FAA closing 149 towers

[Brad]

Under orders to trim hundreds of millions of dollars from its budget, the Federal Aviation Administration released a final list Friday of 149 air traffic control towers that it will close at small airports around the country starting early next month.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/03/22/faa-to-close-14-air-traffic-towers-citing-sequester

Here's the full list:

http://www.faa.gov/news/media/fct_closed.pdf

Fly safe boys and girls!

[PHall]

So they become "uncontrolled" airports, big whoop. Learn to use Unicom.

The towers to be closed are manned with contractor personnel, not FAA government employees.
If the owners of the airport want to pay the controllers wages, the tower can stay open.

[NIN]

There is a contract tower at Nashua Airport that will be closing.  Nashua is pretty busy, but it has just ONE runway.  Folks who fly know how to get into and out of uncontrolled airports just fine.   Its not like they have scheduled service into most of these airports.

[cm42]

KOSU is going to be pretty interesting...



Student pilots, private jet aircraft, medical helicopters, and about 10 miles from a mildly busy Class C, somewhat north of eastbound finals.

[Spaceman3750]

There is a contract tower at Nashua Airport that will be closing.  Nashua is pretty busy, but it has just ONE runway.  Folks who fly know how to get into and out of uncontrolled airports just fine.   Its not like they have scheduled service into most of these airports.

One (BMI) actually has a fair amount of scheduled service, mostly codeshare "Express" flights, but they'll do fine.

[bflynn]

KOSU is going to be pretty interesting...



Student pilots, private jet aircraft, medical helicopters, and about 10 miles from a mildly busy Class C, somewhat north of eastbound finals.

At 187 operations per day (airnav), that's 7 per hour or about 1 every 9 minutes.  Certainly it gets busier during certain times, but any popular airport does.  Our Saturday morning push - or the entire day if the weather is nice - has 2-3 aircraft stacked up waiting to take off and another 1-2 in the pattern practicing and we manage quite nicely without a tower.

The multiple runway will just mean you have to keep your head on a swivel, IF they keep all the runways open.  Personally, I don't like multiple runway uncontrolled airports, I find too many places I should be looking...but if it's the right place to land, then it's the right place.

[bosshawk]

I truly get tired of the press making a big deal out of not having a control tower operating.  For some reason the several thousand airports in the US that don't have towers and never have, manage to get along just fine.  There is no doubt that a tower makes things safer at an airport that has a lot of traffic, but it isn't the end of the world for the pilots.  The last time that I checked, the controllers were not flying the aircraft.

I live fairly near Castle Airport(the former Castle AFB) and the big issue there is a flight school that caters to Chinese, Korean and Viet Namese students.  Those kids have a tough time speaking English and an even tougher time understanding the language, so I will be extra cautious going into and out of Castle. 

[redfox98]

Better start reading the AFD.  Some of these airports have dual facing ILS systems, which the tower switches when the winds change. also bunch of the AFD entries say ILS unmonitored when the tower is closed, as most closed at 10pm and reopened at 7am.  Will those ILS systems now be unmonitored? The controllers provided limited weather obs capability.  For VFR not much of a problem. For IFR-- you decide.  Read the notams starting Apr 7. If it doesn't get bogged down.  I do notice most of those kept open have something of a military presence like Rosecrans- in St. Joe, MO.

[bflynn]

Better start reading the AFD.  Some of these airports have dual facing ILS systems, which the tower switches when the winds change. also bunch of the AFD entries say ILS unmonitored when the tower is closed, as most closed at 10pm and reopened at 7am.  Will those ILS systems now be unmonitored? The controllers provided limited weather obs capability.  For VFR not much of a problem. For IFR-- you decide.  Read the notams starting Apr 7. If it doesn't get bogged down.  I do notice most of those kept open have something of a military presence like Rosecrans- in St. Joe, MO.

For IFR aircraft, they still get their box and controllers will monitor that.  But yes, there is an issue with non-IFR aircraft that don't appear on radar, there always has been at all the uncontrolled airports.  Flying on a MVFR day, you could break out and find another airplane right in front of you.  That isn't a control tower issue, it's a VFR/IFR issue.

I think what we might expect is to see some of these airports reconfigured over the coming years for safer operation.  I've seen the list of the five in North Carolina and I really can't argue with any of them.  The only reason they have towers is because they have a few commercial flights every day.  Commercial flights can land perfectly fine using the CTAF as long as the pilots work themselves into the traffic pattern.

[Critical AOA]

Three interesting closures:
FDK – Home of AOPA
OSH – Home of EAA / Airventure
LAL – Home of Sun 'n Fun

[Eclipse]

^ Presumably those private activities are more then capable of bringing in contract controllers during the couple weeks of their events.

[PHall]

^ Presumably those private activities are more then capable of bringing in contract controllers during the couple weeks of their events.

These towers had contract controllers, that's why the FAA decided to cut them.
It's easy to get rid of a contractor, darn near impossible to get rid of a government employee.

[Eclipse]

My point was that they aren't going to cancel either of those activities because of lack of controllers.  The activities will simply bring them back for those weeks.

FDK's actually pretty busy, and I would imagine the fact that the tower isn't even a year old will cause some gnashing of teeth.

[coudano]

some/many of those towers close during off-peak hours anyway.
COU i think closes at 9pm

Apparently commercial air carriers can fly in and out of airports without towers?
I know some small rural airports without towers take kingairs down to the bigger ones
but like a CRJ or something, into an uncontrolled field?  i guess... (why not?)

[PHall]

some/many of those towers close during off-peak hours anyway.
COU i think closes at 9pm

Apparently commercial air carriers can fly in and out of airports without towers?
I know some small rural airports without towers take kingairs down to the bigger ones
but like a CRJ or something, into an uncontrolled field?  i guess... (why not?)

They can make the advisory calls on UNICOM just as well as anybody else.
Seen it done in a lot of places. Matter of fact it's very common in many areas of the Pacific. (i.e. Kwajalien, Pago Pago, Roi Namour)

[OldGuard]

Looks like Fullerton Airport will be one of the 149 towers.


http://www.ocregister.com/articles/airport-500312-fullerton-faa.html

[wuzafuzz]

some/many of those towers close during off-peak hours anyway.
COU i think closes at 9pm

Apparently commercial air carriers can fly in and out of airports without towers?
I know some small rural airports without towers take kingairs down to the bigger ones
but like a CRJ or something, into an uncontrolled field?  i guess... (why not?)

I used to work at KOXR and the airlines operated after the tower closed each day.  Some of them were flying Brasilias without the tower's help.  Now I live near KFNL where Allegiant Airlines routinely operated MD-82'ss without the benefit of a tower.  They left last year though.

[NIN]

The airport near me, KCON, has no tower.  For at least two weekends a year, it becomes one of the busiest airports in New England as NASCAR's Air Force migrates up from North Carolina for the races at NHIS.  Everything from King Airs and PC-12s to Saabs and Gulfstreams.  (Heck, Roush Racing, I think, used to have at least one 727 they'd fly in with.  It would be parked wayyy on the otherside of the field on the closed runway, and everybody within a mile would know they were leaving since they'd taxi right to very threshold of 17, point that behemoth down the runway, and spool all three to 100%, hold it in the brakes for as long as possible, then rocket away.  I'm pretty sure they used all 6005 ft to their full advantage)  Everybody, including all the MD500s and Bell 204s shuttling people from the track to the airport ramp, are on the Unicom talking to one another.

Same goes for KLCI up north of the track.  They have one runway and no tower.  Dozens of jets and light turboprops and no issues with traffic.

[Cliff_Chambliss]

The last time I bothered to count there were in the neighborhood of 5,200 public use airports in the US.  Of this number only 530 had operating control towers. 

(Request:  Please consider saying non-towered as opposed to uncontrolled.  In fact non-towered airports require more self control, precision, and attention to detail than do towered airports.)

These non-tower airports range from such mega field as Addison, Al. (a delightful grass municipal airport but read the AFD Remarks:  "Runway marked by white cones, Runway length and width subject to change without notice"). to some really large ex-military facilities.

My point is other than what I perceive as political grandstanding the overall effect should be negligible.  However, there are a number of pilots who have operated out of towered airports for so long and they have in fact abdicated their authority as Pilots in Command to ATC 'control' for so long that they just will not go to a non-towered airfield if there is any way at all to avoid it.  (Suggestion:  amend Form 5 checkouts to require landings and takeoffs from both towered and non-towered airfields.)

So, as the 149 towers close, maybe it's time to step back and review some FAA Publications such as 14CFR91, AIM, AFD, PHAK, AC's, etc pertainiong to non-towered operations, to pay a little more attention, be a little more considerate, think a bit more, and be a more aware of what the other guy is doing.

[Cliff_Chambliss]

Adding a bit to history:
  The first "Control towers" were not put in place by the FAA , CAA, or CAB.  The first control towers were put in place by indivial airports.  The present runway numbering system was not created by any government agency, it was developed by one individual airport and later adopted and made "code" by the Air Commerce Act of 1926. 
  In all things aviation advances, improvements, and innovations have come from the private sctor and not the government.  Pilots, aircrew, and airport operators will find a safe efficient way to keep the planes moving safely.

[wuzafuzz]

On a positive note, that's 149 airports that just opened up to Sport Pilots without the ATC endorsement. 

[redfox98]

The sad part is the loss of a paid for infrastructure. While the controllers were contract, at most of these airports,  the tower buildings and equipment, radios, voice switches, remote radar displays, engine generators, flight strip printers, weather displays are all FAA owned and maintained by FAA technicians. We as taxpayers have already supplied millions to equip and even upgrade some of these, like FDX.  Our closing tower at ALN just qualified for a remote radar display 3 years ago.  The contract controllers are leaving, but their salaries were a fraction  of what an FAA controller makes. Quite a few of these folks are retired military.  The tower buildings and equipment will still need some level of maintenance. Some of the equipment inside will still be operational- pilot controls for lighting, RCO to FSS,  most of these, when they closed at night, their tower freq was switched so it could be controlled by the nearest approach facility when they closed. So they wont be able to turn off the HVAC.  Most only had 3-4 controllers on staff. When they were FAA towers in the 70s, they had 10-15. 
I don't for a second believe they are saving the amount of money they claim, and the paid for infrastructure is wasted. Kind of like being told to ground your C182 cause there is no gas money.     We will probably hear more as they proceed with these phased in closings.

[coudano]

I'm told some insurance policies stipulate atc

[lordmonar]

Redfox......money spent last year......is last year's money....no one cares about abandoing millions of dollars of equipment....because the government does not look at it as capitol investment.

The costs to maintain the airport lighting equipment and radios will be passed to the FBO/Airport authority.

As for the contractor vs government employee.......one of the reasons why the FAA contracted out the ATC jobs was becasue it was cheaper in the first place and it is easier to simply terminate the contract then it is to lay off a government employee.

[Nuke52]

I don't for a second believe they are saving the amount of money they claim, and the paid for infrastructure is wasted. Kind of like being told to ground your C182 cause there is no gas money.     We will probably hear more as they proceed with these phased in closings.

The phrase "government savings" is a sham each and every time you hear it.  It's all a shell game with the money just being diverted to someone else's pocket.  These so-called "savings" NEVER materialize, especially this time with sequestration--it's all just political theater with both "sides" of our corrupt political machine doing their best to distract us from the real financial problems which will eventually devour what's left of our once-great nation.

[Critical AOA]

One of my concerns will be the corporate jockey who is accustomed to the controllers at certain airfields accommodating their straight in approaches by having those in the traffic pattern extend downwind or make other allowances for the jets.  Now imagine the same tower closed and a Cessna 150 is on downwind and about to turn base when a jet calls in on a long straight in final.  This might be his first call as center just let him go and he has not been monitoring CTAF.  The jet jockey who is accustomed to getting his way in the past, now will need to be prepared to modify his approach as the Cessna is likely to maintain his right of way and complete his pattern and land while the jet is closing fast.  And the Cessna would be within the rules to do so.  Throw in the possibility of some NORDO guys who had not been flying into this airport while it was controlled and things get even more interesting.  Personalities, past expectations and other factors could make things interesting. 

[a2capt]

..and how is that scenario different from the first time the jet jockey goes into a field that has been traditionally uncontrolled all along?

Listen first, or ASK - "anyone in the pattern?" ..

Like a local airport that is on that list, where fire operations are based. I hated going there just because of the way the fire people acted. They had no problem taxiing right past you at the hold short line, the hell with what you said on the radio, that you're about to take the runway, next thing a fire aircraft just goes in between you and takes it, makes a hot dog departure and a really low pass downwind. 

No, there was not an active fire. That was drill or screwing off flying.

The opening of the tower fixed that, now I fear.. it's going to go right back.

[Critical AOA]

The scenario is different in that they are accustomed to receiving the royal treatment at certain airports but not others so they quite possibly will have a mindset or a certain expectation at the formerly controlled field that they don't have at the uncontrolled ones until they shake off that mindset and lose the expectation.  It won't be all jet pilots and even the ones it does affect should shake it off rather quickly.  However, if you don't think that the first flight into such an airport there is not potential for this to occur, you are wrong.  It comes down to expectation bias, norms, complacency and other human factors. 

Your experience with the fire pilots is not much different than what is experienced in the mid south with crop dusters.    They rarely make radio calls, fly nonstandard traffic patterns and as you are rolling at the the end of the runway and applying power after announcing your departure on CTAF they will make an intersection take off right in front of you without saying a thing.  However I do not let it deter me from flying into those airports.  I know how they are so I adapt.  I keep a sharp eye out (which I normally do anywhere, even at a controlled field), fly standard patterns and make all the right radio calls.   

I currently fly from both controlled and uncontrolled airports and will continue to do so.  However, I will admit that I will probably have a little trepidation when I first fly into any of the airports shortly after losing its tower. 

[Pump Scout]

Three interesting closures:
OSH – Home of EAA / Airventure

My understanding of Airventure week is that the contracted controllers are replaced by FAA controllers for the week. In theory, Airventure shouldn't be affected by this. Honestly, even though OSH has huge runways, the rest of the year they're not overly busy. Any commercial traffic goes elsewhere, and general aviation activities are only as busy as many other airports around WI that are without towers.

[♠SARKID♠]

My point was that they aren't going to cancel either of those activities because of lack of controllers.  The activities will simply bring them back for those weeks.

FDK's actually pretty busy, and I would imagine the fact that the tower isn't even a year old will cause some gnashing of teeth.

They bring in a temporary tower and controllers to run FDL (Fond Du Lac) just to the south of OSH during Airventure, normally an uncontrolled airport.  I agree that they'll do the same for OSH.

[bflynn]

I looked up the towers being closed in NC.  All of them have less traffic than my home field, which is uncontrolled.  Only one of the five has regularly scheduled commercial flights.  I flew into one of them a few weeks ago and couldn't figure out why they had a tower.

The fact is, it is PILOTS, not ATC that make flying safe.  If ATC was required for safety, we'd never fly without it.

[Walkman]

Not a pilot, so this may be a dumb question...

Heard the part of a local news report this morning that one of the towers closing was in the next metro over (20 minutes east). What caught my attention is that this airport is home the WMUs school of aviation as well as the ANG base. I'm sure the ANG base is fine, but it seemed to me that closing a tower on a very active airfield with college student pilots isn't the safest idea. Am I overreacting?

[a2capt]

About the only thing it will deprive them of is frequent access to the radio with ATC interaction.

There are many more heavy flight school operations operating out of uncontrolled fields. The system is absolutely setup to handle it.

[Walkman]

About the only thing it will deprive them of is frequent access to the radio with ATC interaction.

There are many more heavy flight school operations operating out of uncontrolled fields. The system is absolutely setup to handle it.

Cool. Just wonderin'. Thanks.

[Woodsy]

^ Presumably those private activities are more then capable of bringing in contract controllers during the couple weeks of their events.

I can tell you that LAL will have controllers for Sun n Fun. 

[SJFedor]

Not a pilot, so this may be a dumb question...

Heard the part of a local news report this morning that one of the towers closing was in the next metro over (20 minutes east). What caught my attention is that this airport is home the WMUs school of aviation as well as the ANG base. I'm sure the ANG base is fine, but it seemed to me that closing a tower on a very active airfield with college student pilots isn't the safest idea. Am I overreacting?

Maybe a little. Murfreesboro (MBT) is a non-towered field with MTSU's aerospace program, as well as the othefr traffic that's in and out of there, and they manage just fine w/o a tower.

Shame that Columbus, IN (BAK) was on the list, that's the field that NESA MAS uses. Granted, the other 50 weeks of the year it's not a terribly busy place.