Another IFR "oops"

[Dan Luke]

Another one of those things I guess I should have been ready for sneaked up
on me this morning.

We were going from BFM to EET (Shelby County Airport, Alabaster, Alabama)
and the ceiling was right at minimums for the RNAV 33 approach, and below
minimums for the VOR-A. Naturally, I wanted the RNAV 33.

There's no ATIS at EET, so no particular approach was being advertised. When
Montgomery approach handed us off to Birmingham, BHM approach told me to
expect the VOR-A. I asked him "...any chance we can do the RNAV 33?"

"Nope. It's not in my airspace. You should have asked Montgomery for that
one. Standy by and I'll see if they'll take you back."

We got handed back to MGM, but by the time MGM was ready for us, we were
right on top of the IAF (IXUSE) and 1,900' high. Not a serious problem,
really, because by then I had slowed to 90 kts, but it made the first part
of the approach more rushed than it needed to be. Nevertheless, we made it
in just under the cloud deck

The interesting thing is BHM's comment that I "...should have asked
Montgomery for that one." How was I to know that? BHM is named on plates as
the approach facility for EET. There's no ATIS at EET. What should I have
done to find out that BHM couldn't give me the RNAV 33 approach?
--
Dan
C172RG at BFM

[Peter R.]

Jon Kraus wrote:

<snip>
> My
> instructor didn't know what to say except to point out that I was so
> far behind the plane that if we were a minimums I never would have been
> able to make the approach. I really didn't know what to say except for
> I'll do better next time. All I could do on the ride hope is get a good
> laugh from my stupidity. I have had so much on my mind that I probably
> shouldn't have been flying. Not IFR any way's.

As you undoubtedly know, the absolute best time to make that kind of
mistake is with your instructor or safety pilot. :) That lesson served
multiple purposes.

--
Peter

[Jon Kraus]

I've got a better oops then that Dan. This morning I was doing some approaches
with my instructor. We went to Anderson Indiana (AID) and shot a couple of
ILS's and a VOR-A. They were fine. I requested the GPS 36 back at Indianapolis
Terry and was cleared direct to the airport. So I just flew direct to the
airport... The problem was that that is all I did, fly direct to the airport...
I didn't set anything else up for the approach ! ! ! I really don't know what
the hell I was thinking but as we got close to Terry my instructor said "are you
set up for the approach?" I realized what I had done but it was too late. My
instructor said "just take off the foggles and look". I did and there was the
runway about 1000 feet below me. Needless to say I had to slip all the way to
the runway. At least I greased the landing (not a big conciliation). My
instructor didn't know what to say except to point out that I was so far behind
the plane that if we were a minimums I never would have been able to make the
approach. I really didn't know what to say except for I'll do better next
time. All I could do on the ride hope is get a good laugh from my stupidity. I
have had so much on my mind that I probably shouldn't have been flying. Not IFR
any way's.

Jon Kraus
PP-ASEL
Student-IA

Dan Luke wrote:

> Another one of those things I guess I should have been ready for sneaked up
> on me this morning.
>
> We were going from BFM to EET (Shelby County Airport, Alabaster, Alabama)
> and the ceiling was right at minimums for the RNAV 33 approach, and below
> minimums for the VOR-A. Naturally, I wanted the RNAV 33.
>
> There's no ATIS at EET, so no particular approach was being advertised. When
> Montgomery approach handed us off to Birmingham, BHM approach told me to
> expect the VOR-A. I asked him "...any chance we can do the RNAV 33?"
>
> "Nope. It's not in my airspace. You should have asked Montgomery for that
> one. Standy by and I'll see if they'll take you back."
>
> We got handed back to MGM, but by the time MGM was ready for us, we were
> right on top of the IAF (IXUSE) and 1,900' high. Not a serious problem,
> really, because by then I had slowed to 90 kts, but it made the first part
> of the approach more rushed than it needed to be. Nevertheless, we made it
> in just under the cloud deck
>
> The interesting thing is BHM's comment that I "...should have asked
> Montgomery for that one." How was I to know that? BHM is named on plates as
> the approach facility for EET. There's no ATIS at EET. What should I have
> done to find out that BHM couldn't give me the RNAV 33 approach?
> --
> Dan
> C172RG at BFM

[Sydney Hoeltzli]

Dan Luke wrote:
> Another one of those things I guess I should have been ready for sneaked up
> on me this morning.

I don't see why you feel you 'should have been ready'.

> There's no ATIS at EET, so no particular approach was being advertised. When
> Montgomery approach handed us off to Birmingham, BHM approach told me to
> expect the VOR-A. I asked him "...any chance we can do the RNAV 33?"
>
> "Nope. It's not in my airspace. You should have asked Montgomery for that
> one. Standy by and I'll see if they'll take you back."

<....>

> The interesting thing is BHM's comment that I "...should have asked
> Montgomery for that one." How was I to know that? BHM is named on plates as
> the approach facility for EET. There's no ATIS at EET. What should I have
> done to find out that BHM couldn't give me the RNAV 33 approach?

I don't think there's a thing you could have done. BHM was listed
as the approach facility, I would have waited until transferred to BHM
to ask for the approach I wanted. If it was less than 30 nm out, might
query ATC facility I'm talking to "N123 requests RNAV 33 at EET", which
would probably get you a "I'll be handing you off in a minute, ask them"
response most of the time but would have helped this time.

A while back on these newsgroups, I was asking how to get a chart of
the airspace different facilities control. I was told I might as well
ask for the moon, more likely.

At a guess, does it look feasible it might be one of these "1 IAF
in his airspace, 2 in mine" things, where there isn't really provision
to indicate different facilities?

What I don't understand is why the BHM controller didn't just
coordinate with Montgomery for you instead of shipping you back.
They obviously can talk to each other -- why wouldn't it be easier
to just have Montgomery approve whatever it was BHM needed for you
to fly the approach, since the airport was apparently in their
airspace?

Oh well. Be interested to see what other answers you get,
Sydney

[Ryan Ferguson]

Dunno. Plate says Montgomery, I'd expect to talk to Montgomery about the
approach. It's that simple.

-Ryan

Dan Luke wrote:

> Another one of those things I guess I should have been ready for sneaked up
> on me this morning.
>
> We were going from BFM to EET (Shelby County Airport, Alabaster, Alabama)
> and the ceiling was right at minimums for the RNAV 33 approach, and below
> minimums for the VOR-A. Naturally, I wanted the RNAV 33.
>
> There's no ATIS at EET, so no particular approach was being advertised. When
> Montgomery approach handed us off to Birmingham, BHM approach told me to
> expect the VOR-A. I asked him "...any chance we can do the RNAV 33?"
>
> "Nope. It's not in my airspace. You should have asked Montgomery for that
> one. Standy by and I'll see if they'll take you back."
>
> We got handed back to MGM, but by the time MGM was ready for us, we were
> right on top of the IAF (IXUSE) and 1,900' high. Not a serious problem,
> really, because by then I had slowed to 90 kts, but it made the first part
> of the approach more rushed than it needed to be. Nevertheless, we made it
> in just under the cloud deck
>
> The interesting thing is BHM's comment that I "...should have asked
> Montgomery for that one." How was I to know that? BHM is named on plates as
> the approach facility for EET. There's no ATIS at EET. What should I have
> done to find out that BHM couldn't give me the RNAV 33 approach?
> --
> Dan
> C172RG at BFM

[John Clonts]

Which plate says Montgomery? The NACO plates for both approaches say
Birmingham-- are you using Jeppesen?

"Ryan Ferguson" > wrote in message
...
> Dunno. Plate says Montgomery, I'd expect to talk to Montgomery about the
> approach. It's that simple.
>
> -Ryan
>
> Dan Luke wrote:
>
> > Another one of those things I guess I should have been ready for sneaked
up
> > on me this morning.
> >
> > We were going from BFM to EET (Shelby County Airport, Alabaster,
Alabama)
> > and the ceiling was right at minimums for the RNAV 33 approach, and
below
> > minimums for the VOR-A. Naturally, I wanted the RNAV 33.
> >
> > There's no ATIS at EET, so no particular approach was being advertised.
When
> > Montgomery approach handed us off to Birmingham, BHM approach told me to
> > expect the VOR-A. I asked him "...any chance we can do the RNAV 33?"
> >
> > "Nope. It's not in my airspace. You should have asked Montgomery for
that
> > one. Standy by and I'll see if they'll take you back."
> >
> > We got handed back to MGM, but by the time MGM was ready for us, we
were
> > right on top of the IAF (IXUSE) and 1,900' high. Not a serious problem,
> > really, because by then I had slowed to 90 kts, but it made the first
part
> > of the approach more rushed than it needed to be. Nevertheless, we made
it
> > in just under the cloud deck
> >
> > The interesting thing is BHM's comment that I "...should have asked
> > Montgomery for that one." How was I to know that? BHM is named on plates
as
> > the approach facility for EET. There's no ATIS at EET. What should I
have
> > done to find out that BHM couldn't give me the RNAV 33 approach?
> > --
> > Dan
> > C172RG at BFM
>

[Dan Luke]

"Sydney Hoeltzli" wrote:
> I don't see why you feel you 'should have been ready'.

That ol' PIC thing. I'm trying to determine if I missed some available
information necessary to the safe completion of the flight.

> I don't think there's a thing you could have done. BHM was listed
> as the approach facility, I would have waited until transferred to BHM
> to ask for the approach I wanted. If it was less than 30 nm out, might
> query ATC facility I'm talking to "N123 requests RNAV 33 at EET", which
> would probably get you a "I'll be handing you off in a minute, ask them"
> response most of the time but would have helped this time.

I think that's the right answer: it's a situational awareness issue. Next
time I'm getting that close to a little airport destination and haven't been
handed off, I'll ask.

> What I don't understand is why the BHM controller didn't just
> coordinate with Montgomery for you instead of shipping you back.
> They obviously can talk to each other -- why wouldn't it be easier
> to just have Montgomery approve whatever it was BHM needed for
> you to fly the approach, since the airport was apparently in their
> airspace?

Or, why didn't MGM say something? Surely they know by now they own the
airspace for that approach. Don't TRACONs have special procedures for such
situations?
--
Dan
C172RG at BFM

[Guy Elden Jr.]

> I don't think there's a thing you could have done. BHM was listed
> as the approach facility, I would have waited until transferred to BHM
> to ask for the approach I wanted. If it was less than 30 nm out, might
> query ATC facility I'm talking to "N123 requests RNAV 33 at EET", which
> would probably get you a "I'll be handing you off in a minute, ask them"
> response most of the time but would have helped this time.
>
> A while back on these newsgroups, I was asking how to get a chart of
> the airspace different facilities control. I was told I might as well
> ask for the moon, more likely.

My instructor told me that the airspace that a particular facility controls
can change on a day to day basis, depending on which runways are in use at
the various airports in the affected areas. Airspaces tend to overlap, so
when the winds shift around, causing different runways to be in use, the
tracons will adjust their airspace boundaries. Or something like that.

Bottom line is exactly what was said... use the charts as a guide, not as an
absolute rule for who owns the airspace on a given day. And ignore ATC when
they "complain" that you should be able to read their minds.

[Bob Gardner]

I think that your instructor has overstated the cast to some extent. Sector
boundaries are not changed all that often, and certainly do not depend on
wind direction. There are letters of agreement between terminal and center
facilities outlining who is responsible for what. I have in my hot little
hand a "Depiction of Seattle Approach Airspace and Sector 01 and 31 of
Seattle ARTCC airspace" and it says nothing about wind or anything
else...there are some overlays, where Approach controls the airspace below
certain altitudes, but that's it.

Sector responsibilities can change with the wind, though. The controller on
120.4 can be Seattle Departure one day and Seattle Approach the next,
depending on which way Sea-Tac is landing.

I'm sure that Steve M has a more cogent explanation.

Bob Gardner

"Guy Elden Jr." > wrote in message
...
> > I don't think there's a thing you could have done. BHM was listed
> > as the approach facility, I would have waited until transferred to BHM
> > to ask for the approach I wanted. If it was less than 30 nm out, might
> > query ATC facility I'm talking to "N123 requests RNAV 33 at EET", which
> > would probably get you a "I'll be handing you off in a minute, ask them"
> > response most of the time but would have helped this time.
> >
> > A while back on these newsgroups, I was asking how to get a chart of
> > the airspace different facilities control. I was told I might as well
> > ask for the moon, more likely.
>
> My instructor told me that the airspace that a particular facility
controls
> can change on a day to day basis, depending on which runways are in use at
> the various airports in the affected areas. Airspaces tend to overlap, so
> when the winds shift around, causing different runways to be in use, the
> tracons will adjust their airspace boundaries. Or something like that.
>
> Bottom line is exactly what was said... use the charts as a guide, not as
an
> absolute rule for who owns the airspace on a given day. And ignore ATC
when
> they "complain" that you should be able to read their minds.
>
>
>

[[email protected]]

Ryan Ferguson wrote:

> Dunno. Plate says Montgomery, I'd expect to talk to Montgomery about the
> approach. It's that simple.

Why do you expect such perfection from the FAA? Do you expect the same from the
IRS or the CIA? ;-)

[Jon Kraus]

Thanks Peter... I sure hope so.... and yes, much was learned...

Jon Kraus
PP-ASEL
Student-IA

"Peter R." wrote:

> Jon Kraus wrote:
>
> <snip>
> > My
> > instructor didn't know what to say except to point out that I was so
> > far behind the plane that if we were a minimums I never would have been
> > able to make the approach. I really didn't know what to say except for
> > I'll do better next time. All I could do on the ride hope is get a good
> > laugh from my stupidity. I have had so much on my mind that I probably
> > shouldn't have been flying. Not IFR any way's.
>
> As you undoubtedly know, the absolute best time to make that kind of
> mistake is with your instructor or safety pilot. :) That lesson served
> multiple purposes.
>
> --
> Peter

[John Clonts]

Roy Smith > wrote in message
...
> "Guy Elden Jr." > wrote:
> > ignore ATC when
> > they "complain" that you should be able to read their minds.
>
> Yeah.
>
> I had a bizarre experience just the other day. We were doing a left
> downwind departure from Morristown NJ's runway 23 and I wanted to get
> back to White Plains as efficiently as possible. For those not
> familiar with the area, it's very congested airspace, with Morristown
> and Caldwell's Class D's abutting, Teterboro's Class D right next door,
> and all of this under the shelf of New York's Class B.
>
> GPS gave me a bearing to White Plains and Morristown tower let us leave
> the frequency as soon as we broke ground. I called up NY Approach and
> requested "Class Bravo clearance, heading 080, direct White Plains".
> The controller gave us a squawk and instructed us to "remain below the
> floor of the class bravo, and clear of Caldwell's airspace".
>
> A quick glance at the chart showed that we could do all that by
> squeaking between Caldwell and Teterboro, almost exactly in the
> direction we wanted to go. So we started to do that. Not long after,
> the controler was back, yelling at us to head north-west (about 120
> degrees off our on-course heading), and ranting about how we needed to
> stay out of the arrival path, blah, blah. Clearly he felt we had
> disregarded his instructions.
>
> The problem is, what he really wanted us to do was stay clear of CDW's
> airspace to the west. All he *told* us to do was to stay clear of it,
> and we were doing that by going east of it. What was I supposed to do,
> read his mind?

At what altitude were you intending to skirt east of CDW? Isn't the Class B
floor 1800 there?

[Roy Smith]

"John Clonts" > wrote:
> At what altitude were you intending to skirt east of CDW? Isn't the Class B
> floor 1800 there?

I think you answered your own question, no?

[Sriram Narayan]

On Sat, 12 Jul 2003 16:10:27 -0500, "Dan Luke"
> wrote:


>The interesting thing is BHM's comment that I "...should have asked
>Montgomery for that one." How was I to know that? BHM is named on plates as
>the approach facility for EET. There's no ATIS at EET. What should I have
>done to find out that BHM couldn't give me the RNAV 33 approach?

No, I don't think so. I tried that once flying down to LA (actually
John Wayne/Orange Cty), thinking that it would be nice to get a
certain approach since I felt I was quite close, but they didn't care
for it. Little did I know I was going to be vectored around and handed
over three more times within the LA sector, so there was no way to
know when to request a certain approach. It was IMC at that time, and
considering the volume of traffic at Orange Cty it would have been
moot anyway.

[gpa]

Dan:

I see you fly out of BFM. Do you know Bobby Mooring the mixmaster mosquito
abatement man & resident flying instructor at BFM? I was wonder how he is
doing these days. I think he calls himself Azalea Air...

When you get a chance you might want to fly up to Monroeville for your $100
hamburger and and ask if Harper Lee (Author of To Kill a Mockingbird) is
still signing copies of her book. One of her relatives runs the FBO there
and in the past was able to get pilots who dropped in signed copies of her
books...Never know, it might be worth something someday...I got me one last
time I was up there.

Greg Arnold

--
I've learned that it is what I do not know that I fear, and I strive,
outwardly from pride, inwardly from the knowledge that the unknown is
what will finally kill me, to know all there is to be known about my
airplane. I will never die. -Richard Bach

"Dan Luke" > wrote in message
...
> Another one of those things I guess I should have been ready for sneaked
up
> on me this morning.
>
> We were going from BFM to EET (Shelby County Airport, Alabaster, Alabama)
> and the ceiling was right at minimums for the RNAV 33 approach, and below
> minimums for the VOR-A. Naturally, I wanted the RNAV 33.
>
> There's no ATIS at EET, so no particular approach was being advertised.
When
> Montgomery approach handed us off to Birmingham, BHM approach told me to
> expect the VOR-A. I asked him "...any chance we can do the RNAV 33?"
>
> "Nope. It's not in my airspace. You should have asked Montgomery for that
> one. Standy by and I'll see if they'll take you back."
>
> We got handed back to MGM, but by the time MGM was ready for us, we were
> right on top of the IAF (IXUSE) and 1,900' high. Not a serious problem,
> really, because by then I had slowed to 90 kts, but it made the first part
> of the approach more rushed than it needed to be. Nevertheless, we made it
> in just under the cloud deck
>
> The interesting thing is BHM's comment that I "...should have asked
> Montgomery for that one." How was I to know that? BHM is named on plates
as
> the approach facility for EET. There's no ATIS at EET. What should I have
> done to find out that BHM couldn't give me the RNAV 33 approach?
> --
> Dan
> C172RG at BFM
>
>

[Dan Luke]

"gpa" wrote:
> I see you fly out of BFM. Do you know Bobby Mooring the mixmaster
mosquito
> abatement man & resident flying instructor at BFM? I was wonder how he is
> doing these days. I think he calls himself Azalea Air...

Yep, I know Bobby well - he owns the other 172RG on the field. He gave me my
BFR-before-last. He's the local FAA Safety Counsellor. Bobby seems to be
doing fine.

> When you get a chance you might want to fly up to Monroeville for your
$100
> hamburger and and ask if Harper Lee (Author of To Kill a Mockingbird) is
> still signing copies of her book. One of her relatives runs the FBO there
> and in the past was able to get pilots who dropped in signed copies of her
> books...Never know, it might be worth something someday...I got me one
last
> time I was up there.

Love the book, but I only have a worn out paperback. It would be a thrill to
find a hard cover copy and fly it up there for her to sign. Like most pilots
who trained around Mobile, I've been to MVC many times.
--
Dan
C172RG at BFM