Air Service to Galena, AK

There is proposal by the FAA to discontinue the nav aids as well as vasi, high intensity runway lights and AWOS here in Galena, AK.

This is the link which will take you to the actual proposal. http://www.alaska.faa.gov/at/notices/GAL_BRACdecommission.htm
Note the para that reads b. Standard instrument approach procedures will be published, however, they will not be available for use by Part 135 or 121 Carriers due to the lack of a local altimeter. No scheduled air service to the community of Galena will be available.

The link to reply with comments is in the link above.

Here is a draft of my proposed reply. I think the more cogent comments the FAA gets the better. I would suppose they should be primarily from AK residents or down-staters with specific interests up here.

I am writing to object as strongly as I am possibly capable of to your proposal to discontinue the navigational aids and weather facilities at Edward G. Pitka Sr. Airport (GAL) at Galena Alaska. Facility identification GAL (ICAO PAGA)

This proposal has far reaching adverse ramifications not only to the community of Galena but also to the villages of Ruby, Huslia, Koyukuk, Nulato and Kaltag. These other villages are also served by the same air carriers who serve Galena. When the weather is overcast but VMC underneath it is common for air carriers to shoot an approach to Galena and then continue to land at Galena or to continue on VFR to one of the villages just mentioned.

If there was no dependable air service to this area then the schools would have to do away with most of their extracurricular activates such as sports, academic decathlon, science fairs etc. because without a dependable way to travel there is no way to maintain schedules for these events.

Without dependable air service there would be no medical-evacuation capability for this area. I am the grandfather of a child who needed and used this capability and I hope you can imagine what a feeling of security this capability is.

We have a clinic and two physician’s assistants but no physician here in Galena. Most of the villages around Galena generally have only health aids. How would people schedule and keep medical and dental appointments in Fairbanks or Anchorage if there were no scheduled air carriers?

What would this area do about mail and groceries? The scheduled air carriers are also providing these services.

Galena is the cargo hub for this area. Carriers such as Everts Air Cargo, Lynden Air Freight, Frontier Flying Service, Warbelow’s Air Ventures, and occasionally large jet aircraft come to Galena and off-load then their cargo which is used here or transported by smaller aircraft to the surrounding villages.

When the BRAC hammer fell; the residents of Galena were assured that everything possible was going to be done to make the transition as painless as possible. One of the primary ways Galena will try to maintain the economy is to expand their boarding-home school, GILA, or Galena Interior Learning Academy. It has been growing in enrollment since its inception. It uses the physical facilities which are on the air base. How will it maintain enrollment let alone expand if students have no dependable way to go to and from Galena?

What about safety? There is without doubt a need for scheduled reliable air service to this area. The air carriers are trying to make a living. Undoubtedly some would continue to try to operate even if there were no navigational aids or weather facility here in Galena. There would be pressure to operate in marginal weather. What would a pilot do? Scud run down the Yukon in a Beach 1900 or Navajo? I hope not. Would they instead get on top in hopes of finding a hole? What if no hole? Turn off the transponder and punch down through it? I hope not. I hope people making this important decision will see the necessity of leaving the navigational aids and weather facility here in Galena in tact. It really is a small amount of money when all things are considered; especially lives.

My wife Gloria and I moved here after retirement from Montana in order to be close to one of our sons and his family. He and his wife are both employed with the school system here. I am a commercial, instrument pilot and retired aerial applicator. I also served two tours as a pilot in the Viet Nam conflict. I am sure there are a multitude of ways to reduce spending which are much safer and with many many fewer adverse effects than this proposal.

Respectfully, Ross Buchanan, Galena, AK

No surprise the FAA doesn't want to take over navaids. In the new FAA funding proposal there's a clause to give the navaids to the airports and let them maintain them and pay to update them. Gives the airports authority to charge landing fees to recoup the cost.

Looks to me if you want to keep that stuff you will have to talk the Air Force into giving it to you and then the airport hire a civilian contractor to maintain it.

I don't get it. Turning off the navaids is one thing. But how can the FAA shut down scheduled air service to an airport? Isn't that a private business decision by the companies that are offering that service?

BTW my dad paved that airport long ago, I think late 1960s / early 1970s...

Find out who has the essintial air service contract there, probably Frontier. See what their take is. If nav/asos services are eliminated then you have a typicial alaska bush village airstrip, and they typically get pretty good air service.

Mike and all,

Mike knows, some of you don’t. Galena is a hard surface airport on the Yukon River in interior AK. It was built up by the Air Force as a ADC base and then around 1992 put in a semi warm status where a contractor looked after the facilities and the Air Force used the base for exercises. All the facilities at one time belonged to the Air Force. I don’t know where a primarily native village, with some of the residents making a living working for the contractor, without a viable economy other than their boarding home school would come up with the money to maintain the facilities it would take to allow IFR operations. All Air Force associated jobs will cease this summer.

Please read my objection again Mike. As I say, there are many times when the only way to get VFR below a layer or layers is to fly the approach to Galena and land or continue on to one of the surrounding villages. It isn’t like operating on the coast where you can either stay under it or let down over the ocean IMC with little jeopardy.

I would imagine Frontier is the primary carrier if that means they have the essential air service contract….I don’t know……I do now that Warbelow’s has the med-evac. service.

I really feel this area is being dealt a low blow by the government to consider discontinuing enough services to make it a VFR only airport. As I say in my objection, this is happening just after BRAC and this village is trying to expand their boarding home school and looking for some other ways to maintain some sort of viable economy.

Buck,

It seems to me that the logical first step here is to get the FAA and/or the State to take over responsibility for maintenance of the AWOS. Note that the AWOS are typically FAA machines.

That would give the carriers the capability of flying GPS based approaches, and soon, probably a precision GPS approach even.

Frankly, I suspect that's the best you can hope for. To maintain an ILS for the level of ILS traffic that occurs at Galena would be hard to sell. Fort Yukon is in similar situation, traffic wise. Frontier takes their 1900's in there, with GPS and VOR approaches.

Oh, by the way, I'd push real hard for the Air Force to give up the Galena 1 and 2 MOA's. They have said repeatedly that they can only use that airspace when operating out of Galena. They have refused to decommission those MOA's before, and if they are completely pulling out of Galena, they no longer need them. It's about time the AF gave up some airspace, instead of just adding and adding, while cutting back on infrastructure.

MTV

By the way you do not need a weather station to commence an approach for FAR 135 non-sched. Charter and med-evac flights can still operate in and out of Galena.

An AWOS/ASOS is a pretty piss poor way to get weather. What about someone becoming a Weather Observer and making hourly observations? I worked for one company that got one of their people to do this so operations could commence. That would be kind of fun hanging out at the airport and doing something. It can be done very inexpensively.

Christina Young said:

I don't get it. Turning off the navaids is one thing. But how can the FAA shut down scheduled air service to an airport? Isn't that a private business decision by the companies that are offering that service?

Click to expand...

Well, yes, and no. If you shut of the services that are legally required by the operating regulations, the carriers may no longer legally go there. Under Part 121, you won't be able to fly an approach without a weather observation. If there's no weather observing it becomes a VFR only airport. I'm less familiar with 135 regs, so I can't say how this would affect them.

Buck said:

As I say, there are many times when the only way to get VFR below a layer or layers is to fly the approach to Galena and land or continue on to one of the surrounding villages.

Click to expand...

well, not exactly. Huslia, Kaltag, Nulato and Ruby all have instrument approaches, all except Nulato have Wx reporting.

A great deal of the money in air transportation in Alaska comes from the Bypass Mail. The bypass for the "downriver" villages is currently moved by mainline carriers to Galena, then moved by 135 carriers to the villages. If Galena was no longer a legal 121 destination, then that bypass would be moved from Fairbanks to the downriver villages by bush carriers at bush rates. (bypass rates for bush carriers are much higher than mainline rates, in some cases, many times higher) So if Galena is no longer a mainline hub then Frontier gets a huge boost in their amount of bypass mail, at very high rates. Probably the future of Galena depends on whether Everts' or Frontier is contributing more to Stevens' campaign fund.

I was under the impression that even under part 135 you had to have a local altimeter reading to initiate an instrument approach. Not true? I was under the impression that this is part of most operator's op specs, if not actually in the regs.

I totally agree that an automated observer basically sucks as a source of weather information. That said, it does provide an altimeter setting at least, and does so pretty reliably.

As to human observers, there was VERY limited success in using this approach in a couple of Interior villages that I'm familiar with. This is the reason the operators supported the automated observers in the first place: they don't wander off during their shift, or simply fail to show up on time.

MTV

mvivion said:

As to human observers, there was VERY limited success in using this approach in a couple of Interior villages that I'm familiar with. This is the reason the operators supported the automated observers in the first place: they don't wander off during their shift, or simply fail to show up on time.

Click to expand...

A few years back I needed to take some aerial photography for mapping at Port Heiden. We had some surveyors from another company there doing surveying in support of the mapping. They had called that morning and left a message that the sky was clear. I checked the official weather, it was reporting 3000 broken. Now for mapping photography, you have to have pretty much absolutely crystal clear sky, the kind of day which is rare in Port Heiden. It common for folks who weren't that familiar with aerial photography to misunderstand what was needed, that when we said we need clear skies, we really meant *clear*. Tried to check with the surveyor, he was already in the field. Checked the Wx again, still 3000 broken. Called someone else in Port Heiden. She said the wx was really nice, how nice? really, really nice (OK, in port Heiden that can mean a lot of things) Asked her if the were any clouds that she could see ... nope, none , not a single cloud in the sky. So we headed out there, sure enough skies were clear from just outside King Salmon. When I got back to Anchorage that evening I checked the days observations for Port Heiden, the observations were for 3000 broken all day long. This was before Port Heiden had an automated observing station.

I've got my issues with automated stations too, but when ever I hear someone bemoaning the demise of human observers, I think of this incident. Didn't cause safety of flight issues, but the observations were nowhere close to reality.

I was trying to be polite when making that suggestion
If the village of Galena, the airlines, the school that trains people for FAA certificates will not step up and get somebody(s) trained to spend six hours a day five days a week to drink coffee well maybe Galena won't have scheduled air service. I guess that be a community call to action. Quite frankly they could sit in the Frontier Terminal with a radio and B.S. for half the day, people already hang out at the airport. Point Lay had the same thing happen too years back.

There is also the DOI that maintains the BLM firebase there in the summer, I'm sure they would have some interest in maintaining airport services.

I really don't mean to be cold hearted, honest.

I appreciate the comments. I’m sure, Mike you aren’t trying to be hard hearted.

I, of course liked Mike V’s comment best
“ It seems to me that the logical first step here is to get the FAA and/or the State to take over responsibility for maintenance of the AWOS. Note that the AWOS are typically FAA machines”

It has been a loooong time since I’ve been IFR current but I can’t imagine flying an approach without a current altimeter setting.

We probably don’t need a full blown ILS with all the lights. The ILS minimum weather here is 300-1. I would imagine the company minimums for most carriers coming in here
Are significantly higher than that.

Mike A……An observer would be an answer. The question is who would have the qualifications? We had a “man in the tower” from 0800 to 1700 when the Air Force was paying for it but personally I liked the AWOS better; you didn’t have to call two or three times to get a reply and the reply was always a courteous (if automated) and professional. Granted it is only as good as the equipment but that can be said for the observer as well.

I certainly didn’t know Huslia, Ruby, Kaltag and Nulato had approaches. They must be GPS……..granted my AK terminal book is a 1996 model

My point was that there is an AWOS ON SITE in Galena. Why would you want to go to the expense and hassle of hiring and training an observer? Tell the AF the price of doing business is to leave the AWOS there, and convince the state or FAA to maintain it.

Besides, the AWOS gives altimeter settings 24/7, which can be a big deal for medevacs.

mghallen: I believe BLM closed that base a couple years ago, though they may keep a few folks there at times in a hot year.

MTV

I still shoot Med-evac approaches without an altimeter setting, it sucks. The procedure for Ruby is to use Galena's setting. You do not need to pay someone to sit there to take observations, people already work at the airport. Get the Frontier station manager as an approved weather observer and bamo, good to go! Now Everts, Wright's,Frontier and Warbelow's have access to WX. 135 and 121 regs met, ops continue. This is not to haed and the goverment need not be put-out. Sorry if we want limited Govermnet this is a good and easy step. The FAA cannot maintain what they have now, sorry but they are ^%$#.

Mike

I still don't want to see Galena left out in the cold, but it isn't like you don't have a book of matches.

mghallen said:

The procedure for Ruby is to use Galena's setting.

Click to expand...

Hmmm, my Jepps are showing a ASOS for Ruby, and it's not the same freq. as Galena.

Mike,

Ever hear of vacations? What happens when your approved observer goes on vacation? Or goes to town for medical care, or is sick?? Or, he just needs to run downtown for lunch? If you are going to put an observer there, their shift and observations have to be predictable and reliably timed.

The human observer solution hasn't worked well in many places. That is specifically why they went to automated observers in the first place. I can remember when Galena HAD human observers, by the way. It might work in Galena, but at the VERY LEAST you need TWO trained observers, not just one. Oh, and by the way, they need some instruments.....that costs money as well, not a lot, but....and training costs a lot, etc.

My point was simply that there is an existing APPROVED machine in operation at GAL. I'd bet dollars to doughnuts that the NWS will be on the side of the village to keep this thing up and running, since they in part base their forecasts on observed weather. NWS is always complaining that there aren't enough weather data points around, and Galena is an important one.

Buck, get in touch with the NWS forecast office in FAI (John Lingaas) and let them know about this deal. Those guys can be good advocates.

MTV

MTV, yes you are correct... however,but, a real person is still the best. If the airlines want real weather, they do, then they are able to use already existing people to take observations. Everywhere I have worked we check the ASOS/AWOS then call the village agent too. I know all the stories about bad reports, but the automated services have screwed me many more times than a real person no matter their training. Train two, three people hell train more. I admit to ranting here, but I fundamentally disagree with you on this one, sorry.

I hate to say it but Galena is withering away. It might really help to say there is work for real people there, taking observations. Right now it could be the airlines agents, the Frontier folks seem to be pretty reliable. In the future this could turn into a real job for two people down the road. They have a aviation school there....

The future of Bush Alaska may very well rest on the ability for people to find jobs, maybe here are a couple.

aalexander,

It has changed of recent then, I am wrong.

ASOS

Ruby came on line with an ASOS last year!!! GPS appr. for both 3 and 21
Huslia and Kaltag also have WX and GPS appr. You are not stuck with the scud run up /down the river from GAL anymore...

Damn, last year? Well there goes the fun. 8)

Mike,

I totally agree with you regarding the accuracy of human observers versus an AWOS. A prime example is in Fort Yukon, where they actually hire a local to provide human augmentation to the AWOS, simply because the AWOS weather is so often wrong.

That said, the original discussion centered around LEGAL weather so an operator could fly approaches. The AWOS provides a LEGAL altimeter setting 24/7, and that can be a good thing. Now, an operator can call their agent, or someone else's agent and find out what the "real" weather is. Same while en route, or about to start an approach.

The trouble is, as I pointed out, that the automated observers aren't very good at providing weather for VFR flying, they are pretty good at providing at least the basics for IFR operations. On the other hand, human observers may work fine, or they may be gone half the time. That all depends on the person, and who's supervising them.

My point was simply that if what you primarily are concerned with is commercial IFR traffic, the AWOS is probably the best deal you'll get.

If you want to actually know what the weather is, I too would choose a human observer. But, having been down that road when the observer was out moose hunting or in fish camp when they were being PAID to observe and report weather.......and nobody could do anything about it. They are paid whether they actually report or not, by the way, in the NWS system.

MTV

Mike and Mike,

Good discussion.

Galena is undoubtedly in a fight for their economic survival. A number of possibilities are being looked into. Probably the most realistic is the expansion of the boarding school. Mike A., your comments about local observers make sense but as Mike V says I believe we would need something automated to insure IFR operations.

The NWS does have a parochial interest in an AWOS here and are aware of the proposal. This next paragraph is from an AOPA representative.

"The only addition detail I can see is that the loss of weather also means the National Weather Service loses one of the few weather reports in this area, which means the loss of a Terminal Forecast for Galena and probably degrades the quality of the Area Forecast as well, which impacts safety for pilots and the public who has to travel by air, while flying VFR in the region."

The decision by the FAA to NOT take over operation and maintenance of the Navaids at Galena when the USAF finally pulls out is a serious oversight and defies logic. These Navaids inlcude the AWOS, ILS, VASI and Approach Lights. As pointed out by Buck, Galena is the hub that serves all the surrounding villages. By choosing not to maintain these facilites the FAA will be not only limiting Part 135 air service to Galena they will in effect be shutting down much of the air service to these smaller communites by default. On the other hand the FAA seems to find no end of funds to install new AWOS, PAPI'S and Weather Cameras at virtually every small village it can find, including Ruby, Kaltag, Huslia. So the FAA is in effect limiting the effectiveness of it's own facilities at these satellite airports by choosing not to maintain ANY of the Navaids at the hub that serves them. In other words, why should Frontier Airlines (for example) care what the weather in Kaltag is doing when they can't get into Galena in the first place to distribute passengers coming from the main hub of Fairbanks. Where is the logic here?

Galena is a regional hub on the order of Aniak, McGrath and Iliamna in my opinion. Since Alaska Airlines does not fly into them with its 737's they don't get the attention that Nome, Kotz or Bethel does but they still are important. I find it interesting that the FAA claims the traffic count at GAL doesn't support an ILS yet they maintain one at Aniak. (By the way the FAA built and maintains a full ILS at St. George in the Pribilofs with 3 scheduled flights per week!! Where is the justification here?) They also maintain part time FSS services at Ilimna and McGrath and of course full automated weather with that all important altimeter setting for the instrument approaches important to the main flow of Part 135 air traffic. So apparently McGrath, Aniak and Ilimana are far more important in the FAA's eyes and GAL and it's surrounding villages can just go to VFR? Where's the logic here in the agency that is to promote and maintain air safety?

I don't have a dog in this fight, I'm lucky if I fly VFR to GAL once a year, but I do like logical and rational decision making by our local FAA. I urge all of you who care about this issue to contact the FAA Regional Office in Anchorage regarding this. Public comment is being taken until April 30, 2007. Click on the link that Buck has in the beginning of this thread for the FAA public notice containing the address and phone number to contact.

Bruce

tundra grapevine says same talk about BTI

Bruce,

Thanks for your email of support. I'm certain the residents of this area truly appreciate it.

Goose,

I've heard something similar is going on at Barter Island. I don't know any particulars.

Bruce makes good points about where FAA money was spent and the "return on investment" of it.

Buck

Bruce makes excellent points. Unfortunately, if you are looking for logic, the FAA is NOT the place to go.

On the other hand, they do listen to users.

In addition to contacting the FAA on this one, I would send letters to Senator Ted Stevens (want to know why there's still FSS's around Alaska? Look no further), and to the State of Alaska DOT. They have a dog in that fight, in that they maintain a very large airport out there, and if all the support goes, it won't get used nearly as much.

An ILS is becoming less important now that there are precision GPS based approaches coming on line, but....it would be dumb to remove a functioning and already flight checked ILS frankly.

Good luck, but definitely get in touch with Senator Stevens office on this, Buck.

MTV

N3243A said:

The decision by the FAA to NOT take over operation and maintenance of the Navaids at Galena when the USAF finally pulls out is a serious oversight and defies logic.

Click to expand...

Only if you don't have all the pieces of the puzzle.

N3243A said:

...... they will in effect be shutting down much of the air service to these smaller communities by default.

Click to expand...

No, those communities will still have air service, it will just be directly out of Fairbanks instead of Galena.

N3243A said:

In other words, why should Frontier Airlines (for example) care what the weather in Kaltag is doing when they can't get into Galena in the first place to distribute passengers coming from the main hub of Fairbanks.

Click to expand...

Because they don't need Galena to go to Kaltag. They can (and do) take their 1900 into Kaltag quite handily, along with Nulato and Ruby. I suspect it wouldn't be difficult to add Huslia as a 1900 destination, as it already has Wx and an approach. Trust me, Frontier will make a great deal more revenue (and presumably profit) if Fairbanks were the *hub* for those villages rather than Galena. They could close their Galena station, and everything would be handled by agents in the villages (who they are already paying anyway) SO they can cut expenses, but more importantly It would mean a *huge* increase in revenue because of the bypass mail. The bypass mail, to a large degree funds air transportation in Alaska. It is the 600 lb gorilla. In most operations the passenger revenue is insignificant compared to the bypass revenue. Currently, bypass arrives in Galena by mainline carrier, at very low mainline rates. Frontier doesn't get a penny of that, as they are not a mainline carrier. It then goes from Galena to the villages aboard carriers like Frontier at bush rates, which are much, much, higher than mainline rates. If this change happens, the bypass mail will then go from Fairbanks directly to the villages. Bush rate direct to the villages from FAI will be a great deal more money than Mainline to Galena and then bush rate to the villages, and Frontier will be pocketing all of that, rather than just the Galena-Village portion they are now getting. Why Frontier? well, the bypass mail regulations dictate that the bypass mail must be given to those carriers operating multiengine turbine equipment on a given Bush route. Now who operates multiengine turbine equipment from Fairbanks to Ruby, Nulato and Kaltag? Could it be Frontier and their 1900??? Why yes, it could be.

It gets back to the age old principle: If you want to understand something like this, follow the money. And Frontier stands to make a *HUGE* amount of money as a result of this change.

mvivion said:

Good luck, but definitely get in touch with Senator Stevens office on this, Buck.

Click to expand...

Well, nice idea, but you can bet your sweet bippy that the folks from Frontier have already been there, and they brought a much bigger bag of money than Buck will be able to scrape together.