Comments for Arizona Flight Training Workgroup

Comment on Southwest Valley Practice Areas – ATCA by theamericanpilot

theamericanpilot — Fri, 02 Jul 2010 17:28:29 +0000

A maximum of two (2) ATCA aircraft are present at any given time in these areas for the purpose of airwork. There could be multiple non-ATCA aircraft maneuvering (airwork or transition) at the same time (including ATCA aircraft). BEWARE! Occasionally, the crews flying the Grobs or the F33C Bonanza may reserve any of these areas for high performance maneuvers training. It’s recommended that you state your position and intentions on the appropriate frequency before entering. Training Area “A” is now a published aerobatic box from the surface to 8,000MSL (refer to Airport/Facility Directory Special Notices).

Comment on Southwest Valley Practice Areas – ATCA by Rubert

Rubert — Fri, 23 Apr 2010 06:41:40 +0000

So what exactly is this meant to show me, espec. black areas – without a legend, this is meaningless

Comment on FAA Notice – Change CGZ Communication Procedures by Greg

Greg — Tue, 20 Apr 2010 23:29:06 +0000

Rex we can post the graphic from your email here too.
Matt- I was thinking of an overlay as well. You have the source maps, if we could create layers and overlay each I think it would be really interesting.

Comment on FAA Notice – Change CGZ Communication Procedures by Matt Miller

Matt Miller — Tue, 20 Apr 2010 22:44:58 +0000

Hi Guys,

Nice point about AYZUT. However, if we then apply the 10 nm rule to the VOR Rwy 5 at P08, that’s crossing Interstate 10 just east of Casa Grande (town). Between the two approaches, and uncertainty of how many VFR trainers even use the sector, I think we should either put a healthy floor on the sector, or drop it.

Also, what would everyone think about having the respective CTAF’s and/or typical altitudes on the two approach paths (CGZ GPS 23 & P08 VOR 5) where they pass?

Comment on FAA Notice – Change CGZ Communication Procedures by Greg

Greg — Tue, 20 Apr 2010 22:32:38 +0000

Most of this pre-dates my role. There is no doubt for by book flying of THAT approach, you should be on the CTAF. However, if I recall there has been discussion on this for some time since that Airspace airspace is very congested with traffic NOT practicing THAT approach. They may be arriving or departing Coolidge, Air work practice, transiting. Etc.
Tragically the accident there last year is an example of this. By the book, both aircraft collided while on the proper, yet different frequencies (CGZ CTAF,P08 CTAF, though exact calls were not confirmed). This was the type of situation everyone wanted to avoid, unfortunately it’s busy airspace no matter how you slice it….See and avoid…

Comment on FAA Notice – Change CGZ Communication Procedures by Rex

Rex — Tue, 20 Apr 2010 21:50:14 +0000

For those not familiar with the SE practice area, the particular geographic location of the hold at AYZUT is one of the most heavily traversed regions in the entire area. Traffic from IWA, CHD, FFZ, GYR, and DVT all traverse this area as they fly from their home airports to AVQ, Pinal, and Tucson area airports. AYZUT also shares proximity to the practice hold for KCKY radio beacon.

The current design of the procedure serves to protect those with only one radio. It helps aid in separation for VFR practice approaches. As we all are aware of, the AIM is non-regulatory in nature. The FAA basically wants us to change or remove our listed procedure to align with the AIM and give pilots the option or recomendation to communicate on both frequencies.

Those who are fortunate enough to have TIS-B or ADS-B are actually able to “see” all of the traffic that is out there, whether they are talking or not. I will try and get some PDARS information for the area from Tracon to show the amount of traffic in the area.

Some food for thought.

Comment on FAA Notice – Change CGZ Communication Procedures by benw

benw — Tue, 20 Apr 2010 21:21:29 +0000

For those not familiar with this procedure, it can be viewed online at: http://www.naco.faa.gov/d-tpp/1004/06656G23.PDF.

Notice that AYZUT is 10 NM from the MAP, or approach end of Runway 23.

If the AIM were followed strictly, then pilots should be on CTAF at AYZUT, or on the inbound holding leg to AYZUT, and announcing their position and intentions for Runway 23.

For Runway 5 procedures, we usually are on CTAF in the practice hold (not the practice area frequency).

So, for argument’s sake, why should pilots remain on the Practice Area frequency while in the published hold at AYZUT?

Comment on FAA Notice – Change CGZ Communication Procedures by Greg

Greg — Tue, 20 Apr 2010 13:01:03 +0000

Thanks Rex. good comments.

Comment on FAA Notice – Change CGZ Communication Procedures by Greg

Greg — Tue, 20 Apr 2010 13:00:07 +0000

Previously on the site the procedure recommended was … “When flying the GPS 23 approach into Casa Grande, pilots should make position reports on 122.85 until crossing TAFYE inbound on the approach. At this point switch over to 122.70 (CGZ CTAF) for position reports”…So basically you would be on the practice area frequency at AYZUT and your hold and inbound to TAFYE

Comment on FAA Notice – Change CGZ Communication Procedures by Rex

Rex — Tue, 20 Apr 2010 04:17:38 +0000

If anyone is interested, the factual from the NTSB concerning the recent accident near AYZUT is published at the following web address:

http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/brief2.asp?ev_id=20090909X44833&ntsbno=WPR09FA437A&akey=1