What are they thinking?
Wed Sep 08, 2004 3:43 pm
Just got my new copy of the Vermont Agency of Transportation, Operations Division newsletter "Tip's and Tricks". In it is a piece written by Tom Trudeau, manager of the Rutland (Vt.) airport that I am reprinting here in it's entirety. Bold text is my doing and not the authors.
The Collings Foundation visited Rutland Airport August 22-24. This foundation brings WWII aircraft to local airports as a living history tour. The turnout was great due to good press and good weather. The Vermont Site Team, Roberta Haskins and Chris Pollard, definitely helped improve the quality of the event. The only downside is that the FAA is looking at restricting these bombers to 6000 feet of runway (in fact all WWII aircraft). That would in effect end Collings Foundation visits to Vermont. What is ironic is the Rutland Airport was originally designed and built for just such aircraft as a staging airport for aircraft enroute to Europe. Bob Snarski, Unit Chief of Starbase said it all in an e-mail to me: "Thanks for your help as always. Again, I really enjoyed seeing the B-17 and 24, but most of all, I enjoyed listening to the WWII vets that abounded there. I saw a lot of pictures, yearbooks, etc. that those guys had and they were all very willing to tell about their experiences in those planes. One of those priceless experiences."
END OF ARTICLE
Ok, what is this crap about limiting to 6000 feet of runway and why haven't I heard anyone talking about it before this. Is he blowing smoke or is there some truth to this?
The Collings Foundation visited Rutland Airport August 22-24. This foundation brings WWII aircraft to local airports as a living history tour. The turnout was great due to good press and good weather. The Vermont Site Team, Roberta Haskins and Chris Pollard, definitely helped improve the quality of the event. The only downside is that the FAA is looking at restricting these bombers to 6000 feet of runway (in fact all WWII aircraft). That would in effect end Collings Foundation visits to Vermont. What is ironic is the Rutland Airport was originally designed and built for just such aircraft as a staging airport for aircraft enroute to Europe. Bob Snarski, Unit Chief of Starbase said it all in an e-mail to me: "Thanks for your help as always. Again, I really enjoyed seeing the B-17 and 24, but most of all, I enjoyed listening to the WWII vets that abounded there. I saw a lot of pictures, yearbooks, etc. that those guys had and they were all very willing to tell about their experiences in those planes. One of those priceless experiences."
END OF ARTICLE
Ok, what is this crap about limiting to 6000 feet of runway and why haven't I heard anyone talking about it before this. Is he blowing smoke or is there some truth to this?
Wed Sep 08, 2004 3:57 pm
6000 feet? You've got to be joking. Of all the airports with operating warbirds I know of in the state of Minnesota only 1(Duluth Intl) has a runway >= 6000 feet. Surely the author of the newsletter must be mistaken. Are we to believe just because it is a World War II aircraft, a Piper L-4 must be operated from a 6000+ foot runway? Surely not even the FAA can be so daft as to considder such an obviously flawed regulation. B-17s routinely(well only one weekend a year now) operate from runway 10R/28L at Flying Cloud without issue, and it's only 3900 feet.
Wed Sep 08, 2004 4:36 pm
All--
There is no movement by the FAA or any other gov't agency looking to restrict aircraft to runways of any size from what we have heard... seeing as how it was placed in the context of our listing, I am guessing someone in VT seems to be using particular artistic license or something.
We try to adhere to a 5000' restriction on most airports due to our wishes to not overload the brakes (particularly in the case of the B-24) since the NOS brakes are becoming more and more rare. We have made accomodations for smaller airports, but the 5000' idea is more of a guideline than a rule (we require more for higher altitudes).
In my humble opinion this is one of the things we don't need to worry about... there is much more to worry about in the FAA relating to warbirds than this issue (which seems to be made up anyhow).
Ryan Keough
Collings Foundation
There is no movement by the FAA or any other gov't agency looking to restrict aircraft to runways of any size from what we have heard... seeing as how it was placed in the context of our listing, I am guessing someone in VT seems to be using particular artistic license or something.
We try to adhere to a 5000' restriction on most airports due to our wishes to not overload the brakes (particularly in the case of the B-24) since the NOS brakes are becoming more and more rare. We have made accomodations for smaller airports, but the 5000' idea is more of a guideline than a rule (we require more for higher altitudes).
In my humble opinion this is one of the things we don't need to worry about... there is much more to worry about in the FAA relating to warbirds than this issue (which seems to be made up anyhow).
Ryan Keough
Collings Foundation
Wed Sep 08, 2004 5:42 pm
Well I'll tell you my jaw hit the floor when I read it too. I couldn't belive it at first but the gubament being what it is at times it wouldn't surprise me either, thats why I posted this in the first place.....to hear from those that know. The newsletter is an in house publication of the Vermont Agency of Transportations Operations Division which is responsible for Vermonts highways, railroads and state run airports. Articles for the newsletter are submitted by employees and supervisors, upper and lower management. I reprinted the entire piece verbatim except for the above mentioned change in the text. I'm going to send an e-mail to my general foreman and try to get her to send it to the editorial staff of the newsletter and see if they can print a retraction of thisw statement. Probably not but it's worth a try.
Not to be long winded, BUT I remember a few years ago that the B-17 and 24 were going to fly into Hartness airport in Sprinfield Vt. It was raining and the clouds were hanging low to the ground but the weatherman said that conditions would improve a little throughout the day. Dad and I loaded up up into the old crash truck and headed down to see that B-24 for our first time. It did stop raining after a bit but the clouds hung low to the ground and at the appointed arrival time we heard the unmistakeable sound of big radials circling up above the clouds. No way they are ever going to chance coming down in this mess we all said but what did we hear? Engines getting louder as they got closer. All eyes looked up in anticipation and sure enough the Nine o Nine broke out under the clouds nearly over our heads, made a very tight nearly 180 degree turn and was down on the runway. Everyone broke out in cheers as she rolled up to her parking spot and I knew I had just seen something that had not really been seen since 1945 in England. It is a memory I shall cherish to my end and it is why that little article upset me so.
I want the Collings foundation to keep coming to Vermont even if I can't always make it to their display. I know that I'll see them here again at some point and it might even be overcast.
And yes, it was two more years until I got to see the B-24 at Lebanon N.H.
Not to be long winded, BUT I remember a few years ago that the B-17 and 24 were going to fly into Hartness airport in Sprinfield Vt. It was raining and the clouds were hanging low to the ground but the weatherman said that conditions would improve a little throughout the day. Dad and I loaded up up into the old crash truck and headed down to see that B-24 for our first time. It did stop raining after a bit but the clouds hung low to the ground and at the appointed arrival time we heard the unmistakeable sound of big radials circling up above the clouds. No way they are ever going to chance coming down in this mess we all said but what did we hear? Engines getting louder as they got closer. All eyes looked up in anticipation and sure enough the Nine o Nine broke out under the clouds nearly over our heads, made a very tight nearly 180 degree turn and was down on the runway. Everyone broke out in cheers as she rolled up to her parking spot and I knew I had just seen something that had not really been seen since 1945 in England. It is a memory I shall cherish to my end and it is why that little article upset me so.
I want the Collings foundation to keep coming to Vermont even if I can't always make it to their display. I know that I'll see them here again at some point and it might even be overcast.
And yes, it was two more years until I got to see the B-24 at Lebanon N.H.