Temporary Tower - Airspace height?

[DesertNomad]

Looking at KTVL this weekend and there is a NOTAM for a temporary control tower in place (126.4) July 8 - 14. Does that effectively make it D airspace with a 4nm radius and 2500' high? They don't list an ATIS, so maybe it is still Class E.

KTVL is at 6268' so if it is Class D, it would be up to 8800'.

I am doing a scenic flight over Tahoe this weekend with friends and we'll be much higher (10,500') but just curious how this affects airspace.

 

[luvflyin]

Looking at KTVL this weekend and there is a NOTAM for a temporary control tower in place (126.4) July 8 - 14. Does that effectively make it D airspace with a 4nm radius and 2500' high? They don't list an ATIS, so maybe it is still Class E.

KTVL is at 6268' so if it is Class D, it would be up to 8800'.

I am doing a scenic flight over Tahoe this weekend with friends and we'll be much higher (10,500') but just curious how this affects airspace.

Unless there’s a Notam designating Class D, it remains Class E. You are required to establish Radio Communications with the Tower in accordance with FAR 91.127 c.

EDIT: A Notam designating Class D wouldn’t happen anyway as described by @Brad Z below in post #7

 

[Pilawt]

I think KTVL would be Class E - 91.127(c) governs.

 

[DesertNomad]

91.127(c):

"Communications must be established prior to 4 nautical miles from the airport, up to and including 2,500 feet AGL. However, if the aircraft radio fails in flight, the pilot in command may operate that aircraft and land if weather conditions are at or above basic VFR weather minimums, visual contact with the tower is maintained, and a clearance to land is received."

How is that functionally any different from Class D?

 

[Pilawt]

How is that functionally any different from Class D?

None that I can think of, other than that Class Ds can be established and charted with non-standard dimensions.

There's a towered military heliport southeast of PHX (KPCA) with no Class D. It's not very noticeable on the sectional chart, so the airport information box spells out, "Ctc PCA Twr within 4 NM below 2500 ft AGL."

 

[luvflyin]

91.127(c):

"Communications must be established prior to 4 nautical miles from the airport, up to and including 2,500 feet AGL. However, if the aircraft radio fails in flight, the pilot in command may operate that aircraft and land if weather conditions are at or above basic VFR weather minimums, visual contact with the tower is maintained, and a clearance to land is received."

How is that functionally any different from Class D?

Functionally not much different. 91.127 (c) pretty much encompasses 91.129 (c) and (d). It doesn’t talk about satellite airports though, 91.129 (c) (2) (ii). And then there’s all the other stuff in 91.129 from (e) onward about big airplanes and jets, noise abatement, visual approach slope indicators and all that other stuff that isn’t in 127.

 

[Brad Z]

You can't just NOTAM an airspace change...it is a regulatory action that goes through a whole process and requires public notice and comment. That's why 91.127(c) exists, to effectively create the same communication requirements with the tower within a defined area when delta airspace doesn't already exist.

 

[luvflyin]

You can't just NOTAM an airspace change...it is a regulatory action that goes through a whole process and requires public notice and comment. That's why 91.127(c) exists, to effectively create the same communication requirements with the tower within a defined area when delta airspace doesn't already exist.

Yeah. Little history on that is when Alphabet Soup Airspace became effective they just dropped the Airport Traffic Area, which had established the communication requirement at Towered airports, out of FAR 91. It took some regulatory action to get that solved with amendments to 91.126 & 127 which took awhile.

 

[flyingron]

Brad and Luv'n are exactly right. There's no "airspace" here. The FAA specifically stated in the rulemaking that bogus ATA uncharted airspace wouldn't happen anymore. As usual, the FAA lied and had to put it back.

 

[luvflyin]

Brad and Luv'n are exactly right. There's no "airspace" here. The FAA specifically stated in the rulemaking that bogus ATA uncharted airspace wouldn't happen anymore. As usual, the FAA lied and had to put it back.

Do you recall the date that the FAR's got amended to put it back?

 

[flyingron]

Do you recall the date that the FAR's got amended to put it back?

The alphabet airspace went into effect on September 16, 1993. 91.126(d) and 91.127(c) was railroaded through the rulemaking process as a "not significant regulatory action" without public comment period, published March 11, 1994, and effective immediately.