"Antoņio" wrote in message
oups.com...
An instruction from ATC is often a free pass to deviate from the FAR's.
I was allowed deviation from a FAR last week in my J-3 when I entered
the mode C veil of Seatack.
No you weren't. You *complied* with the FAR that reads, in part, "Unless
otherwise authorized or directed by ATC". That's assuming the J-3 was
originally certified with an engine-driven electrical system (I don't recall
if that's the case or not). If it wasn't, you *complied* with the part that
exempts such aircraft from that regulation.
Either way, ATC didn't allow any deviation from any FAR by permitting you to
enter the Mode C Veil of Sea-Tac.
They can (and do) ask that as pilot in command you take final authority
for
the safety and legality of your flight. FAR 91.3
Which I did by extending my downwind.
If you deem it necessary for the safety of the flight to fly into airspace
for which you were not authorized, it's true that you ought to do that as
PIC. However, a) you need to declare an emergency to do so (even if it's
under your breath, to be reported to ATC later), and b) if the FAA asks you
for an explanation, you have to give one. If they don't like your
explanation, they may cite you for a violation of the regulations.
[...]
I was only about 1/2 mile off the end of the abeam point on the runway.
The airspace is tight there and requires a better knowledge of the
ground references than my GPS provided. I agree that in the future I
should have some other solution to the problem.
Funny, you didn't mention the use of a GPS earlier. I will take this
opportunity to point out that flying in the pattern of an airport with such
a complex is a perfect example of when to NOT be relying on a GPS, and to
become familiar with the ground references PRIOR to the flight.
That said, assuming your GPS was performing correctly, it should have
provided you with all the information you required in order to fly the
downwind as far as you liked, without touching the Class B airspace. Even
assuming a worst-case scenario of 300' off (and GPS is usually much better
than that, especially when airborne), the half-mile plus space between the
extended centerline and the Class B airspace still leaves you with over
2000' of room between you and any traffic on final.
You think it's dumb to "complain" about the possibility of being
maneuvered by ATC to a position that does not provide enough separation
for safety just in order to avoid the clipping of a corner of B
airspace? I'll take the busted B over a busted ass any day.
Even though busting the Class B puts you directly in line with the airliners
on final approach? A collision is undesirable, whether it happens in Class
B or Class D.
And just how much separation do you require anyway? There's at least a
half-mile between the final approach course for 31L and the Class B
airspace. So, you must want more than that. How much more?
Yes, I know. I sure hope I never have to follow you into BFI as you
decide to do a 360 on the downwind for better spacing !
I'm guessing that if I ever did, you wouldn't even notice. There's a lot
more room up there, even at Boeing Field, than you apparently think.
I got a buck that says this happens everyday there. In fact, it
happened to a friend of mine about 9 years ago in his 210.
I'm a bit bewildered at your statement here. I wouldn't be surprised if
360s are used for spacing at KBFI on a daily basis. But when you try to
make a claim that it does, you hardly reinforce your assertion that doing so
would be dangerous. If it's so dangerous, and it happens so often, why
aren't there any crashes?
I have spent plenty of time in the pattern at Boeing Field. Yes, it's a
busy airport. But there is still LOTS of room in the air. I have had
several go-arounds caused by a variety of reasons, and there's lots of
room
above the airport to maneuver safely.
Above the airport, yes. Not to the south end though...which is where I
was.
The air is just as clear south of the airport.
[...]
I could have been a bit wide. I don't know the area well enough to say
for sure. However, the airspace is close to the end of the runway.
I agree the Class B is unusually close at KBFI. But that doesn't mean that
a downwind leg, even an extended one, requires flight through the Class B
airspace. It just means you need to be on top of your game when you fly
there.
The difficulty in reporting your actions to ATC should not cause you fail
to
take appropriate actions. "Aviate, navigate, communicate". There's a
reason the radio is the last item in that list.
That formula is non-regulatory and presumes one has the time and
ability to communicate.
No, it doesn't. In fact, it specifically instructs you to prioritize, and
to not communicate at all until you've addressed your aviation and
navigation. That is, it presumes that one may NOT have the time and ability
to communicate.
It's true that it's non-regulatory, but it's also true that it's a
well-understood mantra, and no pilot has ever been busted for flying the
airplane first, and working the radio second.
It just doesn't realistically work in all cases.
I haven't seen or heard of a situation in which it doesn't work.
Nevertheless, even if there is such a situation, this wasn't one of them.
I think I took appropriate actions. ATC obviously thinks it was
OK because they didn't ask me to call them.
It does seem so, yes. Though, you never really told us what "appropriate
actions" you took. It sounds as though you didn't really do anything other
than just continue to fly your downwind (and presumably turn around and land
at some point). Whatever you did, I'd agree it seems that ATC wasn't
concerned (other than to make whatever comment they made on the radio, but
since you didn't hear that clearly and didn't tell ATC you didn't hear that
clearly, we don't really know what that comment was).
Nobody, to my knowledge, was jepordized by my actions.
It does seem so, yes. Though, you might consider your own pilot certificate
in assessing whether anyone was jepoardized. It doesn't sound as though any
metal got close to running into any other metal, but flying through the
Class B without a clearance isn't good for the safety of that piece of paper
you've got (or maybe you have the plastic one).
And finally, I am attempting to refine my
thinking process on the matter by laying myself out here for anyone to
attack me. What more do you expect?
I expect for you to acknowledge the information provided, rather than to
insist that you already know the answer. In particular, when someone tells
you that flying an extended downwind leg there doesn't require you to fly
through the Class B airspace, you ought to seriously consider listening to
that statement. When a second person says the exact same thing, you might
start thinking there might be something to it.
No one has attacked you, by the way. But every time you make a false
statement, you prompt someone else to correct that false statement. That's
how it works around here.
Errr...no. There are situations where either/or thinking does not apply
to the reality of the situation. I am (both) not uncomfortable flying
in tight quarters AND it was not possible without unusual maneuvering
for me to avoid getting too close to B. (I am still not sure if I
actually busted it.)
There you go again, with the false statements. No unusual maneuvering was
required for you to avoid the Class B. Or, if you prefer, no maneuvering
that would be considered unusual by someone comfortable flying in tight
quarters was required. There is a LOT of room, relative to the size of even
the largest airplane, between the final approach course for 31L and the
Class B airspace.
BTW...ATC never told me to extend my downwind. The downwind was
extended by virtue of the fact that the aircraft I was told to follow
was way out there.
Red herring. You were given an instruction that required you to extend your
downwind. There's no difference between that and an explicit instruction to
extend your downwind.
My comment about flying tight quarters is based simply on observed facts.
Your "facts" are not my facts in all cases.
I'm not sure what you mean by that, but we're not really concerned with "all
cases" here. We're concerned with THIS case.
Fact #1: there is over a half mile between the final approach course of 31L
and the Class B airspace
Fact #2: a pilot comfortable flying in tight quarters can easily negotiate a
corridor over half a mile wide, using appropriate references (GPS or ground,
doesn't matter).
Fact #3: a pilot who believes it impossible to fly an extended downwind
between the final approach course of 31L at KBFI and the Class B airspace
nearby must not be comfortable flying in tight quarters.
Where you fall in the above facts, I'll let you say. The conclusion remains
however: it is not possible to be both comfortable flying in tight quarters,
and yet not be able to extend one's left downwind to 31L at KBFI. The two
are mututally exclusive of each other.
Pete
|