Operating in Class D without clearance

camorton said:
Well, I have even FURTHER bad news for the OP (and everyone else). 91.123 is in effect REGARDLESS of the airspace you are in. If you are in communication with ATC (flight-following, VFR advisories, whatever) anywhere and they give you an instruction, you have to comply as long as it is safe to do so (no emergency, etc.).
...
Needless to say I'm using FF a whole lot less these days, especially with the advent of ADS-B.
Click to expand...
And, with ADS-B ATC can call you in the blind. It's happened to me - has it happened to you?
Flying VFR in class E airspace, near KBFI and KSEA but outside their airspace, I monitor tower frequency just for safety. KBFI tower said my tail number and asked "are you on frequency". I said affirmative and they gave me a traffic advisory and wished me a good evening.
Strange, huh?
I suppose you could ignore them and pretend you weren't on frequency, but that is not the right thing to do and if they call you there probably is a good reason for it.
 
camorton said:
Well, I have even FURTHER bad news for the OP (and everyone else). 91.123 is in effect REGARDLESS of the airspace you are in. If you are in communication with ATC (flight-following, VFR advisories, whatever) anywhere and they give you an instruction, you have to comply as long as it is safe to do so (no emergency, etc.).
Click to expand...
The good news is that it's only in effect in controlled airspace.
 
camorton said:
Well, I have even FURTHER bad news for the OP (and everyone else). 91.123 is in effect REGARDLESS of the airspace you are in. If you are in communication with ATC (flight-following, VFR advisories, whatever) anywhere and they give you an instruction, you have to comply as long as it is safe to do so (no emergency, etc.). So you'll just cancel FF and then do what you want? Nope. ATC can require you to stay in communication and continue to comply with their instructions even in airspace where communication is not required. Lots of pilots will argue this, but the FAA has made it clear that this is the case (Google "FAA" and "Karas Letter").

I (and others I've spoken to) have had it happen real-world:

ATC: "N1234 fly heading 180."
N1234: "N1234 cancel VFR advisories."
ATC: "NO. N1234 Stay with me. Fly heading 180."
...and I'm screwed.

Needless to say I'm using FF a whole lot less these days, especially with the advent of ADS-B.

C.
Click to expand...

From the Karas letter:
​
"A pilot flying VFR in Class E airspace, which is controlled airspace, is not required to​
communicate with ATC; however, if a pilot is communicating with ATC and ATC issues an​
instruction, the pilot must comply with that instruction."​

Nothing in the Karas letter prevents a pilot flying VFR in class E or G airspace from ending communication with ATC without prior notice.
 
Palmpilot said:
From the Karas letter:
​
"A pilot flying VFR in Class E airspace, which is controlled airspace, is not required to​
communicate with ATC; however, if a pilot is communicating with ATC and ATC issues an​
instruction, the pilot must comply with that instruction."​

Nothing in the Karas letter prevents a pilot flying VFR in class E or G airspace from ending communication with ATC without prior notice.
Click to expand...
Watch what happens the day someone does it in Class E and causes enough of a problem for ATC to report it upstream.
 
Palmpilot said:
Nothing in the Karas letter prevents a pilot flying VFR in class E or G airspace from ending communication with ATC without prior notice.
Click to expand...
Ha, ha. I'll let you try that first. The main reason you would want to 'end communication without prior notice' would be if they just gave you an instruction you don't like.

C.
 
Palmpilot said:
From the Karas letter:
​
"A pilot flying VFR in Class E airspace, which is controlled airspace, is not required to​
communicate with ATC; however, if a pilot is communicating with ATC and ATC issues an​
instruction, the pilot must comply with that instruction."​

Nothing in the Karas letter prevents a pilot flying VFR in class E or G airspace from ending communication with ATC without prior notice.
Click to expand...
That depends on how one reads the statement you quoted. Here's how I read it. Suppose you're flying in class E airspace. ATC calls you in the blind (which sometimes happens now that ADS-B is prevalent). You don't have to answer their call. But if you do, you are now communicating with ATC. If they issue an instruction, you must comply, with the normal exceptions of responding "unable" or declaring an emergency.
 
@birdtrick - just curious why you have to do the aerial photo run in a class Delta? Is there some background you are going for? Or is just because its nearly impossible to find someplace without a B,C,D in SoCal?
 
midlifeflyer said:
Watch what happens the day someone does it in Class E and causes enough of a problem for ATC to report it upstream.
Click to expand...
Do you have a prediction for what would happen?
 
camorton said:
Ha, ha. I'll let you try that first. The main reason you would want to 'end communication without prior notice' would be if they just gave you an instruction you don't like.

C.
Click to expand...
In class E or G airspace, if the unannounced frequency change occurred before the instruction was given, I don't see what basis there would be for an enforcement action. If I received the instruction, I would comply with it until I was told that it no longer applied, or "frequency change approved."

Otherwise, if I became dissatisfied with the quality of service that a particular facility habitually provided, I would avoid calling them in the first place. That might require staying out of class D or higher airspace, of course.
 
Palmpilot said:
Do you have a prediction for what would happen?
Click to expand...
They would find a way to say it's a violation. two theories. (1) once you are in communication termination without assent is a 91.123 violation. Or (2) lip service that it's not a 91.123 violation but nevertheless careless/reckless because ATC is sequencing traffic based on the expectation you are there to conform. Similar to what has been done with IFR in Class G when it affects Class E.
 
Sinistar said:
@birdtrick - just curious why you have to do the aerial photo run in a class Delta? Is there some background you are going for? Or is just because its nearly impossible to find someplace without a B,C,D in SoCal?
Click to expand...
Perhaps the pilot is trying to photograph something on the ground inside the Class D airspace.
 
midlifeflyer said:
They would find a way to say it's a violation. two theories. (1) once you are in communication termination without assent is a 91.123 violation....
Click to expand...

What if they never gave you an instruction to be on that frequency?

I suppose they could get you if you changed your squawk code back to 1200 without permission.

midlifeflyer said:
Or (2) lip service that it's not a 91.123 violation but nevertheless careless/reckless because ATC is sequencing traffic based on the expectation you are there to conform. Similar to what has been done with IFR in Class G when it affects Class E.
Click to expand...

It wasn't long after I became a pilot that I concluded that if the FAA wants to get you, they can. So I figure the best policy is to try to avoid pxxxing anybody off. That's been working for me for 32 years.
 
Palmpilot said:
What if they never gave you an instruction to be on that frequency?
Click to expand...
The theory is that once you have asked for services, received a squawk code, and hear "radar contact," you have voluntarily entered into a relationship that creates certain responsibilities.

But my crystal ball is pretty cloudy, so let's see if someone wants to test it out ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top