight, if this were the standard, then every overhead ever done at any field, towered or not, would be a violation. Clearly this is not the case, so I wonder if they are using something else to justify it.

Or, put another way, I don't believe they have any authority to do this.

Mel, since you are local, do you have any insight?
 
Authority

I would suggest you call the airport manager and politely ask for the whole story.

Manager: DAVID TURNBOW
900 THOMPSON
BRIDGEPORT, TX 76426
Phone 940-683-5906
OR 940-683-4880.

John Clark
RV8 N18U "Sunshine"
KSBA
 
Chris is right- I called the airport's AWOS phone number, and there is a notice that aerobatic and formation flight is prohibited. The AWOS phone number is 940-683-8027 if anyone wants to give it a listen.

At the risk of sounding overly paranoid- this is something that needs to be addressed. We are all well aware of the current controversy in North Las Vegas Airport, where they are seeking federal approval to ban experimentals from operating there. The feds have the exclusive right to regulate what happens at these airports, and for good reason. We could not function with a patchwork of local regulations governing operations at airports. Regardless of your feelings about formation flying (let's not get that debate going in this thread) you should be concerned about this.
 
Bridgeport Traffic

They have posted warning signs at the pumps at Bridgeport stating standard traffic patterns only, or some similar wording, due to high traffic volume coming in for fuel. There is also another sign at the pumps requesting that after fueling your plane, move it to the tie-down area away from the pumps. I have been in line at XBP when someone has decided to show off their T6 or even an RV :eek:, and we waited and waited for them to move so we could fuel up and get out of there.
They have also closed the north end of the ramp to aircraft parking so there are very few parking spots if you plan to stay awhile, like taking their courtesy car in to town for food!
A couple weeks ago there was traffic calling a left downwind for 35 and a Cherokee inbound from the west called that he was going to cross mid-field and enter a left downwind for 35. After a few seconds of no response by anyone in the pattern (I was about a mile behind the Cherokee) I mentioned that if he crossed mid-field he would be left for 17 and landing against the established traffic. He said "Oh, then I'll turn right and follow the other traffic for 35." :eek:
With their low fuel prices the place can turn into a "flying circus" on a nice sunny day. IMHO, I think the manager may just be trying to keep things safe for all, but it's a hard task to accomplish!
Let's all be safe out there! :)
 
mrreddick said:
They have posted warning signs at the pumps at Bridgeport stating standard traffic patterns only, or some similar wording, due to high traffic volume coming in for fuel. There is also another sign at the pumps requesting that after fueling your plane, move it to the tie-down area away from the pumps. I have been in line at XBP when someone has decided to show off their T6 or even an RV :eek:, and we waited and waited for them to move so we could fuel up and get out of there.
They have also closed the north end of the ramp to aircraft parking so there are very few parking spots if you plan to stay awhile, like taking their courtesy car in to town for food!
A couple weeks ago there was traffic calling a left downwind for 35 and a Cherokee inbound from the west called that he was going to cross mid-field and enter a left downwind for 35. After a few seconds of no response by anyone in the pattern (I was about a mile behind the Cherokee) I mentioned that if he crossed mid-field he would be left for 17 and landing against the established traffic. He said "Oh, then I'll turn right and follow the other traffic for 35." :eek:
With their low fuel prices the place can turn into a "flying circus" on a nice sunny day. IMHO, I think the manager may just be trying to keep things safe for all, but it's a hard task to accomplish!
Let's all be safe out there! :)
Click to expand...

Considering I live next to our un-towered airport, under the pattern; and see it from the ground and air; I fully agree!

L.Adamson
 
Please don't

All I'm asking is please don't screw up the great fuel prices. I have bought litterally hundreds of gallons of fuel from them and they are saving me a great deal of money.
 
About 9 months ago, they tried banning formation flights, arrivals, depatures at my local airport. KEWB (towered class D)

We took this to our local AOPA airport watch representative and within a month's time we won the right to fly formation again.

It turns out the airport commission was the ones behind it, but they lost big time. I was told that they had no right to impose this kind of restriction without the approval of the FAA.

These days it seems like you can never rest and are always having to fight to defend your freedoms.
 
I hope this thread doesn't get into a debate over loosing rights. What I mean by that is, if an airport gets busy, there is NO place for formation and expecially overhead breaks. What??? well they don't let you do that at an airport that has a big fly in going on, like Arlington or Osh. So get a grip, this is for safety sake. You guys that fly the formation can just split up and single file land. Don't bully the single flier and push your way. Not trying to be outspoken, but things like this are set up for a reason, live with it.
 
sprucemoose said:
Regardless of your feelings about formation flying (let's not get that debate going in this thread) you should be concerned about this.
Click to expand...
Steve,

While I agree with your thoughts about formations giving way to other traffic in the pattern, that's not really what this is about. This is about an airport trying to restrict operations at an airport, where they have no legal right to do so. That is what we need to be concerned about. Again, look at the situation at North Las Vegas that is playing out right now.

If an airport manager (or whoever made this decision) feels that they can get away with this, what is to stop the next guy from banning taildraggers, or experimentals, or ...
 
Sorry, I don't buy it. This is NOT the same as the Nevada stuff. This is a pure case of busy airport and standard landing is needed.
 
Bridgeport is not a "busy" airport. It may be used often as a fuel stop, but the traffic doesn't warrant a tower, so "busy" doesn't apply here. Bridgeport also has a residential community attached to it via taxiway, so while it is a public airport, there is a "private" aspect to it in this respect.

Additionally, an overhead pattern is extremely efficient, and can actually handle many more aircraft at once than a rectangular pattern. It is CERTAINLY NOT aerobatics in the pattern.

If I had to guess, as a person who has actually been to Bridgeport, I'm guessing the "locals" got their feathers ruffled over a "busy" day in "their" pattern, went to the manager, and all of a sudden there is a restriction.

This is absolutely about "control" and ones ability to do something within their legal rights/responsibilities under the FARs. Where do you draw the line...like was posted, what's next?

Joe
 
If this is true than I agree with doing something. I remember one time I went to a local airport early in the morning to get some practice on all runways with different winds. Nobody, I mean nobody was in the pattern. This was before 7:30 in the morning. 4 days later I get a letter stating that if I flew irratic like this again I would be turned in the FSDO, oh and they said they had multiple complaints, ya right, this is in farm country. So I guess we need to look at both sides of the story here. Also, if there really is a problem with traffic because of the fuel pumps, I guess they can always raise the price up or get rid of it. On that airport above, I'm not the only one getting flack from the airport manager, many other pilots have gotten zinged by em' even the student pilots with too many touch and go's.
 
Steve--

Did you ask him/them what the issue was with your pattern work? What made it "irratic"? What authority they had with regard to operations at the airport? If you're not doing anything wrong, there is nothing wrong with taking the high road and questioning the accuser.

Sometimes I wonder what the motivation is to an airport manager who, for whatever reason, wants to drive traffic away from his airport...:confused:
Turn it into a ghost town, tumbleweed airport that doesn't require a manager?

Don't even get me started with crossing the runway at 52F in a vehicle!


Joe
 
I don't go for shooting matches. I just went to another airport, one with a control tower and they let me do the touch and go's with opposite winds without any problems, they always ask me to come back. As for the other airport, I think they like the money they get for improvements, but want no traffic. I guess the old FXXXX control the airways.
 
Mike S said:
The feds have been hammering GA airports over this for quite a while now.

Dont blame this one on the manager.
Click to expand...



Mike--

I told you not to get me started...:rolleyes:


Supposedly, this has nothing to do with the Feds, and everything to do with the OWNER of the runway ( he owns the runway, the hangars are privately owned), and his insistence on a (DR. Evil...) $1M insurance policy to get a permit (from him) to drive a vehicle across. Although he himself has been know to leave forklifts on the runway unattended...yes forklifts. Needless to say, there are a number of business that this affects daily at 52F.

Once again, not an FAA issue (until now ;))

Doug, Monkey, Grady, Tina, etc, etc, can fill in the holes, but this was what I was referring to.

Back to the garage-

Joe
 
allbee said:
As for the other airport, I think they like the money they get for improvements, but want no traffic. I guess the old FXXXX control the airways.
Click to expand...

IF, they take the money, then it's a publicly funded airport and they can't impose local restrictions like this.
This really need to be nipped in the bud. We as a community better watch out for ourselves because it's certain most local politicians see us as a pain in the B@#T
 
I would really like to know the full story about why they felt this restriction was needed. Seems like a whole lot of backstory that we're missing out on.
 
I fly over 300 hrs a year and I've seen quit a bit. Meaning people on the ground that think the airwaves are theirs. Yup, those people are generally pilots, the worse are the ones that can't fly anymore for one reason or other.
I have a thing in my brain that says, the worse enemy for a pilot is unfortunatly another pilot. That being said, we need to be careful when going into any airport. I have a rule that if there is even one airplane in the pattern, I fly normal pattern. That doesn't mean I don't do short approaches. But it does mean that I fly proper direction and radio calls. Head others and be nice. The last thing we need is bad press for the small airplane. Ya I know, there are so many pilots that can be rude. If we choose to be giving and nice than things will go better for everybody. Now that mess in Nevada, we need to spend our time changing or helping with that one, it is definately a pull against our rights. It's going to take an act of God to change the rural airport and how they do things. Why because every one of them usually has a mother hen watching over them.
 
whoa nelly

Easy guys.... I feel a thread drift going on.... maybe we ought to let this one rest because it's not 90% RV related and it's drifting pretty good (not to mention I'm sure we don't have all the facts). I know there are a lot of bad things going on at many many airports because I've seen them. Lets just use this as an opportunity to go contact the AOPA and the related groups and get these things ironed out locally. I agree on the fact that lots of rights are under assault and we need to always be on watch for this. I encourage each and every one of us to take responsibility for our own areas and network with each other to stop the little fiefdoms from ruining everybody else's party... and yes... Jerry I do agree with you(not sure if it's legal but I do agree)...:)
Best
Brian
 
Last edited:
Perspective from a Local

Last week several of us had a conversation with one of the people actually based on XBP. It turns out that the "notams" on the AWOS actually come from ONE local pilot, who happens to own the land on which the AWOS is stationed. This one pilot has decided on his own to attempt to restrict operations at the airport, and the locals are not happy with him. I didn't quite understand the legal implications of why he is able to add his own commentary to the AWOS broadcast, but it evidently has to do with his owning the property.

The AWOS broadcast can state that no left-handed pilots flying yellow painted experimental aircraft are allowed to use the field, but this does not give such a statement the force of regulation. This is a public use airport, and operations allowed by FAR's are allowed unless the FAA issues a notam restricting something.

Pat
 
As someone who is a member of the local airport authority of an airport that has struggle with a bad reputation that we are trying to change. We have to end this soon. It can be very detrimental to the airport if it starts to get a bad reputation. It doesn't matter if gas is cheap after a while people will stop coming there and it will a struggle to get folks back. Our little airport use to have a manger that didn't want to sell fuel because that meant he had to buy more. CRAZY! As for not thinking this isn't RV related, alot of us fly formation (or want to) and this kind of stuff is bad of the RV culture.

On a side note, we had a local Township elected official think that he could make the airspace above his house a restricted area so them darn "allderlites" couldn't fly over his house and crash into it. The FAA got to tell him that he had no authority not to mention a huge abuse of power.
 
4kilo said:
Last week several of us had a conversation with one of the people actually based on XBP. It turns out that the "notams" on the AWOS actually come from ONE local pilot, who happens to own the land on which the AWOS is stationed. This one pilot has decided on his own to attempt to restrict operations at the airport, and the locals are not happy with him. I didn't quite understand the legal implications of why he is able to add his own commentary to the AWOS broadcast, but it evidently has to do with his owning the property.

The AWOS broadcast can state that no left-handed pilots flying yellow painted experimental aircraft are allowed to use the field, but this does not give such a statement the force of regulation. This is a public use airport, and operations allowed by FAR's are allowed unless the FAA issues a notam restricting something.

Pat
Click to expand...

THis is absolutely wrong. If I was flying there I would do it anyway and say the heck with him. Of course I would have a bunch of other pilots next to me, so it wouldn't be just me. Like I said, the worse enemy of a pilot is another pilot, unfortunatly.
 
Formation flight welcome at XBP

Formation flight welcome, fuel is now $3.19
Saturday fly in 8:00-10:00 am
Free Burritos n drinks
Come one come all.
 
I was at that event and it was a fun time. Lots of airplanes and no complaining going on. The airport is actively trying to re-build its relationship with pilots. I would encourage you guys to give XBP another chance. It is a nice little airport now that the runway is extended and I can confirm fuel is still $3.19 which is respectable.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top