Thorp Air Command - T18.net

Bob pointed this out Monday after our trip to Kentucky. Looking at the Jacksonville Sectional, there are airports marked "objectionable" in lieu of the assigned name. Seems any thing to do with angels, etc is subject to being omitted and listed as "objectionable" Our political correct at work??

I further looked at the legend and it says the term "objectionable" means that the operations at that airport may interfer with airspace. The fact that the real airport name is replaced by a term to denote usage or conditions is not in the best interest of safety. Runway elevation and length is also omitted. This seems to apply to private airports only.

This is a flaw in the use of sectionals electronically. You can't see the the legend or inserts contanined in the printed version.

To seewhat we are talking about, look about 12 NM ENE of Tallahassee, FL on the Jacksonville sectional for an example. There are others.

_________________
Bob Highley
N711SH
SN 835
KLAL

I saw that & thought is was a fly-in community with a really bad marketing department!

OBJECTIONABLE AIRPORT ? Not sure how recent that term is , but it is the first time I have seen it . Had to look it up to remove that warm feeling in my pants ! Here is what I found and it still has the oder of "Fuzzy Govt. Math " , which means no one really knows the true meaning of "Objectionable Airport" other than the FAA.

"When a person proposes to construct, alter, or deactivate a civil or joint use (civil/military) airport or to alter the status of such airport they must comply with PART 157 OF CODE OF FEDERAL REGULATIONS . These rules only apply to airports that are not required under federal agreement to have an approved airport layout plan with the FAA . Therefore, most of the airports will be privately owned airfields .

The air traffic office must conduct an airspace review to evaluate the effect on the safe and efficient utilization of airspace by aircraft and the effect that such proposals may have on the movement and contol of air traffic and associated resources (personnel, facilities and equipment) , and the ATC program planning .

Upon completion of the airspace review, and the airspace has not passed the review process, the airspace is deemed objectionable. when this occurs the airport will be printed on the VFR chart with the words OBJECTIONABLE next to it . "

What do we do now ? Fly around the airport ? Over it ? Is is safe to land ? Do we call ATC and tell them we are landing at the Objectionable Airport and do they have any objections to us landing ? The airport has always been there, it just appears that most of these airports changed hands from the military to civil use ? I recommend the airport be labeled as FUBAR until they can figure it out !

RB

Rich, you make my head hurt.....but you have it figured out. I would like to see the airport name and some sort of denotation indicating why this airport does not meet FAA or DOT requirements rather than OBJECTIONABLE with no idication other than it did not meet requirements for what ever reason.

Bill : It's my job to make people's head hurt ! Now that I have had time to think about this problem that poses a National Airspace Security issue, why not just "NOTAM" the airport rather than list the "word" OBJECTIONABLE on the chart . As least with the NOTAM you might get some type of explaination as to why they find this airport not in compliance . Want to put a stop to this non-sense, just ask the Controller every time you fly into one of these airports what the term means . Objectionable will soon turn into REMOVED !

RB

A lot of decisions made at the fed level are " objectionable", I am surprised the Phrase "WE Dunno" is not used instead of "Objectionable ". We have some " Own risk" airfields here close by, I guess everything else is at someone else's risk if you use them instead of the "Own Risk". Dan