Did I bust Class C @ Burbank?

[Unit74]

Also from the Controller's Handbook

d. VFR aircraft approaching Class B, Class C, Class D, or TRSA airspace which is under the control jurisdiction of another air traffic control facility should either be provided with a radar handoff or be advised that radar service is terminated, given their position in relation to the Class B, Class C, Class D, or TRSA airspace, and the ATC frequency, if known, for the airspace to be entered. These actions should be accomplished in sufficient time for the pilot to obtain the required ATC approval prior to entering the airspace involved, or to avoid the airspace.

Boom. Walks back in. Picks up mic. :wink2:

Boooooom! You highlighted the wrong **** slick..... Read the same paragraph you quoted, then drop that mic cuz your beat box was weak sauce and definitely not enough cowbell.

 

[alfadog]

Boooooom! You highlighted the wrong **** slick..... Read the same paragraph you quoted, then drop that mic cuz your beat box was weak sauce and definitely not enough cowbell.

Sez you. Support your claim.

 

[Unit74]

Sez you. Support your claim.

Don't have to.... You quote it for me already. When you read regulations, you have to read it all, not just the part that makes you look like you know what you are talking about. Go back and read your cut and paste.


Never mind.... I'll help you.


Also from the Controller's Handbook

d. VFR aircraft approaching Class B, Class C, Class D, or TRSA airspace which is under the control jurisdiction of another air traffic control facility should either be provided with a radar handoff or be advised that radar service is terminated, given their position in relation to the Class B, Class C, Class D, or TRSA airspace, and the ATC frequency, if known, for the airspace to be entered.

Was he under control? Yes
Radar hand off? Yes
Was he terminated? No
Given a position report? No
Given a frequency? Yes

So...... Using your own horsepower, you proved yourself wrong. I say Good Day!

 

[alfadog]

Don't have to.... You quote it for me already. When you read regulations, you have to read it all, not just the part that makes you look like you know what you are talking about. Go back and read your cut and paste.


Never mind.... I'll help you.


Also from the Controller's Handbook

d. VFR aircraft approaching Class B, Class C, Class D, or TRSA airspace which is under the control jurisdiction of another air traffic control facility should either be provided with a radar handoff or be advised that radar service is terminated, given their position in relation to the Class B, Class C, Class D, or TRSA airspace, and the ATC frequency, if known, for the airspace to be entered.

Was he under control? Yes
Radar hand off? Yes
Was he terminated? No
Given a position report? No
Given a frequency? Yes

So...... Using your own horsepower, you proved yourself wrong. I say Good Day!

Yes, we alluded to that interpretation a bit earlier, it is likely the correct one but the sentence could be clearer.

 

[azure]

I'm not sure what all the argument is about here. I'm not familiar with the airspace, but a quick check of the frequencies on ForeFlight tells me that post #26 has the right answer.

You're required to establish two-way communication with the facility that owns the airspace prior to entry. The OP was talking to SoCal Approach prior to the handoff. SoCal Approach owns the airspace. Full stop, end of story. The OP was legal and in no danger of an airspace bust.

SoCal Approach then handed him off to Burbank Tower for the transition through the Charlie. But Burbank Tower doesn't own the airspace. So that whole line of argument is completely void. It would be one thing if the OP had just (mentally) told everyone to pound sand and gave up trying to contact the tower. But he didn't, the tower controller was busy, so the handoff took a while to complete. It happens.

The only thing that might be worth an ASRS is, as docmirror points out, the controller's "immediate and rapid descent" instruction when he finally got to the OP. That says to me that the controller was WAY behind the game and the OP was in danger of swapping paint with someone, or at least of triggering a separation issue. But that would have been on the controller, not the OP.

(Just to clarify: the ASRS would be to help identify a possible safety issue, since it's not clear whether this was simple controller error or a systematic problem that's likely to happen again to someone else.)

 

[N801BH]

Did I bust Class C @ Burbank?...

NO..... IMHO....

 

[bobmrg]

I don't know if it affects this discussion, but either way, this Letter of Agreement between the TRACON ("SoCal Approach") and Burbank Tower is interesting:

http://ivaous.org/fdr/LOAs/ZLA/SCT/025 - SCT BUR.pdf

Bob G., can you chime back in?

I don't know what you expect me to say. LOA's are not accessible to the flying public, My time in SoCal is minimal...just enough to get a type rating out of SNA.

Bob

 

[luvflyin]

I don't know what you expect me to say. LOA's are not accessible to the flying public, My time in SoCal is minimal...just enough to get a type rating out of SNA.

Bob

This one got out. It's a couple years old. BEWARE of reading an ATC LOA and assume that is how things are going to happen and make your pilot decisions based on that. They are all on an "unless otherwise coordinated" basis. They are made to reduce verbal coordination and set a basic traffic flow that minimizes conflictions. Deviations occur all the time. Sometimes the S**t hits the fan and nothing is happening like you think it should be because "you read their LOA."

 

[alfadog]

I, along with others, may have been addressing a situation different than what the OP experienced. To someone like myself, unfamiliar with the area, the OP read like he was transitioning from an unspecified ATC facility not in control of the class Charlie to the ATC facility, Burbank, in control of the class Charlie. In that case, I, for one, would not enter the class Charlie without two-way communication with the ATC facility that has jurisdiction over the class Charlie. Looking at the chart, if the OP was already in communication with SoCal approach, the ATC facility overseeing the class Charlie, then the question is trivial. He could not have busted the class Charlie as he was already in communication with the class Charlie ATC.

 

[N801BH]

I don't know what you expect me to say. LOA's are not accessible to the flying public, My time in SoCal is minimal...just enough to get a type rating out of SNA.

Bob

Hmmmmm..

Public airspace, Public airport, What is the big secret ??

 

[Shawn]

Wait...people are thinking and actually arguing that if you are on FF on a course headed into Charlie airspace and ATC gives you an handoff to Tower that the approach controller does NOT have jurisdictional control over that airspace thus setting you up for an airspace bust?...wow.

I agree that you should never assume that just because you are on FF that you are talking to a controller that has jurisdictional control over an airspace that you want to transition but the fact that he was given a handoff to Burbank is the end of the story in my book. OP did not need to establish communication with Burbank before entering, communication was established.

 

[MikeELP]

OP did not need to establish communication with Burbank before entering, communication was established.

With whom??

 

[eetrojan]

FAR 91.130(c)(1) relate to operations in Class C airspace.

FAR 91.129(c)(1) relates to operations in Class D airspace.

That said, they both say exactly the same thing:

(1) Arrival or through flight. Each person must establish two-way radio communication with the ATC facility … providing air traffic services prior to entering that airspace and thereafter maintain those communications while in that airspace.

The AIM says that if the controller repeats your callsign, even if only to tell you to standby, then you have established radio communication and you can enter the airspace. However, if the controller omits your callsign and just says “Aircraft calling, please stand by,” then you have not established radio communication and you may not enter. (see 3-2-4 and 3-2-5)

When I’m on flight following and I’m preparing to arrive at a Class D airport, the Approach controller will tell me to “contact tower” when I’m a few miles away from the tower’s surface area. At that point, as I understand it, I MUST establish two-way radio communication in order to enter their airspace. If they don’t repeat my tail number, I may not enter.

So now, let’s turn to the OP’s question about transitioning KBUR’s Class C airspace in order to land at KWHP.

The FARs are directed to “Arrival or through flight,” and they’re exactly the same for Class C and Class D. So, wouldn’t this mean that when the TRACON says “contact Burbank tower,” then I MUST first establish two-way radio communication with the BUR tower before entering? … i.e. just as if I were told to "contact tower" when arriving at a Class D?

If not, why not?

 

[Shawn]

When I’m on flight following and I’m preparing to arrive at a Class D airport, the Approach controller will tell me to “contact tower” when I’m a few miles away from the tower’s surface area. At that point, as I understand it, I MUST establish two-way radio communication in order to enter their airspace. If they don’t repeat my tail number, I may not enter.

That is not at all correct on FF in your scenerio. You would be correct if you were NOT on FF and had not established communication with ATC.

If the airspace is your destination, the ATC approach controller has jurisdictional control over that airspace in addition to tower. You have met the requirement to be in communication to enter by being on FF and handed off in sequence to the appropriate facilities along your route to your destination. "Contact tower" is simply an handoff, not an instruction to establish communication to enter their airspace. You are not required as the pilot to "reestablish" communication to enter their airspace. That has already been done with approach...and it is specifically approach's job to coordinate that transition to the airspace, not yours.

 

[eetrojan]

That is not at all correct on FF in your scenerio. You would be correct if you were NOT on FF and had not established communication with ATC.

If the airspace is your destination, the ATC approach controller has jurisdictional control over that airspace in addition to tower. You have met the requirement to be in communication to enter. "Contact tower" is simply an handoff, not an instruction to establish communication to enter their airspace. You are not required as the pilot to "reestablish" communication to enter their airspace. That has already been done with approach...and it is specifically approach's job to coordinate that transition to the airspace, not yours.

Hmm. Maybe. If so, I have a misunderstanding or a bad memory, but it seems that every time I'm on flight following to a Class D, as I get close to arriving and after they confirm I have the airport in sight, Approach says "contact tower" or "radar service terminated, contact ____ tower on ____. So long."

It is my understanding that I have to establish two-way radio communication with tower to enter their airspace, regardless of whether I got to that point with flight following, or by squawking 1200. Is that not right?

 

[Shawn]

With whom??

The OP was on FF and talking to the approach controller then handed off to Burbank.

Does anyone think that there is an approach controller anywhere that gives a handoff to tower that does not have jurisdictional control over that airspace and not meeting the requirements to enter said airspace? If they did not coordinate with tower, it is on ATC, not the pilot.

Remember, we are talking about being established on FF and being HANDED OFF to tower...not wandering into C or D airspace.

 

[eetrojan]

If the airspace is your destination, the ATC approach controller has jurisdictional control over that airspace in addition to tower.

Thanks. Is there something out there that clearly says this? I don't know where to find it.

 

[Shawn]

Approach says "contact tower" or "radar service terminated, contact ____ tower on ____. So long."

Two different scenarios. If you just get "contact tower" then proceeded on you merry way. You are in communication and can enter at will.

If your are dumped off of FF and squawking 1200 prior to entering, then yes...you need to establish contact with tower as you are no longer in communication.

If you get "radar services terminated, contact tower" and are still on a discrete code...that can be a bit more ambiguous but I get that all the time and treat that as a handoff. Many towers can not provide "radar services" within their airspace and it is 100% on the pilot for see and avoid with no traffic advisories from ATC hence the phraseology...but that does not mean you have been terminated from flight following and are no longer in communication with the handoff.

 

[dmspilot]

every time I'm on flight following to a Class D, as I get close to arriving and after they confirm I have the airport in sight, Approach says "contact tower" or "radar service terminated, contact ____ tower on ____.

The airspace in question is Class C. The chart says to contact SoCal approach, which he did.

 

[Shawn]

Thanks. Is there something out there that clearly says this? I don't know where to find it.

See Bob's post #27

From the controller's handbook:

2−1−16. SURFACE AREAS
a. Coordinate with the appropriate nonapproach
control tower on an individual aircraft basis before
issuing a clearance which would require flight within
a surface area for which the tower has responsibility
unless otherwise specified in a letter of agreement.
REFERENCE−
FAAO JO 7210.3, Para 4−3−1, Letters of Agreement.
14 CFR Section 91.127, Operating on or in the Vicinity of an Airport
in Class E Airspace.
P/CG Term− Surface Area.
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.
The pilot is not expected to obtain his/her own
authorization through each area when in contact with a
radar facility.
c. Transfer communications to the appropriate
facility, if required, prior to operation within a surface
area for which the tower has responsibility.

Bob Gardner

 

[eetrojan]

See Bob's post #27

Thanks Shawn. I wish we didn't have to glean the answer from a note in a 700-page FAA Order about acceptable phraseology for ATC.

You'd think that something this fundamental to busting airspace, or not, would be clearly stated directly to pilots.

If you know, is there a source that is directed to pilots, rather than controllers, ideally from the CFRs?

 

[woodchucker]

I'm thinking the FAA needs to spell this out for pilots. But here's my take. The OP didn't specify that he was talking with an approach controller before the attempted hand-off**. Maybe he was since I've never flown that airspace before, and in that case he is probably okay. But if he was on flight following with Center, then I think yes, that is an airspace bust. I'm curious as to how some posters here assume that OP was talking with Burbank approach? Is that an airspace thing there, local knowledge?

**For Bravo, clearance is provided by approach here at KSLC. The only Charlie airport I've flown to is KBOI, and center handed me off to tower, not approach.

 

[N801BH]

I'm thinking the FAA needs to spell this out for pilots. But here's my take. The OP didn't specify that he was talking with an approach controller before the attempted hand-off**. Maybe he was since I've never flown that airspace before, and in that case he is probably okay. But if he was on flight following with Center, then I think yes, that is an airspace bust. I'm curious as to how some posters here assume that OP was talking with Burbank approach? Is that an airspace thing there, local knowledge?

**For Bravo, clearance is provided by approach here at KSLC. The only Charlie airport I've flown to is KBOI, and center handed me off to tower, not approach.

I usually get handed off from slc to big sky approach going into Boise.

 

[azure]

I'm thinking the FAA needs to spell this out for pilots. But here's my take. The OP didn't specify that he was talking with an approach controller before the attempted hand-off**. Maybe he was since I've never flown that airspace before, and in that case he is probably okay. But if he was on flight following with Center, then I think yes, that is an airspace bust. I'm curious as to how some posters here assume that OP was talking with Burbank approach? Is that an airspace thing there, local knowledge?

Maybe I am making assumptions as I have no local knowledge. But I've never been handed off by Center directly to a tower except in areas not served by an Approach. In this case the OP was being handed off to the tower of the central airport in the Charlie airspace he was transiting. To me, that's a little like being handed off to Flint Tower in the course of transiting Flint's Charlie. That does happen sometimes, but IME it's always Flint Approach that does the handing off to tower, never Cleveland Center - in fact I'd be talking to Flint Approach well before I entered their airspace.

This is a little different because there isn't any Burbank Approach, rather SoCal owns that airspace (much like Boston Approach owns KMHT's Charlie airspace). So maybe I'm assuming here, but I still can't imagine an aircraft that close to the Burbank Charlie not talking to the Approach control that owns the airspace. Anyone? OP?

 

[eetrojan]

Maybe I am making assumptions as I have no local knowledge. But I've never been handed off by Center directly to a tower except in areas not served by an Approach. In this case the OP was being handed off to the tower of the central airport in the Charlie airspace he was transiting. To me, that's a little like being handed off to Flint Tower in the course of transiting Flint's Charlie. That does happen sometimes, but IME it's always Flint Approach that does the handing off to tower, never Cleveland Center - in fact I'd be talking to Flint Approach well before I entered their airspace.

This is a little different because there isn't any Burbank Approach, rather SoCal owns that airspace (much like Boston Approach owns KMHT's Charlie airspace). So maybe I'm assuming here, but I still can't imagine an aircraft that close to the Burbank Charlie not talking to the Approach control that owns the airspace. Anyone? OP?

The OP said he was getting flight following. As far as I can tell, if flying from L35 to WHP, he wouldn't have been with center at any point because he would have always been in the SoCal TRACON's airspace.

The SoCal TRACON, aka SoCal Approach, is a consolidation of "5+1 TRACONS" that now form its six areas. It's airspace is massive (see below). It contains two Class B towers, 4 Class C towers, and dozens of Class D towers.

That's why I don't totally understand what it means to say that SoCal "owns" the airspace that is more locally controlled by the towers.

 

[comanchepilot]

If I am on FF why would I request transition???

Yup - this.

If you are on FF and he did not cancel you - he has arranged a transition through the Charlie which is administered by SoCal approach - at least the outer ring . . .

At BUR and ONT I am often told to contact the tower if I will be transitioning the inner ring. . . .

PS: Andras - there are THREE Class B towers -technically Miramar is at the center of Class B airspace to the surface down there - even if its not technically class B.

 

[Lon33]

That's why I don't totally understand what it means to say that SoCal "owns" the airspace that is more locally controlled by the towers.

I don't understand either. Doesn't the Burbank tower "own" the Burbank airspace? If so, when FF tells a pilot to contact the tower, doesn't the pilot have to make contact with the tower before entering the tower's airspace?

This sort of thing happens all the time in the area around Burbank, Van Nuys and Whiteman, so it's really troubling that we can have such a lengthy debate about whether contact with the tower is necessary -- regardless of who's right.

 

[Sac Arrow]

That's why I don't totally understand what it means to say that SoCal "owns" the airspace that is more locally controlled by the towers.

Meaning they are the (or more correctly an, along with the tower) jurisdictional ATC authority over the Class C airspace. If you are just transiting, you likely won't even talk to the tower, depending on where you are.

 

[eetrojan]

Yup - this.

If you are on FF and he did not cancel you - he has arranged a transition through the Charlie which is administered by SoCal approach - at least the outer ring . . .

At BUR and ONT I am often told to contact the tower if I will be transitioning the inner ring. . . .

PS: Andras - there are THREE Class B towers -technically Miramar is at the center of Class B airspace to the surface down there - even if its not technically class B.

Thanks Comanche.

Does this definition from the Pilot/Controller Glossary in the back of the same ATC Order quoted by Bob relate to this discussion?

It seems to suggest that radar service is "automatically terminated" (same as being canceled?) when a pilot is advised to change to tower, but it's poorly worded and difficult to follow:

 

[Sac Arrow]

I don't understand either. Doesn't the Burbank tower "own" the Burbank airspace? If so, when FF tells a pilot to contact the tower, doesn't the pilot have to make contact with the tower before entering the tower's airspace?

This sort of thing happens all the time in the area around Burbank, Van Nuys and Whiteman, so it's really troubling that we can have such a lengthy debate about whether contact with the tower is necessary -- regardless of who's right.

It's up to approach to decide whether contact with the tower is necessary.

 

[Lon33]

It's up to approach to decide whether contact with the tower is necessary.

Yes. And if approach decides contact with the tower is necessary -- and tells the pilot to do it -- doesn't that mean the pilot must get clearance from the tower before entering the tower's airspace?

 

[MAKG1]

Yes. And if approach decides contact with the tower is necessary -- and tells the pilot to do it -- doesn't that mean the pilot must get clearance from the tower before entering the tower's airspace?

No, not clearance. Towers do not clear airspace (except some parts of Class B, and SVFR). They clear runways.

You do have to establish and maintain two way communication (that last part seems to be ignored here).

 

[Sac Arrow]

Yes. And if approach decides contact with the tower is necessary -- and tells the pilot to do it -- doesn't that mean the pilot must get clearance from the tower before entering the tower's airspace?

Nope, that's a handoff. You will already be in the tower's "airspace" before you are handed off to the tower. You are already cleared to be there. The tower's airspace is Class C. Approaches airspace is whatever their sector is and includes the Class C.

 

[coloradobluesky]

Pilot is required to contact and communicate with ATC having authority over that airspace, NOT necessarily with Tower. And adjacent approach or center will know if they have the authority, and if they don't they wont do it.
Approach or Center can descend you into or even through Class C or D without you talking to the C or D tower. For that matter, they can clear you and put you into B also. If they dump you into Class C and ATC didn't coordinate with the Class C controller, hes made a mistake. But the Class C controller MIGHT blame you. It has happened, but it shouldn't and probably doesn't much anymore. With IFR, they ALWAYS coordinate. With flight following, they aren't quite so rigorous, but they should be.

The system doesn't always work perfectly, but in the end it works satisfactorily. Just work it out! Keep a friendly voice over the radio.

 

[Sac Arrow]

Pilot is required to contact and communicate with ATC having authority over that airspace, NOT necessarily with Tower. And adjacent approach or center will know if they have the authority, and if they don't they wont do it.
Approach or Center can descend you into or even through Class C or D without you talking to the C or D tower. For that matter, they can clear you and put you into B also. If they dump you into Class C and ATC didn't coordinate with the Class C controller, hes made a mistake. But the Class C controller MIGHT blame you. It has happened, but it shouldn't and probably doesn't much anymore. With IFR, they ALWAYS coordinate. With flight following, they aren't quite so rigorous, but they should be.

The system doesn't always work perfectly, but in the end it works satisfactorily. Just work it out! Keep a friendly voice over the radio.

There is one hiccup with Class D. Approach may or may not have authority within Class D. If they do, it's like Class B or C and they may route you through it without you contacting the tower. If they don't, then they will either hand you off to the tower prior to entering, or tell you to stay out.

 

[Lon33]

It looks to me as though we're discussing two different situations:
1. Approach clears a pilot through Class C or D airspace without telling the pilot to contact the Tower.
2. Approach tells the pilot to contact the Tower.

The original question -- and the one that comes up frequently in the airspace around Burbank, Van Nuys and Whiteman -- was whether a pilot busts Class C or D if Approach has told him to contact the Tower, and the Tower doesn't respond before the pilot has entered Class C or D.

This matters in the area near Burbank because doing 360s outside Burbank's airspace, waiting for its Tower to respond, can be a dangerous thing to do, all by itself. Burbank has mountains to the east, Van Nuys to the west, Whiteman to the north, and planes and helicopters coming and going, constantly, on north-south and east-west runways.

So, back to the original question: if Approach tells a pilot to contact the Tower, does the pilot have to hear the Tower recite the plane's tail number in order to enter the Tower's airspace?

 

[Shawn]

So, back to the original question: if Approach tells a pilot to contact the Tower, does the pilot have to hear the Tower recite the plane's tail number in order to enter the Tower's airspace?

No. Communication has been already established and the requirements have been met to enter the airspace by being on FF and getting handoffs in sequence to the destination.

The biggest ambiguity that is not defined anywhere is who has jurisdictional control over that airspace in addition to tower. It is certainly also the approach controller that is sequencing planes for arrival at the field, but beyond that is not defined who else is a controlling authority to meet the "establish and maintain communication" requirement...but if you are on with any ATC controller and they give you a handoff to tower you can be sure that that controller DOES have jurisdictional control and your requirements have been met by talking to that controller.

If you are getting a handoff, your transition to the next controller or tower has already been coordinated.

1. Approach clears a pilot through Class C or D airspace without telling the pilot to contact the Tower.

I know it is semantics, but a VFR plot will never be nor need to be "cleared" into C or D, you only need to establish and maintain communication to enter.

Here is how I handle C & D on FF...if it is my destination, I know I will be handed off to the controllers in sequence that will get me to the field and they will coordinate the transition into that airspace. It is very clearly laid out that is is THEIR job and NOT mine to obtain the proper transitions.

If I am transitioning C or D, I will always state to ATC know my intentions to do so (not request a "clearance" so that can coordinate said transition and I am assured that I am talking to the proper controller that does have control over that airspace.

 

[docmirror]

I still vote that tower is providing the service in that airspace. Not talking to tower and going into the C without hearing the 'spamcan xxxxx <instruction>' is in violation. One can replace tower with approach, departure, center, clearance delivery, I don't care. If you haven't heard from the service provider, and you are in their space - you done wrong.

But, I can understand the rationalizations the other way as well. He's got a squawk, he's been talking to someone in the system before(who is not providing the C services), so it seems like he's all good to motor on in.

Subsequent radio transmission from 'tower' indicates otherwise.

 

[Shawn]

I still vote that tower is providing the service in that airspace. Not talking to tower and going into the C without hearing the 'spamcan xxxxx <instruction>' is in violation.

Negative. FF transitions through C and D happen all the time without the pilot ever talking to tower...you think all of those pilots are in violation and ATC set them up for a bust?

One can replace tower with approach, departure, center, clearance delivery, I don't care. If you haven't heard from the service provider, and you are in their space - you done wrong.

Keeping to the OP's scenario and cruz of the debate, the OP WAS on FF and was given handoffs to the destination which eliminates the C & D boundary walls.

 

[docmirror]

I still vote that tower is providing the service in that airspace. Not talking to tower and going into the C without hearing the 'spamcan xxxxx <instruction>' is in violation. /QUOTE]


Negative. FF transitions through C and D happen all the time without the pilot ever talking to tower...you think all of those pilots are in violation and ATC set them up for a bust?

If you're going to quote, and make assumptions, I can't help you if you don't quote the whole thing.

" One can replace tower with approach, departure, center, clearance delivery, I don't care. If you haven't heard from the service provider, and you are in their space - you done wrong."

So, go ahead, make an entry or transition without talking to one of the service providers. Make my day, have a pen and paper handy.