5 ms·

How difficult is it to get clearance to fly a helicopter or airplane over Manhattan as they did? It seems like an unnecessary risk given the population density.

by larrys 12y ago

How difficult is it to get clearance to fly a helicopter or airplane over Manhattan as they did? It seems like an unnecessary risk given the population density. For that matter wouldn't it be possible for a terrorist to get approval by creating a ruse of a legitimate (but non essential) reason?

davidwihl 12y ago
It isn't particularly difficult for a small aircraft, provided airline traffic isn't too busy. NYC ATC is usually pretty accommodating. There are helicopters constantly buzzing the city. Note that the terror threat is very small since the payload of these light aircraft is significantly less than driving a truck full of explosives at street level. Think typically less than 1,000 lbs vs 20,000 lbs.
- larrys 12y ago
  Good point. Of course if they managed to get a hold of a Chinook they could do much more weight: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_CH-47_Chinook http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_CH-47_Chinook They actually use something like this to hoist HVAC units on roofs (so it's not a total stretch). I was thinking also more in terms of the "terrorism" value of crashing anything of any size into a building in Manhattan vs. the raw damage. Of course airplanes of all sizes are also possible obviously.
  - sokoloff 12y ago
    Corey Lidle did it in Manhattan (accidentally), and someone did it intentionally in Austin a few years' back: http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010_Austin_suicide_attack http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010_Austin_suicide_attack It's just not that effective a means, even of terror, IMO. A rented truck, or a stolen delivery truck, would be wildly more effective.
    - larrys 12y ago
      In aviation is there an implied "see something say something"? By that I mean if you thought a pilot was acting strangely when you were in and around the airport how would you or other pilot's handle the situation? (I know it's a total "it depends" obviously.)
      - sokoloff 12y ago
        Yes, that's the catch phrase of AOPA's Airport Watch campaign, in concert with TSA and DHS: http://capnhq.custhelp.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/888/~/aopa-airport-watch-program http://capnhq.custhelp.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/888/~/aop... Honestly, that program is more likely to turn up drug running or theft from airports/aircraft than terrorism. In terms of seeing odd or unsafe behavior, I feel a moral obligation to talk to a pilot I see doing something unsafe. Talk to him/her, not call the Feds. There's a pretty lively debate about talk face-to-face vs call the Feds. While I've had excellent interactions with the FAA at every turn, I've also read absolute horror stories of other interactions, so I'm still inclined to offer a "word to the wise" type conversation rather than dropping a dime on someone. If I feared for my safety or the safety of others, and didn't want to talk directly to the person, there's ready and ample means to get such an inquiry started. And of course, there are codes (that are basically an open secret) for hijack situations and it would not be hard to encode a message to ATC without using the most well-known code. I don't want to link them directly, but google "squawk codes" and it'll come right up. Edit: here's a fascinating account that I have no reason to think is other than truthful: https://groups.google.com/forum/#!msg/rec.aviation.piloting/nJXglYbjOjs/245C3OSJkzEJ https://groups.google.com/forum/#!msg/rec.aviation.piloting/...
ganeumann 12y ago
NY ATC hates giving VFR clearance in the area. Too much jet traffic to deal with. If you can get a word in edgewise, they'll often let you out over NJ (watch out for the Teterboro jets!) but I never see anyone heading out over Manhattan. You need to be above 2000' to be legal because of the height of the buildings and then you're starting to get into the altitudes the jets are using on approach to JFK or LGA. Over the Hudson River (East River too) is VFR (uncontrolled) airspace up to 1500 feet [edit: this was changed to 1300 feet in 2009, after the accident referenced below] bank to bank up to the George Washington Bridge. My flight instructor told me that the radar shadow of the buildings makes it difficult to control, but I don't really know if that's the reason. You don't need ATC permission to fly there. It's a zoo, though, pretty dense helicopter and small plane traffic, and everybody's looking at the big buildings, not the other planes. In 2009 a small plane and helicopter collided, killing 9 people. I've flown up there once, and it was totally worth it, but I probably wouldn't do it again.
- sokoloff 12y ago
  That's not been my experience. I can regularly get my choice of the Hudson at 2000 or lower with a clearance (1100-2000 requires a clearance in most places). At night, I prefer lower as the buildings are more impressive when you're below the top of them. On a nice summer day, the VFR corridor can be a zoo, so I'll sometimes take the clearance at 1500 just to stay in less congested airspace. If LGA is landing 13 or Newark is using 11/29, then you have a conflict with the airspace over the river, but it's very rare for Newark to use 11/29, and LGA traffic counts aren't all that high to present a conflict. Plus, if you're on a clearance and being controlled by LGA tower, they'll turn you if they need to to accommodate a departure or an arrival. I often hear pilots complain they can't get a clearance through NYC Bravo airspace, but I've only once been turned down in probably 50 attempts. That was a Thanksgiving Wednesday when they had a radar outage and they were turning everyone away who wasn't landing inside the Bravo. I've found NYC tri-Bravo controllers some of the easiest and most accommodating approach controllers to work with.
  - larrys 12y ago
    Total envy that you (and the parent commenter) actually get to do this type of thing. (Meaning fly private planes or helis).

by larrys 12y ago

davidwihl 12y ago

It isn't particularly difficult for a small aircraft, provided airline traffic isn't too busy. NYC ATC is usually pretty accommodating. There are helicopters constantly buzzing the city. Note that the terror threat is very small since the payload of these light aircraft is significantly less than driving a truck full of explosives at street level. Think typically less than 1,000 lbs vs 20,000 lbs.

larrys 12y ago
Good point. Of course if they managed to get a hold of a Chinook they could do much more weight: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_CH-47_Chinook http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_CH-47_Chinook They actually use something like this to hoist HVAC units on roofs (so it's not a total stretch). I was thinking also more in terms of the "terrorism" value of crashing anything of any size into a building in Manhattan vs. the raw damage. Of course airplanes of all sizes are also possible obviously.
- sokoloff 12y ago
  Corey Lidle did it in Manhattan (accidentally), and someone did it intentionally in Austin a few years' back: http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010_Austin_suicide_attack http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010_Austin_suicide_attack It's just not that effective a means, even of terror, IMO. A rented truck, or a stolen delivery truck, would be wildly more effective.
  - larrys 12y ago
    In aviation is there an implied "see something say something"? By that I mean if you thought a pilot was acting strangely when you were in and around the airport how would you or other pilot's handle the situation? (I know it's a total "it depends" obviously.)
    - sokoloff 12y ago
      Yes, that's the catch phrase of AOPA's Airport Watch campaign, in concert with TSA and DHS: http://capnhq.custhelp.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/888/~/aopa-airport-watch-program http://capnhq.custhelp.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/888/~/aop... Honestly, that program is more likely to turn up drug running or theft from airports/aircraft than terrorism. In terms of seeing odd or unsafe behavior, I feel a moral obligation to talk to a pilot I see doing something unsafe. Talk to him/her, not call the Feds. There's a pretty lively debate about talk face-to-face vs call the Feds. While I've had excellent interactions with the FAA at every turn, I've also read absolute horror stories of other interactions, so I'm still inclined to offer a "word to the wise" type conversation rather than dropping a dime on someone. If I feared for my safety or the safety of others, and didn't want to talk directly to the person, there's ready and ample means to get such an inquiry started. And of course, there are codes (that are basically an open secret) for hijack situations and it would not be hard to encode a message to ATC without using the most well-known code. I don't want to link them directly, but google "squawk codes" and it'll come right up. Edit: here's a fascinating account that I have no reason to think is other than truthful: https://groups.google.com/forum/#!msg/rec.aviation.piloting/nJXglYbjOjs/245C3OSJkzEJ https://groups.google.com/forum/#!msg/rec.aviation.piloting/...

ganeumann 12y ago

NY ATC hates giving VFR clearance in the area. Too much jet traffic to deal with. If you can get a word in edgewise, they'll often let you out over NJ (watch out for the Teterboro jets!) but I never see anyone heading out over Manhattan. You need to be above 2000' to be legal because of the height of the buildings and then you're starting to get into the altitudes the jets are using on approach to JFK or LGA. Over the Hudson River (East River too) is VFR (uncontrolled) airspace up to 1500 feet [edit: this was changed to 1300 feet in 2009, after the accident referenced below] bank to bank up to the George Washington Bridge. My flight instructor told me that the radar shadow of the buildings makes it difficult to control, but I don't really know if that's the reason. You don't need ATC permission to fly there. It's a zoo, though, pretty dense helicopter and small plane traffic, and everybody's looking at the big buildings, not the other planes. In 2009 a small plane and helicopter collided, killing 9 people. I've flown up there once, and it was totally worth it, but I probably wouldn't do it again.

sokoloff 12y ago
That's not been my experience. I can regularly get my choice of the Hudson at 2000 or lower with a clearance (1100-2000 requires a clearance in most places). At night, I prefer lower as the buildings are more impressive when you're below the top of them. On a nice summer day, the VFR corridor can be a zoo, so I'll sometimes take the clearance at 1500 just to stay in less congested airspace. If LGA is landing 13 or Newark is using 11/29, then you have a conflict with the airspace over the river, but it's very rare for Newark to use 11/29, and LGA traffic counts aren't all that high to present a conflict. Plus, if you're on a clearance and being controlled by LGA tower, they'll turn you if they need to to accommodate a departure or an arrival. I often hear pilots complain they can't get a clearance through NYC Bravo airspace, but I've only once been turned down in probably 50 attempts. That was a Thanksgiving Wednesday when they had a radar outage and they were turning everyone away who wasn't landing inside the Bravo. I've found NYC tri-Bravo controllers some of the easiest and most accommodating approach controllers to work with.
- larrys 12y ago
  Total envy that you (and the parent commenter) actually get to do this type of thing. (Meaning fly private planes or helis).