Class B busted...My problem or the controller's ?

Anto=F1io wrote:
So would you say that if one were in the pattern that it would imply
the same responsibilities of ATC as if I were on, say, flight
following?

Absolutely not. "Flight Following" is a colloquial term for "VFR radar
traffic advisory service". Many towered Class D airports don't have
radar.

-R

Peter Duniho wrote:
"Gary Drescher" wrote in message
...
I think what Anto=F1io was asking for was a regulation to support the n=
otion
that a pilot can or must refuse an ATC instruction just because complia=
nce
would violate the FARs.

Maybe that's what he meant.
Fortunately, all of the above is moot. In this particular instance, the
controller gave no instruction that would have forced a violation of the
FARs.


Not so Pete... The controller told me to "follow the Arrow" . To do so
*safely* (in my opinion) required I extend the downwind leg right into
class B.

Antonio

Peter Duniho wrote:
"Anto=F1io" wrote in message
ups.com...
So would you say that if one were in the pattern that it would imply
the same responsibilities of ATC as if I were on, say, flight
following?

As Gary points out, whether or not ATC is coordinating transit through ot=
her
airspace, you still need the clearance. Beyond that, since flight into t=
he
Class B isn't necessary for operating at KBFI, there would be no need for
ATC to coordinate transit through the Class B, and thus you would have no
expectation that they would.

Pete

You mean flight into class B for landing at BFI is not *normally*
required. In this particular case I maintain it was for safe
separation.

Given the above is true, how do you think AIM 3-2-1d figures in? ...

"d.VFR requirements. It is the responsibility of the pilot to insure
that ATC clearance or radio communication requirements are met prior to
entry into class B, Class C, or Class D airspace. The pilot retains
this responsibility when receiving ATC radar advisories. (See 14 CFR
Part 91)"

Antonio

Gary Drescher wrote:


I don't think there's anything in the FARs themselves that would let a pilot
conclude that following ATC instructions is secondary to complying with the
other FARs. That's not the way analogous situations work when driving a car,
for example; there, police directives do take precedence over the traffic
laws that would otherwise hold (even though there are other, implicit
exceptions of the sort you mentioned; e.g. if you're instructed to stop your
car ten feet above the pavement, you presumably can't be penalized for
failing to comply).

--Gary

Well said and exactly my dilema which, as yet, is unresolved.

Antonio

Peter Duniho wrote:

Generally speaking, you are required to comply with a police officer's
instruction only so long as it would not cause you to break any other law.
The police officer does not have the authority to waive laws.

So would you reason that I was not required to "follow the Arrow" on
the 2 mile final because the controller was, by implication, causing me
to "waive laws"
(bust B airspace)?

Antonio

Gary Drescher wrote:

I think what Anto=F1io was asking for was a regulation to support the not=
ion
that a pilot can or must refuse an ATC instruction just because compliance
would violate the FARs. That is, what regulation says that other
regulations take precedence over 91.123b (which requires compliance with =
ATC
instructions, except if there's an emergency need to deviate)? As far as I
can tell, there's no such regulation (although AIM 4-4-1a,b and 4-4-6c are
at least tangentially relevant).

--Gary

Exactly. However, AIM 3-2-1d is somewhat disquieting...

"d.VFR requirements. It is the responsibility of the pilot to insure
that ATC clearance or radio communication requirements are met prior to
entry into class B, Class C, or Class D airspace. The pilot retains
this responsibility when receiving ATC radar advisories. (See 14 CFR
Part 91)"

Antonio

Gary Drescher wrote:


If you want an official opinion on this question, you can email your local
FSDO.


Good idea. I will do so and report back here.

Antonio

Steven P. McNicoll wrote:

I followed ATC instructions. What more can the FAA ask of me?


That you fly a proper pattern?


Define what the "proper pattern" would have been in this case please.

Antonio

A Lieberman wrote:
On 28 May 2005 18:00:43 -0700, Anto=F1io wrote:

No clearance, no entry.

Not necessarilly true in other cases--such as while on an IFR flight
plan.

Incorrect Antonio.

As soon as you receive your IFR clearance, you are cleared into Bravo. A=
TC
makes room for your entry based on your IFR flight plan.

The beauty of IFR is that all airspace becomes "transparent" as you are
cleared from wheels up to wheels down.

Allen

Yes. I believe you may have misunderstood me. I was stating that a
clearance through all airspace comes automatically on IFR flight plans
and using it as an analolgy to explain my point.=20

Antonio

Bob Gardner wrote:
I instructed at BFI for twenty years...and I was never concerned that I
would bust the Class B when doing left traffic to 31L. If you fly at 800
feet, stay over the Duwamish, and turn before you get to 405, there is
nothing to be worried about.

I will remember that and the instructions Peter gave me for the future.
Thanks!

Antonio