Legal aerobatic maneuvering according to 91.303

CFI A&P

CFI A&P

Exploring the world one toilet at a time.
As a controller, how do you handle IFR traffic that is in VMC while in the vicinity of an aircraft that is squawking 1200 while maneuvering in accordance with 91.303 ?

The reason I ask is that a buddy of mine encountered this recently. When he landed he had a message at the FBO desk to call the number for the local class charlie ATC when he lands... First time this has happened, he was 100% legal in the airplane, off of victor airways, at the legal altitude, etc...

Thoughts?
 
CFI A&P said:
As a controller, how do you handle IFR traffic that is in VMC while in the vicinity of an aircraft that is squawking 1200 while maneuvering in accordance with 91.303 ?

The reason I ask is that a buddy of mine encountered this recently. When he landed he had a message at the FBO desk to call the number for the local class charlie ATC when he lands... First time this has happened, he was 100% legal in the airplane, off of victor airways, at the legal altitude, etc...

Thoughts?
Click to expand...

If he complied with the regs he should be fine. Was it over a congested or populated area though?
 
It's the controllers job to provide separation, not the pilots job to clear out of the way when ATC wants to send an airplane though your box.

As much as they may not like it, they don't control everybody. As long as he is in compliance, there really isn't anything they can do...
 
CFI A&P said:
As a controller, how do you handle IFR traffic that is in VMC while in the vicinity of an aircraft that is squawking 1200 while maneuvering in accordance with 91.303 ?

The reason I ask is that a buddy of mine encountered this recently. When he landed he had a message at the FBO desk to call the number for the local class charlie ATC when he lands... First time this has happened, he was 100% legal in the airplane, off of victor airways, at the legal altitude, etc...

Thoughts?
Click to expand...

i give traffic calls if warranted, out side of that i dont give a crap.
 
CFI A&P said:
The reason I ask is that a buddy of mine encountered this recently. When he landed he had a message at the FBO desk to call the number for the local class charlie ATC when he lands... First time this has happened, he was 100% legal in the airplane, off of victor airways, at the legal altitude, etc...
Click to expand...


It was probably just a friendly, courtesy message to call. Probably just wanted to ask that they give a head's up to approach as to what they would be doing next time, so they would know what to expect.

Telephone call doesn't mean the world is going to end, I've called approach before to talk about things that could be done better, but the freq isn't the time or place to discus.
 
Houston said:
After a lifetime listening to one side of a story only to later find out that there was some creative rationalization or major twisting of the truth, I think I'd want to hear more than one side of that story before I drew any conclusions.
Click to expand...

I agree completely, usually three sides to a story. Generally both parties involved have a different opinion and then the truth.

However the additional information that I should have put in the previous post is that he and I are based out of a non-towered airport about 15 miles north of this charlie airport. During that flight an inbound aircraft to the charlie reported to ATC that there was unreported traffic maneuvering nearby. This area is about 20 northwest of the charlie and 10 west of the non-towered airport. Makes a great place to run out for an aerobatic lesson with out having to go cross country to get in legal airspace. He has been flying in that sliver of legal aerobatic airspace five times a week for three years, and I am usually out there at least once a week with out any incident until this recent interaction. If he did a split S to catch up with an inbound Boeing or something of similar intelligence- he get's all the attention he deserved. But it was just his normal morning routine, and it has caught my attention because I also use this area for aerobatics, spin training and such.

Nothing has come of this, it happened a few weeks ago and already went through the chain to the FSDO and back. Regulations were not violated, no enforcement action against my buddy. He was legal, in a legal airplane, legal aerobatic area not a box, or waivered airspace. You can loop and roll anywhere that meets the requirements of 91.303. The outcome is really just a bunch of elevated blood pressure and wasted time not flying upside down.

My intention was to find out if anyone else here has encountered this situation before, and if so how was it handled?
 
Did your buddy call ATC? I can't help but think that the outcome of that call would resolve this question one way or another...
 
Since it's an undesignated area, I would assume it's probably never been discussed with ATC. New controller that just wants to know what's up maybe?

Grand Forks approach, for example, is aware of all the practice areas that UND has and specifically knows exactly where the boundaries for their 2 aerobatic practice areas are, which are very close to GFK relatively speaking.
 
I caught up with him today, the resolution is suggested that getting a code from them and they'll ask for his intentions. Such as I am maneuvering in this area from 2,000 to 4,000 or whatever block he needs.

It's been a few weeks and seems to be working for now. I guess I should be doing that too, to avoid future conflicts. I'll see how it works when I go up with a student next week.
 
My gut would have been to tell them to hit the road. From time to time, I have these issues with the airship, we will often operate underneath the floor of a Class B/C in order to make our workload less. Because let me tell you, when you are in a spot all day listening to traffic calls every 2 minutes for 8 hours, you wish you had a recorder and playback device to say "traffic in sight maintaining visual"
 
It depends... If he's operating in airspace waivered for aerobatic activity then the FAA kinda has him by the balls and he needs to play nice. If he's just out in class E and meeting all the requirements of 91.303, then he can squawk VFR and tell them to go kick rocks.

On a side note, we've had a couple complaints of high performance aerobatic aircraft (2000ft+ of vertical) set off the TCAS on some air carriers on an arrival over our area. I think is was due to the closure rate. The box goes up to 5500MSL and min IFR altitudes on that segment of the arrival is 8000MSL and we have a Victor with a MEA of 6000 that goes right through the box.
 
TwoTwoLeft said:
... we have a Victor with a MEA of 6000 that goes right through the box.
Click to expand...

As long as you're waivered, you're good if the box is hot... but I hope nobody ever does aerobatics there when the box is cold! That would cross 91.303(c) at a bad angle.

-Fox
 
Acrofox said:
As long as you're waivered, you're good if the box is hot... but I hope nobody ever does aerobatics there when the box is cold! That would cross 91.303(c) at a bad angle.

-Fox
Click to expand...

Oh yeah. We're waivered. SR-SS, opened every morning. Pilot and aircraft must also be on the waiver.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top