ATC question

wrote in message
. net...

Oshkosh's tower doesn't have a BRITE scope or any other type of radar.


Approach control services at OSH are provided by Chicago ARTCC, the Horicon
ARSR provides good radar coverage.

Dave S wrote:
Matt Whiting wrote:

A question for Stephen, Newps or other folks knowledgeable in the
finer points of ATC. A friend of mine flew into Reading, PA last week
with another pilot. Since Reading is a class D airport with no TRSA,
but with radar approach control, they elected to simply call tower
directly 6 or so miles out. My friend said that the controller was
quite nasty and told them they had to contact approach first if they
wanted to land. By then they were even closer in, but they called
approach who "informed" them gruffly that they were now 4 miles from
the airport and needed to contact tower "immediately." They then
called tower and landed.

My friend is a new private pilot (last December) and both he and the
person flying (a pretty experienced pilot, I believe) were rather
taken aback by this. What authority does a class D tower have to
refuse entry to an airplane that hasn't called approach control? Even
a TRSA is voluntary, so I can't imagine that a non-TRSA, non-class B,
non-class C airport can mandate use of approach control.

Is there some new regulation that I've missed?

Matt

Did you listen to the ATIS prior to contacting the tower? Local arrival
procedures are usually spelled out during this broadcast. Most of the
local Class D's around me don't work in the manner you've described, but
if thats how they work, thats what you do.

I wasn't flying so I don't know if they did or not.


As for what authority do they have... pretty much if you want to land at
a Class D, you have to be in communication with them to be in their
airspace. You can be denied entry. The Controller does not have to
justify it, and their decision is final as far that that moment is
concerned.

If you are in communication with them, you have to accept and follow any
directions ATC gives you (91.123 - b), unless you deem it unsafe and
invoke 91.03/declare an emergency. If you choose not to follow their
instructions you can be told to remain clear or exit the class D (or
applicable airspace) and you would be bound to comply.

Its not a new rule.

I find it pretty hard to believe that a controller can decide locally
who to provide service to or not. The first time this happens to me,
I'll be talking with my representative and senators. Folks need to
remember who is the customer and who is paying the salaries.

Matt

I find it pretty hard to believe that a controller can decide locally
who to provide service to or not. The first time this happens to me,
I'll be talking with my representative and senators. Folks need to
remember who is the customer and who is paying the salaries.

Matt

It has not been proven that the controller made a unilateral decision
here. If they have an operating practice that says "contact approach
first" they can fall back on that practice and choose not to make an
"exception". Newps is right. Any local controller COULD accept a pop up.
But are they required to? Again.. if the arrival procedures are
described on the ATIS, your friend has nobody to be miffed at but
himself, for not being able to "make himself aware of all pertinent
information regarding his flight".

I've known of two separate instances in my short stint in flying where
someone didn't want to talk to approach, and was directed to contact
approach for sequencing. One was into Savannah, the other Beaumont.
Neither was the exact type of airport described by the original poster,
but that was how they operated.

I remember explicitly Savannah approach telling someone who was VFR
inbound, who didn't want to take sequencing vectors VFR and was going to
go "around" to tower "Sir, if you are landing at Savannah, you will be
going through me" Given the exchange, that actually was pretty direct
and effective.

Dave
Not an ATC guy, but I did sleep in a holiday inn express once..

Dave S wrote:



I remember explicitly Savannah approach telling someone who was VFR
inbound, who didn't want to take sequencing vectors VFR and was going to
go "around" to tower "Sir, if you are landing at Savannah, you will be
going through me" Given the exchange, that actually was pretty direct
and effective.



And if the airport is busy with traffic that is usually the most
efficient for everyone involved.

Newps wrote:


Dave S wrote:



I remember explicitly Savannah approach telling someone who was VFR
inbound, who didn't want to take sequencing vectors VFR and was going
to go "around" to tower "Sir, if you are landing at Savannah, you will
be going through me" Given the exchange, that actually was pretty
direct and effective.



And if the airport is busy with traffic that is usually the most
efficient for everyone involved.

I agree, but this is Reading, PA after all which has fewer operations
per day than a real airport has in half an hour.

Matt

"Dave S" wrote in message
ink.net...

It has not been proven that the controller made a unilateral decision
here. If they have an operating practice that says "contact approach
first" they can fall back on that practice and choose not to make an
"exception".


I thoroughly examined the Reading SOP, they have no operating practice that
says "contact approach first".



Newps is right. Any local controller COULD accept a pop up.
But are they required to?


Pop up?



Again.. if the arrival procedures are described
on the ATIS, your friend has nobody to be miffed at but himself, for not
being able to "make himself aware of all pertinent information regarding
his flight".


The SOP calls for the ATIS to state that Basic Radar Services are available,
nothing beyond that.



I've known of two separate instances in my short stint in flying where
someone didn't want to talk to approach, and was directed to contact
approach for sequencing. One was into Savannah, the other Beaumont.
Neither was the exact type of airport described by the original poster,
but that was how they operated.

I remember explicitly Savannah approach telling someone who was VFR
inbound, who didn't want to take sequencing vectors VFR and was going to
go "around" to tower "Sir, if you are landing at Savannah, you will be
going through me" Given the exchange, that actually was pretty direct and
effective.


Savannah has Class C airspace, sequencing of VFR arrivals is a Class C
service. Reading provides Basic Radar Service which does not include
sequencing of VFR arrivals.

On Apr 17, 1:07 pm, "Steven P. McNicoll"
wrote:

Savannah has Class C airspace, sequencing of VFR arrivals is a Class C
service. Reading provides Basic Radar Service which does not include
sequencing of VFR arrivals.

And yet, the OP is correct that in actual practice, Reading Tower will
regularly deny class D services to inbound aircraft who have not been
sequenced by approach.

On Apr 16, 8:13 pm, Dave S wrote:

Did you listen to the ATIS prior to contacting the tower? Local arrival
procedures are usually spelled out during this broadcast. Most of the
local Class D's around me don't work in the manner you've described, but
if thats how they work, thats what you do.


The RDG SOP calls for the ATIS broadcast to state that Basic Radar
Services are available, nothing beyond that.



As for what authority do they have... pretty much if you want to land at
a Class D, you have to be in communication with them to be in their
airspace. You can be denied entry. The Controller does not have to
justify it, and their decision is final as far that that moment is
concerned.


Upon what do you base your assertion that the tower controller needs
no justification to deny entry to Class D airspace?

"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote:
On Apr 16, 8:13 pm, Dave S wrote:
As for what authority do they have... pretty much if you want to land at
a Class D, you have to be in communication with them to be in their
airspace. You can be denied entry. The Controller does not have to
justify it, and their decision is final as far that that moment is
concerned.


Upon what do you base your assertion that the tower controller needs
no justification to deny entry to Class D airspace?

I'm curious: By what point in time is the controller compelled to provide
justification for a denied entry?

"Jim Logajan" wrote in message
.. .

I'm curious: By what point in time is the controller compelled to provide
justification for a denied entry?


FAAO 7110.65 does not require the controller to state the justification at
all.