Training with ordinance ?

J

JayAre

Well-Known Member
Yesterday coming back to SLC I was with clover control. Listening to the controller he was asking some of the F16s to verify ordinance on board for a overflight on traffic behind me which also was another company plane.
Are there rules in if a civilian aircraft is in your vicinity and you have ordinance onboard.
Earlier I was watching them under me doing turns over Wendover and it looked like they had some missiles on board.
 
Can't speak for the Navy, but there are several Air Force Instructions, range regulations, and local guidance that cover flying with live ordnance.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk - now Free
 
No, I have never heard of anything like that. If we have "hung" live ordnance (as in a weapon that received a firing/release pulse and separated partially from the aircraft), that is a really big deal due to safety concerns, but that is mainly just a matter of not flying over populated areas and making a straight in to a runway that makes sense (normally determined via a local SOP). There is absolutely no risk to civilian air traffic (or anything else) when we are simply transiting with live ordnance. Having carried live missiles and live bombs (and expended all), I can't think of a reason this would be an issue. Maybe I am wrong, but I have no idea what that controller was talking about. Weapons don't just magically come off the jet when we are over people that would be hurt by them.
 
///AMG said:
No, I have never heard of anything like that.
Click to expand...
The only time that anybody asked us about ordnance was at a joint-use airport (Greensboro, I think). By policy, aircraft with ordnance were directed to the revetments for parking.
 
Last edited:
///AMG said:
No, I have never heard of anything like that. If we have "hung" live ordnance (as in a weapon that received a firing/release pulse and separated partially from the aircraft), that is a really big deal due to safety concerns, but that is mainly just a matter of not flying over populated areas and making a straight in to a runway that makes sense (normally determined via a local SOP). There is absolutely no risk to civilian air traffic (or anything else) when we are simply transiting with live ordnance. Having carried live missiles and live bombs (and expended all), I can't think of a reason this would be an issue. Maybe I am wrong, but I have no idea what that controller was talking about. Weapons don't just magically come off the jet when we are over people that would be hurt by them.
Click to expand...
Thank you!
 
Pilot Fighter said:
The only time that anybody asked us about live ordnance was at a joint-use airport (Greensboro, I think). By policy, aircraft with ordnance were directed to the revetments for parking.
Click to expand...

Yeah, agreed.....if actually intending to land at any sort of civilian field with live ordnance, I'm sure there would be a whole lot of questions, not least of which would be who the f is going to de-arm you. I could probably de-arm an AIM-9X, but I wouldn't have a clue what to do with anything else......and I'm the ordies divo :)
 
///AMG said:
Yeah, agreed.....if actually intending to land at any sort of civilian field with live ordnance, I'm sure there would be a whole lot of questions, not least of which would be who the f is going to de-arm you. I could probably de-arm an AIM-9X, but I wouldn't have a clue what to do with anything else......and I'm the ordies divo :)
Click to expand...
They are used to dealing with transport aircraft with hot cargo, not tactical aircraft with live ordnance. The answer is "hell no", I'm parking at the GA terminal.

Edit: Replaced "live ordnance" with "ordnance" above.
 
///AMG said:
Yeah, agreed.....if actually intending to land at any sort of civilian field with live ordnance, I'm sure there would be a whole lot of questions, not least of which would be who the f is going to de-arm you. I could probably de-arm an AIM-9X, but I wouldn't have a clue what to do with anything else......and I'm the ordies divo :)
Click to expand...

Im calling your XO and having you made scullery officer instead. :)

But to the OP, oftentimes, the ordnance you're seeing on jets is inert anyway, often with blue bands on it to show that status, vice yellow for live.

Sometimes, things hanging on pylons on jets is hard-mounted and have no ejection-squibs installed to allow for jettison. On the A-10, this was the case for stations 1/11. They could have squibs installed like any other station when carrying ordnance, but when the dual-rail adapter and AIM-9s were installed, and especially when the ECM pod was installed, those couldn't be jettisoned; the ECM pod because it was more expensive than the jet itself. :) Which made for interesting times for an engine failure on takeoff in a jet that's already severely underpowered, and now has a large pod hanging on the far end wing station, weight/drag and all. Lose the "correct" engine, and it somewhat helps with lateral control, though is still 800lbs of dead weight; lose the "wrong" engine, and all of that works against you.

With regards to live/heavyweight ordnance, a base must have appropriate ordnance loading and parking areas for those aircraft; this comes into play at "joint-use" bases where you have civilian/military ops.....many of these jets have to go to an active duty base to load heavyweights. Too, there can be departure or arrival restrictions for heavyweight live ordnance at particular fields; at KDMA, departures with heavyweights must be off RW 12 to the southeast; no departures allowed off RW30 to the northwest......I guess the central Tucson residents are more important then the Rita Ranch ones. :)
 
MikeD said:
this comes into play at "joint-use" bases where you have civilian/military ops.....
Click to expand...
Flying into joint-use bases was always fun. Out of habit, they would try to marshal us to the mil side of the field while Navy guys wanted to park at the GA ramp where the rental cars were.
 
Pilot Fighter said:
Flying into joint-use bases was always fun. Out of habit, they would try to marshal us to the mil side of the field while Navy guys wanted to park at the GA ramp where the rental cars were.
Click to expand...

The age-old debate (and a correct one, mind you) or USAF vs USN/USMC, and how they view cross country ops:

USAF: treat you like a child, micromanage you, try to do everthing to make it as un-fun as possible. Must go to AFB if at all possible, or other DoD installation if not. If joint use, must park on mil-side. Must use mil fuel, must use (often non-existant) mil ground transportation, must stay in mil billeting. The USAF gives you a noose, with a rope thats 3 feet long, thus making it very easy to hang yourself.

USN/USMC: treat you like an adult, minimal supervision, don't do anything to make something fun or un-fun.......that's up to you. May go to any suitable field, mil or civilian, that has DoD contract fuel and the appropriate ground support; if joint use, may park on FBO side. May use FBO fuel (which they love!), can use transportation you can acquire, may use civilian or military billeting. The USN/USMC gives you the SAME noose the USAF gives you; however their noose is attached to a rope that is 3000 feet long, SO, if you somehow do manage to hang yourself by something you did, then it was ALL your OWN fault.

This discussion reminded me of a NOTAM I came across a while back when heading out on a flight. Id mentioned this before too.

Seems too many C-17s, F/A-18s, C-130s, etc, had been swinging over to the Cutter Aviation side of the airport in KABQ, instead of heading to the KIKR side of the field. I saw a C-17 over there getting filled up once, when the military side of the field has fuel. That must've cost a fortune to the taxpayer, although I don't know the reason (if any) that the C-17 would've been over there, when the transient line was open on the base side.........apart from the amenities! :) USN aircraft are always over there at Cutter (at KPHX too), as well as many airport FBOs, as the USN has more liberal regs on where their tactical aircraft could go as Ive mentioned. As this was a DOD directive/NOTAM, I wonder what its effect is/was for them. The reason this NOTAM is out, is that ABQ is a joint-use field, and I believe this affects all joint-use fields......ie- if there is military fueling available, then it needs to be used.
L0039/10 - PER DOD INSTUCTIONS DESC-I-31, MILITARY INSTALLATION AVIATION
FUEL RESOURCES AND RELATED SERVICES SHALL BE USED DUE TO SIGNIFICANT
COST SAVINGS. ALL MILITARY AIRCRAFT ARRIVING ALBUQUERQUE
INTERNATIONAL SUNPORT DURING KIRTLAND AIR FORCE BASES OPERATING HOURS (M-F 1300Z-0100Z, SAT 1400Z-1900Z) SHOULD USE MILTARY SIDE OF THE
AIRPORT FOR SERVICES. CONTACT KIRTLAND OPS AT DSN 246-8335/6 OR COMM
505-846-8335/6. 05 AUG 14:23 UNTIL 01 NOV 23:59. CREATED: 05 AUG 14:20
Click to expand...
 
MikeD said:
The age-old debate (and a correct one, mind you) or USAF vs USN/USMC, and how they view cross country ops:

USAF: treat you like a child, micromanage you, try to do everthing to make it as un-fun as possible. Must go to AFB if at all possible, or other DoD installation if not. If joint use, must park on mil-side. Must use mil fuel, must use (often non-existant) mil ground transportation, must stay in mil billeting. The USAF gives you a noose, with a rope thats 3 feet long, thus making it very easy to hang yourself.

USN/USMC: treat you like an adult, minimal supervision, don't do anything to make something fun or un-fun.......that's up to you. May go to any suitable field, mil or civilian, that has DoD contract fuel and the appropriate ground support; if joint use, may park on FBO side. May use FBO fuel (which they love!), can use transportation you can acquire, may use civilian or military billeting. The USN/USMC gives you the SAME noose the USAF gives you; however their noose is attached to a rope that is 3000 feet long, SO, if you somehow do manage to hang yourself by something you did, then it was ALL your OWN fault.

This discussion reminded me of a NOTAM I came across a while back when heading out on a flight. Id mentioned this before too.

Seems too many C-17s, F/A-18s, C-130s, etc, had been swinging over to the Cutter Aviation side of the airport in KABQ, instead of heading to the KIKR side of the field. I saw a C-17 over there getting filled up once, when the military side of the field has fuel. That must've cost a fortune to the taxpayer, although I don't know the reason (if any) that the C-17 would've been over there, when the transient line was open on the base side.........apart from the amenities! :) USN aircraft are always over there at Cutter (at KPHX too), as well as many airport FBOs, as the USN has more liberal regs on where their tactical aircraft could go as Ive mentioned. As this was a DOD directive/NOTAM, I wonder what its effect is/was for them. The reason this NOTAM is out, is that ABQ is a joint-use field, and I believe this affects all joint-use fields......ie- if there is military fueling available, then it needs to be used.
Click to expand...

That's why I don't mind being lower than petrified whale dookie on the AF's list of aircraft to keep an eye on.
 
@ Mike, yeah we stopped through Cutter last time we came back from Fallon. Nice folks, easy and convenient. It is just the convenience factor......easy to deal with the folks at an FBO where you are not being helped by some 18-20 yr old Airman at an air ops desk who is standing the weekend watch and doesn't want to do anything but watch TV/internet. That and you don't have to file a DD-175 which is probably really the biggest reason. Of all the -175's I've painstakingly filed, I'd say a good 95% of them were never even put into the system once they got to air ops......and then there you are, sitting in a hot jet, burning taxpayer gas, while they try to find the clearance that said ops dude just threw in the trash or didn't even bother to look for, even after you called over to verify that it had been received. ......../soapbox
 
I wrote a money-saving "IDEA" form up last year to just use the FAA flight plan system instead of the DD-175. I'm sure the airfield ops community crapped all over it.
 
hook_dupin said:
I wrote a money-saving "IDEA" form up last year to just use the FAA flight plan system instead of the DD-175. I'm sure the airfield ops community crapped all over it.
Click to expand...

Youre trying to put them out of business? :)

How about having to file an 1801 to fly from Osan to Suwon, two airfields that overlap one another, and I can see their tower from my field; but need that international flight plan filed to fly a 0.1 relocation flight.
 
MikeD said:
The age-old debate (and a correct one, mind you) or USAF vs USN/USMC, and how they view cross country ops:

USAF: treat you like a child, micromanage you, try to do everthing to make it as un-fun as possible. Must go to AFB if at all possible, or other DoD installation if not. If joint use, must park on mil-side. Must use mil fuel, must use (often non-existant) mil ground transportation, must stay in mil billeting. The USAF gives you a noose, with a rope thats 3 feet long, thus making it very easy to hang yourself.

USN/USMC: treat you like an adult, minimal supervision, don't do anything to make something fun or un-fun.......that's up to you. May go to any suitable field, mil or civilian, that has DoD contract fuel and the appropriate ground support; if joint use, may park on FBO side. May use FBO fuel (which they love!), can use transportation you can acquire, may use civilian or military billeting. The USN/USMC gives you the SAME noose the USAF gives you; however their noose is attached to a rope that is 3000 feet long, SO, if you somehow do manage to hang yourself by something you did, then it was ALL your OWN fault.

This discussion reminded me of a NOTAM I came across a while back when heading out on a flight. Id mentioned this before too.

Seems too many C-17s, F/A-18s, C-130s, etc, had been swinging over to the Cutter Aviation side of the airport in KABQ, instead of heading to the KIKR side of the field. I saw a C-17 over there getting filled up once, when the military side of the field has fuel. That must've cost a fortune to the taxpayer, although I don't know the reason (if any) that the C-17 would've been over there, when the transient line was open on the base side.........apart from the amenities! :) USN aircraft are always over there at Cutter (at KPHX too), as well as many airport FBOs, as the USN has more liberal regs on where their tactical aircraft could go as Ive mentioned. As this was a DOD directive/NOTAM, I wonder what its effect is/was for them. The reason this NOTAM is out, is that ABQ is a joint-use field, and I believe this affects all joint-use fields......ie- if there is military fueling available, then it needs to be used.
Click to expand...
When I moved over to the supply side of the hangar, I managed the operations funding for the squadron. It's actually easier to manage and process fuel expenditures using the gas cards (not the white DOD card) at civilian FBOs. It also keeps operational expenditures reporting up to date and not having to go back and report them later on during a different month or however long it takes to catch up. We were "advised" by both the Wing and AIRLANT/AIRPAC that when aircraft were on a cross country the were to explicitly stop to refuel at into-plane contracted fuel (FBOs) versus stopping at military airfields for DOD fuel.
 
///AMG said:
Of all the -175's I've painstakingly filed, I'd say a good 95% of them were never even put into the system once they got to air ops......and then there you are, sitting in a hot jet, burning taxpayer gas, while they try to find the clearance that said ops dude just threw in the trash...
Click to expand...
If anybody ever read mine, they would have been entertained by my remarks and honor codes.

I never did get the high school marching band I requested. Actually, I think I could have called that in to any number of FBO's and they would have made it happen.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top