ATC and Airspace question

[cale42]

Alright.. I got a question that I am looking for some input on, either from people that have been in a similar situation or in this case from some active controllers.

I fly out of a class D that abuts very closely to the surface space of a Class B.. PWK specifically for those familiar with Chicago. We have about 2 miles from the south tip of our runway to the surface space.

I'm coming in with a student yesterday, VFR to the runway that is closest the the Bravo surface and am told to extend my downwind and tower would call my base. About a half mile from where I know the surface of the Bravo starts I ask if we can turn base yet, and I'm advised by tower that I need to go another mile. I respond that I will be unable to go another mile due to the surface space. At which point tower goes off on me that they know where I am and that once I accept an extended downwind with tower calling my base I am absolved of responsibility for avoiding the bravo. Now this is of course I radar environment and I know they can see, but I don't buy this.. I do a little super slow flight to stay out the bravo in this instance and make my turn when called. Then when I get on the ground, I get another lecture from the tower, on the open tower frequency, that once I accept them calling base the bravo airspace is their responsibility, not mine, and I need to abide by their clearance.

So thats the situation, my issues are this. The regs state very clearly that to enter the bravo you have to have explicit clearance from the controlling agency. In this case, I received no explicit clearance, and even if I had PWK tower doesn't control that airspace, Chicago approach does, so they don't even have the right to give me that clearance. If this is somehow going to waived in this situation I want to see it in writing.. b/c it's going to be my ticket, not the controllers on the line when I violate airspace.

Just wanted some thoughts on this perhaps from more experienced pilots familiar with PWK or controllers that know something I don't...

thanks,
cale

 

[kaj837]

I don't know the answer, even though I spent some time up that way a while ago. I would think that without a specific clearance into the Bravo space and probably a squawk code, you can't enter regardless of what the twx says. Maybe, just maybe they were coordinating that with ORD, or maybe they have an agreement to that effect, but certainly he should have passed that information on to you. I suspect that if they had an agreement, it would be common knowledge around the airport.

 

[kaj837]

Correction: twr

 

[gkrangers]

Are you questioning the GND up to 10,000 Class B immediately surrounding ORD?

Pretty long downwind...(not as long as I originally thought, but still long)

 

[cale42]

gkrangers,

Yes that is what I'm questioning.. the surface level airspace. Definitely a long downwind, but when they are trying to get IFR departures out it isn't unusual to be asked to extend out that far...

 

[gkrangers]

gkrangers,

Yes that is what I'm questioning.. the surface level airspace. Definitely a long downwind, but when they are trying to get IFR departures out it isn't unusual to be asked to extend out that far...

Here is a question...does the Class Delta surface override the Class B surface or the other way around?

 

[mar]

It's worth a visit.

Cale42--You're correct about the explicit clearance into Class B airspace. It would sound like, "November 123 Alpha Bravo is cleared in to Class Bravo via radar vectors (or direct to ABC VOR) (or via some VFR corridor)..."

I'm not familiar with your airport and there may very well be a letter of agreement between the tower and the TRACON but the only way to find out is to ask.

As for gettin' chewed out on the tower freq...pretty rude. I hate it when controllers try to make an example out of us with a public lashing.

But think of this little story (so many of us are asked to call the tower): One day I heard a new tower controller (obviously training) lose total control of the traffic pattern. One of the local 135 operators got so upset, after he landed and cleared the runway he said to tower, "Grab a pencil because I want *you* to call *me* when I get inside the office!"

So there!

It's worth a visit to the tower.

 

[minitour]

Here is a question...does the Class Delta surface override the Class B surface or the other way around?

Other way around.

§ 71.9 Overlapping airspace designations.

(a) When overlapping airspace designations apply to the same airspace, the operating rules associated with the more restrictive airspace designation apply.
(b) For the purpose of this section—
(1) Class A airspace is more restrictive than Class B, Class C, Class D, Class E, or Class G airspace;
(2) Class B airspace is more restrictive than Class C, Class D, Class E, or Class G airspace;
(3) Class C airspace is more restrictive than Class D, Class E, or Class G airspace;
(4) Class D airspace is more restrictive than Class E or Class G airspace; and
(5) Class E is more restrictive than Class G airspace.


-mini

 

[gkrangers]

Thats what I figured. I don't have a FARAIM here, and didn't know exactly where to look.

I would guess they have a LOA with Chicago...but thats just a guess...call the tower and ask, good idea in areas where things look complex.

 

[minitour]

I would guess they have a LOA with Chicago...but thats just a guess...call the tower and ask, good idea in areas where things look complex.

We've got a similar situation with BKL and CLE up here...I don't like the LOA thing.

I really really want to hear "Cleared into the Bravo" on the tapes...from the controlling agency. But I'm just paranoid.

-mini

 

[FN FAL]

I would guess they have a LOA with Chicago...but thats just a guess...

I would bet that's the deal as well. It's not like either one of those airspaces was built yesterday.

 

[cale42]

You all have hit the nail on the head with the concept that their may be an LOA authorizing the tower to send me into the Bravo surface space. However without a copy of that in my hand that I can point to it really doesn't help protect me. While in no way claiming this makes me a veteran I have about 600 hours flying out of PWK and 4 checkrides with local examiners and no one has been able to clear this up which makes me question it. Also a call to the local FSDO basically brought up nothing about an LOA and tended to side with me.

The fact(sad as it may be) with the FAA is that if you can't prove it, it doesn't matter. So until someone can show me this for sure, I feel I'm not allowed into the Bravo.

I'm really not mad about the incident with tower... while unfortunate, this is the fourth or fifth time I've gotten into it with them on this issue. I just finally want some resolution, I'm sick of dealing with it every couple of months.

cale

 

[minitour]

Next time you get reamed on freq, ask for their initials and the phone number...tell them you'll do 360s until they can clear you for the base and to land. When you get on the ground, call and talk to the supervisor...just explain that you'd like to know what's going on. If you need to, pull out the FAR/AIM and quote the reg that says you need cleared into the bravo by the controlling agency (in this case, Chicago Approach).

Hopefully it won't come to that. Honestly, if it were me...I'd probably call and ask for the supervisor now before it happens again.

Just be tactful and explain that you don't want anyone (them or yourself) to have any issues and explain your concerns about busting the Bravo. I'm sure he or she will be more than happy to talk to you about it.

But definitely if you get a reaming, get initials and a phone number...maybe have them mark the tape.

And remember, you're the PIC. If they give you a clearance that could cause you to bust a reg, it's your responsibility to do what you did "unable". Maybe next time give them an option "Tower, cessna 123 unable downwind due to airspace, I can give you (R or L) 360s or turn base now."

Good luck...drop me a PM with how it all ends up (if you don't post it on here).

-mini

 

[smellthejeta]

cale,

I side with you on this one. Yeah, you're right... the approximate wording of the applicable reg(s) reads that you must receive the clearance/maintain contact with the facility that provides radar service in the airspace in which you are flying. That means that maintaining two way radio contact with Chicago Approach can satisfy the requirements of transiting PWK's airspace, but communication with PWK cannot get you into Chicago's airspace. And you still need a clearance, which begins with "cleared..."

The other technical problem with the words "clear" and "VFR" is that the only thing a Class D tower controller can do is clear you to land and takeoff. His job is to maintain runway separation, and all he does for VFR's airborne is provide sequencing. At least that's my interpretation of the rules.

I'd say go visit the tower and talk to a supervisor. Just as a controller is not responsible for knowing Parts 91, 135, and 121, you are not responsible for knowing what's in the 7110.65 or what the applicable LOA's are.

 

[midlifeflyer]

Even with a LOA, I think you should hear "Cleared into Class Bravo" from the Tower controller. At this point the best bet would be to call the Tower, speak with a Supervisor and clear the issue.

In the air, in stead of "unable" in response to the extension, I would probably say, "Confirm N1234X is cleared into Class Bravo for the downwind."