Changes to OSH Arrivals procedures?

[flybuddy]

Somehow this has moved into the "spin" zone.. The failings last year were caused by a lot more than just runway usage. There weren't accidents but it wasn't safe and with forced compression of traffic continually back to initial fixes it was dangerous. Is there anyone here who thinks it wasn't a cluster last year and an accident waiting to happen? Yes, a lot of this would have been negated IF there were better flow but ti doesn't eliminate all of the problems. We all admit that pilots didn't follow the procedures and there was a lot of cutting in which caused folks to be sent back time and time again. There seems to be some extreme resistance toward trying to utilize ADSB as a partial fix. It's a tool that can help in several ways. So let's say there's too much resistance to ADSB usage so we dump it...What solutions do you think will truly work and somehow prevent people from not following procedures and cutting in?

[CHICAGORANDY]

Having read all 13 pages of posts on this subject, I reckon I'm not totally unhappy that MY "Ripon Approach" to Oshkosh is in a Hyundai Tucson over Rtes 23, 44 and N - with a stop for fresh coffee at the PlaneView Plaza - lol

I suspect that if we get better weather pre-Monday, things will kinda sort themselves out? Like many who have posted in this thread I too marvel that people with Pilot's privileges are incapable of following simple published procedures and employing common courtesy to their fellow airmen and women. But as the comic Ron White often notes - "You can't fix stupid, stupid is forever."

[Bill Greenwood]

FlyBuddy, yes it was congested last year and could have had an accident. But still answer this one question please, lets say you have ADSB and every other gadget Garmin and others make, and you get to Ripon and start toward Fiske and lo and begora, there on your magic screen it shows there are quite a few other airplanes around you doing the same thing. What are you going to do? MIght you look out the window and try to avoid them and find a place to fall in line and follow someone , same as we.ve done for years? Do you have a "clear" button on the panel that will make all the other planes vanish? And as a beside, just for interest, what plane are you flying and how many years have you flown in?
I think last year was the worst of factors coming together, likely will be normal or better this year? I'll have to admit I wasn't in the middle of the bucnch, when the atis and approach said that much delay, I diverted elsewhere.

[flybuddy]

Thx Bill, I've had several aircraft over the years that I've flown in, including a Velocity, 3 years with Mooney Caravan, RV6, Cherokee, Mooney alone, Varieze, First flight in the 80s and I've made most shows. Just to be clear, I absolutely disagree with pilots looking at the screen anywhere during the procedure. My first post was only addressing using ADSB OUT as a help for the controllers after Ripon once spacing established. No more waggle wings and the controller can call aircraft by number, changing speed, spacing, etc. as well as correct folks that try to circumvent the procedure. Seems that would be smoother and safer. The proposal for this is only when the weather is below 1500'

[DaleB]

That would work... if and only if ADS-B were not mis-configurable by the user. The regs say that after 1/1/2020 I have to have ADS-B OUT. They do NOT say I have to show my actual tail number when squawking VFR. Even if they did, I suspect the number of people with misconfigured gear (intentionally or otherwise) would pretty well negate the improved process. All you need is a dozen or two NCC-1701 flights in the mix. I mean, how many people already come blasting into the place without having read the NOTAM?

Of course there are still all the airplanes that will not be required to have ADS-B... I really don't think you want to try to bar them from Oshkosh, or restrict their arrival times and routes. You'd be fighting a losing battle.

I'm absolutely not trying to trash your ideas, I'm just trying to figure out how any such changes could be actually enforced, at least without having an FAA welcoming committee with tracked Vulcans.

[flybuddy]

Good points!..As time progresses more people will have adsb and probably have a better configuration rate after 2020 kicks in...This may be ahead of its time but might be more useful in 2020.

[MEdwards]

Somehow this has moved into the "spin" zone..

No spin, just a so far civil discussion. First, I am a big proponent of ADS-B, have had both Out and In for several Oshkosh visits, and saw the problems on the screen Sunday afternoon last year. i bugged out after one attempt. I use ADS-B In as a third eyeball, and it has been extremely useful in helping me find and see traffic I otherwise might very well have missed. However, I did not find it very useful approaching Ripon last year due to saturation and the need to keep the first two eyeballs intently on nearby traffic.

flybuddy, as I understand it your initial suggestion was an ADS-B-only approach, perhaps to a dedicated runway, with another "chaotic" approach to the other one.

An approach where the Fisk controllers use ADS-B to identify and separate traffic becomes basically an "ADS-B approach control" with the controller staring at a screen rather than the present approach where the controller is looking at the sky through binoculars. I think that would be less efficient and more confusing than the present system. Some form of separation standards would come into play. It also would take more air time dealing with N numbers than "blue cessna." The previous poster's comments about configuration errors and nonstandard IDs are also an issue.

Separate approaches to the different runways is also less practical than the present system. Runways open and close for lots of reasons all the time, and now the controller can react instantly to send people to the open runway and away from the just-closed one.

Basically the problems last year were caused by the weather, as others have noted. Concentration of three days' arrivals into one day and soft shoulders off the runways. Pilots have to deal with weather problems all the time. One year's weather problems are not sufficient reason to completely overhaul a system that has worked well for decades. Improvements are always appropriate, but radical changes are not.

And finally, my suggestion for an improvement: If a mass arrival can't happen, for whatever reason, reasonably close to its schedule (say an hour or so), cancel it. Under no circumstances move it to the next day.

[dougbush]

And finally, my suggestion for an improvement: If a mass arrival can't happen, for whatever reason, reasonably close to its schedule (say an hour or so), cancel it. Under no circumstances move it to the next day.

Why, is YOUR arrival at Oshkosh more important than mine?

[MEdwards]

No, and vice versa. I enjoyed flying in with the Bonanzas many years ago. But the mass arrivals close two runways for something like half an hour. The schedules are published so others can avoid those times. When the schedule changes drastically it messes up everybody else. If they get pushed from a Friday to Saturday to Sunday they contribute to the closed runway congestion experienced last year. You can still arrive, just like everybody else, but I think prioritizing mass arrivals when everybody is suffering from weather-induced arrival saturation is not a good idea.

But, suggestions aside, I guess we’ll find out what changes they are going to make in just a few weeks. In the past I think the NOTAM has been released in March or April.

[Bill Greenwood]

Hey Mike, I think it is. The mass arrivals seem to be a sore spot for some, but remember, even if it takes a half hour, that is a lot of airplanes landed in that time. In the case of the Bonanzas it was 171 of them! I think, so that many are out of the line and out of the congestion. If they came one at a time, it would likely take longer.