Question about NY TFR-HPN

[Joe Johnson]

Returning to HPN from the northwest last night, approach cleared me to the
Tappan Zee bridge, then to HPN as usual. I said "unable, the TZ bridge is
inside the TFR" and proposed a route to the Carmel VOR, then direct HPN,
which the controller accepted. This is the relevant part of
http://tfr.faa.gov/tfr/jsp/save_pages/detail_4_9872.html:

PART B. OUTER AREA, PROCEDURES FOR AIRCRAFT OPERATING WITHIN THE NY CLASS B
TFR FROM 7 NMR TO THE CLASS B 20 NM BOUNDARY, FROM THE SURFACE, UP TO BUT
NOT INCLUDING FL180, ARE LISTED BELOW: 1. FIXED WING AIRCRAFT SHALL BE ON AN
ACTIVE IFR OR VFR FLIGHT PLAN FILED WITH AN AFSS. 2. ALL AIRCRAFT SHALL
SQUAWK A DISCRETE TRANSPONDER CODE ASSIGNED BY ATC. ALL AIRCRAFT SHALL
SQUAWK THE DISCRETE TRANSPONDER CODE PRIOR TO DEPARTURE AND AT ALL TIMES
WITHIN THE TFR. IN THE EVENT OF A TRANSPONDER FAILURE, THE PILOT SHALL
ADVISE ATC AND ATC WILL PROVIDE THE MOST DIRECT COURSE TO OUTSIDE THE
LATERAL LIMITS OF THE TFR. 3. ALL AIRCRAFT MUST REMAIN IN TWO-WAY RADIO
COMMUNICATIONS WITH ATC. 4. FIXED WING OPERATIONS ARE LIMITED TO AIRCRAFT
ARRIVING OR DEPARTING LOCAL AIRFIELDS. AIRCRAFT MAY NOT LOITER.

The TZ bridge is within the outer area mentioned above. I had a transponder
code (point 2 above) assigned by approach, but was not on an active flight
plan filed with and AFSS(point 1 above). Questions:

1. Is my interpretation that I was not authorized to fly to the bridge
correct, or is a transponder code assigned by ATC tantamount to a flight
plan?
2. If I had flown to the bridge and been intercepted, would it have been an
adequate defense that approach ATC had cleared me to that location?

[G.R. Patterson III]

Joe Johnson wrote:
>
> The TZ bridge is within the outer area mentioned above. I had a transponder
> code (point 2 above) assigned by approach, but was not on an active flight
> plan filed with and AFSS(point 1 above). Questions:
>
> 1. Is my interpretation that I was not authorized to fly to the bridge
> correct, or is a transponder code assigned by ATC tantamount to a flight
> plan?

I agree with your interpretation -- a transponder code is not a flight plan.

> 2. If I had flown to the bridge and been intercepted, would it have been an
> adequate defense that approach ATC had cleared me to that location?

The last official notice I read on that subject was about a year ago. IIRC, it would
not have been an adequate defense. Things may have changed, but I doubt it.

George Patterson
If a man gets into a fight 3,000 miles away from home, he *had* to have
been looking for it.

[Ray Bengen]

In reality, you need to file an IFR flight plan with a FSS; you then get
your code either on the ground or in the air BEFORE you penetrate the TFR;
and you can just fly VFR, wx permitting of course. You don't have to get
and fly a clearance. Just do what ATC tells you to do when you're in the
TFR.

This is based on my experiences.

Ray

On Wed, 22 Sep 2004 15:12:47 GMT, Joe Johnson > wrote:

> Returning to HPN from the northwest last night, approach cleared me to
> the
> Tappan Zee bridge, then to HPN as usual. I said "unable, the TZ bridge
> is
> inside the TFR" and proposed a route to the Carmel VOR, then direct HPN,
> which the controller accepted. This is the relevant part of
> http://tfr.faa.gov/tfr/jsp/save_pages/detail_4_9872.html:
>
> PART B. OUTER AREA, PROCEDURES FOR AIRCRAFT OPERATING WITHIN THE NY
> CLASS B
> TFR FROM 7 NMR TO THE CLASS B 20 NM BOUNDARY, FROM THE SURFACE, UP TO BUT
> NOT INCLUDING FL180, ARE LISTED BELOW: 1. FIXED WING AIRCRAFT SHALL BE
> ON AN
> ACTIVE IFR OR VFR FLIGHT PLAN FILED WITH AN AFSS. 2. ALL AIRCRAFT SHALL
> SQUAWK A DISCRETE TRANSPONDER CODE ASSIGNED BY ATC. ALL AIRCRAFT SHALL
> SQUAWK THE DISCRETE TRANSPONDER CODE PRIOR TO DEPARTURE AND AT ALL TIMES
> WITHIN THE TFR. IN THE EVENT OF A TRANSPONDER FAILURE, THE PILOT SHALL
> ADVISE ATC AND ATC WILL PROVIDE THE MOST DIRECT COURSE TO OUTSIDE THE
> LATERAL LIMITS OF THE TFR. 3. ALL AIRCRAFT MUST REMAIN IN TWO-WAY RADIO
> COMMUNICATIONS WITH ATC. 4. FIXED WING OPERATIONS ARE LIMITED TO AIRCRAFT
> ARRIVING OR DEPARTING LOCAL AIRFIELDS. AIRCRAFT MAY NOT LOITER.
>
> The TZ bridge is within the outer area mentioned above. I had a
> transponder
> code (point 2 above) assigned by approach, but was not on an active
> flight
> plan filed with and AFSS(point 1 above). Questions:
>
> 1. Is my interpretation that I was not authorized to fly to the bridge
> correct, or is a transponder code assigned by ATC tantamount to a flight
> plan?
> 2. If I had flown to the bridge and been intercepted, would it have
> been an
> adequate defense that approach ATC had cleared me to that location?
>
>



--
Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/

[G.R. Patterson III]

Ray Bengen wrote:
>
> In reality, you need to file an IFR flight plan with a FSS; you then get
> your code either on the ground or in the air BEFORE you penetrate the TFR;
> and you can just fly VFR, wx permitting of course. You don't have to get
> and fly a clearance. Just do what ATC tells you to do when you're in the
> TFR.

With the NY TRACON, at least, you file a VFR flight plan and you tell them that it's
for the purposes of the TFR (you don't need the search procedure if you fail to show
up). They will take care of it from there. My understanding is that they enter it as
a pseudo-IFR flight plan to get it in the system, but that's their problem/solution.

George Patterson
If a man gets into a fight 3,000 miles away from home, he *had* to have
been looking for it.

[Marco Leon]

I think it would be hard for people to predict how the FAA/FBI/Secret
Service would react to a TFR violation. I would think many other aspect come
into play. I was in the pattern at Farmingdale (FRG) which was also in the
TFR on Tuesday. The tower instructed me to "Stay on downwind [for runway
32]" which put me on a direct course for the southern part of the cut-out.
As we were getting closer to the TFR, I discussed it with my safety pilot
(who is a CFI and had been flying all day) and he said just keep going and
not to worry since we were in the pattern. Well, I played it safe and asked
the tower if they can "call my base" so at least it would be in record that
I was aware and concerned about the TFR.

On another related topic, I was listening all day to the FRG live ATC feed
on the web and was surprised at how many pilots called ATC for clearances
that would have violated the TFR. These were things like touch-n-gos,
downwind departures, and staright-ins that would have cut through the TFR.
We talking at least 2-3 requests per hour. After a while the tower just told
them to contact FSS for a "re-brief" and stopped giving them service. Man,
no wonder there are so many violations! Makes us all look bad...

Marco


"Joe Johnson" > wrote in message
. ..
> Returning to HPN from the northwest last night, approach cleared me to the
> Tappan Zee bridge, then to HPN as usual. I said "unable, the TZ bridge is
> inside the TFR" and proposed a route to the Carmel VOR, then direct HPN,
> which the controller accepted. This is the relevant part of
> http://tfr.faa.gov/tfr/jsp/save_pages/detail_4_9872.html:
>
> PART B. OUTER AREA, PROCEDURES FOR AIRCRAFT OPERATING WITHIN THE NY CLASS
B
> TFR FROM 7 NMR TO THE CLASS B 20 NM BOUNDARY, FROM THE SURFACE, UP TO BUT
> NOT INCLUDING FL180, ARE LISTED BELOW: 1. FIXED WING AIRCRAFT SHALL BE ON
AN
> ACTIVE IFR OR VFR FLIGHT PLAN FILED WITH AN AFSS. 2. ALL AIRCRAFT SHALL
> SQUAWK A DISCRETE TRANSPONDER CODE ASSIGNED BY ATC. ALL AIRCRAFT SHALL
> SQUAWK THE DISCRETE TRANSPONDER CODE PRIOR TO DEPARTURE AND AT ALL TIMES
> WITHIN THE TFR. IN THE EVENT OF A TRANSPONDER FAILURE, THE PILOT SHALL
> ADVISE ATC AND ATC WILL PROVIDE THE MOST DIRECT COURSE TO OUTSIDE THE
> LATERAL LIMITS OF THE TFR. 3. ALL AIRCRAFT MUST REMAIN IN TWO-WAY RADIO
> COMMUNICATIONS WITH ATC. 4. FIXED WING OPERATIONS ARE LIMITED TO AIRCRAFT
> ARRIVING OR DEPARTING LOCAL AIRFIELDS. AIRCRAFT MAY NOT LOITER.
>
> The TZ bridge is within the outer area mentioned above. I had a
transponder
> code (point 2 above) assigned by approach, but was not on an active flight
> plan filed with and AFSS(point 1 above). Questions:
>
> 1. Is my interpretation that I was not authorized to fly to the bridge
> correct, or is a transponder code assigned by ATC tantamount to a flight
> plan?
> 2. If I had flown to the bridge and been intercepted, would it have been
an
> adequate defense that approach ATC had cleared me to that location?
>
>

[Rosspilot]

I called for a briefing today around 3--wanted to do a NYC flight with
out-of-town company. I asked if the TFR around the UN was over at 5PM, they
confirmed. I then specifically asked if that meant the VFR corridor was open
after 5.
In a kinda sarcastic tone, the briefer said, "well if the TFR is expired . . .
but if you want to be sure you can call TRACON" (she starts to give me the
phone number). I said, "it's ok . . . I know their number".

So we depart after 5 and I call LGA from the Alpine Tower ( as I have done
hundreds of times before) looking for clearance into the B at 1500. They tell
me there is a TFR because the Yankees are playing a double header . . . Can't
even duck under the B space into the exclusion. Corridor is closed.

I don't care one whit about the Yankees . . . don't even read a sports page.


I wonder why the FSS briefer didn't tell me about that one.


www.Rosspilot.com

[Judah]

The FSS people don't seem to have a Yankees schedule, and don't have any
interest in getting one. Recently, when there were no other distractions
(you know, like visits from Dubya and UN Meetings), a briefer I spoke to
told me that and told me to check the schedule. Of course, I didn't have
one either, so I called my cousin who is a fan.

I thank the Lord every day that us little Cessnas and Pipers are
prohibited from flying within 3 NM of Yankee Stadium when there is a game
on. After all, if somebody hijacks a 747 and nosedives it into Yankee
stadium at 500KIAS, I'm sure they'll be able to scrounge up F-16s to
intercept it within the 20 seconds it wil take the 747 to fly the 3NM
through the TFR... And I don't want to be there when that happens!



(Rosspilot) wrote in
:

> I called for a briefing today around 3--wanted to do a NYC flight with
> out-of-town company. I asked if the TFR around the UN was over at 5PM,
> they confirmed. I then specifically asked if that meant the VFR
> corridor was open after 5.
> In a kinda sarcastic tone, the briefer said, "well if the TFR is
> expired . . . but if you want to be sure you can call TRACON" (she
> starts to give me the phone number). I said, "it's ok . . . I know
> their number".
>
> So we depart after 5 and I call LGA from the Alpine Tower ( as I have
> done hundreds of times before) looking for clearance into the B at
> 1500. They tell me there is a TFR because the Yankees are playing a
> double header . . . Can't even duck under the B space into the
> exclusion. Corridor is closed.
>
> I don't care one whit about the Yankees . . . don't even read a
> sports page.
>
>
> I wonder why the FSS briefer didn't tell me about that one.
>
>
> www.Rosspilot.com
>
>
>

[Joe Johnson]

"Judah" > wrote in message
...
> The FSS people don't seem to have a Yankees schedule, and don't have any
> interest in getting one. Recently, when there were no other distractions
> (you know, like visits from Dubya and UN Meetings), a briefer I spoke to
> told me that and told me to check the schedule. Of course, I didn't have
> one either, so I called my cousin who is a fan.
>
> I thank the Lord every day that us little Cessnas and Pipers are
> prohibited from flying within 3 NM of Yankee Stadium when there is a game
> on. After all, if somebody hijacks a 747 and nosedives it into Yankee
> stadium at 500KIAS, I'm sure they'll be able to scrounge up F-16s to
> intercept it within the 20 seconds it wil take the 747 to fly the 3NM
> through the TFR... And I don't want to be there when that happens!
>
These security measures against small single engine aircraft are so
outrageous. It's all about PR, trying to convince the public at large that
officials are "doing something" about terrorism. As somenone put it on one
of these newsgroups a few montths ago, when terrorists start using such
craft, we'll know we're safe, because they've run out of good ideas.

[Joe Johnson]

The whole situation is ridiculous. I'm all for PIC responsibility, but ATC
needs to know the TFRs in their area and brief pilots appropriately. This
includes stadium schedules. Each new ATC shift change should include such
information. How is ATC being managed anyway?

[Joe Johnson]

None of this makes anyone secure. No one is going to attack a VIP with a
small craft like the spam can I fly. It's inexcusable for ATC at anly level
not to have accurate information in their area of responsibility. With all
these violations, I'm concerned someone is going to panic and have an
accident while being intercepted (and not just in their pants). Does anyone
think these agencies will care?

[Marco Leon]

Agreed that the TFR situation is ridiculous. However, the tower can not and
should not have to educate pilots about the details of a TFR affecting their
airport over an active frequency while handling traffic. FSS should do that.

Marco

"Joe Johnson" > wrote in message
.. .
> The whole situation is ridiculous. I'm all for PIC responsibility, but
ATC
> needs to know the TFRs in their area and brief pilots appropriately. This
> includes stadium schedules. Each new ATC shift change should include such
> information. How is ATC being managed anyway?
>
>

[G.R. Patterson III]

Joe Johnson wrote:
>
> How is ATC being managed anyway?

Poorly, it seems.

George Patterson
If a man gets into a fight 3,000 miles away from home, he *had* to have
been looking for it.

[Judah]

It's not even about PR, because quite frankly, no one is talking about
the TFRs except pilots..

I'm not sure what the motivation is, exactly. In some ways, I think it is
similar to speeding tickets on highways. They actually want people to
bust the TFRs so they can use it as ammunition to eliminate GA
altogether...

"Joe Johnson" > wrote in
:

>
> "Judah" > wrote in message
> ...
>> The FSS people don't seem to have a Yankees schedule, and don't have
>> any interest in getting one. Recently, when there were no other
>> distractions (you know, like visits from Dubya and UN Meetings), a
>> briefer I spoke to told me that and told me to check the schedule. Of
>> course, I didn't have one either, so I called my cousin who is a fan.
>>
>> I thank the Lord every day that us little Cessnas and Pipers are
>> prohibited from flying within 3 NM of Yankee Stadium when there is a
>> game on. After all, if somebody hijacks a 747 and nosedives it into
>> Yankee stadium at 500KIAS, I'm sure they'll be able to scrounge up
>> F-16s to intercept it within the 20 seconds it wil take the 747 to fly
>> the 3NM through the TFR... And I don't want to be there when that
>> happens!
>>
> These security measures against small single engine aircraft are so
> outrageous. It's all about PR, trying to convince the public at large
> that officials are "doing something" about terrorism. As somenone put
> it on one of these newsgroups a few montths ago, when terrorists start
> using such craft, we'll know we're safe, because they've run out of
> good ideas.
>
>
>

[G.R. Patterson III]

Judah wrote:
>
> It's not even about PR, because quite frankly, no one is talking about
> the TFRs except pilots..
>
> I'm not sure what the motivation is, exactly.

The motive is that a variety of people feel that they should get a cut of the
advertising income from the banner towers that used to fly over the stadiums.

George Patterson
If a man gets into a fight 3,000 miles away from home, he *had* to have
been looking for it.