KISN closed to UND

middies10

middies10

Well-Known Member
Effective immediately – the Williston Airport (KISN) is a no fly airport to UND operations. Nothing specifically happened with or to a UND aircraft. This is purely a proactive change. If there is a specific need to go to Williston – yes, approval can be asked for. With the number of airports out there – there are many options available to UND.

Hopefully, this is temporary. When the infrastructure at Williston improves – we will resume operations to that airport.

The Williston Airport is an uncontrolled airport with a level of activity that has been described as needing a control tower. Ramp parking is limited with aircraft parking on taxiways. Aircraft MX is very limited resulting in higher fees than at other airports. No hotel rooms are available. Therefore, a training flight stuck in Williston – the crew has nowhere to stay."


I remember when I flew out there this summer how limited the GA ramps were. A quick look on flightaware will show just how busy it can get. I've also heard from a friend who contacted the City of Williston that they are planning to build an entirely new airport and demolish the old one. Don't know how much truth there is to that but there defiantly needs to be some expansion of the facilities at ISN.
 
I can understand this. I went solo in an arrow back in 2005 to Williston. At that point, we had the ramp full with 5 aircraft, granted one of them was a B17. The FBO was small and the courtesy car almost didn't run. The best food available was the McDonalds and the town was just quiet. I've been out there a few times lately and the town is just packed. The infrastructure is stretched and the Federal and State are working on massive upgrades asap. There is a town of 200 out by there that has 8000 trucks per day going through town. The road was made for 1000 trucks per year. So there are crumbling roads, overstretched sewage systems and lacking fresh water problems. The airport is just one of the many issues right now.
 
Dugie8 said:
Really? The "leadership" at UND realizes the safety implications that KISN presents and took proactive steps to ward off an incident, you know the whole prior planning and piss poor performance thing


---
I am here: http://tapatalk.com/map.php?cf5mkj
Click to expand...

The only safety implication is that students might freeze to death if their airplane breaks, and that's not even really a factor because they'd certainly be able to find a place to stay eventually - or hell, the UND King Air could come over eventually and pick them up if it was that bad. Going to a busy uncontrolled airport is great experience and they should have the opportunity to go learn. Why the hell not? On top of that, why should the school be planning that for them? This is about learning how to make your own decisions as a pilot, not have someone tell you what decisions you can make. Williston's kinda busy, but not too busy, would UND students be forbidden from flying into MSP where it's really busy? If it's actually about having a place to stay if something breaks, then has UND got a hotel room reserved at every place their students go? Bismarck doesn't have a single room in town - no, it's true, the Ramkota may have a few left, but the whole damn town is booked up - are the UND students not going to be able to go to Bismarck?

On top of that, Williston isn't that busy. I mean, it's busy, but it's not really that busy. Learning to fly, learning to make decisions, and learning how to operate in an environment that isn't standard is excellent training. How the hell are they supposed to learn if they aren't allowed to go to challenging places?
 
We are in and out all week. Oil workers. Its a nice field but lots o jets and turbo props flying in and out.
 
MSP will NOT do Mx on piston aircraft. UND would have to call out Mx from STP or FCM to do any issues at MSP. As such, MSP is off limits since there are OTHER AIRPORTS. My God, heaven forbid that the company that owns the aircraft makes the rules. Don't like it, GO RENT AN AIRPLANE SOMEWHERE ELSE, or go buy your own!

Next time you rent off an FBO and they say you can't do something, go ahead, argue, see what happens. There are PLENTY of operations that I could do at UND Aerospace that I couldn't do with Lowell's airplanes at KCKN. So get off your high horse already! It is overcrowded, a long flight away, limited gas, maintenance and shelter, so they said no. They can say no to any airport at any time, it is a condition of using their aircraft. You wanna go complain, there's the door!
 
Dugie8 said:
Really? The "leadership" at UND realizes the safety implications that KISN presents and took proactive steps to ward off an incident, you know the whole prior planning and piss poor performance thing




---
I am here: http://tapatalk.com/map.php?cf5mkj
Click to expand...
There's no way that airport is busier than anywhere in the LA basin that people train at all the time. I've been to quite a few uncontrolled airports on the east cost that have 5-7 airplanes in the vicinity about 12 hours a day. Pistons, turbo props and jets, all mixing in and managing to to kill each other.

If you don't go do it, you can't learn it. When it comes to flying there is a significant portion of it that cannot be learned from the ground. That was the point, as I to went to a 141 school for most of my ratings and saw the same garbage... if there was good experience to be had... NO!
Thankfully, I put a bit of pt 61 in there with an instructor that saw some deficiencies in areas, which I think lead to me being competent enough to do some of my first jobs.
 
I don't get it. I honestly don't get you people. Taking the conservative road is never a bad idea, ever. KISN is getting busy and doesn't have the ramp space, facilities or housing to deal with potential and foreseeable problems by allowing training flights to go there. Read the message, approval is available which will most likely result in a quick discussion of the mentioned factors and the student sent on their way. This isn't about busy traffic and the UND bubble its simply about reducing the risk that a student and training resources could be tied up without proper facilities when that risk can be effectively managed

We dont take the jet into strips less than 5500 feet without speaking to the CP or DO. It has nothing to do with our ability or experience and everything to do with risk management.

This constant rage against the machine a lot of people show is getting old. The invincible attitude will get you exactly nowhere.
 
Dugie8 said:
I don't get it. I honestly don't get you people. Taking the conservative road is never a bad idea, ever. KISN is getting busy and doesn't have the ramp space, facilities or housing to deal with potential and foreseeable problems by allowing training flights to go there. Read the message, approval is available which will most likely result in a quick discussion of the mentioned factors and the student sent on their way. This isn't about busy traffic and the UND bubble its simply about reducing the risk that a student and training resources could be tied up without proper facilities when that risk can be effectively managed

We dont take the jet into strips less than 5500 feet without speaking to the CP or DO. It has nothing to do with our ability or experience and everything to do with risk management.

This constant rage against the machine a lot of people show is getting old. The invincible attitude will get you exactly nowhere.
Click to expand...

I couldnt agree more. Most things UND does is for safety reasons and I can respect that. Other things such as not letting a CFI student (who has a commercial pilot license) go out and fly solo to the practice area without getting a wind endorsement and a sign off is pretty dumb if you ask me.
 
As always, fly the airplanes where and how the Company says to. However, denying the use of one particular airport out of literally hundreds within a 300 NM radius because of a lack of mx and surplus of traffic seems a little asinine to me. I mean do UND planes get downed at outstations so often that that is a real valid concern? I landed at a lot of Podunk Airports in the ArkLaTex where we would have been SOL had something broke, but most of the time something doesn't and really that's just a risk of doing business.
As a side note, if the airport is really that busy with little to no maintenance on the field I think I see a ripe opportunity for a new maintenance shop...
 
z987k said:
There's no way that airport is busier than anywhere in the LA basin that people train at all the time. I've been to quite a few uncontrolled airports on the east cost that have 5-7 airplanes in the vicinity about 12 hours a day. Pistons, turbo props and jets, all mixing in and managing to to kill each other.

If you don't go do it, you can't learn it. When it comes to flying there is a significant portion of it that cannot be learned from the ground. That was the point, as I to went to a 141 school for most of my ratings and saw the same garbage... if there was good experience to be had... NO!
Thankfully, I put a bit of pt 61 in there with an instructor that saw some deficiencies in areas, which I think lead to me being competent enough to do some of my first jobs.
Click to expand...
Ok, I just ran the stats for 2011 in terms of airport operations, GFK is number 21 nationwide. I can recall takeoffs and landings every 30 seconds for hours upon hours a day. So with your "busy" california airports...
  • #5 LAX
  • #15 SFO
  • #21 GFK
  • #26 VNY
  • #27 LGB
  • #34 SNA
  • #43 OAK
  • #55 SAN
Now, if you want to say about the merits of the bubble, fine, I get it. Before you criticize the fact that UND doesn't get to busier airports... It's in North Dakota, it is the 21st busiest airport in the US. We have had years where we are in the top10. There is a big push to do more at satellite airports and get out there. There are probably 30 planes a DAY in Mx at GFK and probably about 10 at satellite airports. UND has more operations in a year than most airlines. So to control costs they try to set up with certain cities for Mx. They have UND Mx drive for hours sometimes in the middle of the night to fix a plane.

So going to ISN or MSP where there is no mx and sometimes no fuel is a bad idea for every flight. Yet they will still let you go there if you plan properly. They have a lot of contract and ppl students that don't think everything through. So, the blanket is there to keep everyone cosy.

Point of story... GRAND FORKS IS NOT A SMALL AIRPORT with NO TRAFFIC. Come stop by any nice day between 10am-7pm and just see how far back you are. I have been number 19 for landing when the weather gets bad. When I few to O'Hare in the Baron at peak, I was number 3 on the ILS. So yeah, get a clue.
 
I've never flown around gfk, but I highly doubt it's as busy as the basin, where if you're not at the exact same altitude it's not even worth pointing out, and half the people aren't even talking to anyone. The point was, it's not just one airport, it's all of them, together, and the traffic isn't just in the pattern, or within 30 miles doing local. A bunch of people in Cherokees doing training is not the same environment at all.
Up in and around NYC it can be the same, flying vfr under the shelves and such.
 
Roger Roger said:
As always, fly the airplanes where and how the Company says to. However, denying the use of one particular airport out of literally hundreds within a 300 NM radius because of a lack of mx and surplus of traffic seems a little asinine to me. I mean do UND planes get downed at outstations so often that that is a real valid concern? I landed at a lot of Podunk Airports in the ArkLaTex where we would have been SOL had something broke, but most of the time something doesn't and really that's just a risk of doing business.
As a side note, if the airport is really that busy with little to no maintenance on the field I think I see a ripe opportunity for a new maintenance shop...
Click to expand...
it's not just lack of MX and high traffic, it's the combination of distance, no place for students to if they get stuck, etc. when the deck starts getting stacked against you, you take the conservative course of action.

There is nothing of note that KISN offers that restricting it robs anybody of anything.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top