A.K.A. “our flight can’t take off/land right now because Air Force One is in the vicinity”.
My understanding is that this is done to maximize safety for The Prez, although it seems counter-intuitive to me. How could a policy forcing all incoming flights to circle around the airport be safer for anyone? Wouldn’t the increased risk of a midair collision offset the presumed gain in safety from… what? another plane inadvertently sharing a runway with AF1? (And the midair collision risk isn’t the end of it; you’re talking about a massive disruption of flight schedules, with their rippling effects across the system – delays, missed connections, and probably some scheduling-related safety risks.) What are the safety pros and cons involved? Are there any Doper air traffic controllers or airline employees who can comment on this?
This policy affected me once when flying into Newark. AF1 was also landing, so my plane flew stomach-churningly tight circles around NWK for forty-five minutes, at night, and in heavy weather (turbulence – what fun!). Newark is a very busy airport; 45 minute’s worth of delayed landings makes for a lot of planes in holding patterns. Whether it was the turbulence or my morbid worrying that was most responsible for my nausea was, no pun intended, a tossup…
IANAAP (I am not an airline pilot) but as a private pilot I have some small insight into this matter.
Prior to 9/11, there were restrictions placed on air traffic in the vicinity of AF1. Post 9/11, however, they have become more onerous.
As I said, I am not an airline pilot, but as a private pilot I am famillar with the “temporary flight restrictions” or TFR’s that go up around potential terrorist targets, sensitive areas, natural disasters, and the body of the POTUS. For us small-fry pilots, there is a 30-mile no-fly zone around the president. The Air Force has authority to shoot us down if we violate it, although they have not taken matters to that extreme (yet). The Prez may be safer, I’m not sure I am. Anyhoo…
The President’s scheduled appearances are frequently known in advance - AOPA’s website, as one example, usually has a running banner with current and anticipated TFR’s. As an example, when I looked in just now they said that on June 4 (that’s tomorrow as I type) the POTUS is expected to be in both Chicago, IL and Grand Rapids, MI. Which tells me that no matter how nice tomorrow might be, I’m not flying. Presumably, the airlines also have access to this in advance and (one would hope) would adjust their schedules accordingly. One would hope. As you yourself know, this is not always the case.
Yes, this is done in the name of Presidential security. Does it really help? DamnifIknow. I can think of scenarios for which a 30 mile radius around AF1 would not prevent mayhem (and no, I’m not sharing). On the other hand, I can think of some things it would discourage, too. I don’t know, but I suspect a lot of this comes from the Secret Service, who might know a lot about protecting people but probably know jack about aviation. Bottom line - all the SS cares about is the President - they really don’t give a damn if YOU get killed in a mid-air as long as the POTUS is safe.
Airport traffic movement is stopped at an airport when the POTUS is on AF1 or very near it. For example, when AF1 lands at LAX and the POTUS goes to give a speech somewhere air traffic can resume as soon as he is clear of the airport. When he returns, traffic stops until AF1 has departed the area.
Why do this? Simple: when the airport is locked down, ANY aircraft movement is considered a threat. At busy airports this is crucial: keeping track of 30 different taxiing aircraft is difficult enough without also trying to figure out if any one is posing a threat to AF1. So no movement is allowed, period.
If you’re wondering how another aircraft on the ground could be a threat to AF1, just remember the accident in Tenerife involving two 747s. If someone managed to get his airplane onto the runway while AF1 was on it’s takeoff roll, the results could be disastrous. So instead of trying to guess whether someone will make a run at AF1, the airport is locked down. Heck, they even lock down Andrews AFB when AF1 is taxiing: no military aircraft can move. I’ve had this happen to me while carrying the presidential limousines and Secret Service agents on my airplane. The only exception that I know of is for Marine One, the Presidential helicopter.
As to other airplanes holding, you seem to be assuming that this is an inherently unsafe maneuver, or at least “less safe” than normal operations. It is not. AF1’s schedule gets passed to ATC in advance and the holding plan is set up before AF1 arrives on scene. Both lateral and vertical separation are used to maintain required distances between airplanes. The whole process is orderly and somewhat routine. Things are MUCH busier when nasty weather rolls into an airport, because it can be fast-moving and can eliminate holding airspace that ATC was counting on using. In other words, a line of thunderstorms moving across NY is a much more dynamic event than AF1 flying into JFK. Yet this also happens several times a year with no ill effects.
The FAA and airlines work together to minimize the effects of things like this. One of the most common procedures that you are likely to see is a “ground hold” wherein your airplane is held on the ground and not allowed to depart until there will be room for it in the ATC system. This prevents too many airplanes arriving over an airport at once, and also saves money (sitting on the ground is cheap; boring holes in the sky while holding burns gas). The ground holds and delays are an inexact science, and sometimes things don’t work out. When this happens, you hold. It is by no means dangerous or any riskier than normal routine operations.
With a little more information, I found out it was for President Clinton, who is also (apparently) entitled to such protection even post-office. It’s not just the sitting president who gets protected with TFR’s. Or even individuals. The Superbowl and the Indianapolis 500 both got one, along with some other high-profile events.
I just wish airlines would be more honest about this.
Well, maybe not your airline, Pilot141 - I don’t even know who you fly for, come to think of it - but some airlines lie to their customers on a regular basis. And I hate that.
At work, I’ll have someone call me from some distant city, furious that their airplane has been delayed (unreasonable customer expectations deserve a rant all their own, but that’s another thread), the airline has told them “weather” is the cause, and they’re suspicious. So they call me (because I’m a pilot of sorts and I know everything about flying, uh-huh :rolleyes: ) and say “is this true?” And sometimes it is - it can be bright and sunny in Baltimore and rain and hail and tornadoes in Chicago. But more and more often it seems I can pop up on the Internet and see a ground hold at airport XXXXXX due to someone sneaking past security or an airplane run off a runway or something else that is clearly not “weather”.
You know, some of the worst offender airlines in this regard are struggling to get out of bankruptcy. Maybe more folks would fly with them more often if they could trust them more. I’m not sure these companies understand that all those little lies (whether coming from the top or from folks with front-line customer contact) are seriously eroding the trust in their customers. And folks do not want to fly with people they can’t trust. If they won’t be honest about delays, what else are they lying about/concealing?
I agree about honesty, but let me make two points.
Point 1: Your basic $8/hour gate agent has neither the time nor resources to research why there’s a ground stop to airport X. All her mainframe computer is going to tell her is that there’s a ground stop. Some airlines, some times, will put info in about why. But not all, and not always. So blaming it on the weather becomes the simple, not-our-fault, default answer when no other info is available.
Point 2: We’re all taught from day one in passenger handling that most fliers are nervous grandmothers that will cut and run screaming from the terminal if there’s the slightest hint of anything risky involved in today’s journey. So there’s a powerful, if subconscious, desire to sugar-coat all news given to any individual or group of passengers.
I’ve also, on several occasions, seem mob psychology in action.
Tell the people the less-than-attractive truth, the most nervous passenger panics, and suddenly 25 otherwise blase’ fliers are all nervously fingering their baggage and debating changing their plans. Then one decides to change and suddenly you’ve got a stampede of angry people all demanding RIGHT NOW to be reticketed at no charge, while the poor agent is still trying to board and depart on time.
End result: We leave 20 minutes late due to the reticketing mess, minus 15-20 people, we operate 100% normally to the destination, and 15-20 people go home sweating about their close call with DOOM.
sometimes I/we feel a lot like a cowboy in charge of a very skittish herd. And I’m a pilot, so I only deal with this problem sort-of second hand. the gate agents and flight attendants are very cognizant of this stuff because they deal with it every flight.
The public, especially in confined groups, is not nearly as sane or as rational as you think/wish they are.
Broomstick, you mention a “30 mile no-fly zone around the POTUS”. Just curious, is that thirty miles around where the plane is scheduled to land, or is that a moving thirty mile zone based on the flight path of AF1? I don’t know jack about flying but it seems like it would be difficult to know exactly where the plane is at any given moment and be sure you are 30 miles away from it. Like you said, on those days it might be better just to stay on the ground…
When I have a nervous-nellie co-worker on the phone I frequently trot out the standard line “If the planes aren’t flying I’m sure the airline has a good reason, they’re no doubt being very cautious. Flying is still the safest way to travel.” Then I hang up and want to go choke one of the office plants.
The TFR’s usually seem centered on a fixed location, so presumably it’s based on the place the POTUS (or other VIP) is making an appearance. By the time the AF1 is outside that 30 mile zone it’s up in a portion of the sky where instrument flight plans are essentially mandatory, everybody’s on radar, and air traffic control can simply keep everyone else a sufficient distance away to keep the SS happy. My airplane can’t even go that high, so it’s sort of a moot point from my viewpoint.
Keep in mind that one security strategy utilized is not to tell anyone exactly where and when the POTUS will be somewhere. It makes it a trifle difficult to avoid these places. The current system is compromise between what the SS wants - which is basically not to tell anyone anything and simply arrest any “little guy” who gets in their way - and what we pilots want, which is a lot fewer (maybe even none) and a lot smaller TFR’s.
Now, when the current POTUS was driving around in a big tour bus recently, on a campaign event, THEN the TFR actually traveled with him - which sort of begs the question how, exactly, is the average Joe Pilot supposed to know where the heck the POTUS will be every exact second of such a trip? Also, if the POTUS on a whim decides to take exit ### for an unscheduled stop it blows the whole schedule, or if he decides to visit that little hamlet instead of this little hamlet then published notices are out the window. The FAA and various organizations will scramble to try to notify pilots - but how do you notify someone who’s already in the air? Even if you are on a duly filed flight plan, under air traffic control, if the Prez decides to change course arbitrarially it is up to YOU to figure this out and change YOUR course and YOUR plans with no notice. If you do not you WILL be arrested and possibly prosecuted. It is a real problem - I’ve called up flight service and wound up giving THEM TFR information I had obtained off the internet that they - the FAA briefers - had not yet been informed of. How in the hell is a person supposed to stay out of trouble with this so-called system?
(This gets back to my long-standing issue of wanting effective security, not feel-good “solutions” that cause more problems than they solve. Yes, the President needs protection, but does that justify setting up a situation where a law-abiding citizen could wind up in jail simply because Dubya decided to stop for donuts or make a detour to see some obscure roadside attraction a few miles down a side road?)
Not surprisingly, the areas affected by the POTUS bus tour saw a definite dip in air travel during those few days. It’s easier to simply change your plans than to play games with this sort of thing.
I would also like to point out that the airlines, although prevented from taking off and landing for a short time while the POTUS in on or near AF1, actually ARE permitted into the 30-mile TFR’s - my sort of pilots are not. That is, we are physically banned from the airports in such an area for the duration, no exceptions. If you own an airplane at an airport where the POTUS/AF1 is, then you will not be permitted near it for the duration. If we are caught inside that zone for any reason we are subject to arrest. There have been instances where air traffic controllers directed a general aviation airplane into just such an area. Despite this fact, in several instances the pilots were arrested on landing and their licenses suspended. Even if the air traffic controller made a genuine mistake - thought the directive was legal and OK, or even if the controller was given incorrect information on a TFR - it doesn’t matter. The small plane pilot is the one to suffer the consequences. As far as the SS is concerned, all general aviation pilots are terrorists without exception and are to be treated as such.
Apparently there are exceptions, because I landed well within a 30nm TFR last week in Nashville. Usually only the inner 10nm is restricted to POTUS support aircraft and scheduled passenger/cargo operations. The outer ring is flyable provided you have a discrete transponder code and a VFR/IFR flight plan. Nashville let me fly into and land well within the 30nm TFR without even having to remain in radio contact, provided I kept my transpoder set to 0157 (my assigned code).
Some days, Berkut, I’m not sure we’re flying on the same planet - other days I’m positive.
Leaving aside the crowd whose airplanes don’t have transponders or radios (and they do exist, it’s the end of aviation where I got involved), the TFR’s vary considerably from place to place and time to time. Usually, for instance, it’s 30 miles. When the Prez was doing the bus tour it was, IIRC, “only” 20 miles in radius. I’ve seen a 5-mile TFR pop up in my area. Yes, now they offer the discreet transonder code option for *some * of them, but early post-9/11 that option often didn’t exist and there’s no requirement that it be part of any TFR
The “security” system is also strongly slanted in favor of IFR pilots - and the majority of general aviation doesn’t fall into that category. You, Berkut, have had something of a charmed life in regards to earning your license quickly and progressing swiftly up the ranks - your experience is far from typical. For most people I know, getting the private license and maintaining safe proficiency at that level is about all they can manage - it’s can be hard to justify the $4k+ investment in an instrument rating to a family ('cause most of us have to reckon with the spouse and/or kids) when a pilot flies only in good weather and daylight, and often enough flies only to and from non-towered airports. Sure, I’d like to get an instrument rating, I think I’d have fun along the way, and it certainly wouldn’t hurt, but I’m coming out of a six-month stretch where I couldn’t afford to fly at all, much less work on a new rating.
Ironically, the VFR-only small-scale pilots like myself are probably the least threatening part of aviation - we’re just not big enough to do significant damage.