Aviation & Airport Ground Access
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
United States Air Force and Its Antecedents Published and Printed Unit Histories
UNITED STATES AIR FORCE AND ITS ANTECEDENTS PUBLISHED AND PRINTED UNIT HISTORIES A BIBLIOGRAPHY EXPANDED & REVISED EDITION compiled by James T. Controvich January 2001 TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTERS User's Guide................................................................................................................................1 I. Named Commands .......................................................................................................................4 II. Numbered Air Forces ................................................................................................................ 20 III. Numbered Commands .............................................................................................................. 41 IV. Air Divisions ............................................................................................................................. 45 V. Wings ........................................................................................................................................ 49 VI. Groups ..................................................................................................................................... 69 VII. Squadrons..............................................................................................................................122 VIII. Aviation Engineers................................................................................................................ 179 IX. Womens Army Corps............................................................................................................ -
FRENCH VALLEY AIRPORT (F70) 37600 Sky Canyon Dr
FRENCH VALLEY AIRPORT (F70) 37600 Sky Canyon Dr. Murrieta, CA Phone: 951-600-7297 Riverside FAA FSDO Complaint Line: (951) 276-6701 Visit the F70 website for additional information regarding the airport and procedures at www.rcfva.org Federal Aviation Administration FAA Headquarters 800 Independence Ave., SW Washington, DC 20591 www.faa.gov/contact Feedback is always appreciated at [email protected] INTRODUCTION In response to community interest, this booklet was developed to provide an overview of Airport operations and the complaint process. It will explain how and what aircraft operate in vicinity of F70, their interaction with our neighbors, and how complaints are handled. (F70 is the identifier selected by Federal Aviation Administration for the French Valley Airport. All airports have a three- character identifier; local examples are ONT for Ontario International Airport and LAX for Los Angeles Airport.) AIRPORT HISTORY In the late 1970s, discussion and planning began on relocating the existing Rancho California Airport due, in part, to safety deficiencies. In addition, the airport was leased to the County with the owner not wanting to renew the lease. An evaluation leading to the identification and selection of potential new sites was undertaken in June 1983. In June 1985 the Riverside County Board of Supervisors approved a resolution designating the French Valley site as the replacement site for the existing Rancho California Airport. The Federal Aviation Administration approved the French Valley Airport Layout plan in 1985 and funded four grants for land acquisition. Initial construction of French Valley Airport began in October 1987 and was completed in April 1989. -
Countywide Airspace Usage
A PPENDIX I Countywide Airspace Usage Riverside County is within one of the busiest and most complex sections of airspace in the United States, handling over 4.3 million operations annually. To better understand the magnitude of these op- erations and complexities of this system, Map 1 depicts Instrument Flight Rule (IFR) operations for the six busiest airports in the area for a 24-hour period on January 26, 1996. This exhibit does not depict operations from the 14 airports in Riverside County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan update. AIRSPACE STRUCTURE Since the advent of aviation, nations have established procedures within their boundaries to regulate the use of airspace. Airspace is broadly classified as either “controlled” or “uncontrolled” in the United States. The difference between the two categories relates primarily to requirements for pilot qualifica- tions, ground-to-air communications, navigation and traffic services, and weather conditions. Six classes of airspace have been designated in the United States. Airspace designated as Class A, B, C, D, or E is considered controlled airspace. Aircraft operating within controlled airspace are subject to vary- ing requirements for positive air traffic control. The airspace in Riverside County, as illustrated on Map 2, is constantly occupied by aircraft arriving and departing from other airports in the region. Frequently, overflights experienced in communities near Riverside County airports are not the result of operations at nearby airports, but from aircraft us- ing airports outside Riverside County. After the preparation of this plan, additional approaches have been established for aircraft arriving at Los Angeles International Airport. These new approaches were not included as part of the map development process for this plan. -
~ COP11 Performance of Recycled Asphalt G~ DOT/FAA/PM-86/12 -/ Program Engineering Concrete Airport Pavement /.(.L-~ and Maintenance Service Washington, D.C
;~ COP11 Performance of Recycled Asphalt g~ DOT/FAA/PM-86/12 -/ Program Engineering Concrete Airport Pavement /.(.l-~ and Maintenance Service Washington, D.C. 20591 Surfaces G. D. Cline M.C. Hironaka Naval Civil Engineering Laboratory Port Hueneme, CA 93043 Q 24 ~ ~~ ~""" r ~ 01'1• llJ. ... October t 986 Final Report This document is available to the public through the National Technical Information Service, Springfield, Virginia 22161 U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Aviation Administration -----------~--~~ NOTICE This document is disseminated under the sponsorship of the Department of Transportation in the interest of information exchange. The United States Government assumes no liability for its content or use thereof. Technical Report Documentation Page 1. Report No. 2. Government Accession No. 3. Recipient's Catalog No. DOT/FAA/PM-86/12 4. Title and Subtitle 5. Report Date PERFORMANCE OF RECYCLED ASPHALT CONCRETE October 1986 AIRPORT PAVEMENT SURFACES 6. Performing Organization Code NCEL (L53) !--:::----...,-,-----------------------------1~~--~~~----~~--~----~ 8. Performing Organization Report No. 7. Authorl s) Technical Note N-1765 Cline, G.D. and Hironaka, M.C. 9. Performing Organization Name and Address 10. Work Unit No. (TRAlS) Naval Civil Engineering Laboratory 53-048 Port Hueneme, California 93043-5003 11. Contract ar Grant Na. DTFA01-83-Y-30593 13. Type af Report and Period Covered ~~--------------------~--------------------------------~ 12. Sponsoring Agency Name and Address U.S. Department of Transportation Final Report Federal Aviation Administration Aug 1983 - May 1986 Program Engineering and Maintenance Service 14. Sponsoring Agency Code Washington, DC 20591 APM-740 15. Supplementary Notes 16. Abstract The objective of this research was to make an assessment of the relative performance of recycled versus new asphalt concrete pavement surfaces constructed for airport facilities. -
Jurupa Area Plan This Page Intentionally Left Blank
Jurupa Area Plan This page intentionally left blank TABLE OF CONTENTS VISION SUMMARY .............................................................................................................................................1 INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................................................................4 A Special Note on Implementing the Vision ................................................................................................5 LOCATION...........................................................................................................................................................6 FEATURES ..........................................................................................................................................................6 SETTING ............................................................................................................................................................6 UNIQUE FEATURES .............................................................................................................................................7 Santa Ana River ..........................................................................................................................................7 Jurupa Mountains/Pyrite Canyon ................................................................................................................7 Pedley Hills ..................................................................................................................................................7 -
Final Environmental Impact Report Doris Avenue/Patterson Road Educational Facilities Project Ventura County, California SCH# 2017051041
EXHIBIT "A" Resolution #17-30 (1 of 2) Job No. 34007.05 Final Environmental Impact Report Doris Avenue/Patterson Road Educational Facilities Project Ventura County, California SCH# 2017051041 Volume I Prepared for: Mr. David Fateh Director of Facilities Oxnard School District 1051 South A Street Oxnard, California 93030 Prepared by: Tetra Tech, Inc. 5383 Hollister Avenue, Suite 130 Santa Barbara, California 93111 March 12, 2018 Tetra Tech, Inc. TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................................................. 1-1 1.1 Final EIR Requirements ............................................................................................................................. 1-1 COMMENTS AND RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ........................................................................................... 2-7 2.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................................................ 2-7 2.2 Format of Responses to Comments .......................................................................................................... 2-8 2.3 Responses to Comments ........................................................................................................................... 2-9 DRAFT EIR ERRATA ...................................................................................................................................... 3-1 3.1 Overview ................................................................................................................................................... -
The Catalina Triangle — Magnificence & Mystery Meet Mayhem & Murder Most Foul Off the Souther California Coast
THE CATALINA TRIANGLE — MAGNIFICENCE & MYSTERY MEET MAYHEM & MURDER MOST FOUL OFF THE SOUTHER CALIFORNIA COAST Dedicated to the many men and women who have lost their lives in the Catalina Triangle by Ned Madden, San Clemente, Calif. – 2017 * * * “…The lure of the sea is some strange magic that makes men love what they fear. Death on the shifting barren sands seems less insupportable to the imagination than death out on the boundless ocean, in the awful, windy emptiness. Man's bones yearn for dust.” — Zane Grey "If a life is taken close to the 33rd Parallel North, this fits with the Masons’ demonic mythology in which they demonstrate their worldly power by spilling human blood at a predetermined locale." — "Masons and Mystery at the Parallel" by Day Williams (Anti-Freemason Christian writer) A bee on a balloon and a kite on the moon … The Catalina Triangle … a 1,200-square-mile pie-slice-shaped wedge of Pacific Ocean off the OC coast in between Dana Point, Santa Catalina and San Clemente islands … works in mysterious ways, and, yeh, I did once look up to glimpse that very real and singular close-bee- balloon/far-kite-moon visual floating before my eyes as I walked along the Capo Beach strand. No surprise. I’ve come to expect Catalina Triangle strangeness – like the Avalon “sleepkiller,” the 33rd Parallel/“Bloodline of the Earth” link, Natalie Wood and Phil Hartman, St. John Capistrano: “Scourge of the Jews,” sado-masochistic padres and blood-soaked natives, ghosts and pirates, a 30-kiloton nuke, mountain ranges spun sideways, sinking islands and northwest- trending fault epicentrum, Borderland and Bight, Gyre and eddy, countercurrent and undercurrent, earthquake and tsunami, moonscape sea craters and underwater knoll oases, Navy SEALs’ bin Laden-killing fake city, a real building made of human bones, largest animal (with the largest penis, a ten-footer) ever to draw breath and spout water vapor (the animal, not the organ) in the long sweep of phallic time on Mother Earth herself … beginning-of-life stuff. -
Oxnard Airport Economic Benefit Analysis
OXNARD AIRPORT ECONOMIC BENEFIT ANALYSIS Prepared for Coffman Associates In association with Dr. Lee McPheters, Arizona State University May 2019 Economic Benefit Analysis Oxnard Airport TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................. 2 MEASURING ECONOMIC BENEFITS...................................................................... 3 Direct, Secondary, And Total Economic Benefits ....................................... 5 ECONOMIC BENEFIT HIGHLIGHTS ........................................................................ 6 A DAY AT OXNARD AIRPORT ............................................................................... 8 ON‐AIRPORT ECONOMIC BENEFITS ..................................................................... 9 Capital Improvement Projects ................................................................. 10 Direct, Secondary and Total On‐Airport Benefits ..................................... 11 GENERAL AVIATION VISITOR ECONOMIC BENEFITS ........................................... 12 General Aviation Visitor Spending ........................................................... 13 Direct, Secondary, And Total Visitor Benefits .......................................... 14 GOVERNMENTAL REVENUE BENEFITS ............................................................... 15 COMPARISON OF DIRECT ECONOMIC BENEFITS: 2008 AND 2018 ...................... 15 DATA SOURCES ................................................................................................ -
Rwy 5 Rnav (Gps)
HEMET, CALIFORNIA AL-6678 (FAA) 20254 Rwy Idg APP CRS 4315 TDZE 1513 RNAV (GPS) RWY 5 035° Apt Elev 1515 HEMET-RYAN (HMT) RNP APCH MISSED APPROACH: Climb to 2500 then climbing left turn to T 7900 direct SETER and hold, continue climb-in-hold to 7900. A AWOS-3PT MARCH APP CON UNICOM 118.375 133.5 306.975 123.0(CTAF)L UMIT 25 H N 2931 A S M SETER 2890 M 2704 167 12700 347 ° 4050 2569 ° 7 NM 2689 5188 5000 3876 4106 2238 3000 2673 00 0 5 SW-3, 07 OCT 2021 to 04 NOV 2182 1598 2574 2281 Final approach course offset 14.89°. (MAP) HUMIT (FAF) FOMIN 3343 OTEBE 2.6 NM to HUMIT HUMAN 3 3400 0 0 035° (2.4) 0 4652 3040 3000 ° 4000 2555 3666 035) (IF/IAF) (6 WESIN 5640 SW-3, 07 OCT 2021 to 04 NOV Procedure NA for arrivals at WESIN ELEV TDZE on V186 southeast bound. 1515 1513 23 2500 7900 22 WESIN SETER P P HUMAN U 3% 25 0. X OTEBE 4 FOMIN 2014 2.6 NM to 5 100 X 5500 HUMIT 2.1 NM to 035 4315 ° 3.02° HUMIT H 4000 TCH 40 HUMIT 3400 2520 Rwy 4-22 restricted for 6 NM 2.4 NM 2.7 NM 0.5 NM 2.1 0.5 glider operations. CATEGORY A B C D 1 1 2360-1 2360-14 2360-2 2 LNAV MDA NA 1 1 847 (900-1) 847 (900-14 ) 847 (900-2 2 ) 1 2360-1 2400-14 2600-3 CIRCLING NA 1 MIRL Rwy 5-23 L 845 (900-1) 885 (900-14 ) 1085 (1100-3) HEMET, CALIFORNIA HEMET-RYAN (HMT) Orig-D 10SEP20 33°44'N-117°01'W RNAV (GPS) RWY 5 M1 A ALTERNATE MINS A 21280 INSTRUMENT APPROACH PROCEDURE CHARTS A IFR ALTERNATE AIRPORT MINIMUMS Standard alternate minimums for non-precision approaches and approaches with vertical guidance [NDB, VOR, LOC, TACAN, LDA, SDF, VOR/DME, ASR, RNAV (GPS) or RNAV (RNP)] are 800-2. -
Public Transit Countywide Performance Report
AUGUST 2018 Riverside County Public Transportation Annual Countywide Performance Report FY 2016/2017 Prepared by This page intentionally left blank. TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction n 1 About This Report | 1 Context for Public Transit | 1 Performance Reporting n 3 Purposes | 3 The Measures | 3 Policy and Compliance | 4 Utilization | 7 Accessibility and Coverage | 10 Connectivity | 20 Resources | 21 Summary of How We’re Doing n 21 What Do This Year’s Indicators Suggest for Riverside County Public Transportation | 27 New Transit Initiatives n 21 City of Corona | 26 City of Riverside | 26 Palo Verde Valley Transit Agency | 27 Pass Transit - City of Banning | 28 Pass Transit - City of Beaumont | 28 Riverside Transit Agency | 28 Sunline Transit Agency | 29 The Challenge Going Forward n 30 Strategies to Promote Responsiveness to Customer Needs | 31 TABLE OF CONTENTS Appendices n 32 Appendix A – Definitions, Data Sets, and References | 33 Appendix B – Public Transit Trips Provided, All Modes | 34 Appendix C – Bus Stop Location Counts by Operators Supporting Table 5 (Transfer Locations) | 35 Appendix D – Public Transit Fleet Size Over Four Fiscal Years | 39 Appendix E – Public Utilities Code Requirement for Performance Monitoring | 40 Introduction About This Report This fifth iteration of the RIVERSIDE COUNTY PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION ANNUAL COUNTYWIDE PERFORMANCE REPORT, FISCAL YEAR 2016/2017 (COUNTYWIDE REPORT) examines the performance of public transportation services of rail, bus, demand response and specialized transportation in Riverside County. Prepared in compliance with Public Utilities Code Section 99244, this report reflects Transportation Development Act (TDA) requirements that county transportation planning agencies monitor transit provider performance. The COUNTYWIDE REPORT serves another purpose: providing a comprehensive, countywide picture of public transit expenditures and what was provided and consumed for these investments. -
National Transportation Safety Board Aviation Accident Final Report
National Transportation Safety Board Aviation Accident Final Report Location: Corona, CA Accident Number: LAX05FA041 Date & Time: 11/25/2004, 1434 PST Registration: N747JU Aircraft: Cessna 411 Aircraft Damage: Destroyed Defining Event: Injuries: 2 Fatal Flight Conducted Under: Part 91: General Aviation - Personal Analysis The multiengine airplane impacted terrain shortly after departing from the airport. The airplane began the initial climb after liftoff and initially maintained a track along the extended runway centerline. Witnesses indicated that about 1 mile into the initial climb, the aircraft began to make erratic yawing maneuvers and the engines began to emit smoke. The airplane rolled to the left and dove toward the ground, erupting into fire upon impact. Prior to the accident, the pilot had reportedly been having mechanical problems with the fuel tank bladder installations and had attempted to install new ones. He was performing his own maintenance on the airplane in an attempt to rectify the problem. The day before the accident, the pilot told his hangar mate that he took the airplane on a test flight and experienced mechanical problems with an engine. Neither the nature of the engine problems nor the actions to resolve the discrepancies could be determined. On site examination of the thermally destroyed wreckage disclosed evidence consistent with the right engine producing significantly more power than the left engine at ground impact. The extent of the thermal destruction precluded any determination regarding the fuel selector positions, the positions for the boost pump switches, or the fuel tanks/lines. Probable Cause and Findings The National Transportation Safety Board determines the probable cause(s) of this accident to be: A loss of engine(s) power for undetermined reasons. -
FRENCH VALLEY AIRPORT Murrieta, California Draft Final
DRAFT FINAL AIRPORT MASTER PLAN for FRENCH VALLEY AIRPORT Riverside County, California Draft Final Technical Report Prepared by Coffman Associates, Inc. April 2009 “The preparation of this document may have been supported, in part, through the Airport Improvement Program financial assistance from the Federal Aviation Administration as provided under Title 49, United States Code, Section 47104. The contents do not necessarily reflect the official views or policy of the FAA. Acceptance of this report by the FAA does not in any way constitute a commitment on the part of the United States to participate in any development depicted therein nor does it indicate that the proposed development is environmentally acceptable in accordance with appropriate public laws.” FRENCH VALLEY TABLE OF CONTENTS A•I•R•P•O•R•T FRENCH VALLEY AIRPORT Murrieta, California Draft Final Airport Master Plan INTRODUCTION MASTER PLAN OBJECTIVES .......................................................................... ii MASTER PLAN ELEMENTS AND PROCESS ................................................. ii COORDINATION .............................................................................................. iv Chapter One INVENTORY REGIONAL SETTING..................................................................................... 1-1 Infrastructure ........................................................................................ 1-2 Climate .................................................................................................. 1-2 Utilities .................................................................................................