dropped in D

[Arden Prinz]

I recently made a flight from Sumter, SC (SMS) to Columbia Metro
(CAE). Just after takeoff from Sumter, I contacted Shaw AFB approach,
told the controller that I was going to Columbia Metro, and got flight
following. Between Shaw class C airspace and Columbia class C
airspace there is Mc Entire ANGS class D airspace. As I approached Mc
Entire airspace, I figured that I was OK to enter because I had
established two-way communications with Shaw approach. After I got in
the middle of Mc Entire class D airspace, Shaw approach gave me "radar
services terminated, squawk VFR, for further flight following suggest
you contact Columbia approach on 133.4". Hmmmm.... Doesn't this mean
that the instant after he terminated me, that I was not in two-way
communication with the ATC facility (and unintentionally in violation
of 91.129(c)(1))? If so, what action should I have taken? Honestly,
I would have expected a handoff to either the Mc Entire tower
controller or to the Columbia approach controller, as opposed to a
"...suggest you contact...".

Also, 91.129(d) says "Each person who operates an aircraft in a class
D airspace area must maintain two-way radio communications with the
ATC facility having jurisdiction over that area." Where is "..the ATC
facility having jurisdiction over that area" defined? For example,
for the Mc Entire class D airspace, is this just the Mc Entire tower,
or do Shaw approach and Columbia approach also have jurisdiction over
that area? And if it is only the tower, then why didn't Shaw approach
hand me off to the Mc Entire tower prior to my entering the Mc Entire
class D airspace? (Note that the Shaw controller did not sound busy
and my flight path was such that it should have been obvious that I
was going through.)

Sorry for so many questions... I just want to do things 100% right
(well at least 90% of the time :-) )!

Arden

[Maule Driver]

Interesting question. Without trying to look it up, I would say that it is
your responsibility to remain clear or make contact with Mc Entire Tower
when VFR.

You don't have a clearance of any sort so your path of flight as well as
altitude is at your discretion. If you are in Class B,C,D, then the
controller can give you vectors and altitudes but doesn't necessarily have
to under FF.

An example would be where you have established flight following and
announced that you are at 3,000ft. Then over Mc Entire, you decide to
descend to 2,000 feet. Nothing prevents you from to doing so under FF but
you would be compelled to contact the tower to enter the Class D.

But I'm just thinking off the top of my head.

"Arden Prinz" > wrote in message
om...
> I recently made a flight from Sumter, SC (SMS) to Columbia Metro
> (CAE). Just after takeoff from Sumter, I contacted Shaw AFB approach,
> told the controller that I was going to Columbia Metro, and got flight
> following. Between Shaw class C airspace and Columbia class C
> airspace there is Mc Entire ANGS class D airspace. As I approached Mc
> Entire airspace, I figured that I was OK to enter because I had
> established two-way communications with Shaw approach. After I got in
> the middle of Mc Entire class D airspace, Shaw approach gave me "radar
> services terminated, squawk VFR, for further flight following suggest
> you contact Columbia approach on 133.4". Hmmmm.... Doesn't this mean
> that the instant after he terminated me, that I was not in two-way
> communication with the ATC facility (and unintentionally in violation
> of 91.129(c)(1))? If so, what action should I have taken? Honestly,
> I would have expected a handoff to either the Mc Entire tower
> controller or to the Columbia approach controller, as opposed to a
> "...suggest you contact...".
>
> Also, 91.129(d) says "Each person who operates an aircraft in a class
> D airspace area must maintain two-way radio communications with the
> ATC facility having jurisdiction over that area." Where is "..the ATC
> facility having jurisdiction over that area" defined? For example,
> for the Mc Entire class D airspace, is this just the Mc Entire tower,
> or do Shaw approach and Columbia approach also have jurisdiction over
> that area? And if it is only the tower, then why didn't Shaw approach
> hand me off to the Mc Entire tower prior to my entering the Mc Entire
> class D airspace? (Note that the Shaw controller did not sound busy
> and my flight path was such that it should have been obvious that I
> was going through.)
>
> Sorry for so many questions... I just want to do things 100% right
> (well at least 90% of the time :-) )!
>
> Arden

[john smith]

Arden Prinz wrote:
> Sorry for so many questions... I just want to do things 100% right
> (well at least 90% of the time :-) )!

First things first...
Have you filed out your Aviation Safety Reporting System form yet?

Go to: http://asrs.arc.nasa.gov/

[Nathan Young]

(Arden Prinz) wrote in message >...
> I recently made a flight from Sumter, SC (SMS) to Columbia Metro
> (CAE). Just after takeoff from Sumter, I contacted Shaw AFB approach,
> told the controller that I was going to Columbia Metro, and got flight
> following. Between Shaw class C airspace and Columbia class C
> airspace there is Mc Entire ANGS class D airspace. As I approached Mc
> Entire airspace, I figured that I was OK to enter because I had
> established two-way communications with Shaw approach. After I got in
> the middle of Mc Entire class D airspace, Shaw approach gave me "radar
> services terminated, squawk VFR, for further flight following suggest
> you contact Columbia approach on 133.4". Hmmmm.... Doesn't this mean
> that the instant after he terminated me, that I was not in two-way
> communication with the ATC facility (and unintentionally in violation
> of 91.129(c)(1))? If so, what action should I have taken? Honestly,
> I would have expected a handoff to either the Mc Entire tower
> controller or to the Columbia approach controller, as opposed to a
> "...suggest you contact...".

Interesting thread. I am curious to see what others think.

I have always assumed that VFR flight following does not provide
transition services to facilities that aren't on their field. Hence,
I would have called McEntire's Class D.

I run into this getting flight following around the OHare Bravo, and
crossing through DuPage's Class D. I always suggest to the approach
controller that I get a freq change to call DuPage tower, and then
give him/her a call on the other side. It works out well as Dupage is
roughly the boundary between OHare's SW approach (133.50) and North
approach (120.55). So it is like a handoff, but with a few minutes
talking to DuPage tower between approach controllers.

-Nathan

[Vassilii Khachaturov]

> the middle of Mc Entire class D airspace, Shaw approach gave me "radar
> services terminated, squawk VFR, for further flight following suggest
> you contact Columbia approach on 133.4". Hmmmm.... Doesn't this mean
> that the instant after he terminated me, that I was not in two-way
> communication with the ATC facility (and unintentionally in violation

Most likely he had already given a call to the class D
tower and coordinated your transition as he would with IFR traffic.

> of 91.129(c)(1))? If so, what action should I have taken? Honestly,

He didn't say he won't accept any further radio calls from you, did he?
Did he say "freq change approved"? Anyway, the action is quite obvious -
you should have called him again with a request for clarification,
because you didn't fully understand his intentions
(smth like "please confirm we do not need to call the ... tower").
"When in doubt, ask"

[Arden Prinz]

"Maule Driver" > wrote in message >...
> Interesting question. Without trying to look it up, I would say that it is
> your responsibility to remain clear or make contact with Mc Entire Tower
> when VFR.

I realize that it is my responsibility to remain clear or have two way
communications. Well, I had two way communications with ATC -- I was
in communications with Shaw Approach. Does that count? Normally I
think Shaw Approach provides approach ATC functions for Mc Entire.

> You don't have a clearance of any sort so your path of flight as well as
> altitude is at your discretion. If you are in Class B,C,D, then the
> controller can give you vectors and altitudes but doesn't necessarily have
> to under FF.
>
> An example would be where you have established flight following and
> announced that you are at 3,000ft. Then over Mc Entire, you decide to
> descend to 2,000 feet. Nothing prevents you from to doing so under FF but
> you would be compelled to contact the tower to enter the Class D.

I varied neither my heading nor my altitude.

Arden

[Arden Prinz]

john smith > wrote in message >...
> Arden Prinz wrote:
> > Sorry for so many questions... I just want to do things 100% right
> > (well at least 90% of the time :-) )!
>
> First things first...
> Have you filed out your Aviation Safety Reporting System form yet?
>
> Go to: http://asrs.arc.nasa.gov/

Thank-you for the suggestion. I have never submitted one of these.
That's a good idea and I may do just that. I just printed out the form.
I was hoping that maybe I didn't do anything wrong.

Arden

[Arden Prinz]

(Nathan Young) wrote in message >...
> Interesting thread. I am curious to see what others think.
>
> I have always assumed that VFR flight following does not provide
> transition services to facilities that aren't on their field. Hence,
> I would have called McEntire's Class D.

I guess I was assuming that since Shaw Approach provides approach
functions for Mc Entire, that I was OK having two way communications
with Shaw Approach (or that Shaw Approach would tell me when to switch
if I needed to switch). I guess that's what I get for assuming!!

> I run into this getting flight following around the OHare Bravo, and
> crossing through DuPage's Class D. I always suggest to the approach
> controller that I get a freq change to call DuPage tower, and then
> give him/her a call on the other side. It works out well as Dupage is
> roughly the boundary between OHare's SW approach (133.50) and North
> approach (120.55). So it is like a handoff, but with a few minutes
> talking to DuPage tower between approach controllers.

That sounds like a good plan for the future! I may have just been too
used to ATC suggesting frequency changes vs. me having to suggest the
change.

Arden

[Arden Prinz]

(Vassilii Khachaturov) wrote in message >...
> > the middle of Mc Entire class D airspace, Shaw approach gave me "radar
> > services terminated, squawk VFR, for further flight following suggest
> > you contact Columbia approach on 133.4". Hmmmm.... Doesn't this mean
> > that the instant after he terminated me, that I was not in two-way
> > communication with the ATC facility (and unintentionally in violation
>
> Most likely he had already given a call to the class D
> tower and coordinated your transition as he would with IFR traffic.

Perhaps, but I'm not sure how that impacts my requirement to
have/maintain two way communication.

> > of 91.129(c)(1))? If so, what action should I have taken? Honestly,
>
> He didn't say he won't accept any further radio calls from you, did he?

The Shaw approach controller didn't say that, but did suggest that I
contact Columbia approach and obviously Shaw wouldn't be able to
contact me as soon as I started trying to contact Columbia approach.

> Did he say "freq change approved"? Anyway, the action is quite obvious -
> you should have called him again with a request for clarification,
> because you didn't fully understand his intentions
> (smth like "please confirm we do not need to call the ... tower").
> "When in doubt, ask"

The Shaw approach controller's instruction was clear and what I did
was to take his suggestion and contact the Columbia approach
controller. But I agree that I should have asked for clarification.
Thanks for the suggestion.

Arden

[Gary L. Drescher]

"Arden Prinz" > wrote in message
om...
> john smith > wrote in message
>...
> > Arden Prinz wrote:
> > > Sorry for so many questions... I just want to do things 100% right
> > > (well at least 90% of the time :-) )!
> >
> > First things first...
> > Have you filed out your Aviation Safety Reporting System form yet?
> >
> > Go to: http://asrs.arc.nasa.gov/
>
> Thank-you for the suggestion. I have never submitted one of these.
> That's a good idea and I may do just that. I just printed out the form.
> I was hoping that maybe I didn't do anything wrong.

I don't think you entered class D improperly. But ASRS forms are helpful to
NASA even if you did nothing wrong.

--Gary

>
> Arden

[Robert Henry]

"Arden Prinz" > wrote in message
m...
>
> I realize that it is my responsibility to remain clear or have two way
> communications. Well, I had two way communications with ATC -- I was
> in communications with Shaw Approach. Does that count?

No.

My hypothesis is that the controller did himself and you a favor. McEntire
called and asked if anyone was talking to you, the controller dropped you,
and then replied, no. File the ASRS within ten days.

Flying VFR, there are no direction of flight restrictions below 3000 AGL, so
a climb to an altitude, 2600 AGL in most cases, allows you to avoid Class D.
If weather is a factor, circumnavigate the airspace or call the tower. For
the controller, simply advise of your intentions (climb, or leaving freq.).

--

Bob
PP-ASEL-IA, A/IGI

[Sydney Hoeltzli]

Maule Driver wrote:
> Interesting question. Without trying to look it up, I would say that it is
> your responsibility to remain clear or make contact with Mc Entire Tower
> when VFR.

Maule Driver,

This was the subject of a long thread some time ago.

The bottom line is:

It is NOT the responsibility of a pilot receiving radar services
to coordinate with each surface area he flies through. (if he
is landing in that surface area, ordinarily radar services would
be terminated prior to entering it)

The facility providing the radar services is supposed to coordinate,
and maintaining contact with them counts under the communication
requirement of the FARS.

I have heard before that there are some areas where this does
not happen, but it is spelled out quite clearly in the controller's
regulations (7110.65) it is supposed to.

The particular situation described is problematic, because the
facility providing radar services terminated them w/out a handoff.
In that circumstance, I personally would probably contact the tower
immediately, including in my call up something like "I had
radar services from XXXX, I assume they coordinated with you".
(because that's what's supposed to happen).

Cheers,
sydney

[Sydney Hoeltzli]

Robert Henry wrote:
> "Arden Prinz" > wrote in message
> m...
>
>>I realize that it is my responsibility to remain clear or have two way
>>communications. Well, I had two way communications with ATC -- I was
>>in communications with Shaw Approach. Does that count?
>
>
> No.

Yes, it does. Why would you think it doesn't? 14CFR 91.129
does not specify that the pilot must establish or maintain
communications with the control tower, simply with "the ATC
facility providing air traffic services". A radar facility
which provides approach services to a class D airport certainly
counts.

From 7110.65:
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 facilities airspace

Note: the pilot is not expected to obtain his own authorization
through each area when in contact with a radar facility

> My hypothesis is that the controller did himself and you a favor.

You can hypothesize anything you want, but if McEntire called
the radar controller and asked if anyone was talking to that
code in his airspace, the radar controller dropped the ball and
is in error. This is clearly spelled out in the regulations
he must follow.

Cheers,
Sydney

[Sydney Hoeltzli]

Arden Prinz wrote:

> I realize that it is my responsibility to remain clear or have two way
> communications. Well, I had two way communications with ATC -- I was
> in communications with Shaw Approach. Does that count? Normally I
> think Shaw Approach provides approach ATC functions for Mc Entire.

Yes, it counts.

Shaw approach is responsible to coordinate class D transitions if
you are receiving radar services from them when you enter class
D surface area.

This is clearly spelled out in the controller's regulations
(7110.65).

The only complication in your case is that they terminated
your radar services while you were in the Class D area, making
it hard to "maintain continuous communication". In that
case, I would call the tower before switching code, giving
location and intentions and saying something like "I had
radar services from Shaw, I assume they coordinated with you
before I entered".

Even facilities which normally don't coordinate (as they're
supposed to) won't generally get in a p***ing match on freq
with a pilot who politely makes it clear he knows how it's
supposed to work.

If it makes you feel better though, you can file an ASRS
describing the quandry you were placed in, maybe someone will
tweak some procedures at Shaw Approach.

Cheers,
Sydney

[Sydney Hoeltzli]

Arden Prinz wrote:
> (Nathan Young) wrote in message >...
>>Interesting thread. I am curious to see what others think.
>>I have always assumed that VFR flight following does not provide
>>transition services to facilities that aren't on their field.

You assume wrong. They are supposed to.

> I guess I was assuming that since Shaw Approach provides approach
> functions for Mc Entire, that I was OK having two way communications
> with Shaw Approach (or that Shaw Approach would tell me when to switch
> if I needed to switch).

You assumed rightly. That's how it's supposed to work.

>>I run into this getting flight following around the OHare Bravo, and
>>crossing through DuPage's Class D.

I've heard this before about these specific facilities, but that's
not how it's supposed to work. If you have radar services, they're
supposed to coordinate the class D transition.

Cheers,
Sydney

[Steven P. McNicoll]

"Arden Prinz" > wrote in message
om...
>
> I recently made a flight from Sumter, SC (SMS) to Columbia Metro
> (CAE). Just after takeoff from Sumter, I contacted Shaw AFB approach,
> told the controller that I was going to Columbia Metro, and got flight
> following. Between Shaw class C airspace and Columbia class C
> airspace there is Mc Entire ANGS class D airspace. As I approached Mc
> Entire airspace, I figured that I was OK to enter because I had
> established two-way communications with Shaw approach.
>

You were correct. A radar controller is required to coordinate the
transition of Class D airspace with the control tower when providing radar
traffic advisories. You are not expected to contact the tower yourself.


FAA Order 7110.65N Air traffic Control

Chapter 2. General Control

Section 1. General

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 7210.3, Letters of Agreement, Para 4-3-1.
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.

NOTE-
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.

REFERENCE-
FAAO 7110.65, Radio Communications Transfer, Para 2-1-17.
FAAO 7110.65, Surface Area Restrictions, Para 3-1-11.
FAAO 7110.65, Application, Para 7-6-1.
14 CFR Section 91.129, Operations in Class D Airspace.


>
> After I got in
> the middle of Mc Entire class D airspace, Shaw approach gave me "radar
> services terminated, squawk VFR, for further flight following suggest
> you contact Columbia approach on 133.4". Hmmmm.... Doesn't this mean
> that the instant after he terminated me, that I was not in two-way
> communication with the ATC facility (and unintentionally in violation
> of 91.129(c)(1))?
>

No, it doesn't. Note that FAR 91.129(a) begins with "Unless otherwise
authorized...".


§ 91.129 Operations in Class D airspace.

(a) General. Unless otherwise authorized or required by the ATC facility
having jurisdiction over the Class D airspace area, each person operating an
aircraft in Class D airspace must comply with the applicable provisions of
this section. In addition, each person must comply with §§ 91.126 and
91.127. For the purpose of this section, the primary airport is the airport
for which the Class D airspace area is designated. A satellite airport is
any other airport within the Class D airspace area.


>
> If so, what action should I have taken? Honestly,
> I would have expected a handoff to either the Mc Entire tower
> controller or to the Columbia approach controller, as opposed to a
> "...suggest you contact...".
>
> Also, 91.129(d) says "Each person who operates an aircraft in a class
> D airspace area must maintain two-way radio communications with the
> ATC facility having jurisdiction over that area." Where is "..the ATC
> facility having jurisdiction over that area" defined?
>

I've never seen an explicit definition.


>
> For example,
> for the Mc Entire class D airspace, is this just the Mc Entire tower,
> or do Shaw approach and Columbia approach also have jurisdiction over
> that area?
>

Unless delegated some authority from the overlying IFR facility, (Center or
approach control) VFR towers don't actually have any real authority over
airspace. About all they can do is require arriving VFR aircraft to remain
outside.

[Steven P. McNicoll]

"Maule Driver" > wrote in message
.com...
>
> Interesting question. Without trying to look it up, I would say that it
is
> your responsibility to remain clear or make contact with Mc Entire Tower
> when VFR.
>

No. It is the responsibility of the radar controller to coordinate the
transition of Class D airspace.


FAA Order 7110.65N Air traffic Control

Chapter 2. General Control

Section 1. General

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 7210.3, Letters of Agreement, Para 4-3-1.
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.

NOTE-
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.

REFERENCE-
FAAO 7110.65, Radio Communications Transfer, Para 2-1-17.
FAAO 7110.65, Surface Area Restrictions, Para 3-1-11.
FAAO 7110.65, Application, Para 7-6-1.
14 CFR Section 91.129, Operations in Class D Airspace.


>
> You don't have a clearance of any sort so your path of flight as well as
> altitude is at your discretion. If you are in Class B,C,D, then the
> controller can give you vectors and altitudes but doesn't necessarily have
> to under FF.
>

The radar controller can issue vectors to VFR aircraft in Class B and Class
C airspace, but not in Class D airspace unless it is also a TRSA.

[Steven P. McNicoll]

"Arden Prinz" > wrote in message
m...
>
> I realize that it is my responsibility to remain clear or have two way
> communications. Well, I had two way communications with ATC -- I was
> in communications with Shaw Approach. Does that count?
>

Yes, but you have to give them a fighting chance to coordinate the
transition. You can't call Shaw approach just as you're about to enter the
McEntire Class D airspace.


>
> Normally I
> think Shaw Approach provides approach ATC functions for Mc Entire.
>

They do.

[Steven P. McNicoll]

"Arden Prinz" > wrote in message
m...
>
> I guess I was assuming that since Shaw Approach provides approach
> functions for Mc Entire, that I was OK having two way communications
> with Shaw Approach (or that Shaw Approach would tell me when to switch
> if I needed to switch). I guess that's what I get for assuming!!
>

Shaw approach is required to coordinate the transition, it's not an option.
If they fail to coordinate the transition it's their error, not yours.

[Steven P. McNicoll]

"Arden Prinz" > wrote in message
m...
>
> Perhaps, but I'm not sure how that impacts my requirement to
> have/maintain two way communication.
>

You were relieved of the requirements of FAR 91.129(c)(1) in accordance with
FAR 91.129(a).


§ 91.129 Operations in Class D airspace.

(a) General. Unless otherwise authorized or required by the ATC facility
having jurisdiction over the Class D airspace area, each person operating an
aircraft in Class D airspace must comply with the applicable provisions of
this section. In addition, each person must comply with §§ 91.126 and
91.127. For the purpose of this section, the primary airport is the airport
for which the Class D airspace area is designated. A satellite airport is
any other airport within the Class D airspace area.

[Steven P. McNicoll]

"Sydney Hoeltzli" > wrote in message
...
> Arden Prinz wrote:
>
> > I realize that it is my responsibility to remain clear or have two way
> > communications. Well, I had two way communications with ATC -- I was
> > in communications with Shaw Approach. Does that count? Normally I
> > think Shaw Approach provides approach ATC functions for Mc Entire.
>
> Yes, it counts.
>
> Shaw approach is responsible to coordinate class D transitions if
> you are receiving radar services from them when you enter class
> D surface area.
>
> This is clearly spelled out in the controller's regulations
> (7110.65).
>
> The only complication in your case is that they terminated
> your radar services while you were in the Class D area, making
> it hard to "maintain continuous communication". In that
> case, I would call the tower before switching code, giving
> location and intentions and saying something like "I had
> radar services from Shaw, I assume they coordinated with you
> before I entered".
>

There's no need to call the tower. Assuming the Shaw controller did his job
properly the tower knows he's there and what he's doing. He was relieved of
the requirements of FAR 91.129(c)(1) in accordance with FAR 91.129(a).


§ 91.129 Operations in Class D airspace.

(a) General. Unless otherwise authorized or required by the ATC facility
having jurisdiction over the Class D airspace area, each person operating an
aircraft in Class D airspace must comply with the applicable provisions of
this section. In addition, each person must comply with §§ 91.126 and
91.127. For the purpose of this section, the primary airport is the airport
for which the Class D airspace area is designated. A satellite airport is
any other airport within the Class D airspace area.


>
> Even facilities which normally don't coordinate (as they're
> supposed to) won't generally get in a p***ing match on freq
> with a pilot who politely makes it clear he knows how it's
> supposed to work.
>
> If it makes you feel better though, you can file an ASRS
> describing the quandry you were placed in, maybe someone will
> tweak some procedures at Shaw Approach.
>
> Cheers,
> Sydney
>
>

[Maule Driver]

"Sydney Hoeltzli" > wrote in message
...
> Maule Driver wrote:
> > Interesting question. Without trying to look it up, I would say that it
is
> > your responsibility to remain clear or make contact with Mc Entire Tower
> > when VFR.
>
> The bottom line is:
>
> It is NOT the responsibility of a pilot receiving radar services
> to coordinate with each surface area he flies through. (if he
> is landing in that surface area, ordinarily radar services would
> be terminated prior to entering it)
>
> The facility providing the radar services is supposed to coordinate,
> and maintaining contact with them counts under the communication
> requirement of the FARS.

Makes sense and I stand corrected. Thanks.

I was trying to think through the meaning of 'radar services' and 'flight
following'. I was thinking that you are not bound to maintain a heading or
an altitude while under FF (right?). So that would mean that you can
deviate from your reported heading and altitude and enter Class D without
necessarily notifying the controller. Or am I way off base here and need to
do some reading?

> The particular situation described is problematic, because the
> facility providing radar services terminated them w/out a handoff.
> In that circumstance, I personally would probably contact the tower
> immediately, including in my call up something like "I had
> radar services from XXXX, I assume they coordinated with you".
> (because that's what's supposed to happen).
>
Really puts the focus on situational awareness when that happens!

[Arden Prinz]

> Flying VFR, there are no direction of flight restrictions below 3000 AGL, so
> a climb to an altitude, 2600 AGL in most cases, allows you to avoid Class D.
> If weather is a factor, circumnavigate the airspace or call the tower. For
> the controller, simply advise of your intentions (climb, or leaving freq.).

In this case, I was crossing east-to-west, there was adverse weather
to the south, a restricted area to the north, and a low ceiling
preventing me from clearing this airspace above. In general, while it
might be possible for me to circumnavigate controlled airspaces in
order not to worry about additional regulations, I personally do not
want to get into this habit. Where it is safe, legal, and convenient
for me to fly through, I prefer to know and adhere to the applicable
regulations and navigate "as the crow flies". Just a personal
preference, I guess. Anyway, that's why I'm seeking clarification,
for the future.

thank-you
Arden

[Newps]

Nathan Young wrote:

If so, what action should I have taken?


Take them up on their suggestion to call the next radar facility. You
do not suddenly lose your transition rights because you got terminated.



> I have always assumed that VFR flight following does not provide
> transition services to facilities that aren't on their field.

You're wrong, it does.


Hence,
> I would have called McEntire's Class D.

A courtesy call wouldn't hurt.


>
> I run into this getting flight following around the OHare Bravo, and
> crossing through DuPage's Class D. I always suggest to the approach
> controller that I get a freq change to call DuPage tower, and then
> give him/her a call on the other side.

Total waste of time.

[Newps]

>>Interesting question. Without trying to look it up, I would say that it is
>>your responsibility to remain clear or make contact with Mc Entire Tower
>>when VFR.

No. How can you remain clear when you are right in the middle of it?


>
>
> I realize that it is my responsibility to remain clear or have two way
> communications. Well, I had two way communications with ATC -- I was
> in communications with Shaw Approach. Does that count?

Yes.


>>You don't have a clearance of any sort so your path of flight as well as
>>altitude is at your discretion. If you are in Class B,C

Yes.


,D,

No.


then the
>>controller can give you vectors and altitudes but doesn't necessarily have
>>to under FF.

What? In class B you are essentially IFR and will be separated from
everyone else. In class C you may or may not be separated. Some class
C facilities make their controllers separate all aircraft from all
others, most don't. In class D you get nothing except a generic traffic
call.

>>
>>An example would be where you have established flight following and
>>announced that you are at 3,000ft. Then over Mc Entire, you decide to
>>descend to 2,000 feet. Nothing prevents you from to doing so under FF but
>>you would be compelled to contact the tower to enter the Class D.

No, absolutely not. It is 100% the responsibility of approach to
contact the tower. And your altitude isn't relavant. As an example at
my tower/TRACON the TRACON owns the airspace up to 12,000. We let the
tower have about 1500 feet AGL. That doesn't mean however that the
TRACON can bring overflights right over the airport at 2000 AGL without
coordinating with the tower. Any airplane that the TRACON is working
that is going over the airport has to be coordinated with the tower,
even if you are at 12,000, because the tower has automatic releases for
all departures. Same thing if Salt Lake is working a VFR overflight at
12,500 or an IFR overflight at 13,000. He has to call me to point out
that traffic to me. Now you would have to know what kind of agreement
between the tower and its approach facility is in effect. Of course you
have no way of knowing that. That's why overflights are coordinated
with the tower from the approach controller.

[Steven P. McNicoll]

"Newps" > wrote in message
news:1JeYa.55203$cF.19683@rwcrnsc53...
>
> No, absolutely not. It is 100% the responsibility of approach to
> contact the tower. And your altitude isn't relavant. As an example at
> my tower/TRACON the TRACON owns the airspace up to 12,000. We let the
> tower have about 1500 feet AGL. That doesn't mean however that the
> TRACON can bring overflights right over the airport at 2000 AGL without
> coordinating with the tower. Any airplane that the TRACON is working
> that is going over the airport has to be coordinated with the tower,
> even if you are at 12,000, because the tower has automatic releases for
> all departures. Same thing if Salt Lake is working a VFR overflight at
> 12,500 or an IFR overflight at 13,000. He has to call me to point out
> that traffic to me.
>

No he doesn't.

[Robert Henry]

"Sydney Hoeltzli" > wrote in message
...

> Yes, it does. Why would you think it doesn't?
>[14CFR 91.129
> does not specify that the pilot must establish or maintain
> communications with the control tower, simply with "the ATC
> facility providing air traffic services". ]

14CFR 91.126d as referenced in 14CFR 91.129a?


> A radar facility
> which provides approach services to a class D airport certainly
> counts.

According to whom? I see several references to the "ATC facility having
jurisdiction over the Class D airspace area." Can there be more than one
facility with that authority?

[Robert Henry]

"Newps" > wrote in message
news:GLeYa.55220$cF.19491@rwcrnsc53...

> Holy cow, I bet you listen to Art Bell.
>

Who? I guess not.

[Robert Henry]

"Vassilii Khachaturov" > wrote in message
om...
>
> Most likely he had already given a call to the class D
> tower and coordinated your transition as he would with IFR traffic.
>

Remember, this is not an arrival, but a through flight. Would it be likely
for through IFR traffic to be that low that the controller would normally
provide such coordination for a through IFR flight. I'm thinking that would
be quite unusual.

> "When in doubt, ask"

Agree 100%.


--

Bob
PP-ASEL-IA, A/IGI

[Robert Henry]

"Newps" > wrote in message
et...

> There are no classes of airspace that matter to an IFR pilot. Airspace
> classes were designed for VFR. As to does IFR traffic fly low so as to
> get into other classes of airspace where coordination would be required?
> Yes, all the time. But usually it's not the class that matters but
> whose airspace it actually is. If center is working an overflight that
> passes thru the top 2-3000 feet of my airspace they will often call me
> and ask if I want to talk to him or just take him as a point out. If I
> take it as a point out the pilot may never know he got into my airspace.

Regarding the airspace classifications for IFR, understood. The original
assertion that I responded to was :

> Most likely he had already given a call to the class D
> tower and coordinated your transition as he would with IFR traffic.

The essence of my point is still valid. How often will a radar controller
coordinate an IFR transition through Class D airspace? Based upon your
additional explanation, I'd conclude almost never.

Arrival/approach coordination happens all the time - it must - but
transitions is wholly different.

[Sydney Hoeltzli]

Maule Driver wrote:

> I was trying to think through the meaning of 'radar services' and 'flight
> following'. I was thinking that you are not bound to maintain a heading or
> an altitude while under FF (right?). So that would mean that you can
> deviate from your reported heading and altitude and enter Class D without
> necessarily notifying the controller.

Sure, you can change heading and altitude without necessarily
notifying the controller, but situational awareness and common
sense do enter into it.

The radar controller will make a decision on whether or not he
needs to coordinate based on your altitude and direction of
flight. If you need to change either or both, and that
change might put you in a surface area your original altitude
and heading would keep you clear of, it may not be a regulatory
requirement to communicate your intentions but it only makes
sense IMO.

>>The particular situation described is problematic, because the
>>facility providing radar services terminated them w/out a handoff.
>>In that circumstance, I personally would probably contact the tower
>>immediately, including in my call up something like "I had
>>radar services from XXXX, I assume they coordinated with you".
>>(because that's what's supposed to happen).

> Really puts the focus on situational awareness when that happens!

Well, Steve may be correct that the communication requirements
have been met, but I'd personally contact the tower in those
circs, just in case there was a need to communicate; IME it
takes several minutes to establish communication and radar
contact with a busy approach facility, and I really don't
want to be distracted from keeping a sharp look-out when I'm close
to an airport, either.

Cheers,
Sydney

[Steven P. McNicoll]

"Robert Henry" > wrote in message
news:57hYa.26627$5f.25359@lakeread05...
>
> 14CFR 91.126d as referenced in 14CFR 91.129a?
>

Note that FAR 91.126(d) also begins with, "Unless otherwise authorized or
required by ATC,..."


§ 91.126 Operating on or in the vicinity of an airport in Class G
airspace.

(d) Communications with control towers. Unless otherwise authorized or
required by ATC, no person may operate an aircraft to, from, through, or on
an airport having an operational control tower unless two-way radio
communications are maintained between that aircraft and the control tower.
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.
If the aircraft radio fails while in flight under IFR, the pilot must comply
with § 91.185.


>
> According to whom? I see several references to the "ATC facility having
> jurisdiction over the Class D airspace area." Can there be more than one
> facility with that authority?
>

VFR towers actually have little authority over Class D airspace, about all
they can do is require VFR aircraft to remain clear of it. Authority and
responsibility for IFR and SVFR operations rests with the overlying Center
or approach control facility, although some of that is often delegated to
the tower.

[Steven P. McNicoll]

"Robert Henry" > wrote in message
news:bihYa.26631$5f.4102@lakeread05...
>
> Remember, this is not an arrival, but a through flight. Would it be
> likely for through IFR traffic to be that low that the controller would
> normally provide such coordination for a through IFR flight. I'm
> thinking that would be quite unusual.
>

The lowest practical enroute IFR altitude tends to be the MIA/MVA plus 1000
feet rounded up to the next cardinal altitude. That tends to be more than
2500 AGL and thus above typical Class D airspace.

[Steven P. McNicoll]

"Robert Henry" > wrote in message
news:4djYa.26675$5f.6442@lakeread05...
>
> Regarding the airspace classifications for IFR, understood. The original
> assertion that I responded to was :
>
> > Most likely he had already given a call to the class D
> > tower and coordinated your transition as he would with IFR traffic.
>
> The essence of my point is still valid. How often will a radar controller
> coordinate an IFR transition through Class D airspace?
>

As often as he has an IFR aircraft flying through Class D airspace.

[Arden Prinz]

"Robert Henry" > wrote in message news:<57hYa.26627$5f.25359@lakeread05>...
> "Sydney Hoeltzli" > wrote in message
> ...
>
> > Yes, it does. Why would you think it doesn't?
> >[14CFR 91.129
> > does not specify that the pilot must establish or maintain
> > communications with the control tower, simply with "the ATC
> > facility providing air traffic services". ]
>
> 14CFR 91.126d as referenced in 14CFR 91.129a?

91.126(d) is not referenced from 91.129(a). Rather 91.126 (the whole
section) is referenced from 91.129(a). And it seems that 91.126(a)
indicates that 91.126 is only relevant to persons operating an
aircraft on or in the vicinity of an airport in a Class G area. In
this particular instance, I was not in the vicinity of an airport that
was in a Class G area. The only airport that I was close to was Mc
Entire ANGS which is not in a Class G area (it is in a Class D area).
Therefore I'm thinking that 91.126 has no real relevancy to this
particular instance.

> > A radar facility
> > which provides approach services to a class D airport certainly
> > counts.
>
> According to whom? I see several references to the "ATC facility having
> jurisdiction over the Class D airspace area." Can there be more than one
> facility with that authority?

This jurisdiction thing seems to be a big whole to me -- the FARs
reference "...the ATC facility having jurisdiction..." but nowhere
does the FAA make it clear to pilots exactly what that means. I
believe this whole facilitated my confusion in the first place.

Arden

[Sydney Hoeltzli]

Robert Henry wrote:

> According to whom? I see several references to the "ATC facility having
> jurisdiction over the Class D airspace area." Can there be more than one
> facility with that authority?

Of course. If you want to get picky, I understand that all the
controlled airspace in the US is under the jurisdiction of the
ARTCCs, who cede it to various TRACONS and surface areas by LOA
(letters of agreement) which are regularly revised. More to the
point, every day various ATC facilities cede control of aircraft
which are actually within the airspace they control, to other
facilities for various reasons. This simply wouldn't work if
aviation law couldn't accept the concept of more than one facility
with authority over a particular airspace area, provided the
question of who has authority at the moment is properly coordinated.
That's why controllers spend a lot of time on the phone...

But in particular, the radar facility which provides approach
services to a surface area controlled by a VFR tower has to
count as having jurisdiction over that surface area in order
to separate aircraft within it. Just try and get a vector
out of a VFR tower, one with a BRITE....

Cheers,
Sydney