James331
Ejection Handle Pulled
- Joined
- Apr 18, 2014
- Messages
- 20,309
- Display Name
Display name:
James331
Can I enter Class C...?
- Thread starter VWGhiaBob
- Start date
- Joined
- May 11, 2010
- Messages
- 20,703
- Location
- Charlotte, NC
- Display Name
Display name:
Snorting his way across the USA
I think they are wrong. I specifically departed KSAC under flight following, and NORCAL cleared me through MHR's Class D. I specifically asked if I could transit their D through them and they said yes.
Sometimes Approach has rights within an underlying Class D and sometimes they don't. It's still their job to coordinate transit.
True. What I was trying to say is that if you're on flight following with Center and they forget to give you a frequency change, then it's the pilot's responsibility to stay out of the class C until talking to Approach.
Shawn
En-Route
You are right, that answer is incorrect:
JO 7110.65 ATC STATES:
2-1-16. SURFACE AREAS
- b. Coordinate with the appropriate control tower for transit authorization when you are providing radar traffic advisory service to an aircraft that will enter another facility's airspace.
NOTE: - The pilot is not expected to obtain his own authorization through each area when in contact with a radar facility.
While FF does not permit you to dart around and willy nilly fly into any C or D at will, if it is part of your expected route it is on ATC to coordinate the transitions for you or provide instruction otherwise.
Last edited:
farangutan
Pre-takeoff checklist
- Joined
- May 14, 2019
- Messages
- 405
- Display Name
Display name:
farangutan
A couple weeks ago, I requested flight following to a destination under the Bravo in Tampa, (KSPG, St Pete) from KVNC Venice. The approach controller clears me through the Bravo direct to my destination, squawk code, etc. but no mention of the class C airport directly between. I simply asked if I was cleared through the C airpace and he said, "yes, you're with me." Just an example of 'if in doubt, ask'.
Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe
Touchdown! Greaser!
- Joined
- Jun 7, 2008
- Messages
- 16,021
- Location
- DXO124009
- Display Name
Display name:
Light and Sporty Guy
Larry in TN
En-Route
I think talking about a "clearance" through Class C airspace causes confusion. No clearance is required to operate in Class C airspace. Two-way contact with the applicable ATC facility is all that is required. I'd suggest using other phraseology such as "authorization", or similar, instead of "clearance" would help avoid confusion.
There's no way for a pilot to know what the "appropriate" ATC is. As pointed out, ATC is supposed to manage this themselves. I suppose it doesn't hurt to ask. Years ago, I was talking to C90 flying up the Chicago lakeshore. I asked them if they were going to coordinate with Miegs. They cancelled me. I had just enough time to dial up Miegs and tell them "5327K, 2000' Hotels Northbound".
I started a thread a few months ago. On FF and the approach controller asked if I was going to remain clear of a class D airport. I was confused as I thought he was supposed to coordinate the transit through their airspace.
https://www.pilotsofamerica.com/community/threads/controller-incorrect.119421/
https://www.pilotsofamerica.com/community/threads/controller-incorrect.119421/
Lindberg
Final Approach
Or just ask if he is coordinating the class C transition.
PaulS
Touchdown! Greaser!
This, I did this when transiting Manchester NH Charlie, the controller seemed mildly irritated with me and just reissued the vector he had given and I had acknowledged a few minutes before, so I reacknowledged the instruction and thanked him for his help. I probably should have known, but, whatever.
- Joined
- Jul 3, 2012
- Messages
- 15,597
- Display Name
Display name:
Velocity173
SRQ? Tampa Approach is the facility listed for that Class C.
Shepherd
Final Approach
If you are NORDO, you can do it anytime you want and they can't even yell at you.
Well they can yell at you but you won't hear them.
Well they can yell at you but you won't hear them.
farangutan
Pre-takeoff checklist
- Joined
- May 14, 2019
- Messages
- 405
- Display Name
Display name:
farangutan
That's right. I used as an example of a situation where it doesn't hurt to ask if you're in doubt at the moment.
Earlier that day I flew that leg in reverse (KSPG > KVNC) and the controller was vectoring me to the far edge of the class C. The flight back I just wanted make sure I was good to go cutting practically straight through the middle of the class C.
Eric Brunelle
Pre-takeoff checklist
I'm working through test prep for my CPL, and found this question (paraphrasing - I don't have it in front of me)
Question - When flying west on Flight Following at 2500 MSL, can you fly through KXYZ (elev - 150, class D) without a clearance?
Answer - NO, you must obtain clearance from KXYZ tower before entering their airspace.
The explanation is that you will need to get clearance from KXYZ to fly through. If TRACON doesn't own it, you must obtain the clearance yourself. The two way communication must be between YOU and the ATC authority that owns the airspace.
The best thing to do is ask for clearance to be sure that Approach Control has communicated with the Class C or Class D Tower - particularly if you are unfamiliar with the area.
Question - When flying west on Flight Following at 2500 MSL, can you fly through KXYZ (elev - 150, class D) without a clearance?
Answer - NO, you must obtain clearance from KXYZ tower before entering their airspace.
The explanation is that you will need to get clearance from KXYZ to fly through. If TRACON doesn't own it, you must obtain the clearance yourself. The two way communication must be between YOU and the ATC authority that owns the airspace.
The best thing to do is ask for clearance to be sure that Approach Control has communicated with the Class C or Class D Tower - particularly if you are unfamiliar with the area.
- Joined
- Jul 3, 2012
- Messages
- 15,597
- Display Name
Display name:
Velocity173
There is no clearance for class D, only two way communication with the ATC facility providing the service. Has nothing to do with ownership but everything to do with being in comms with the ATC facility “providing air traffic control service.” The service is FF and the TRACON listed for that class D is providing that. They are required by order to coordinate the transition.
Shawn
En-Route
True for D as Approach does not provide air traffic services for Delta, not necessary for C as they DO provide air traffic services for Charlie thus you have already received authorization.
Even though the requirement for entry are the same for both, understanding who controls what is critical nuance of who you are talking to hence receiving authorization or not.
However it is explicitly ATC's job to coordinate transitions while receiving radar services.
That "correct" answer is in direct contradiction to:
JO 7110.65 ATC:
2-1-16. SURFACE AREAS
- b. Coordinate with the appropriate control tower for transit authorization when you are providing radar traffic advisory service to an aircraft that will enter another facility's airspace.
NOTE: - The pilot is not expected to obtain his own authorization through each area when in contact with a radar facility.
Last edited:
There's a practical problem which explains the apparent contradiction. As pilots we don't necessarily know who controls the airspace.
I brought the point home to a student when I taught in the Denver area. We were returning from the north, not using Flight Following, and were going to transition the BJC Class D. My student called BJC tower. I didn't "correct" him. "Contact Denver Approach," was the response. "They control the airspace above [I forget the exact altitude but it wasn't much above the pattern]."
A suggestion, not arguing your decision on whom to call. If you are working on your CPL, it's a good idea to understand the difference between airspace which requires a "clearance" and airspace which only requires establishing "two-way communication."
That last sentence appears to be in conflict with the following excerpt from the Chief Counsel interpretation linked in post #46:
Also in your letter you posited a situation in which a pilot operating under visual flight rules (VFR) is communicating with an Air Route Traffic Control Center (ARTCC or Center) while approaching the boundary of Class C airspace. In your hypothetical, you inquired whether a pilot would be in violation of section 91.130(c)(1) if he enters the Class C airspace while in two-way communication with the Center and not the TRACON. You further inquired if the Center’s “failure to hand him off” would relieve the pilot of the responsibility to establish two-way communication with the TRACON prior to entering their Class C airspace.
The operator of the aircraft would be in violation of section 91.130(c)(1) in the hypothetical that you present. Under section 91.3, the pilot in command is directly responsible for and is the final authority as to the operation of the aircraft. The receipt of traffic advisories from a Center or any other ATC facility does not relieve the pilot of the responsibilities of section 91.3.
The operator of the aircraft would be in violation of section 91.130(c)(1) in the hypothetical that you present. Under section 91.3, the pilot in command is directly responsible for and is the final authority as to the operation of the aircraft. The receipt of traffic advisories from a Center or any other ATC facility does not relieve the pilot of the responsibilities of section 91.3.
Maybe. Maybe not. The quoted section of the ATC handbook (the "point 65" for purists) talks about "radar facilities," "surface areas," and "control towers" It's specifically about TRACON and the Class C and D airspace they work. Center may well be a "radar facility" sometimes, but The 10 NM ring surrounding Class C is not a surface area and Approach Control (TRACON) is not a control tower.
The most interesting thing about that Chief Counsel opinion is the practical likelihood of that scenario actually happening. If I were receiving flight following from Center and weren't handed off to Approach by the time I was 10 miles outside a Class C area, I'd suspect lost comm.
Shawn
En-Route
It is pretty simple for C and D:
-Tower and Tower alone owns D
-TRACON (Approach/Departure) and/or Tower owns C
-Center does not own squat for C/D.
(by "own" I mean providing services to thus granting you authorization to enter while in communication)
If you start with those assumptions as a default regardless of what other agreements may be in place you won't be wrong even if they direct you otherwise as you noted above.
However if ever unsure all concerns are alleviated by simply simply asking the controller you are currently talking to: "Approach, Skylane 345, confirming your are coordinating my transition though XYZ?". A pilot should never have to leave frequency unprompted to initiate contact on your own while on FF unless directed to do so.
Any pilot that asks for a "clearance" for C/D they deserves to be laughed at by everyone else on frequency IMO!
Last edited:
Larry in TN
En-Route
TRACONs frequently "own" portions of Class D areas based on the rules setup between the facilities.
Same here, although I might also suspect that the controller just forgot. It's pretty theoretical though. It's never happened to me, and I suspect that it's rare.
"Understand cleared Charlie?"
That's all you have to say to respond to the radio call. Takes two seconds.
That's all you have to say to respond to the radio call. Takes two seconds.
Shawn
En-Route
Correct, but that is unknown to the pilot so if you always start with the assumption Delta is Tower you will never be wrong which was my point. However If you assume Approach for Delta without clarification you very well MAY be wrong and in violation.
...and two seconds to get a response of an audible sigh as Charlie does not need a "clearance" or be cleared into. It may seem like just semantics but "clearance/cleared" has a very distinct meaning in ATC phraseology and for which entry into C or D does not require.
"Confirm authorization for Charlie" would be more appropriate.
Last edited:
Larry in TN
En-Route
JO 7110.65 2-1-16 quoted above.
Yeah. I was trying to do it in three words...
Shawn
En-Route
Almost.
65 refers to operating procedures for FF services by TRACON, NOT who provides services to that airspace (or owns) thus granting authorization. By the letter off the law as the order is worded, per .65 that technically only applies to transition THOUGH but NOT not entry into for arrivals which is why understanding who controls what is critical otherwise you could be faced with a Pilot Deviation into Delta for late handoff even while on FF (it has happened at LVK reported here by others).
The order is not law. It's not even regulation. It's binding only on controllers, and only becomes binding on a pilot if a controller issues a clearance or instruction in accordance with it, in which case 14 CFR 91.123 is applicable.
So if a pilot callas up to transition the class c, and the two options are yes transition at xxx alt, heading xxx as opposed to negative remain clear of Charlie airspace. Would the approval for transition be a clearance? A pilot just can’t establish 2 way communication and decide to transition the airspace at their own will, can they?
No. All that such an approval would do is confirm that you are in communication with the correct ATC facility. Being in two-way communication with the appropriate ATC facility is what gives you authority to operate in class C airspace. A clearance is not needed.
They can. If ATC needs you to fly a particular route or altitude, they will tell you. Otherwise, it's entirely your choice.
Of course, if you choose a route and altitude that conflicts with the flow of traffic to or from a busy airline hub, you are very likely to receive specific instructions not to do that.
Last edited:
Shawn
En-Route
Yes. If you are talking to the facility providing services to that C/D airspace authorization to enter is automatically granted absent any other instructions. No request necessary but you are required to follow instructions if provided.
- Joined
- Jul 3, 2012
- Messages
- 15,597
- Display Name
Display name:
Velocity173
91.129 doesn’t say to contact the tower prior to entering. It says to establish two way comms with the facility providing the ATC service. It only mentions tower on departure and for good reason. Establishing comms with approach while sitting on the ramp would make no sense.
And I keep saying it, a GCA is the best example of the two way comm requirement without being up tower. The service that’s being provided is a radar approach. The ATC facility providing the service is the GCA or TRACON if equipped. By being up the final controller, you meet the two way comm requirement prior to entering. They, just like the approach controller for flight following are required to coordinate your arrival AND get your landing clearance from tower. You wouldn’t ask the final controller if they’ve done their job, why would you ask the approach controller if they’ve done theirs?
And I keep saying it, a GCA is the best example of the two way comm requirement without being up tower. The service that’s being provided is a radar approach. The ATC facility providing the service is the GCA or TRACON if equipped. By being up the final controller, you meet the two way comm requirement prior to entering. They, just like the approach controller for flight following are required to coordinate your arrival AND get your landing clearance from tower. You wouldn’t ask the final controller if they’ve done their job, why would you ask the approach controller if they’ve done theirs?
People have posted about instances where the approach controller hasn't, which leaves the pilot at risk of an enforcement action.
- Joined
- Jul 3, 2012
- Messages
- 15,597
- Display Name
Display name:
Velocity173
People have posted about instances where the approach controller hasn't, which leaves the pilot at risk of an enforcement action.
They actually got a PD or is this just rumors? If so, I’d ask the controller who wrote them up, where it says in 91.129 to contact “tower” prior to entry. And if it’s a comm violation, then literally hundreds of GCAs a day that penetrate a D are 91.129 violations as well.
How about, "confirm you are talking to me"?
I didn't save links to the posts, but my recollection is that the authors of the posts were reporting conversations that they either heard or were involved in on tower frequencies, in which tower controllers complained to pilots who had been given a frequency change after they had already entered the class D. I don't recall any mention of PDs; my statement that it creates a risk of enforcement action is just my inference based on the fact that pilots are occasionally held responsible for violating regulations. I don't know whether the controllers' manual, which is an order, not a regulation, would be sufficient to get the pilot off the hook. However I'm not saying it's a high risk.
If both of the controllers involved are on the same page as to which of them is providing ATC services for a given piece of airspace, then I don't see a comm violation. If they're not, or if the approach controller fails to give a timely frequency change when required, the pilot may not find that out until the alleged violation has already occurred.
Shawn
En-Route
There was an actual incident described over on the Red Board where a hate handoff to LVK tower resulted in a PD and follow up by FAA...but that was also by a known Delta Bravo controller that works that tower. Nothing came of it other than a reprimand by FAA stating the pilot was indeed at fault even though he was talking to NorCal Approach but it has happened even though 99% of the time it is no harm, no foul nor anyone really cares.
That assumes the pilot knows that you are actually the facility providing services to that airspace to be legal to enter in which case if that was clearly understood, the question would be moot.
Last edited:
