• If You Are Having Trouble Logging In with Your Old Username and Password, Please use this Forgot Your Password link to get re-established.
  • Hey! Be sure to login or register!

Two too close for comfort.

If a deviation isn’t available that means the Air Force guys are flying. I’ll cross at 700’ if it provides me more clearance under those guys. I have two friends, very experienced Lake Hood guys, who’ve bent spars in Cessnas from military wake turbulence. I’ll pass!
 
Don't fly Lake Hood unless it's really necessary (which isn't often), but even going to / from little 'ol Merrill, the Point Mac area gets pretty busy and as previously noted, one probably needs to focus on what's outside rather than inside.

"....but there is a lot of lax behavior going in and out of the lake.": unfortunately true and for those of us who haven't internalized the LHD approach and departure procedures, it's always a bit of "wait, am I supposed to be doing what he's doing?" voice in the background.
 
I guess I'm a weirdo but out of merrill I do the city high, inlet, chester creek or shoreline, take a squawk and get flight following above 2,000 across the inlet when wx permits. That doesn't stop me from needing to look out the window but it sure feels a whole lot better. Might helps if the motor stops too.

Did some lake hood flying recently too and it's just bonkers how small that strip of land between the boat hull and point MacKenzie is that everyone funnels through. You would need some pretty good performance to get above 2200 by mid channel on that outbound.
 
A lot of planes coming out of Hood are float and/or wheel planes loaded with as much stuff as they can carry and also trying to conserve gas to get to a remote location. So climb rate is an issue. Hood traffic coming out will typically be low. Incoming Hood traffic is typically starting to descend for landing at Point Mackinze.

Merrill outbound traffic may be heavy as well for the same reasons Hood traffic is heavy. Merrill traffic is typically running perpendicular to Hood and trying to get under Elmendorf's flight path which is more restrictive because they are closer to Elmendorf. They are also wanting to conserve fuel to/from remote locations. Incoming Merrill is getting ready to land as well.

So lots of folks in the same area at lower elevations trying to optimize performance.
 
It definitely is a congested area, but mid-airs in the Lake Hood segment are actually relatively small. Most of the trouble happens outside of the Lake Hood segment in the vicinity of power line bend where the traffic is all converging. Maybe some better communication on a CTAF type frequency that is more localized to going in and out of Anchorage would help. Because as of right now only 122.90 is for that area which has the half the valley talking on it. Which is almost worthless to get a word in on edge wise when it’s busy and that’s when it’s most important, when coming in/out of Anchorage. Additionally, you have half the pilots on 122.80 thinking it’s the right frequency, so there’s several problems on just the radio side of things.


Sent from my iPad using SuperCub.Org
 
When I’m inbound I’ve listened to ATIS and am on tower frequency a few miles before I get to the powerline corner so I can get a picture of who’s coming out. The same is true when leaving. I don’t switch away from tower til I’m a couple of miles past the powerline. There’s no reason to be on CTAF in that area. The two problems with my use are Merrill traffic isn’t on 126.8 but controllers are usually good at calling their positions, and the biggie? Guys aren’t very good at calling position. Some guys will announce powerline bend or Lost Lake when they’re 3 miles away. That doesn’t serve anyone.
 
Why wouldn't you talk to Approach Control anywhere within 25 miles?? They actually have radar, after all. I ALWAYS worked Approach in and outbound when within 25 or 30 miles. Get ATIS for wherever you're going before you go to Approach, and traffic advisories and vectors, if you get.....errrr, a bit confused about 93 airspace.

When I worked in Kodiak, and was going to LHD, I called Approach from the Forelands, for flight following across the Inlet, and traffic advisories.

It's a free service, BTW. Well, sorta....

MTV

MTV
 
Because approach will hand us off to Hood Tower at the same areas I described. Past those areas isn’t an issue. Squawking 1200 works just fine.
 
It’s amazing to me how many Anchorage area pilots haven’t upgraded to led’s or for that matter even turn their lights on.

Wag the wings and light the lights. It's been a few years but i recall siting other aircraft against the city being a challenge. How do they do it at Oshkosh?

Gary
 
I don’t agree with opinions that ADS-B isn’t a benefit or advisable in very busy airspace. It only takes literally a few seconds to cross-reference and confirm ADS-B traffic displayed on iPad or panel display - about the length of time it takes to bracket a few sectors over in your scan and much less than scan time from one side of windscreen to the other. It shouldn’t be stared at, but with careful glances it’s a helpful tool providing additional info.

Agreed about LHD controllers tightening up. I heard two chidings in last few days for pilots cutting corners into ANC airspace off the Tudor departure Southbound.

My point exactly about ADSB and GPS's and anything else you look down to fiddle with. Over the boat hull and over Point Mac is not the place to be looking anywhere but outside.

Once you get past there things open up some.

And yes, this summer seems to be a bad year for flying at whatever altitude you want. Few ask for deviations but most don't.

Part 93.51 is written specifically for this airspace and it's not adhered to well. (I didn't look it up but pretty sure it's .51)

My 2 cents says that will be changing and controllers will be issuing more altitude advisories.
 
Controllers don’t control north of the shoreline. Any info they provide is a courtesy.

I think Lake Hood guys get complacent because they’re used to controllers calling traffic. I’m way more vigilant with my visual scans in the valley. Lots of planes, lots of strips. I just flew home from Hood. It was nice to be back for a visit.
 
Current supplement: “Cross mid-channel of Knik Arm at 1200’ MSL or at or above 2200’MSL” coming from Pt Mac.
Guidance below could potentially put you in head-on situation with departing traffic that would be at 900’.

Inbound for the water or the strip, when you enter the north edge of Lake Hood segment until mid channel your supposed to be below 1200 or above 2000. The 185 on floats was quickly approaching the shoreline and if he was at 1475 he either needed to go higher or get down. But then the whole ADSB altitude reporting is suspect if it really does show 450 after landing.
 
300’ minimum altitude separation is provided for inbound/outbound aircraft IF guys play by the rules.
 

Attachments

  • 2D233644-95E3-40AD-91B9-3818C33E35E8.png
    2D233644-95E3-40AD-91B9-3818C33E35E8.png
    327.6 KB · Views: 241
  • DC0A0208-505A-48BD-A745-002ADA470E13.png
    DC0A0208-505A-48BD-A745-002ADA470E13.png
    282.6 KB · Views: 179
Again with the Lake Hood non-conformers:

Coming in last week on wheels for the Tudor Overpass approach to 32/gravel, I had a near miss with departing traffic from the right downwind Tudor departure.

They are supposed to arrest climb at 900' and remain just south of Tudor until east of the corner w/Muldoon, yet I'm inbound at the overpass and they're flying outbound at 1,200' directly over the highway and directly at me. I stopped my descent and they flew under me with about 80-100' vertical separation. When I queried the tower about the near miss I was told that the traffic had me in sight. No correction to departing traffic; no education process.

It's just a matter of time.
 
When I queried the tower about the near miss I was told that the traffic had me in sight. No correction to departing traffic; no education process.

It's just a matter of time.
I can tell you a very scary first person story of "the traffic has me in sight" over downtown Los Angeles while flying a B-757. I still shake when I think about it 30 years later. I could see in his cockpit window, there was no head looking at me. Always remember when you hear someone else has you in sight DO NOT BELIEVE HIM. They all say that while continuing to look at their fancy avionics.
 
Look folks, I’ve said for decades that Anchorage has some of the most complex airspace in North America. If you’re going to operate there, you need to familiarize yourself with ALL the rules and procedures, NOT “just avoid the Class C airspace and you’ll be okay”.

Then you need to follow the guidance, use ALL the “tools”, like ATC advisories, ADS-B, AND your eyeballs.

And finally, be paranoid! Do not just cruise in there. It’s pretty easy to get casual, but that airspace is not the place for casual.

MTV
 
Who are you admonishing? Cuz I'm fairly certain the violating pilots aren't reading this!

All of the tools you mention were in play, but sometimes a change-up is thrown at us like an unpredicted and errant climb and turn of a tracked aircraft into one's path. Within the space of a few seconds the other plane's "normal" trajectory that I was both tracking on ADS-B and looking for with the peepers changed to a dangerous one, putting it directly in my path. The radio channel was so congested that day (as it frequently is...) that hailing was impossible and it was up to me to break the chain. After the fact call to the tower, as I reported, was less than satisfying.

There needs to be an education process for folks that are not playing by the right rules, such as issuing/reminding altitudes for each Hood clearance from the tower and, in more cases, issuing violations. Think I'll call the FSDO today.

Look folks, I’ve said for decades that Anchorage has some of the most complex airspace in North America. If you’re going to operate there, you need to familiarize yourself with ALL the rules and procedures, NOT “just avoid the Class C airspace and you’ll be okay”.

Then you need to follow the guidance, use ALL the “tools”, like ATC advisories, ADS-B, AND your eyeballs.

And finally, be paranoid! Do not just cruise in there. It’s pretty easy to get casual, but that airspace is not the place for casual.

MTV
 
There needs to be an education process for folks that are not playing by the right rules, such as issuing/reminding altitudes for each Hood clearance from the tower and, in more cases, issuing violations. Think I'll call the FSDO today.
Johnny, I understand your message. I would like to point out there are also individuals who pretend to fly by "the rules of the road", they talk the talk, yet somehow they always seem to present the picture that they truly believe those "rules of the road" are for the other guy. I've known people like this. You can talk to them with a nice polite helpful friendly attitude. They will acknowledge what you have explained, then ............................ they go right back out there operating with their old me me me procedures. These people are not trainable by anyone.
 
What Johnny’s talking about. There’s almost zero lateral space on the E-W leg of that route so altitude is pretty important.
 

Attachments

  • FC614EF8-DC5E-43E3-B389-691B8E09AE73.jpeg
    FC614EF8-DC5E-43E3-B389-691B8E09AE73.jpeg
    75.3 KB · Views: 330
Who are you admonishing? Cuz I'm fairly certain the violating pilots aren't reading this!

All of the tools you mention were in play, but sometimes a change-up is thrown at us like an unpredicted and errant climb and turn of a tracked aircraft into one's path. Within the space of a few seconds the other plane's "normal" trajectory that I was both tracking on ADS-B and looking for with the peepers changed to a dangerous one, putting it directly in my path. The radio channel was so congested that day (as it frequently is...) that hailing was impossible and it was up to me to break the chain. After the fact call to the tower, as I reported, was less than satisfying.

There needs to be an education process for folks that are not playing by the right rules, such as issuing/reminding altitudes for each Hood clearance from the tower and, in more cases, issuing violations. Think I'll call the FSDO today.

Johnny,
It wasn’t my intent to admonish you. Your actions clearly saved the day, and good for you! My point was there are a lot of folks floating around that airspace who are pretty “casual” about the airspace, traffic and risks. THAT was my point.

As to whether any of those folks post on or read these forums, who knows? But, there are a LOT of “visitors” who enter that airspace not even knowing what Part 93 IS, trust me….I’ve met some, fortunately on the ground.
And, a lot of pilots who visit ANC airspace DO read these forums. If we reach one of those….

So, if my post came across as accusing you of anything, my apologies, it sounded to me like YOU were doing it right.

MTV
 
Different matter but I've seen lots of IFR traffic and a few accident histories reported by ADS-B on Flightrader24 to be off expected altitudes. They provide a GPS Altitude which is sometimes different than what FT24 calls Calibrated Altitude. Needs further explanation.

ADS-B Out reports pressure altitude and GPS altitude. Neither is a good indication of the aircraft baro corrected altitude unless the proper corrections are applied.

Remember that, below the transition altitude, aircraft are flying and reporting baro corrected altitude - that is not what ADS-B Out is reporting.
 
There are the regs, the altitude assignments, reporting locations etc all around Anchorage.

Some guys are good, some are not so good. Some know the rules but don't care.

The reality is, flying in and out of Anchorage is sometimes a goat rope.

Look outside, see and avoid just like Johnny did. He saw, he avoided. Complain if you want.

It's Alaska. If we were all law abiding, rule following citizens a percentage of the state wouldn't be here.

How many remember 30-40 years ago when the Feds would ramp check at Talkeenta

About 1/2 the guys there didn't have licenses.

Really, traffic is down at Lake Hood from the height in the late 70's. Radios are better. Transponders are better. GPS replaced Lorans. ADSB came along and yet things seem worse.

When we had little, and you navigated with ADF tuned to 750 AM coming into Anchorage in the crap and looking out the window we all seemed to do better.
 
There are the regs, the altitude assignments, reporting locations etc all around Anchorage.

Some guys are good, some are not so good. Some know the rules but don't care.

The reality is, flying in and out of Anchorage is sometimes a goat rope.

Look outside, see and avoid just like Johnny did. He saw, he avoided. Complain if you want.

It's Alaska. If we were all law abiding, rule following citizens a percentage of the state wouldn't be here.

How many remember 30-40 years ago when the Feds would ramp check at Talkeenta

About 1/2 the guys there didn't have licenses.

Really, traffic is down at Lake Hood from the height in the late 70's. Radios are better. Transponders are better. GPS replaced Lorans. ADSB came along and yet things seem worse.

When we had little, and you navigated with ADF tuned to 750 AM coming into Anchorage in the crap and looking out the window we all seemed to do better.

I don't think it's when the weather is down that the problems exist. It's on those nice sunny days, when EVERYbody is out flying....

There are rules and there are rules. These rules aren't designed to punish honest citizens....they were designed to prevent honest citizens from being killed in a mid air.

MTV
 
I get that but nothing is going to replace looking outside the windows while flying in/out of Anchorage. No reg or rule is going to fix it.
Recently every year seems to get worse not better. Maybe there will be a big generational turn over that will change things.
 
Excuses, excuses...

I get what you're saying and do understand that we share the skies with all sorts (some of whom we would be better off without). Pete wisely pointed out that some folks are completely unteachable or don't wake up until there's a penalty - either a violation or an accident. I don't want to be included in any way in those hard won lessons.

Not to point fingers, but you provided a great illustration of how even long time local LHD pilots can get it wrong and may be endangering themselves/others. Remember the earlier inaccurate scoop on altitudes you posted for one of the Lake Hood segments (see Post #43). If one of the good guys can get it wrong or fudges the altitudes, then who else is not keeping up with the procedures? It only takes a little bit of error in those tight quarters.

The starting point for safety isn't looking outside - that's what happens after we launch and we're in the airspace. The basic element that has to first be in place is: Every pilot who is flying into that airspace needs to routinely review the procedures. That means young and old; newbie and seasoned pro. If we all took a moment and checked to see if how "we've always done it" is the way it's supposed to be done, maybe it would be a less risky place.

Then we can look out the window.



There are the regs, the altitude assignments, reporting locations etc all around Anchorage.

Some guys are good, some are not so good. Some know the rules but don't care.

The reality is, flying in and out of Anchorage is sometimes a goat rope.

Look outside, see and avoid just like Johnny did. He saw, he avoided. Complain if you want.

It's Alaska. If we were all law abiding, rule following citizens a percentage of the state wouldn't be here.

How many remember 30-40 years ago when the Feds would ramp check at Talkeenta

About 1/2 the guys there didn't have licenses.

Really, traffic is down at Lake Hood from the height in the late 70's. Radios are better. Transponders are better. GPS replaced Lorans. ADSB came along and yet things seem worse.

When we had little, and you navigated with ADF tuned to 750 AM coming into Anchorage in the crap and looking out the window we all seemed to do better.
 
Last edited:
I bet I am not the only one here who has been going in and out before part 93 came into being. At the time we got lessons and updates and read the FAR so we could get through the biennial flight reviews.
It's seldom after 30+ years of going in and out of a location that you read the supplements anymore. We might buy them and have them in the plane but seldom open them unless we go somewhere unfamiliar. I know lots of guys around the lake who have supplements that are years old.
What was is, 2001 or so when Part 93 got added in?
So knowing the FAR general rules will put me in conflict with other traffic. Great. I guess I will read the supplement nightly now.
Thanks for pointing it out.
 
Spread the word!

We’re all in this together.

I bet I am not the only one here who has been going in and out before part 93 came into being. At the time we got lessons and updates and read the FAR so we could get through the biennial flight reviews.
It's seldom after 30+ years of going in and out of a location that you read the supplements anymore. We might buy them and have them in the plane but seldom open them unless we go somewhere unfamiliar. I know lots of guys around the lake who have supplements that are years old.
What was is, 2001 or so when Part 93 got added in?
So knowing the FAR general rules will put me in conflict with other traffic. Great. I guess I will read the supplement nightly now.
Thanks for pointing it out.
 
Back
Top