Flying under Class B

"C J Campbell" wrote in message
...

One inch under the floor is okay. The area under class B is often
constricted, so it can help to get flight following. Whether ATC has a
right
to do it or not, controllers regularly assign altitudes to VFR traffic for
whatever reasons of their own.


Yup, and receiving an altitude assignment from a controller that hasn't the
authority to issue it is an indication that you're not working with a sharp
troop.

In article . net,
"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote:

"C J Campbell" wrote in message
...

One inch under the floor is okay. The area under class B is often
constricted, so it can help to get flight following. Whether ATC has a
right
to do it or not, controllers regularly assign altitudes to VFR traffic for
whatever reasons of their own.


Yup, and receiving an altitude assignment from a controller that hasn't the
authority to issue it is an indication that you're not working with a sharp
troop.

This is one of my pet peeves about the folks at NY Tracon. They've got
this strange habit of telling VFR flights inbound to HPN to "descend to
pattern altitude". It used to only happen to me once in a while, but
lately it seems to have become SOP.

It's more than just a polite suggestion, too. I've had controllers tell
me that I'm not descending fast enough, and that they "need me" to
descend. I once said "unable" when a controller tried to do this to me
15 miles out at night and ended up with an invitation to call them when
I got on the ground. Said phone call resulted in a verbal reaming out
by the supervisor for refusing to follow instructions.

A written complaint from me to the tracon resulted in a letter informing
me that I must obey all controller's instructions.

"Roy Smith" wrote in message
...

Yup, and receiving an altitude assignment from a controller that hasn't
the
authority to issue it is an indication that you're not working with a
sharp
troop.


This is one of my pet peeves about the folks at NY Tracon. They've got
this strange habit of telling VFR flights inbound to HPN to "descend to
pattern altitude". It used to only happen to me once in a while, but
lately it seems to have become SOP.

It's more than just a polite suggestion, too. I've had controllers tell
me that I'm not descending fast enough, and that they "need me" to
descend.


Again, a sign that you're not working with a sharp troop.



I once said "unable" when a controller tried to do this to me
15 miles out at night and ended up with an invitation to call them when
I got on the ground. Said phone call resulted in a verbal reaming out
by the supervisor for refusing to follow instructions.


Had it been me it would have been the supervisor that would have received
the verbal reaming out.



A written complaint from me to the tracon resulted in a letter informing
me that I must obey all controller's instructions.


But not supported by any documentation, of course.

So long as they are not directing you to do something unsafe, or hard on the
equipment or passengers, or otherwise an extreme hassle - why not just go
along?

Lets say he is not a sharp troop. Why make his job harder. While you are
giving the guy fits, someone else is trying to get a clearance or advice.
Keep it up, and they will just expand the class B, because they NEED to
control that space.

If we go along, we can delay or eliminate the need to expand class B areas.


"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in message
ink.net...

"Roy Smith" wrote in message
...

Yup, and receiving an altitude assignment from a controller that hasn't
the
authority to issue it is an indication that you're not working with a
sharp
troop.


This is one of my pet peeves about the folks at NY Tracon. They've got
this strange habit of telling VFR flights inbound to HPN to "descend to
pattern altitude". It used to only happen to me once in a while, but
lately it seems to have become SOP.

It's more than just a polite suggestion, too. I've had controllers tell
me that I'm not descending fast enough, and that they "need me" to
descend.


Again, a sign that you're not working with a sharp troop.



I once said "unable" when a controller tried to do this to me
15 miles out at night and ended up with an invitation to call them when
I got on the ground. Said phone call resulted in a verbal reaming out
by the supervisor for refusing to follow instructions.


Had it been me it would have been the supervisor that would have received
the verbal reaming out.



A written complaint from me to the tracon resulted in a letter informing
me that I must obey all controller's instructions.


But not supported by any documentation, of course.

Roy Smith ) wrote:

It's more than just a polite suggestion, too. I've had controllers tell
me that I'm not descending fast enough, and that they "need me" to
descend. I once said "unable" when a controller tried to do this to me
15 miles out at night and ended up with an invitation to call them when
I got on the ground. Said phone call resulted in a verbal reaming out
by the supervisor for refusing to follow instructions.

A written complaint from me to the tracon resulted in a letter informing
me that I must obey all controller's instructions.

Shoulda had the supervisor tell you what section of the Federal Aviation
Regulation supports his assertion that ATC control VFR aircraft outside
of B or C airspace.

--
Peter

Peter R. wrote:
Roy Smith ) wrote:

It's more than just a polite suggestion, too. I've had controllers tell
me that I'm not descending fast enough, and that they "need me" to
descend. I once said "unable" when a controller tried to do this to me
15 miles out at night and ended up with an invitation to call them when
I got on the ground. Said phone call resulted in a verbal reaming out
by the supervisor for refusing to follow instructions.

A written complaint from me to the tracon resulted in a letter informing
me that I must obey all controller's instructions.

Shoulda had the supervisor tell you what section of the Federal Aviation
Regulation supports his assertion that ATC control VFR aircraft outside
of B or C airspace.

That was in the letter I wrote to complain. The (written) response
was "you have to follow all instructions the controller gives you".

"Peter R." wrote in message
...

Shoulda had the supervisor tell you what section of the Federal Aviation
Regulation supports his assertion that ATC control VFR aircraft outside
of B or C airspace.


He might respond with FAR 91.123(b), which states; "Except in an emergency,
no person may operate an aircraft contrary to an ATC
instruction in an area in which air traffic control is exercised." Well,
the VFR aircraft is in Class E airspace, and Class E airspace is
obviously an area in which air traffic control is exercised, so if the
controller instructs the pilot to maintain a specific altitude then absent
an emergency the pilot must maintain that specified altitude, right?

Wrong.

That line of reasoning would treat all ATC instructions equally. Let's take
a rather extreme example to illustrate. Let's say you're on short final in
Class D airspace when the tower instructs you to "roll inverted and pull".
Must you adhere to that instruction? Are you required by regulation to bury
yourself and your aircraft in the dirt? Of course not. Clearly, then,
there are limits to the "control" exercised by ATC.

FAA Order 7110.65 places substantial limits on the authority of ATC in
various situations. Paragraph 2-1-1. ATC SERVICE states, in part:

"Provide air traffic control service in accordance with the procedures and
minima in this order except when:

a. A deviation is necessary to conform with ICAO Documents, National
Rules of the Air, or special agreements where the U.S. provides air traffic
control service in airspace outside the U.S. and its possessions or:

NOTE-
Pilots are required to abide by CFRs or other applicable regulations
regardless of the application of any procedure or minima in this order."

In short, ATC cannot require you to do something which would be a violation
of an FAR. That altitude assigned by our wayward controller could require
to violate cloud clearance requirements or minimum safe altitudes.

FAA Order 7110.65 does have provisions for the issuance of altitudes to VFR
aircraft, but only in Class B and Class C airspace, the Outer Area
associated with Class C airspace, and in TRSAs. That makes sense, because
ATC separates VFR aircraft in those areas. Clearly, if separation is
required the controller must have the necessary tools to provide it. But
outside of those areas ATC does not separate VFR aircraft and has no
authority to assign altitudes to them.

You didn't mention, but I presume you were not flying in the class bravo at
the time? That is weird.