VFR Tower?

[86BravoPapa]

At a Class C airport today I overhead tower tell a USAF T-6, in the pattern, that they couldn't find an IFR flightplan in the system and because they were a "VFR tower," weren't technically supposed to file for aircraft...

I've never heard a tower distinguished as VFR or IFR...

 

[RetiredATLATC]

Whether the said they were a "vfr" or "ifr" tower makes no difference, though those aren't things that are normally said.

ATC's job isn't to file flight plans for aircraft. If it's not in the system, then workload permitting, we will file one..... otherwise contact your company.

 

[86BravoPapa]

I was curious about the differences in a "VFR vs. IFR tower." That's the part I'd never heard of before.

 

[Flyinthrew]

Methinks Mr. Controller was distinguishing the fact that he wasn't in the business of handling IFR traffic at all. Tower controllers have way more important things to do than file some military doofus's flight plan for him because he doesn't know how to file a flight plan or because his base ops is crappy at their job.

He was basically asking the tower controller to be a personal assistant because he couldn't bother to tune the other radio to FSS or other agency that could do the work.

 

[MikeD]

You're a T-6. Just VFR it. Sheesh.

 

[greg1016]

Usually, VFR tower refers to a Class D tower. Most pilots I've mentioned it to don't know this terminology. What is likely the case is that if the tower is a separate facility from the approach control, the tower controller has no jurisdiction over IFR flight (hence VFR tower). If the aircraft is already airborne, then the tower cannot issue an IFR clearance. At my facility, I would tell the pilot to contact departure, and then I'd immediately call departure on the land line and tell them the aircraft is their control (even if still within my D). If the pilot insists, on picking up the flight plan with me, I would have to call departure first and get a release and most likely a heading to fly before issuing a clearance. It is just a whole lot easier to ship the aircraft to departure instead and let them take care of it.

 

[Stinger]

I would tell the pilot to contact departure, and then I'd immediately call departure on the land line

I literally hate that you do that. What you should be doing is coordinating with departure first, then tell the pilot to contact departure. That way you and the pilot aren't both trying to talk to the same person at the same time.

 

[MikeD]

Usually, VFR tower refers to a Class D tower. Most pilots I've mentioned it to don't know this terminology. What is likely the case is that if the tower is a separate facility from the approach control, the tower controller has no jurisdiction over IFR flight (hence VFR tower). If the aircraft is already airborne, then the tower cannot issue an IFR clearance. At my facility, I would tell the pilot to contact departure, and then I'd immediately call departure on the land line and tell them the aircraft is their control (even if still within my D). If the pilot insists, on picking up the flight plan with me, I would have to call departure first and get a release and most likely a heading to fly before issuing a clearance. It is just a whole lot easier to ship the aircraft to departure instead and let them take care of it.

I literally hate that you do that. What you should be doing is coordinating with departure first, then tell the pilot to contact departure. That way you and the pilot aren't both trying to talk to the same person at the same time.

Just send the pilot to the local ARTCC freq, kick the can to them and make it their problem.

Or send them to Flight Watch or FSS

 

[86BravoPapa]

Usually, VFR tower refers to a Class D tower. Most pilots I've mentioned it to don't know this terminology. What is likely the case is that if the tower is a separate facility from the approach control, the tower controller has no jurisdiction over IFR flight (hence VFR tower). If the aircraft is already airborne, then the tower cannot issue an IFR clearance. At my facility, I would tell the pilot to contact departure, and then I'd immediately call departure on the land line and tell them the aircraft is their control (even if still within my D). If the pilot insists, on picking up the flight plan with me, I would have to call departure first and get a release and most likely a heading to fly before issuing a clearance. It is just a whole lot easier to ship the aircraft to departure instead and let them take care of it.

Thank you for the response. I'm often surprised by the disconnect between the flying side and control side of aviation.

 

[greg1016]

I literally hate that you do that. What you should be doing is coordinating with departure first, then tell the pilot to contact departure. That way you and the pilot aren't both trying to talk to the same person at the same time.

Well maybe that's how you do it, but 9/10 times if I do that departure is just going to tell me to ship them anyway. Hell of a lot easier to pick up the land line and say 1200 code 3 west looking for IFR your control, than going through all the proper coordination and clearance issuing just so that as soon as it is done I ship them to departure. Or what is actually more likely at my airport is a medevac helo that already has an assigned local code via LoA encounters IMC and wants to pick up IFR, then I can just call them by name. Also, we have an LoA with departure that gives them control on contact, but I didn't feel the need to go that in depth to a laymen.

Just send the pilot to the local ARTCC freq, kick the can to them and make it their problem.

Or send them to Flight Watch or FSS

Not even close to the same thing. My jurisdiction over IFR flight is about the same as FW or FSS. And you know what? If you want something that is under their perview (for instance info on a sigmet more than 150nm away from me), you can contact them for it. I need permission from whichever facility runs my approaches and departures to release an IFR aircraft (regardless of whether it is airborne or on the ground). If I file an IFR flight plan, and issue a squawk code for an airborne aircraft without contacting departure first and getting specific instructions for what the aircraft is to do, then I just had a deal. Cutting out a bunch of needless coordination is not passing the buck. If the aircraft is on the ground that is a completely different story. My job in the tower is to apply appropriate arrival/departure separation between aircraft as it is spelled out in 3-9 and 3-10 of the .65 and to sequence IFR/VFR aircraft.

 

[MikeD]

Not even close to the same thing. My jurisdiction over IFR flight is about the same as FW or FSS. And you know what? If you want something that is under their perview (for instance info on a sigmet more than 150nm away from me), you can contact them for it. I need permission from whichever facility runs my approaches and departures to release an IFR aircraft (regardless of whether it is airborne or on the ground). If I file an IFR flight plan, and issue a squawk code for an airborne aircraft without contacting departure first and getting specific instructions for what the aircraft is to do, then I just had a deal. Cutting out a bunch of needless coordination is not passing the buck. If the aircraft is on the ground that is a completely different story. My job in the tower is to apply appropriate arrival/departure separation between aircraft as it is spelled out in 3-9 and 3-10 of the .65 and to sequence IFR/VFR aircraft.

That's what I mean. Just send them over to ARTCC, tell the plane to maintain VFR and to contact them with the request. Wouldn't that work?

 

[greg1016]

That's what I mean. Just send them over to ARTCC, tell the plane to maintain VFR and to contact them with the request. Wouldn't that work?

Thought you were being smart. It would work if center had jurisdiction of the airspace the aircraft happened to be flying in. In the case of my VFR tower, it is the TRACON that has jurisdiction of IFR flight within the Delta (unless otherwise specified). At my particular facility, the very few responsibilities we do have for IFR aircraft are delegated from the TRACON by letter of agreement and they are very specific.

 

[greg1016]

And I do not know if there are any centers that run approaches into class D towers other than TXKF (run by ZNY), and I know first hand that TXKF does not ever depart anyone VFR. They call the center and get releases.

 

[Stinger]

Hell of a lot easier to pick up the land line and say 1200 code 3 west looking for IFR your control, than going through all the proper coordination and clearance issuing just so that as soon as it is done I ship them to departure.

This is not the same as what you said earlier. Earlier you said you tell the aircraft to contact departure and then you call them on the landline for coordination to tell them what they want.
And what you said this time is that you call departure first on the landline and tell them the info and then switch the aircraft.

Do the second way, all the time.

 

[MikeD]

Thought you were being smart. It would work if center had jurisdiction of the airspace the aircraft happened to be flying in. In the case of my VFR tower, it is the TRACON that has jurisdiction of IFR flight within the Delta (unless otherwise specified). At my particular facility, the very few responsibilities we do have for IFR aircraft are delegated from the TRACON by letter of agreement and they are very specific.

And I do not know if there are any centers that run approaches into class D towers other than TXKF (run by ZNY), and I know first hand that TXKF does not ever depart anyone VFR. They call the center and get releases.

No, it was a serious question. Appreciate the answer. I figure if a VFR tower and receiving a request that's beyond the scope of what service you provide, that there's really nothing else you can do but recommend to the pilot who he would need to call and maybe even pass the frequency to him and make his request with that appropriate facility.

Regarding LOAs, its very interesting how different facilities deal with operations within their airspace, and how it's seemingly facility-specific, with no real standardization. And I've only learned this while having to work out procedures for our aircraft to operate within certain airspace areas in both Class B and C airspace within our working area here in AZ. For example, P50, as a rotary wing and if going into/through PHX tower's airspace, you can simply fly beneath the Class B shelf, and contact PHX tower directly for transit or landing in their surface area, while never having talked to P50 itself. However, at U90, it is verboten to fly under the Class C shelf and contact TUS or DMA tower directly before entering their surface areas to transit or land.......you must contact U90 first, even though most of the time all they do is issue a squawk, radar ID you, then hand you right off to TUS/DMA tower anyway. Almost a waste of time contacting them in the first place, it seems.

 

[Stinger]

And I do not know if there are any centers that run approaches into class D towers other than TXKF (run by ZNY), and I know first hand that TXKF does not ever depart anyone VFR. They call the center and get releases.

Class D towers controlled by Centers are extremely common.

 

[greg1016]

Class D towers controlled by Centers are extremely common.

thanks.

 

[greg1016]

No, it was a serious question. Appreciate the answer. I figure if a VFR tower and receiving a request that's beyond the scope of what service you provide, that there's really nothing else you can do but recommend to the pilot who he would need to call and maybe even pass the frequency to him and make his request with that appropriate facility.

Regarding LOAs, its very interesting how different facilities deal with operations within their airspace, and how it's seemingly facility-specific, with no real standardization. And I've only learned this while having to work out procedures for our aircraft to operate within certain airspace areas in both Class B and C airspace within our working area here in AZ. For example, P50, as a rotary wing and if going into/through PHX tower's airspace, you can simply fly beneath the Class B shelf, and contact PHX tower directly for transit or landing in their surface area, while never having talked to P50 itself. However, at U90, it is verboten to fly under the Class C shelf and contact TUS or DMA tower directly before entering their surface areas to transit or land.......you must contact U90 first, even though most of the time all they do is issue a squawk, radar ID you, then hand you right off to TUS/DMA tower anyway. Almost a waste of time contacting them in the first place, it seems.

I have noticed the same disparities in my travels on the other side of the mic. I learned to fly at ISP, which is a C under N.90's jurisdiction. Helicopters are allowed to fly under the shelf and contact tower to land, but fixed wing are not. However, for departures, if you didn't want to climb above 1400, you could go out under the shelf with the tower. Also, the TRACON was not very active with sequencing there, where as other class Cs I'd get vectored all over the place and be set up on a long straight-in by approach. At ISP they'd usually just give me a pattern entry and then ship me over to tower, or give me a short vector followed by a pattern entry and over to tower.

Edit: talking about VFR there of course

 

[NovemberEcho]

Regarding LOAs, its very interesting how different facilities deal with operations within their airspace, and how it's seemingly facility-specific, with no real standardization.

That's because there's no standard airspace layouts or operations at different airports. A lot of those weird loas that don't make sense are there because of some type of operation that may not be common, but when it does happen whatever actions are written in the LOA protects for that. It's kind of like how we can't clear you for a visual into an uncontrolled airport even if you have the preceding traffic in sight until we get a down time for the preceding aircraft. 99 out of 100 times he won't go around, but we need to protect for that 1 time.

 

[greg1016]

That's because there's no standard airspace layouts or operations at different airports. A lot of those weird loas that don't make sense are there because of some type of operation that may not be common, but when it does happen whatever actions are written in the LOA protects for that. It's kind of like how we can't clear you for a visual into an uncontrolled airport even if you have the preceding traffic in sight until we get a down time for the preceding aircraft. 99 out of 100 times he won't go around, but we need to protect for that 1 time.

That definitely has something to do with it, but facility culture has a lot to do with it as well. For instance, when it comes to VFR handling, I have not come across any approach control more accommodating to VFRs than N.90. ABE treats VFR as if their entire airspace is class B (obviously none of it is). They assigned altitudes and go nuts if you don't adhere to them or request something different. I avoid talking to ABE approach at all costs. PIT won't allow a VFR to cut across mid field south to north even at 055 no matter their configuration. This is just from personal experience on the airplane side of the mic.