When do you really have permission to enter Bravo airspace?

roncachamp said:
In practice that's true, but it's not consistent with FAR 91.131.


§ 91.131 Operations in Class B airspace.

(a) Operating rules. No person may operate an aircraft within a Class B airspace area except in compliance with § 91.129 and the following rules:

(1) The operator must receive an ATC clearance from the ATC facility having jurisdiction for that area before operating an aircraft in that area.
Click to expand...

The FAA is the entity that controls which ATC facility or facilities have jurisdiction over any particular airspace. Based on their actions, it's evident that the agency has decided that the ATC facility that issues your IFR clearance has jurisdiction over any class B airspace involved, no matter how far away it is, and I, for one, am not going to try to talk them out of that.
 
Last edited:
Palmpilot said:
I figure that it's not up to me to decide which ATC facility or facilities have jurisdiction over any particular airspace.
Click to expand...
When it comes to Class B airspace, it's usually pretty easy to figure that out. New York TRACON owns the NYC Class B, Potomac owns the Balto-Wash Class B, etc. OTOH, you should be smart enough to figure out that Atlantic City Approach can't issue a VFR aircraft a clearance into Philly's Class B, and if a heading ACY gave you will take you into PHL's B-space, you need to speak up before you cross that line.
 
By the way, it appears to me that the only time you can count on the FAA to be precise in their use of language is when it will help them prosecute a pilot.

I noticed early on that if the FAA wants to get you, they can, so it's best to avoid ****ing anybody off unless your survival depends on it.
 
Ron Levy said:
When it comes to Class B airspace, it's usually pretty easy to figure that out. New York TRACON owns the NYC Class B, Potomac owns the Balto-Wash Class B, etc. OTOH, you should be smart enough to figure out that Atlantic City Approach can't issue a VFR aircraft a clearance into Philly's Class B, and if a heading ACY gave you will take you into PHL's B-space, you need to speak up before you cross that line.
Click to expand...

I wasn't talking about deciding in the sense of figuring it out; I was talking about deciding in the sense of controlling who has authority over the airspace. In the U.S., that decision can only be made by the FAA. I'll go back and try to clarify my post.
 
Ron Levy said:
If they say "vector for traffic," then yes, you are correct, although you'd better not create a collision hazard if you deviate from that vector.
Click to expand...

So if something else is given as the reason for the vector then it is an instruction?

However, there are a lot of other reasons why a controller might issue a heading/altitude to VFR traffic, and in those cases, it's an instruction and the conflict can arise.
Click to expand...

Are any of those many other reasons consistent with JO 7110.65?
 
Last edited:
roncachamp said:
So if something else is given as the reason for the vector then it is an instruction.
Click to expand...
If you say so.

Are any of those many other reasons consistent with JO 7110.65?
Click to expand...
That's the controller's concern, not the pilot's. The FAA is very clear on this point in the regulations and the Chief Counsel interpretations, and the NTSB is equally clear in their review of cases where a pilot argued with ATC. Absent an emergency (i.e., a threat to the safety of the flight as a result of following that ATC instruction), the pilot does as s/he is told and saves the argument for the phone call after the flight is concluded.

We have long held that, given the time-sensitive nature of ATC communications and aviation operations, combined with the fact that air traffic controllers must communicate with multiple aircraft within the same short period of time, ATC instructions are not subject to negotiation. For example, in Administrator v. McGuire, 4 NTSB 1824 (1984), we stated as follows: ​

Instructions from ATC are not matters subject to negotiation or bargaining which have the effects of monopolizing the radio frequency and interfering with ​
the controller giving an appropriate degree of attention to other aircraft under his control. Timely response to ATC instructions, and continuing adherence to clearances, are essential to the functioning of the ATC system and its purpose of providing safe traffic separation.
​
Click to expand...
Administrator v. McCarthney.

And personally, I can see lots of good reasons for the FAA and NTSB to take this stand, and absent an impending emergency as a result, but not one good reason at all for them to approve of pilots arguing in flight with controllers over whether or not ATC is authorized to give any particular instruction. That way lies anarchy, and that's not going to keep air traffic moving in a safe and orderly manner, which is the fundamental objective of the National Airspace System and ATC.
 
Last edited:
In spite of that 1984 NTSB claim that ATC instructions are not subject to negotiation, I have seen lots of articles in the aviation press since then recommending that pilots negotiate with ATC if they want and/or need something better, and I have seen plenty of accounts of pilots' doing it. :dunno:
 
roncachamp said:
(1) The operator must receive an ATC clearance from the ATC facility having jurisdiction for that area before operating an aircraft in that area.
Click to expand...

Heh. I see a problem. Should I quiz ZDV if they REALLY used the land line to get that approval from DEN TRACON at 2AM when they're trying to be helpful?

In other words, do I need to hear the words from DEN TRACON themselves, or can controllers still issue clearances on information (from their back channel call) that I do not have nor can I confirm?

Grin...
 
denverpilot said:
Heh. I see a problem. Should I quiz ZDV if they REALLY used the land line to get that approval from DEN TRACON at 2AM when they're trying to be helpful?

In other words, do I need to hear the words from DEN TRACON themselves, or can controllers still issue clearances on information (from their back channel call) that I do not have nor can I confirm?

Grin...
Click to expand...

All questions regarding FARs must be directed to the Office of the Chief Counsel.
 
Nine pages on something so simple!!!!!

IFR: Don't worry about class B, just fly your clearance.

VFR: Don't enter class B unless an ATC agency says the magic words 'Cleared in to Class B'. If you're not sure you are cleared, don't enter class B.

There are some other rules about class B that are well covered in the AIM, but 'ABC' - "Always be cleared" is the main one.

If you want to worry about something, worry about that logbook SWAT team that is probably going to kick down your door tonight, haul you away to Gitmo, where you will be interrogated mercilessly about your 'sole manipulator' manipulations.
 
JimNtexas said:
VFR: Don't enter class B unless an ATC agency says the magic words 'Cleared in to Class B'. If you're not sure you are cleared, don't enter class B.
Click to expand...
Might I suggest altering that second sentence to "If you're not sure you are cleared, ask the controller"?

Don't ever be afraid to ask for clarification, especially since the regulations tell us in no uncertain terms that "When a pilot is uncertain of an ATC clearance, that pilot shall immediately request clarification from ATC." Not "may", not "should", but "shall," which the regulations tell us "is used in an imperative sense." IOW, when you're not sure, it's not just a good idea to ask, it's the law.
 
3.5 years later, I still maintain that GRR or ZAU isn't CVG as required in 91.131.
 
EdFred said:
3.5 years later, I still maintain that GRR or ZAU isn't CVG as required in 91.131.
Click to expand...

I'd bet a bag of donuts there's an LOA somewhere that says GRR does have jurisdiction of whatever airspace they control. It's not up to pilots to ensure the ATC clearing you to do something has the proper authority to issue the clearance.
 
Captain said:
I'd bet a bag of donuts there's an LOA somewhere that says GRR does have jurisdiction of whatever airspace they control. It's not up to pilots to ensure the ATC clearing you to do something has the proper authority to issue the clearance.
Click to expand...
Two points:
  1. If what you think is the wrong facility uses the right words ("cleared into Bravo"), and you have no doubt as to what they said, it's on them, not you.
  2. If what you think is the wrong facility does not use the right words (e.g., Tower telling you to continue downwind in the direction of B-space without saying "cleared into Bravo"), then it's on you, not them.
And as stated before, regardless of all else if you have any doubt, it is incumbent on you to get clarification ASAP rather than trying to guess what the Chief Counsel would say about it.
 
The hard rule I use is IF I am operating VFR then I MUST hear the words 'Cleared into the Class B'. It's happened before where I had to querry ATC to get those words said. The situation that normally brings that up is when I come in IFR and then cancel to take a short cut. A classic example is New York approach near DPK when I'm going to HPN. If it's VFR I'll just cancel and let down just outside the Bravo there. Often they'll just clear me direct HPN and I'll confirm I'm 'Cleared into the Bravo'.

A few FO's of mine have thought me a dork for doing this but I don't really care. I'd like to get the words on tape.
 
Captain said:
I'd bet a bag of donuts there's an LOA somewhere that says GRR does have jurisdiction of whatever airspace they control. It's not up to pilots to ensure the ATC clearing you to do something has the proper authority to issue the clearance.
Click to expand...

Why would GRR have control of CVGs airspace?
 
Well then why ask? Not my burden either.
 
There's been a couple times I entered SFO Class B without hearing "Clear through the Class Bravo."

Scenario

Depart left crosswind from HWD.
Call up SFO tower at the toll plaza

Me: SFO tower, Cessna 123AB 1000 ft at the toll plaza
SFO Tower: Cessna 123AB radar contact, squawk 0XXX maintain 1000 altimeter 29.95.
Me: "Squawk, 0XXX and maintain 1000, 3AB"
SFO Tower: Cessna 3AB, what's your route today?
Me: 92 West, 101 North Transition, 3AB.
SFO Tower: Cessna 3AB, Bridge transition, 101 north approved.
Me: Bridge transition, 101 north approved, 3AB.

Didn't get busted for entering but I guess next time if I don't hear "Clear through the Class Bravo" I'll confirm to be on the safe side.
 
ainokea said:
There's been a couple times I entered SFO Class B without hearing "Clear through the Class Bravo."

Scenario

Depart left crosswind from HWD.
Call up SFO tower at the toll plaza

Me: SFO tower, Cessna 123AB 1000 ft at the toll plaza
SFO Tower: Cessna 123AB radar contact, squawk 0XXX maintain 1000 altimeter 29.95.
Me: "Squawk, 0XXX and maintain 1000, 3AB"
SFO Tower: Cessna 3AB, what's your route today?
Me: 92 West, 101 North Transition, 3AB.
SFO Tower: Cessna 3AB, Bridge transition, 101 north approved.
Me: Bridge transition, 101 north approved, 3AB.

Didn't get busted for entering but I guess next time if I don't hear "Clear through the Class Bravo" I'll confirm to be on the safe side.
Click to expand...
I don't know exactly where the "bridge transition" is, but if it goes through the part of the B-space which SFO Tower controls and they know what that route is (which it sure seems they do), there would be no uncertainty my mind as to whether or not I was cleared through, and I wouldn't sweat the lack of the words "cleared through Class Bravo airspace."
 
Ron Levy said:
I don't know exactly where the "bridge transition" is, but if it goes through the part of the B-space which SFO Tower controls and they know what that route is (which it sure seems they do), there would be no uncertainty my mind as to whether or not I was cleared through, and I wouldn't sweat the lack of the words "cleared through Class Bravo airspace."
Click to expand...

Highway 92 is the bridge that cuts across the class B surface area (and the SFO final approach course), so "bridge transition" was probably just the controller's way of authorizing what the pilot asked for, but using different words.
 
EdFred said:
You said they (probably) did, it falls on you. You know that whole making claims and backing it up thing.
Click to expand...

YOU said GRR was giving clearance to CVGs airspace! Not me. I simply said I'd bet (a bag of donuts) they have an LOA for doing that. Now your questioning your own claim that GRR is giving clearance into CVGS airspace? WTF?!
 
Here's the whole conversation.


EdFred said:
3.5 years later, I still maintain that GRR or ZAU isn't CVG as required in 91.131.
Click to expand...

Captain said:
I'd bet a bag of donuts there's an LOA somewhere that says GRR does have jurisdiction of whatever airspace they control. It's not up to pilots to ensure the ATC clearing you to do something has the proper authority to issue the clearance.
Click to expand...

EdFred said:
Why would GRR have control of CVGs airspace?
Click to expand...

Captain said:
You tell me. You brought it up.
Click to expand...

EdFred said:
I'm not the one that suggested they did. Not my burden.
Click to expand...

Captain said:
Well then why ask? Not my burden either.
Click to expand...

EdFred said:
You said they (probably) did, it falls on you. You know that whole making claims and backing it up thing.
Click to expand...
 
3.5 years later, I still maintain that GRR or ZAU isn't CVG as required in 91.131.
Click to expand...

Have you ever considered calling CVG etc and just asking them to clarify who can clear you into class B in this area? I would if this was bothering me for 3.5 years.

I've called our local ATC a number of times with questions and they've always been very helpful. I'm sure they'd rather clear up questions on the ground rather than have a pilot create a deal in the air.
 
Captain said:
Here's the whole conversation.
Click to expand...

Perhaps you don't know the difference between is and isn't. Read the first post in that string again. Followed by the second post. Use your finger and mouth the words if you have to.
 
EdFred said:
Perhaps you don't know the difference between is and isn't. Read the first post in that string again. Followed by the second post. Use your finger and mouth the words if you have to.
Click to expand...

Isn't the point of your first post that GRR actually was clearing you into CVG's airspace? Finger mouth BS aside, it seemed pretty clear from your post.
 
No my point of the post was that 91.131 isn't always followed.
 
EdFred said:
3.5 years later, I still maintain that GRR or ZAU isn't CVG as required in 91.131.
Click to expand...

Well there's the problem. I took that to mean GRR was clearing you into CVG airspace. If that was the case I'd assume an LOA was in effect. If that's not the case then I don't get the point.
 
Captain said:
Well there's the problem. I took that to mean GRR was clearing you into CVG airspace. If that was the case I'd assume an LOA was in effect. If that's not the case then I don't get the point.
Click to expand...

From early in the thread, I think the point was this:

http://www.pilotsofamerica.com/forum/showpost.php?p=559742&postcount=11

I don't think an LOA would be involved, since the issue is not unique to GRR. It involves all IFR clearances that are issued elsewhere than the facility or facilities controlling any class B airspace to be entered.

The FAA is not always perfectly precise in their wording of the regulations. In my opinion, the practical impact of this one is negligible. There are MANY examples that are far worse.
 
Richard, I'm sorry, I just think you are straining at a gnat here. You won't get an IFR clearance in to any controlled airspace unless the controlling agency has agreed to it.

But really, just call the facility and ask your question. All I ask is that you not write the chief counsel!!!!
 
JimNtexas said:
But really, just call the facility and ask your question. All I ask is that you not write the chief counsel!!!!
Click to expand...

I'm starting to think people want the opposite. Write the Chief Counsel about everything, let them kill off GA. We love our rulebook and our endless debates about them too much to actually want to just go flying.
 
JimNtexas said:
Richard, I'm sorry, I just think you are straining at a gnat here. You won't get an IFR clearance in to any controlled airspace unless the controlling agency has agreed to it.
Click to expand...

I agree that the concern over this is "straining at a gnat." In fact, that's the point I tried to make in my last paragraph.

But really, just call the facility and ask your question.
Click to expand...

I don't have a question. As I said earlier, the FAA is treating the facility that gives you your IFR clearance as having the necessary jurisdiction, and that's good enough for me.

All I ask is that you not write the chief counsel!!!!
Click to expand...

Amen to that!
 
Palmpilot said:
From early in the thread, I think the point was this:

http://www.pilotsofamerica.com/forum/showpost.php?p=559742&postcount=11

I don't think an LOA would be involved, since the issue is not unique to GRR. It involves all IFR clearances that are issued elsewhere than the facility or facilities controlling any class B airspace to be entered.

The FAA is not always perfectly precise in their wording of the regulations. In my opinion, the practical impact of this one is negligible. There are MANY examples that are far worse.
Click to expand...

Ah, I think you're right. Stupid me, I should have known post #214 was tied to post #11 ...and the author didn't know IFR doesn't need special clearance into airspace.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top