need to call if VFR in Class E airspace?

[Keith Smith]

I know the other thread on this topic is a sticky situation, but taking the individuals OUT of that equation, and the tension that resulted from the exchange, a simple question remains. If a VFR aircraft is in Cl[Mod - Happy Thoughts] E airspace, does a controller have the right to ask him to establish contact on VATSIM, and then issue altitude restrictions beyond the Bravo?

 

Regardless of how close the aircraft are to IFR arrivals, I think the answer should be 'no'. Yes, some pilots do it to prove a point, but their point is 100% accurate. Other pilots actually do it as a challenge to themselves, and to enjoy the view of other aircraft. You're either in it, or you're out of it. You can't be 'too close' to it.

 

Bear in mind, ATC is _not_ responsible for separating IFR from VFR in Cl[Mod - Happy Thoughts] E airspace, so there should be no additional ATC workload created by such pilots. If the pilot DOES enter Cl[Mod - Happy Thoughts] B/C without 2 way comms or a clearance (for the Bravo), then by all means, get tough with them...but otherwise, I don't understand the argument that it's ok to ping those pilots and send them altitude restrictions BEYOND keeping them out of Bravo.

 

I believe this issue is worth discussing.

[Nicholas Bartolotta 912967]

I agree with Keith - fair is fair, and out is out. The cl[Mod - Happy Thoughts] B airspace restrictions are designed with arrival/departure flows in mind, so to be honest, it shouldn't be a case where the altitudes that make up the B airspace are causing major havoc on your sector.

 

Of course, if anyone is cutting it on the margins like that, they should be watching for traffic like a hungry hawk and in reality it would be much wiser to be at least with the Approach controllers to get radar advisories. Of course, in the real world you've got a lot invested when you're flying...your aircraft, your life, etc., so the stakes are a bit higher, and thus you're naturally more cautious. On VATSIM, we can fly a bit more gutsy than we might in real life.

 

Make no mistake though, if you're under/above/outside the cl[Mod - Happy Thoughts] B, that's outside, and that's all there is to it. Anyone who wants to really try some fun VFR should head down the Hudson by Manhattan, if you stick to 1000ft or below, you're under the B (and those real world N90 controllers see aircraft going back and forth there all day!)

[David Klain 874106]

Totally correct. As long as you are clear of the Cl[Mod - Happy Thoughts] A, B, C or D airspace, you can fly at whatever altitude you desire. Most people keep at least 500' above/below it to allow for altimeter errors and provide a safety margin, but in theory you could be flying 10' above or below the controller's airspace and are not required to talk to him at all. That said, cutting it as close as a 100' is a good way to get a bust should ATC show that you actually did violate the airspace and in a case like that the ruling will most likely go in the FAA's favor since the pilot was obviously playing at the margins.

 

In Chicago it is not unusual at all to fly the lakeshore VFR squawking 1200 at 2500 feet (500' below the Cl[Mod - Happy Thoughts] B floor). I do it all the time and neither talk to ATC nor expect to talk to him or get altitude [Mod - Happy Thoughts]ignments from him. That's the beauty of flying VFR!

 

Dave

[Michael Hodge Jr 961044]

Totally correct. As long as you are clear of the Cl[Mod - Happy Thoughts] A, B, C or D airspace, you can fly at whatever altitude you desire. Most people keep at least 500' above/below it to allow for altimeter errors and provide a safety margin, but in theory you could be flying 10' above or below the controller's airspace and are not required to talk to him at all. That said, cutting it as close as a 100' is a good way to get a bust should ATC show that you actually did violate the airspace and in a case like that the ruling will most likely go in the FAA's favor since the pilot was obviously playing at the margins.

 

In Chicago it is not unusual at all to fly the lakeshore VFR squawking 1200 at 2500 feet (500' below the Cl[Mod - Happy Thoughts] B floor). I do it all the time and neither talk to ATC nor expect to talk to him or get altitude [Mod - Happy Thoughts]ignments from him. That's the beauty of flying VFR!

 

Dave

 

 

I've done that flight from kvpz up to kmke right along the chicago shoreline. A beautiful flight.

[Alan Hensley 950569]

That is absolutely the way it is in the real world and the way I taught at ZME and the way it is already done at ZTL. In fact, other VATUSA ATM's have requested some of our controllers fly when they are giving an OTS and do exactly what is being described. It is a GREAT learning tool.

 

Alan Hensley

vZTL Training Administrator

[Andrew Doubleday]

Fully agreed... just reading the chat log from the previous situation is disheartening on the controller standpoint.

 

Too much of this happens at many ARTCCs on this network... Sure, lets disregard the Bravo altitudes and [Mod - Happy Thoughts]ign aircraft altitudes well below the shelves - just because the controller aint happy about VFR traffic... wonderful - dumbing down the hobby with that suggestion already! That's a fantastic solution! (Sarcasm if you couldn't pick it up) You think you've got PM in the real world to get into contact with aircraft violating controlled airspace? Guess again... and it happens all of the time, too... gotta roll with the punches and deal with it... give the traffic call to your IFR's and keep it moving... simple as that.

 

Looks as if it's been answered by the br[Mod - Happy Thoughts], however... simply don't attempt to do it! Just kindly remind them to remain outside of controlled airspace at best - if you're going to hail the pilot(s) with a PM.

 

 

-AJ

[Harold Rutila 974112]

Fully agreed. I teach my students exactly about this topic. Keith, you can do whatever kind of cutting close flying you want in Denver. We won't bother you .

[Keith Smith]

Ok, thanks for the input. It sounds like most ppl are on the same page. I was just curious if there was a swell of support for this other approach. Evidently, there isn't.

 

Now, if a controller feels the aircraft is IN the bravo, then it's a completely different story, that goes without saying.

[Gregory Sumner 883451]

Agree 100%. To many controllers make a big deal out of VFR traffic when there should not be.

[Dan Everette]

I fully agree with what's been said, and about the only time I'll ever send a .contactme to a VFR pilot who is in (and will remain in Cl[Mod - Happy Thoughts] E) is when I first logon and they're squawking other than 1200. However, I think this is an acceptable VATSIM concession (when a controller logs on to a previously unstaffed position).

 

Personally I could care less if someone wants to transit under a shelf without talking to anyone. Yes that is the beauty of VFR, but as a pilot, I come from the "rather be talking to someone than nobody" camp when it comes to operating in congested areas (that's just my personal opinion). As a controller on this network, my problem is with the children who intentionally loiter around Cl[Mod - Happy Thoughts] B/C airspace with the sole intent of trying to get the controller to ping them, so they can fire back how smart and intelligent they are that talking with ATC isn't required.

 

There is a difference between flying under the Cl[Mod - Happy Thoughts] B to get to your destination more quickly, and sitting there doing 360's (or hovering) 100' under the shelf under the approach corridor of a major airport during an event for the purpose of seeing if the controller will ping you. One is being a conscientious pilot using the system, the other is being an [Mod - Happy Thoughts]clown.

[Alex Bailey 969331]

I agree completely with everything said here, but our online network is not like the real world. In many cases the altimeter isn't set correctly or these guys ride the rings within 100 feet on their sim, but it shows a bust in VRC. I try to stay 500' above or below to be safe and to be considerate to the controller on VATSIM.

[Wade Williams 877539]

At Memphis, we traditionally had a group of guys that would go fly whenever an announcement was made of a controller test. We would typically obtain the blessing of the ATM to do so, whenever possible.

 

We don't do anything disruptive. We just do things outside the normal visual or ILS approach. We'd fly VFR over the airspace, ask for a popup IFR clearance, request a non-precision approach, etc. The number of controllers that fail miserably at anything but radar vectors is astounding. Additionally, it was not uncommon at all to be threatened to have a supervisor ban us.

 

I certainly won't say I'm perfect - far from it. I still have tons to learn and I've been busted before when I saw an aircraft over my airspace and I sent a contactme without stopping to consider his altitude or presence in a corridor. And yep, I felt mighty stupid when reminded of my own airspace boundaries. But, that's how you learn and when you do learn it that way, you're not likely to forget.

 

Now, if a pilot is intentionally busting airspaces to make you re-vector aircraft or jamming up your frequency pretending he doesn't know anything and needs a 10 minute description of every command, then that's going too far. However, a pilot flying VFR around your airspace or requesting a full VOR approach is not disruptive - it's YOUR JOB to know how to handle that. If you don't, you should be grateful for the learning experience. If it exposes a huge gap in your knowledge and you don't p[Mod - Happy Thoughts] your OTS, then you weren't ready.

 

As to the question of whether the controller has the "right" to issue you instructions in any situation, it's a tricky subject. In the real world, if a controller were to ask you to do something, there's a very high chance you'd do it without questioning it, even if it were not technically "legal." However, in the VATSIM world, I've heard controllers say, "I've got inbounds to the airport - stay at least 5 miles away from the Charlie or I'll call a supervisor." Clearly that's over the top. VATSIM is a learning environment. Therefore, controllers should strive to follow procedures whenever possible. Thus, saying, "You should stay 5 miles away from the airspace because I"M THE CONTROLLER" clearly violates the intent of VATSIM. Remember, in the real world, those VFR aircraft 100 feet below your airspace aren't even tuned to your frequency. There's no way for you to send a "contact me". So since they're not doing anything wrong, you don't send out fighters to intercept - you point them out to other aircraft and continue with your job.

 

Now, to those who do do such flying, I'd say the unwritten rules are:

1) A controller test where an announcement was made is fair game. After all, they asked for traffic.

2) However, if possible, it never hurts to let the ATM or TA know what you're doing and get their consent. If nothing else, it can avoid people getting angry.

3) In general, I think a FNO should be off-limits. A controller test or a mini-event sure - but a FNO is really pushing the line of whether you're trying to help or just be annoying.

4) It goes without saying that a MITRE event would be off-limits. They're trying to accomplish a goal and testing controller airspace knowledge is not one of them. Expect to be quickly kicked if you try it during a MITRE event.

Edited June 8, 2008 at 05:34 PM by Guest

[Reece Hunter]

Throw in another yes vote into the pot. There should be no reason for a VATSIM controller to PM a pilot outside of controlled airspace with the intent of keeping him/her below the Bravo dimensions.

 

However, I have seen it many times working NoCal positions at ZOA where pilots claiming full knowledge of the airspace bust the Bravo and Charlie without being in contact with me. Thus, it may be, based on his previous experience that the controller was being pro-active especially on reading the title of the post. It is one thing if the pilots do stay out of the controlled airspace but should the controller wait until they bust it and interfere with his well laid plans? How long must the controller wait, might be a more appropriate question. Until there is some [Mod - Happy Thoughts]urance that the pilot will not hinder traffic flow, I would at least give the controller the freedom to PM the pilot if he intends to enter controlled airspace, intentionally or otherwise.

 

The other thing that disturbs me is the behavior of the pilots. They claim to be CFIs so I pray that they do not teach the same principle in real-life to paying student pilots. Most of your posts above understand the risks of flying close to the edges of controlled airspace so I would not get into it too much.

[Wyatt Najaro 839595]

Those of you arguing that this is somehow disruptive during an event have got to understand that in real life airspace is at capacity usually many times what we see during even a busy event on vatsim. The cl[Mod - Happy Thoughts] bravo airspace is designed for this reason with additional buffers and often pilots are going to push the boundry of it to get from one place to the other and likewise the controller expects that. You can't go around making up rules for our vatsim airspace that would never exist in a real world scenario if after all we are just trying to be realistic. Lets use a scenario real life N1234 wants to go VFR from the north side of a cl[Mod - Happy Thoughts] bravo airport to the south and is unable to obtain a cl[Mod - Happy Thoughts] bravo clearance. His only choice if he want's to maintain radar flight following is to now take the scenic route with a satelitte sector. Most likely Satellite doesn't own the small chunk of cl[Mod - Happy Thoughts] e airspace you can usually find underneath the finals of cl[Mod - Happy Thoughts] b airports so they are not going to provide radar service down there and were [Mod - Happy Thoughts]uming that final isn't going to take the handoff from sat. So I guess you could try keying up on finals freq (show me that on a sectional chart) and you could enjoy getting ignored by him while he wonders how in the heck you got his freq. This leaves you with one last legal option and thats to dip under the cl[Mod - Happy Thoughts] bravo and take the shortcut happens all the time and you better believe when the cl[Mod - Happy Thoughts] bravo goes down to as low or lower than 1000AGL I'm going to stay right up against that shelf ie 100ft below. Obviously your going to keep your eyes open for a 737 that gets dumped out of the bravo but keep in mind controllers are making every effort to keep them in the bravo for this exact reason. Getting dumped out of the bravo as turbojet aircraft is not something you look forward those of you that know part 91 know what I'm talking about.

 

Wade is that a request of MITRE not to allow VFR aircraft in cl[Mod - Happy Thoughts] echo airspace if it is seems to defeat the purpose of cl[Mod - Happy Thoughts] e airspace and the purpose of MITRE. I know during the Chicago event they welcomed this kind of traffic as long whoever was doing made sure they were doing it right. The cl[Mod - Happy Thoughts] b airspace is designed with these buffers in mind like I said it works in the real world. Any arrivals to a primary cl[Mod - Happy Thoughts] bravo airport that become in conflict with non-participating vfr aircraft is only due to the controller not being aware that he needs to aim to keep his arrivals within the cl[Mod - Happy Thoughts] b airspce.

[Wade Williams 877539]

Wyatt,

 

I don't know anything about the requests of MITRE - it was simply my [Mod - Happy Thoughts]umption that if pilots tried "pushing the envelope" during a busy MITRE event, they would be asked to stop. If that [Mod - Happy Thoughts]umption is wrong, then I apologize.

[Wyatt Najaro 839595]

Wade,

 

I was just wondering nah I don't know if its wrong or not I wasn't really in the loop on the details.

 

Again if certain events wanted to set an upfront policy regarding this sort of thing I wouldn't object to that although I would respectfully disagree. I think most of remember the big uproar regarding the TFR during a PHX event a while back. Setting those ground rules ahead of time is more acceptable as long as its laid out upfront that this is the way its going to be albiet unrealistic it may suit that particular event at the discretion of the powers at play.

 

Wyatt

[Pete Holske 833650]

I would like to say something here. I'm sure everyone expected this to come.

 

 

Most of the people in this post know me, my background, and my Virtual Airline. We do events that exercise this very thing (This case actually wasn't us). We do this at our VA for one reason, to teach! To teach my pilots what they can do, and what they can not do, but also to help controllers to see what Pilots can and can't do, and understand their airspace a little better. To be honest I think flying the fringe of the bravo or "TEASING" the airspace is a good tool and something that controllers do not see on VATSIM very often. From the transcript of this flight it looks to me that the pilot was in E airspace and that the controller had no reason to even worry about him. The problem I do have with the pilot, and yes I am guilty of this too, he got defensive awfully quick. I have had issues with several ARTCCs and I have gotten defensive really quick. I have since changed my philosophy on this very subject and I am teaching my pilots new ways of handling "over controlling". You explain your situation with facts. Facts like DME from the specific point, Visual References, or anything physically proving your point. I have had controllers say I busted airspace numerous times but the fact is, I always have DME off an ILS of the reference airport, a vor, AND GPS/RNAV, FMS reference to the point also, and I have every chart for North America.

 

I believe blame lies in both corners here, a controller trying to over control. Just because you have 9,000,000 vatsim hours does not mean you are the king of aviation. Trust me I have 4300 real world hours, and there are many people with more knowledge then me. The pilot, yes you were probably right about your position, but is there a need to be like that. I understand where you are coming from, and I have been there, but before you go there, give him the proof, and if it continues, then go there. I have told them to please contact the sup and we will discuss this with the SUP and see who's right. In the long run the people who lose out in this situation, are the other pilots, this controller dedicated his full attention to one pilot, that in the grand scheme was not really necessary to dedicate any time to. This is what leads to delays, and bad moral of everyone on the network, and gives a bad name to an ARTCC.

 

The solution to this problem is really hard to enforce I believe. The first step is easy, call the SUP, and determine who is right and wrong in the situation WITH AN UNBIAS MIND. If the controller has no clue about his airspace, there should be some sort of consequence. I just think there is to many controllers here that have a knowledge of what they are suppose to do and WHAT ALTITUDES THEY CONTROL TO, but not a great true knowledge of their airspace and how VFR aircraft relate to that. My second solution is, grow up and stop whining. I am not sure which one will be enforced?

[Pete Holske 833650]

That said, cutting it as close as a 100' is a good way to get a bust should ATC show that you actually did violate the airspace and in a case like that the ruling will most likely go in the FAA's favor since the pilot was obviously playing at the margins.

 

What about going VFR from ACK to TEB in real life, you skirt a D (KHPN White Plains) and go direct to the alpine at 1100' , 100 below the Bravo, because you can't go any further below, and to be honest in real life thats what they WANT! I am not arguing just putting a realistic situation where you fly 100 below the bravo. I do it in Boston in real life too going to BED. In jets and turbo props too, its all about saving money now!!

[Michael Hodge Jr 961044]

Its important for the Controller to know his airspace, and be able to handle such accordingly. Its equally important for the pilot to do things with the right intentions. If i'm flying and a controller does something that I KNOW is incorrect, I leave a constructive feedback and then its out of my hands, I've done all I should do as a pilot: leave feedback. Don't get angry, just explain to the controller (on private chat) and leave CONSTRUCTIVE feedback.

 

The key however, is to do it constructively, and we all have to be open to constructive criticism. Look, If i'm controlling something and I do it wrong and a pilot corrects me, then great! I'll go through, verify, and make corrective action. Is doing this during an event the "right" thing to do? That can be debated, but either way, if your doing something wrong as a controller (or a pilot), One would [Mod - Happy Thoughts]ume you would want to know that as long as its given the proper way. We can't fix what we don't know is broken. Maybe this controller was taught that way? Maybe he wasn't. Maybe he simply forgot. Either way, We ALL have to remember that this is a learning environment. The day you think you are too big of yourself too learn, is the day you need to just step away.

[Pete Holske 833650]

Hey mike,

 

I respect your ideas a lot you are training me to be a controller. I was in the boat of saying both were wrong here, but it has been brought to my attention that this baboon (controller) went around and posted this on several different forums. That is lower then Whale _ _ _ _ <- FOUR LETTER WORD. If you have a problem, be a man and talk to the guy. This in my mind, was a planned attack on VFR aircraft, by this one controller, who I believe should have a re-evaluation. If you are an I1 and you can't conduct yourself in a professional manner, you need to get the boot. If I called out a p[Mod - Happy Thoughts]enger on the corporate jet I fly, would I have a job when I landed? Hell no. The only thing I faulted the pilots for was the lack of first discussing the situation in a professional manner, but I really don't think they have a chance. They were attacked from first message. The case is closed now, but someone needs to take a serious look at who is controlling their airspace if they are a ATM / DATM / TA. I think we need to have a yearly recurrent training or something on each position you are qualified for, because this is just going way over the top.

 

One last example before I go.

 

Holding over the PHTO airport a Delta at 9500, I get booted for being in his airspace. His airspace goes to 2600' in that delta. I get booted because I am VFR in his CONTROL SPACE for IFR airplanes. Get a life, and get retrained.

 

If there was a way to set my mood for this post it would Pissed, and fed up!

[Dan Everette]

Holding over the PHTO airport a Delta at 9500, I get booted for being in his airspace. His airspace goes to 2600' in that delta. I get booted because I am VFR in his CONTROL SPACE for IFR airplanes. Get a life, and get retrained.

 

Something tells me that the above isn't the entire story. I don't think a SUP would just disconnect you (i.e. booted) on request of a controller without at least a discussion with you. Perhaps you should bring this up offline with VATGOV11.

 

Out of curiosity, when you do your "independent controller training flights", do you ever provide detailed feedback to the ARTCC training staff?

[Bryan Wollenberg 810243]

If a VFR aircraft is in Cl[Mod - Happy Thoughts] E airspace, does a controller have the right to ask him to establish contact on VATSIM, and then issue altitude restrictions beyond the Bravo?

 

No, just like real world. There are no requirements for aircraft to be in contact with ATC, nor is any special clearance needed for operation there.

[Alex Bailey 969331]

Hey mike,

 

I respect your ideas a lot you are training me to be a controller. I was in the boat of saying both were wrong here, but it has been brought to my attention that this baboon (controller) went around and posted this on several different forums. That is lower then Whale _ _ _ _ <- FOUR LETTER WORD. If you have a problem, be a man and talk to the guy. This in my mind, was a planned attack on VFR aircraft, by this one controller, who I believe should have a re-evaluation. If you are an I1 and you can't conduct yourself in a professional manner, you need to get the boot. If I called out a p[Mod - Happy Thoughts]enger on the corporate jet I fly, would I have a job when I landed? Hell no. The only thing I faulted the pilots for was the lack of first discussing the situation in a professional manner, but I really don't think they have a chance. They were attacked from first message. The case is closed now, but someone needs to take a serious look at who is controlling their airspace if they are a ATM / DATM / TA. I think we need to have a yearly recurrent training or something on each position you are qualified for, because this is just going way over the top.

 

One last example before I go.

 

Holding over the PHTO airport a Delta at 9500, I get booted for being in his airspace. His airspace goes to 2600' in that delta. I get booted because I am VFR in his CONTROL SPACE for IFR airplanes. Get a life, and get retrained.

 

If there was a way to set my mood for this post it would Pissed, and fed up!

 

Before taking shots at the controller involved and violating VATSIM CoC in the process, think about what you are going to say. You don't know the entire story, and you don't know what has happened for the past year before this occurance, where this very pilot and others were involved with a SUP for busting Cl[Mod - Happy Thoughts] B airspace.

 

Stick to the discussion at hand and don't bring the latest incident into it.

[Wyatt Najaro 839595]

...

Edited June 8, 2008 at 11:11 PM by Guest

[Alex Vainer 929287]

There have been MANY instances in where I've been flying VFR, on a VFR code, under the cl[Mod - Happy Thoughts] bravo, and have gotten told by the approach controller to contact them. I carry up to date sectionals, and am always aware where I am in relation to Cl[Mod - Happy Thoughts] B/C/D airspace. And I know for a fact, I am clear of their airspace.

 

Some small Ga airports, are embedded within a Cl[Mod - Happy Thoughts] Bravo, for example, Schaumburg airport in chicago, is just 6 miles west of KORD.

 

When I'm flying VFR, staying clear of controlled airspace, and I get told to contact the controller, I sign off, not having the energy or patience to argue.

 

So please controllers, KNOW your airspace.