Controller-Pilot Question, legally able to do something and being smart about your safety.

[boondr]

I think the point here is being missed somewhat. The OP was asking if pilots that fly on the edge(side, below, above) of Bravo are aware of the risk they are taking even though it is 100% legal. I have talked to many pilots in our area that spent countless hours 100' or less below the Bravo that were aware but naive to the dangers of doing so.

The problem with Bravo airspaces is, in an effort to balance the needs of a major airport with the desire to not restrict GA, the FAA and the users (121, GA/AOPA etc) came up with a basic "bare minimum" Bravo design. Meaning if the floor of the Bravo is 2500' then I need to have large and heavy turbojet aircraft at that altitude in many places just as a minimum to establish a safe approach. AOPA resists vehemently (and usually successfully) any attempts to expand Bravo airspace.

Now with that in mind you can imagine the dangers of having a MD-11 at 2500' (legally in the bravo) and a VFR C-152 unidentified and squawking 1200 climbing out of a satellite airport to 2400' (legally outside the Bravo) right below it. That is the dangers the OP is talking about. There is nothing ATC can do about people who don't call for services and are legally following the rules.

 

[Boskru]

Or in survey, Hey XX app I'd like flight following, I'm going to be 100 feet below the shelf and right below the approach to your active runway. XX app - unable, I can't have you there. Me - well you see, we need to get this done, and if we work with each other it'll make it easier for both of us. XX app - unable, remain clear of C/B. Me - Uh... ok. 1200 it is, I'll ruin you're whole day I guess.

I've had this plenty of times. You try to be helpful and give the controllers an idea what you want to do and they don't seem to be helpful. Alright then....squawk 1200 and let ATC do all the extra work to keep airliners out of my way! Call back in an hour or two and they'll be MORE than willing to help you out! I've done this for surveys around LAX and ATL.

 

[RedBaron2000]

I departed from a grass airstrip in a Cub some years ago, early in my career, that was at the very edge, but within (I think it was about 4.5nm away) the confines of the Class C airspace. I called the tower as soon as I got in the air, thinking that was what I was supposed to do according to 91.130(c)(2)(ii) ("From a satellite airport without a tower...must establish communications...as soon as practicable after departing.") Well, the tower controller was pretty ticked at me for not calling him on the ground and asking permission to enter his class C airspace. Lesson learned - I was very much legal, and in fact doing exactly what the FAR says to do, but I didn't make that controller very happy! I called from the ground the next time I departed that grass strip (at the time I didn't even realize the TX would work that far from the ground).

 

[Landis]

Most of the people I talk to that run the edges of a Bravo or Charlie without talking to ATC do it specifically because of "run-ins" they've had with cranky controllers in the past. They end up getting vectored all over the place while in G or E airspace near the terminal areas or told to stay away. They figure it's just easier to stay out and not talk to anyone. And it is easier - for them. More dangerous, yes, but ultimately easier.

 

[z987k]

I flew GA 1200 over the LAX Bravo once during my time in the US.

The reason why I was over the top: Controller decided it was too busy for my slow old C172, radar service terminated, remain outside of Bravo, have a nice day. I had somewhere to be, so over the top I go.

Why I will never do it again: the thought of "what if my engine quits now" was quite haunting. The reason I didnt get a clearance is because its busy. So for me to suddenly get forced into the Bravo due Gravity would cause a ridiculous amount of extra safety issues to me, to the streams of traffic below, and a truckload of work for controllers working that entire area.

Next time: go the long way and creep around under the shelves...

Sure, it's legal. Is it safe? Well, do you know EXACTLY how much life your engine has left to give?

Side note, its probably why down here in Australia, our Charlie (kind of like FAA Bravo, but has shelves that go 70nm out ) extends all the way up to Alpha.

Really? You'd rather be really low over a very densely populated area instead of very high because of a potential engine failure? You need to seriously re-think this. If you lost an engine at 10k over LAX, you'd be in about no one's way, squawking 7700, on 121.5 or a Socal frequency, you'd cause a slight disruption(who gives a crap, you have an engine out), and if you're worth a damn, you'll make one of the 17 airports 10,000 feet directly below you. You'll have like a half hour to figure it out.

If you were about 1500agl, which is roughly what it requires to stay somewhat close and under the shelf, you might have no options for airports and get to try to land it on a city street or a house. Yep, that's MUCH safer. Not that I haven't done this, but I really want you to think about how you came to your conclusion.

I think some of you need to figure out how traffic flow into airports actually works. Hint, the structure of the airspace usually gives it away.

 

[inigo88]

^^ This! Sorry airline X for making you spend a couple extra thousand dollars in fuel with those last minute vectors from ATC. I was busy trying not to die...

 

[Pilotforhire587]

Legal isn't always necessarily "prudent" and I think the definition of prudent depends on the actual pilot.

Personally, today? I wouldn't do it, but that's after a few years of experience and feeling the wrath of wake turbulence.

Back in the day, I wouldn't have had a second thought about it and assumed legal=prudent.

One day, during a "Bay Tour", under ATC control, approaching SFO...

I agree with this. When I was still instructing My wife and I used to fly to Flagler Co in Florida to visit her family. Draw a line between MQY and XFL, it goes right over ATL. I would always file IFR and file direct, its just under 3.5 hours direct in calm winds so I would tanker the DA 40 up with gas and plan on making the flight in one leg. I would usually file at 9000 feet, and after they screwed me once I got in the habit of asking if I could keep going direct instead of being being vectored around the airspace, the answer was always no, so I started cancelling, descending to 2500k and going around the surface area and under the first shelf of the B since I couldn't go over, above 12500 without o2. That meant I could still make the trip with out a fuel stop, saves me about 100 bucks each way when you figure the hourly cost of the aircraft rental, thats a lot of money. I would still monitor and stay away from the paths they were landing or departing aircraft in but answer me this, As a controller at an airport with east/west runways, who is going to be in your way more. Someone 9 or even 11k directly about the field that you are talking to, or a vfr target on a 1200 code who you aren't talking to, directly west of the runways, at an altitude damn near the glide slope? I never minded helping out if you really did need me to change course 10 or 20 degrees, but to ask me to add over 100 miles to my 480 mile Direct trip so you can keep me well clear of all of class B, get real.


I think that, as in every facet of aviation, controllers and pilots have to work together. I understand there are limits to the number of aircraft you can work, I also understand the limited space with in the NY airspace itself in your example, I spend half of my life flying Dash 8's in and out of EWR. But that being said if you can't work with the pilots, expect them to do what is legal and best for them with no input from you. Some of the controllers do a great job up there, I love working with Paul, but if more you start working with them, giving VFR flight following, giving them traffic advisories when you have time, and allowing them to cut across B where ever you have room the word will get out and more people will gladly help you out when you need a particular area free of GA.

Just my .02

 

[genot]

Complexity is more than just how many busy airports are located together and it isn't always how busy is the controller you're talking to. What are the procedures in place to deconflict departures from arrivals? Will the airplane need to transit another sector's airspace? Is that controller too busy for the time to take a point out or workload to issue traffic? If the arrivals will be held high for the overflight, will that effect the built in altitude separation as the arrivals converge toward vectors to final? What are the departure routes like? Will the overflight cause problems for those departures? How will the departures get vectored? Will the revectored airplanes case problems for other aircraft such as satellite arrivals?

I can't count how many times I've denied a Bravo clearance/vectored around an IFR overflight when I've been slow and received an angry readback from a pilot even with an explanation of why I'm doing it. Its nearly impossible some times to really explain that I'm not the busy one, its the guy whose airspace I'm keeping you out of that is. Even if its not a matter of being too busy and something seemingly simple. Keeping someone low through a STAR track because, say, arrivals descend to 5,000 here. The immediate reaction at times is well stop them at 6 and give me the 5,000 I filed for. Well if I do that, the other short fix arrivals will be at 6 also and the final controller will have very little wiggle room to get out of jams with as they have no altitude separation. Its very seldom cut and dry.

 

[boondr]

9 times out of 10 you don't get a Bravo clearance on a seemingly dead frequency it is because what you don't hear; an adjacent controller getting their butt whipped or the 2 or 3 30-40 plane long pearl necklaces of arrivals ten minutes out that the controller sees on the long range board, so they know they will have to kick you out in 5 mins anyways. The other 10% may be lazy controllers but that is the exception not the rule. Believe me if you are going to be near the Bravo it is preferable that I have control/knowledge of what you're doing but sometimes we just can't be responsible for separating another aircraft. That said if you do get a Bravo and you have good eyesight your chances of staying are better than if you play the "I'm looking" game like a certain AAirline does from time to time.

 

[TripSix]

...like a certain AAirline does from time to time.

From time to time? You're being wAAy to kind.

 

[cime_sp]

I used to instruct on Long Island and deal with the New York class B. It was very difficult to get clearance in. You're other options were to go dangerously/ilegally offshore in a single, extremely low over highly congested area, or climb above. From a GA safety standpoint option "C" carries the least risk.

 

[moxiepilot]

This is a question from a controllers perspective.

There was a situation the other day where there were numerous unverfied targets (1200 codes) flying above the bravo creating difficult situations for the controllers. the confines of the airpsace are very restricting to allow vectoring around the target to allow positive seperation.

Before answering your questions, let me add my caveat first... part of the key words you use, above, are "the confines of the airspace." The 1200 targets are not within the Bravo airspace. If you need more room to vector aircraft - either NYB needs to restructure their airspace or they need to maintain a flow control; both of which would need to be taken up with the regulatory body. That being said, I understand neither is going to happen and you guys (and gals) really do a bang up job to accommodate everyone with grace under pressure.

so heres the question
- If you are legally able to do something according to the FARS does it make it easier to justify possibly jeopardizing your safety and or that of others flying around you?

It does not make it harder or easier, it is just working within the rules akin to maintaining 3 mile visibility, clear of clouds while VFR within the Bravo.

- Does this seem like something where a pilot does not find it to be a safety issue because they are following all the rules?

I believe so, yes.

- From a pilots perspective do you most of the time find yourself aware of the "bigger picture" of whats going on around you?

I think this is where it gets tricky where you need to separate the professionals from the others. I would define professional (in this case) as the ones who are aware of the big picture, who understand how to function within the airspace, and who anticipate, recognize and are ready to respond.

I'm one of those guys who not only regularly is within the confines of NYB, but LOITERS within that airspace. I think you guys understand I have a job to do and try to mitigate the impact of my job on your job. Do I understand that flying a line at 2,700' between CDW, TEB, EWR and JFK really messes up your departure and arrival flow? Heck yeah! So, part of my being a professional is being situationally aware, keen on your flow patterns, receptive to what you are already dealing with, and whether or not I'm being a hazard. So while you work us within your Bravo, I get to listen to all the people who need a little more experience. Those are the ones I wish had a bigger picture, less glass in their Cirrus, or more experience flying under positive control.

So, I think those of us who fly often may have that bigger picture, but those who are more recreational, inexperienced, or aloof do not have that bigger picture. Don't get me wrong though, flying a jet doesn't omit you from the group that needs to screw their head on a little tighter...9 months ago working north of TEB at 2,200 a business jet departs LGA. Frequency is busy, controller states I'm at this position, this altitude. The jet zips on by, I have him in sight but cannot state that I'll maintain separation clearance (too busy on freq.) although that's what I've done for the past 10 advisories. Biz jet got upset because he got an RA and never saw us. This situation was no one's fault. Controller was helping us by letting us be there. We were helping the controller by always knowing who was where (mental imagery very similar to the opening credits of Pushing Tin, but in my head ) and the biz jet just didn't have enough time to get the mental picture of traffic with their high departure workload and recent handoff from tower. Well, we're all doing our jobs to the best of our ability (except for the snarkiness of the biz jet response.)

Now you compare that with the fella who really shouldn't be in the airspace due to whatever reason, and they are the danger. I think all in all though, having the big picture is a necessity in my line of work. I spend hours at a time in your airspace, while most everyone else is in transit. You boot me out enough, I don't need to give you an excuse to do it because you think I don't know what's going on.

If I had one request though it would be that the LGA controllers (tower) would be a little more accommodating than they are. I don't think they realize that sometimes I am mapping for the FAA so that instrument approaches and airspace can be modified. None of the other airports deny us as frequently as they do and you all have a comparable workload.

This is not a bash of any GA pilots out there just a topic I would like to discuss and see the other side of. on a side note if any airline pilots want to chime in and tell me your perspective on this feel free.

Let me give you my perspective on airline pilots....LOL

 

[Autothrust Blue]

^^ This! Sorry airline X for making you spend a couple extra thousand dollars in fuel with those last minute vectors from ATC. I was busy trying not to die...

Sorry for pAArty rocking.

Although you're lucky if you have a few grand extra of fuel these days...bAAnkruptcy and all, y'know...

 

[framedforlife]

I always talk to ATC and FSS because when I fly I fly out of MIV and the FSS is not on field anymore but they still help with the flow

 

[RobertB]

I agree with this. When I was still instructing My wife and I used to fly to Flagler Co in Florida to visit her family. Draw a line between MQY and XFL, it goes right over ATL. I would always file IFR and file direct, its just under 3.5 hours direct in calm winds so I would tanker the DA 40 up with gas and plan on making the flight in one leg. I would usually file at 9000 feet, and after they screwed me once I got in the habit of asking if I could keep going direct instead of being being vectored around the airspace, the answer was always no, so I started cancelling, descending to 2500k and going around the surface area and under the first shelf of the B since I couldn't go over, above 12500 without o2. That meant I could still make the trip with out a fuel stop, saves me about 100 bucks each way when you figure the hourly cost of the aircraft rental, thats a lot of money. I would still monitor and stay away from the paths they were landing or departing aircraft in but answer me this, As a controller at an airport with east/west runways, who is going to be in your way more. Someone 9 or even 11k directly about the field that you are talking to, or a vfr target on a 1200 code who you aren't talking to, directly west of the runways, at an altitude damn near the glide slope? I never minded helping out if you really did need me to change course 10 or 20 degrees, but to ask me to add over 100 miles to my 480 mile Direct trip so you can keep me well clear of all of class B, get real.


I think that, as in every facet of aviation, controllers and pilots have to work together. I understand there are limits to the number of aircraft you can work, I also understand the limited space with in the NY airspace itself in your example, I spend half of my life flying Dash 8's in and out of EWR. But that being said if you can't work with the pilots, expect them to do what is legal and best for them with no input from you. Some of the controllers do a great job up there, I love working with Paul, but if more you start working with them, giving VFR flight following, giving them traffic advisories when you have time, and allowing them to cut across B where ever you have room the word will get out and more people will gladly help you out when you need a particular area free of GA.

Just my .02

You could ask for 5,000 or 6,000 feet and go directly over ATL, still be IFR, and not be in anyone's way. There is no way you're going to be at 9,000 feet 30 miles north to 30 miles south of ATL because departures climb to 10,000 feet off the ground and are being turned towards possible departures over COKEM, CADIT, BRAVS, et cetera.

 

[Pilotforhire587]

Go fly a ga single around atl. They will keep you over 40 miles away, vectoring you all the way around the b. There is no going over unless it's the middle of the night. I don't blame people for going vfr and cutting it close.

 

[🦈💜]

Flying outside what some may call the busiest class B in the world not talking to anyone. The confines of the BRAVO go up to 7000ft. so It is quite easy for any single engine to get up above it and putz around on a 1200 code.. Now if you do in fact do this do you think to yourself... self Im gonna fly right above the busiest airspace in the world where I know there are large jets with hundreds of people on board going every which direction at every altitude and Im gonna be perfectly fine. There was a situation the other day where there were numerous unverfied targets (1200 codes) flying above the bravo creating difficult situations for the controllers. the confines of the airpsace are very restricting to allow vectoring around the target to allow positive seperation.

I'm SOOO LATE TO THE PAAAHTY. (But it's not necro if it's an active thread, right?

But I've thought about this fair bit, and I want a turn. I've overflown TPA, for example, at 125 ... in contact with and under the control of the controlling agency (In theory I called up for VFR flight following, but I was cleared through class B and vectored around despite being over the top. Fine by me!).
When I considered that what I was doing would be legal without flight following, it just seemed wrong.

so heres the question
- If you are legally able to do something according to the FARS does it make it easier to justify possibly jeopardizing your safety and or that of others flying around you?

I can only speak for myself, of course, but I think it's ridiculous to think that any pilot would feel as you describe--my attitude, and that, I hope, of my compatriots, is that even 14cfr didn't exist we would fly to maximize our safety and that of those flying around us.

- Does this seem like something where a pilot does not find it to be a safety issue because they are following all the rules?

Possibly. The thought process might be that the FAA knew what it was doing when it put the top of its class B at 7,000'.
"I don't know where the jets go, but they must go somewhere else."

For all the talk I see on the internets, I actually see a surprising amount of attitude from high-hour pilots around stuff like this.

- From a pilots perspective do you most of the time find yourself aware of the "bigger picture" of whats going on around you?

I certainly try. It's hard to picture the arrival corridors and traffic flow when you fly in and around airspace you don't know intimately. When in doubt and VFR, I usually go with VFR flight following. I know it increases controller workload, in theory, but I work under the assumption that a controller would generally rather be talking to me than not.

~Fox

 

[🦈💜]

Go fly a ga single around atl. They will keep you over 40 miles away, vectoring you all the way around the b. There is no going over unless it's the middle of the night. I don't blame people for going vfr and cutting it close.

I can see where some might be annoyed by that. Perhaps that is from whence much of the enmity springs.

All of the class B I've flown in and around was accommodating and professional.. but I've never flown ATL or anything in the northeast.

-Fox

 

[Pilotforhire587]

I can see where some might be annoyed by that. Perhaps that is from whence much of the enmity springs.

All of the class B I've flown in and around was accommodating and professional.. but I've never flown ATL or anything in the northeast.

-Fox

Not to knock what you are saying here, but Even during the FedEx push in Memphis, it isn't as busy as the ATL or NYC B

 

[🦈💜]

Not to knock what you are saying here, but Even during the FedEx push in Memphis, it isn't as busy as the ATL or NYC B

I intended for what I said above to acknowledge that fact -- Unfortunately for me, most of my experience has just been out here on the west coast.

For that matter, nobody should listen to anything I say anyway! ^.^ I've barely managed to scrape together 400 hours of flying over ... god.. fifteen years, now? and have yet to hold any sort of job in aviation. Don't even have my CFI yet, despite "studying" for over two years now. I really should just put a signature on with a disclaimer like this so that people don't think I'm sharing worldly wisdom. :\

Blah, now I'm dep^H^H^H sad.

-Fox