ATC and Airspace question

[PC800]

PWK tower doesn't control that airspace, Chicago approach does

Actually, O'Hare Tower does-- they've been delegated the surface to 3000' within a 5nm radius of the center of O'Hare. There is a LOA with PWK, of course, but it does not allow PWK traffic to enter ORD airspace in the situation given.

In short, PWK controllers do not have the authority to clear VFR traffic into the ORD Class B. However, they know precisely how far they can go without infringing on that airspace. It's probable that you were not quite as close to the Class B as you thought you were, and the tower controller knew it. That's no excuse for chewing you out on the frequency, however, and I'd follow up on that with the manager at PWK.

It's also possible that you were that close, in which case the tower screwed up. You have two unpleasant choices in such a situation: follow the instruction, request that the tape be preserved, and be prepared to argue that you were in the Class B due to a controller operational deviation (as opposed to a pilot deviation). You will most likely prevail in such a case, particularly since you questioned the controller about your proximity to the Class B and he reiterated the instruction.

The other option is to refuse the instruction and stay out of the Class B, citing your emergency authority. That's a harder case to make, since avoiding a citation for violation of the Class B might not be seen as a safety issue, particularly if the course you choose puts you closer to other aircraft than straying into the Class B would have.

 

[cezzna]

I think you're getting worked up about nothing. With or without an LOA both sides of the fence probably know precisely what they are doing. I'm sure these controllers have to fly by the seat of their pants sometimes. If you get too close to O'Hare the PWK controller is going to get reamed a new one. I don't think you would be dragged into it. The PWK controllers know how to CYA in these situations. This crap goes on there minute by minute all the time. They know what they can do to work things efficiently and safely with or without an LOA. Nobody wants to make a mess out of something and start a paper trail including the controllers. I'd make a point to visit them and talk to them about the situation. Show that you're interested in how it all works and they'll probably really appreciate a pilot taking interest in their side of the work. I get the feeling controllers don't feel appreciated for the work they do, and these guys have a tough job. The whole Chicagoland airspace and airport design is a clusterf*ck at best. Wait til they make O'Hare bigger, PWK will probably be a one way airport.

 

[GravityHater]

This exact same thing happened in Dallas in the last 6 months I heard. Because I was just a listener on the conversation and not really paying attention I don't know all the details but it was a smaller airport on the edge of DFWs class B.
The D controllers kept putting people into the B space and there was a regular furball on frequency so the pilots from that airport asked for and received a meeting with the atc group in question. I'm not sure how it was resolved but I know the FAA did not amend the regulation to say a class D controller can use class B space at will so I suspect the pilots got an official reading of the LOA to take home and were told you will not be busted for breaking the reg that requires a class B clearance.

 

[mcjohn]

No big deal! Just do it if you're only nipping the edge. The evidence is there that the tower made you do it. If you feel like your goin deep into class B then definitely quiery. Tying to pick the controllers brain seems to always end up in a crap talking session on the radio that's just not worth it.
I suffer a similar situation frequently departing a sattelite airport into class C above. Maybe someone can give me some advice.
Me: AVL approach, C--97B, c152 just off from Hendersonville Airport request flight following to HKY airport 5500'
AVL: 97B squawk ---
AVL: 97B radar contact -----
10 mins later,
AVL: 97B frequency change approved squawk 1200
Now maybe it's just me but, that is not the flight following I'm used to.
I'd expect to be handed to Atlanta Center and be given the freq.
A while back I queiried the controller when this happened:
ME: Avl approach verify 97B has flight following to HKY 5500'
AVL: c97B radar contact 5500', traffic at 9:00, freq. change appoved, squawk VFR, good day.
I'm like Whaaaaa?
I just play along and call Atlanta center on my own for flight following. But I know it took more effort for him to say all that crap then:
c97B contact Atlanta center on 128.5.
So, I,ve learned not to pick the controllers brain but I plan to go to the tower and find out "what I may be doing wrong!"

 

[gkrangers]

In order for him to continue flight following to Atlanta Center...he/she has to coordinate a handoff...that requires work on his/her part and both parties having room to accomodate you. If they are too busy, you won't get flight following.

 

[mcjohn]

In order for him to continue flight following to Atlanta Center...he/she has to coordinate a handoff...that requires work on his/her part and both parties having room to accomodate you. If they are too busy, you won't get flight following.

I know it's only on a work load permitting basis but
why doesn't the controller state something like:
97B, negative on flight following
or
for flight following contact Atl. center ( i hear that one a lot)

Is "freq. change appoved squawk VFR" the appropriate way of denying flight following?

 

[FlyingFisherman]

Zoom your GPS in and watch your airplane and the rings around it. When in this world you can buy a usable aviaiton GPS for $200 that can get you -D-> airports it's a silly thing not to have on board if your airplane isn't already equipped.

If it is equipped...use it! Direct KPWK and monitor your progress. This is one of the first things my students learned when we flew from an airport underlying Charlie airspace and something I use regularly to keep legal when getting around in the Cleveland, Cincy and Pittsburgh areas.

Good luck and happy thanksgiving! :beer:

 

[405]

Maybe the PWK controller initiated a pointout with ORD. If ORD approved the pointout, the PWK controller could legally let you fly into ORD airspace and still have keep you on his frequency without all of the Class B entry requirements.

Here's a link to the definition:

http://www.faa.gov/atpubs/ATC/Chp5/atc0504.html#5-4-2

Then again, I may be completely wrong. I don't even fly airplanes. I'm just an old ex-ATCer that doesn't know shat. HAHAHAHA.

 

[VAPOR]

Don't mess with Class B

I spent a lot of time flight training and instructing at PWK. You need a clearance from Chicago Approach to enter Class B.

I would definitely not trust that any of the controllers know "precisely what they are doing" (above). I've seen them screw up there plenty of times, especially when it's busy. And I know they certainly don't care about excess paperwork; if they're in a bad mood or you upset them they will violate you in a moment regardless of what the workload is.

One thing that may assist your cause is to file an ASRS (NASA) report every time this happens. It will bring attention to the situation and may prevent you from being violated. File one every day if you have to:

http://asrs.arc.nasa.gov/forms/PDF_Files/general.pdf

 

[smellthejeta]

Maybe the PWK controller initiated a pointout with ORD. If ORD approved the pointout, the PWK controller could legally let you fly into ORD airspace and still have keep you on his frequency without all of the Class B entry requirements.

Here's a link to the definition:

http://www.faa.gov/atpubs/ATC/Chp5/atc0504.html#5-4-2

Then again, I may be completely wrong. I don't even fly airplanes. I'm just an old ex-ATCer that doesn't know shat. HAHAHAHA.

405,

The rules are different for IFR and VFR. When you're on an IFR flight plan, you already have the required clearance to operate in any airspace that ATC assigns you to operate in. Now, if they put you on a vector that sends you straight through P-56 (White House/Capitol) I'd question it, but generally speaking, if airspace entry requires specific authorization from a controlling agency, your IFR routing is your clearance and entry authorization.

When flying VFR, the onus is on the pilot to comply with all applicable rules and regulations. (For instance, VFR, if I get a vector into a cloud, I have to inform you that I cannot accept it) The "point out" is what gives you authority to have another aircraft operate in another sector's airspace without having to hand him off. It's a transparent transaction on behalf of the pilot, separate from the airspace entry requirements for pilots in Class B, C, and D airspace. Class B entry requires a specifc clearance to operate in that airspace (a little more than the "two way radio contact" required for C and D entry), which means flight following or services from another controlling authority, absent the specific clearance, don't authorize entry.

Now, if the PWK TWR actually does have authorization to allow their aircraft to operate in the nearby Class B airspace, that *is* information that must be communicated to the pilots, such as by NOTAM, published in the A/FD, or on the corresponding navigational charts.

 

[405]

405,

The rules are different for IFR and VFR. When you're on an IFR flight plan, you already have the required clearance to operate in any airspace that ATC assigns you to operate in. Now, if they put you on a vector that sends you straight through P-56 (White House/Capitol) I'd question it, but generally speaking, if airspace entry requires specific authorization from a controlling agency, your IFR routing is your clearance and entry authorization.

When flying VFR, the onus is on the pilot to comply with all applicable rules and regulations. (For instance, VFR, if I get a vector into a cloud, I have to inform you that I cannot accept it) The "point out" is what gives you authority to have another aircraft operate in another sector's airspace without having to hand him off. It's a transparent transaction on behalf of the pilot, separate from the airspace entry requirements for pilots in Class B, C, and D airspace. Class B entry requires a specifc clearance to operate in that airspace (a little more than the "two way radio contact" required for C and D entry), which means flight following or services from another controlling authority, absent the specific clearance, don't authorize entry.

Now, if the PWK TWR actually does have authorization to allow their aircraft to operate in the nearby Class B airspace, that *is* information that must be communicated to the pilots, such as by NOTAM, published in the A/FD, or on the corresponding navigational charts.

I put a disclaimer in the bottom of my post that explicitly said "I may be completely wrong". I was just putting in my $0.02, man.

 

[PC800]

I would definitely not trust that any of the controllers know "precisely what they are doing" (above).

If you're going to quote from a previous post, please do so accurately. I didn't say that the controllers know "precisely what they are doing". Trust me, I'm well aware that controllers, in general, screw up on a daily basis.

I said "they know precisely how far they can go without infringing on that airspace"-- which they do. If the PWK controller was actively monitoring the airplane in question, as it appears he was in the case at hand, chances that he allowed the airplane to enter the Class B are extremely slim.

As far as a point out goes, PWK never coordinates directly with O'Hare Tower, unless something extremely unusual happens. Ie, if they lost radio contact with an airplane on downwind for 16 that was going to enter the ORD airspace, they'd call, but under normal conditions they never do. Ever. ORD controllers are busy enough without having to help work PWK traffic.

 

[VAPOR]

Exact quote - read carefully

I think you're getting worked up about nothing. With or without an LOA both sides of the fence probably know precisely what they are doing.[\quote]

If you're going to quote from a previous post, please do so accurately. I didn't say that the controllers know "precisely what they are doing".[\quote]

Yes, I totally agree. Read "cezzna's" previous post. I quoted it accurately and exactly. My advice to you Mr. PC800 is "If you're going to criticize a previous post, please make sure you read carefully and know what you are talking about."

 

[PC800]

My advice to you Mr. PC800 is "If you're going to criticize a previous post, please make sure you read carefully..."

I apologize, your post didn't make clear whom you were quoting and I didn't realize that another poster had used wording so similar to mine.

Since you were kind enough to offer me unsolicited advice on how to read, allow me to give you some on how to write: we wouldn't be arguing about quotes if you'd learn to use the quote function correctly. You apparently tried on that last post, but still fell a bit short of the mark.

 

[Gutenberg]

The LOA has nothing to do with VFR procedures. It is an agreement between satellite airport towers and Chicago that specifies altitudes and routings between each of these smaller airports like Waukegan, Lake in the Hills, Palwaukee, Gary, Du Page, Aurora, etc.

As far as turning base to 34 at PWK, you can go to the landfill- all the way to the very edge of it. I used to get scared getting that close, and they will forget about you out there sometimes, but it is your ass if you bust Bravo.