VFR Class B question

R

Roadblock

Well-Known Member
Hey guys. I heard a new one on the radio yesterday, and I'm hoping someone can clarify for me.

I took off out of KSGR having requested flight following through the VFR corridor to the east (Got a squawk code from the tower, before calling approach). On my first call to approach, I'm told "Climb and maintain VFR at or below 2000', cleared into the class Bravo airspace, and fly heading 040, vectors to join I-10 eastbound". I read it back, turn to 040, and level off at 2000'.

A couple of minutes later, he hands me to another approach frequency, who also tells me "maintain 2000, cleared into the class Bravo". Nothing out of the ordinary so far, other than getting passed off to another frequency earlier than usual.

A couple of minutes after that, I hear "Descend below class Bravo". I'm right at 2000' (which is the floor of the Class B in the VFR corridor), and I don't know quite what to make of this so I say "descending below the class Bravo", and descended to 1800'. In hindsight, I probably should have asked for clarification, since I wasn't really sure exactly what he was asking.

So my question is: does anyone know why he said it the way he said it?


Thanks!
 
Yeah I agree that is very odd. I would have just said "leaving the class Bravo" and descended like 20 ft.

Thats weird though, I'm interested in this one....
 
justind0805 said:
Yeah I agree that is very odd. I would have just said "leaving the class Bravo" and descended like 20 ft.

Thats weird though, I'm interested in this one....
Click to expand...

Yeah, this is sort of what went through my mind as well... I'm wondering, "does he have an altitude in mind, or does he just want to ensure I'm absolutely no higher than 2000?". Generally, even VFR, they aren't shy about assigning altitudes and headings. This just struck me as strange. I was hoping perhaps there is a controller who frequents these boards who might have some insight.
 
its easy in class B there is a seperation standard between VFR and IFR A/C, if the VFR is out of the B no seperation required. controller had traffic and didnt want to have to provide seperation so had you decend out of the B, even if its only a foot out of the B it make a diffrance.
 
This is a Grey area and I would have to say since flight following wasn't canceled and the vfr a/c had been radar identified for vfr flight following, separation would still be required. I can see a future incident where the controller is blamed for not providing the required separation since the a/c wasn't advised to squawk a dozen...

PHRASEOLOGY-
LEAVING (name) BRAVO AIRSPACE,

and as appropriate,

RESUME OWN NAVIGATION, REMAIN THIS FREQUENCY FOR TRAFFIC ADVISORIES, RADAR SERVICE TERMINATED, SQUAWK ONE TWO ZERO ZERO.
 
Also keep in mind that VFR flight following is only allowed on a workload permitting basis since the controller's main priority is handling IFR traffic. So for whatever reason he had you descend below class bravo means that he might be getting to busy to accommodate you. I would say at that point your best off to just cancel flight following and fly the corridor.
 
Here ya go.

4. ATC may assign altitudes to VFR aircraft that do not conform to 14 CFR Section 91.159. "RESUME APPROPRIATE VFR ALTITUDES" will be broadcast when the altitude assignment is no longer needed for separation or when leaving Class B airspace. Pilots must return to an altitude that conforms to 14 CFR Section 91.159.

f. Proximity operations. VFR aircraft operating in proximity to Class B airspace are cautioned against operating too closely to the boundaries, especially where the floor of the Class B airspace is 3,000 feet or less above the surface or where VFR cruise altitudes are at or near the floor of higher levels. Observance of this precaution will reduce the potential for encountering an aircraft operating at the altitudes of Class B floors. Additionally, VFR aircraft are encouraged to utilize the VFR Planning Chart as a tool for planning flight in proximity to Class B airspace. Charted VFR Flyway Planning Charts are published on the back of the existing VFR Terminal Area Charts.
 
sector15 said:
This is a Grey area and I would have to say since flight following wasn't canceled and the vfr a/c had been radar identified for vfr flight following, separation would still be required. I can see a future incident where the controller is blamed for not providing the required separation since the a/c wasn't advised to squawk a dozen...

PHRASEOLOGY-
LEAVING (name) BRAVO AIRSPACE,

and as appropriate,

RESUME OWN NAVIGATION, REMAIN THIS FREQUENCY FOR TRAFFIC ADVISORIES, RADAR SERVICE TERMINATED, SQUAWK ONE TWO ZERO ZERO.
Click to expand...

there is NO seperation standard for VFR aircraft in class E airspace with IFR aircraft in class B period only traffic advisories are required. as long as the VFR is not in B airspace there is no 7110 seperation, only if both are in the class B is there a 7110 seperation standard.
 
queeno,
am I understanding you to be saying - that when you have an established radar contact and communications with both an ifr and vfr aircraft that your saying just because you slide the vfr a/c just below class B airspace you no longer have a ifr/vfr aircraft separation requirement or any responsibility? You and I both know that unless you've canceled the flight following .65 states 500' vertical unless a heavy. In the original post, vfr flight following was never canceled and as such it must be assumed the controller was capable of providing advisories, which could of included simply telling the vfr a/c to "maintain visual separation from xyz aircraft" even though the vfr aircraft was lowered to an altitude just below class B airspace. This phraseology would of relieved the controller of his vertical separation liability.

7-9-2. VFR AIRCRAFT IN CLASS B AIRSPACE

a. VFR aircraft must obtain an ATC clearance to operate in Class B airspace.

REFERENCE-
FAAO JO 7110.65, Para 2-1-18, Operational Requests.
FAAO JO 7110.65, Para 2-4-22, Airspace Classes.

PHRASEOLOGY-
CLEARED THROUGH/TO ENTER/OUT OF BRAVO AIRSPACE,

and as appropriate,

VIA (route). MAINTAIN (altitude) WHILE IN BRAVO AIRSPACE.

or

CLEARED AS REQUESTED.

(Additional instructions, as necessary.)

REMAIN OUTSIDE BRAVO AIRSPACE. (When necessary, reason and/or additional instructions.)

NOTE-
1. Assignment of radar headings, routes, or altitudes is based on the provision that a pilot operating in accordance with VFR is expected to advise ATC if compliance will cause violation of any part of the CFR.

2. Separation and sequencing for VFR aircraft is dependent upon radar. Efforts should be made to segregate VFR traffic from IFR traffic flows when a radar outage occurs.

b. Approve/deny requests from VFR aircraft to operate in Class B airspace based on workload, operational limitations and traffic conditions.

c. Inform the pilot when to expect further clearance when VFR aircraft are held either inside or outside Class B airspace.

d. Inform VFR aircraft when leaving Class B airspace
 
Good replies guys. I thought that it might have had something to do with separation with IFR aircraft, but I couldn't hear him talking to anyone but me, and a couple of SWA jets landing at KHOU (I had passed right under the flow maybe 10 minutes prior to the "descend below bravo" call), but it very well could have been traffic on another frequency.

Thanks again for the replies, fellas!
 
THERE IS NO SEPERATION STANDERD IN THE 7110 FOR VFR A/C IN CLASS E AIRSPACE WITH AN IFR A/C IN CLASS B AIRSPACE, the 500' requirement is only for a VFR operation on a class B clearence in class B airspace. once the aircraft is cleared out of the B and is in class E there is no seperation standard, it dose not matter if the aircraft is getting radar services or not. once the aircraft is in class E airspace you are ONLY REQUIRED to give traffic advisories and suggested heading, safety alerts etc.


Service Area- Terminal​
7-9-1. APPLICATION​
Apply Class B services and procedures WITHIN the
designated Class B airspace.​




 
queeno said:
THERE IS NO SEPERATION STANDERD IN THE 7110 FOR VFR A/C IN CLASS E AIRSPACE WITH AN IFR A/C IN CLASS B AIRSPACE, the 500' requirement is only for a VFR operation on a class B clearence in class B airspace. once the aircraft is cleared out of the B and is in class E there is no seperation standard, it dose not matter if the aircraft is getting radar services or not. once the aircraft is in class E airspace you are ONLY REQUIRED to give traffic advisories and suggested heading, safety alerts etc.



Service Area- Terminal​
7-9-1. APPLICATION​
Apply Class B services and procedures WITHIN the
designated Class B airspace.​




Click to expand...

+1
 
it must be an east coast thing. simply sliding an aircraft out of your airspace while still being in contact with and radar identified is no excuse for not providing advisories. If you don't want to handle the aircraft simply state unable vfr flight following and send them on their way, instead of providing the pilot with a false sense of security.

NOTE:
Because there are many variables involved, it is virtually
impossible to develop a standard list of duty priorities that
would apply uniformly to every conceivable situation.
Each set of circumstances must be evaluated on its own
merit, and when more than one action is required,
controllers shall exercise their best judgment based on the
facts and circumstances known to them. That action which
is most critical from a safety standpoint is performed first.

2-1-21. TRAFFIC ADVISORIES
Unless an aircraft is operating within Class A airspace
or omission is requested by the pilot, issue traffic
advisories to all aircraft (IFR or VFR) on your
frequency when, in your judgment, their proximity
may diminish to less than the applicable separation
minima. Where no separation minima applies, such
as for VFR aircraft outside of Class B/Class C
airspace, or a TRSA, issue traffic advisories to those
aircraft on your frequency when in your judgment
their proximity warrants it. Provide this service as
follows:
a. To radar identified aircraft
 
sector15 said:
queeno,
am I understanding you to be saying - that when you have an established radar contact and communications with both an ifr and vfr aircraft that your saying just because you slide the vfr a/c just below class B airspace you no longer have a ifr/vfr aircraft separation requirement or any responsibility? You and I both know that unless you've canceled the flight following .65 states 500' vertical unless a heavy. In the original post, vfr flight following was never canceled and as such it must be assumed the controller was capable of providing advisories, which could of included simply telling the vfr a/c to "maintain visual separation from xyz aircraft" even though the vfr aircraft was lowered to an altitude just below class B airspace. This phraseology would of relieved the controller of his vertical separation liability.
Click to expand...

This isn't accurate. Outside the confines of the Class B (so, within class E, in the OP's example), there aren't prescribed minima for VFR-VFR or VFR-IFR separation, regardless of who has flight following. So, only within the class B do you need your target resolution, or 500ft, or 1.5 miles for larger aircraft etc. Telling the VFR to get out of the Bravo and into Echo airspace relieves the controller from having to provide prescribed separation, which could help the VFR continue to their destination without undue delay.

sector15 said:
it must be an east coast thing. simply sliding an aircraft out of your airspace while still being in contact with and radar identified is no excuse for not providing advisories. If you don't want to handle the aircraft simply state unable vfr flight following and send them on their way, instead of providing the pilot with a false sense of security.
Click to expand...

Wait... Who said anything about canceling advisories? We're still talking about issuing traffic and advisories, but removing the specific separation minima requirement. You see the difference between having to maintain 1.5 miles lateral, or 500ft vertical, while issuing traffic; vs. NO separation required, and issuing traffic, right? If the controllers intent was to cancel advisories altogether, then they should tell the VFR to exit the bravo AND terminate their radar service. This technique being discussed is about removing the specific radar separation requirement, while still being able to retain the aircraft for flight following advisories.
 
I understand why the controller did what he did, but in this case no advisory was issued. it's obvious we was lowered for traffic and that's where I have a problem. to not maintain vertical separation between two aircraft under your control is asking for problems regardless of how you want to interpret .65

Controllers must exercise their best judgment based on the facts and circumstances known to them. That action which is most critical from a safety standpoint is performed first.

You want to believe that just because you have them lowered into E airspace they are safe and not your problem, but I can assure you if something happens because you did this and fail to issue the correct advisories you'll be in a world of hurt.

Concluding the one-day trip to five locales, the chartered Westwind 1124A jet was in a landing pattern for John Wayne Airport in Irvine when it plunged to the ground and exploded in flames shortly after sundown. Federal investigators theorized that the plots lost control when the plane flew into tornadolike "wake turbulence" downdrafts from a Boeing 757 landing just ahead of it.

Investigators questioned why the Westwind's pilots were flying below the landing path of the larger plane, contrary to standard practice,
 
FM_Weasel said:
This isn't accurate. Outside the confines of the Class B (so, within class E, in the OP's example), there aren't prescribed minima for VFR-VFR or VFR-IFR separation, regardless of who has flight following. So, only within the class B do you need your target resolution, or 500ft, or 1.5 miles for larger aircraft etc. Telling the VFR to get out of the Bravo and into Echo airspace relieves the controller from having to provide prescribed separation, which could help the VFR continue to their destination without undue delay.



Wait... Who said anything about canceling advisories? We're still talking about issuing traffic and advisories, but removing the specific separation minima requirement. You see the difference between having to maintain 1.5 miles lateral, or 500ft vertical, while issuing traffic; vs. NO separation required, and issuing traffic, right? If the controllers intent was to cancel advisories altogether, then they should tell the VFR to exit the bravo AND terminate their radar service. This technique being discussed is about removing the specific radar separation requirement, while still being able to retain the aircraft for flight following advisories.
Click to expand...

:yeahthat:
well at leat 2 of us understand , my head is starting to hurt.

OG
 
sector15 said:
I understand why the controller did what he did, but in this case no advisory was issued. it's obvious we was lowered for traffic and that's where I have a problem. to not maintain vertical separation between two aircraft under your control is asking for problems regardless of how you want to interpret .65
Click to expand...

You're continuing to make huge jumps in logic and I'm having a hard time following you. First, you said that the separation was required, and we've now established that it's not. Now, you're saying the operation wasn't safe because a traffic advisory wasn't issued, but you have NO IDEA what the traffic picture was at the time. The OP didn't say he was running close to another aircraft, or had a near mid air, or anything so drastic as the catastrophic pictures you're painting. A traffic advisory may not have been issued because there wasn't exactly any traffic to call at that point.

sector15 said:
You want to believe that just because you have them lowered into E airspace they are safe and not your problem, but I can assure you if something happens because you did this and fail to issue the correct advisories you'll be in a world of hurt.
Click to expand...

No one here has said anything contrary, and the fact that I have to explain that to you is ridiculous. Removing the requirement/hassle of having to apply radar minima does not preclude us from preventing aircraft from hitting each other. Nobody here is claiming otherwise.
 
sector15 said:
it must be an east coast thing. simply sliding an aircraft out of your airspace while still being in contact with and radar identified is no excuse for not providing advisories. If you don't want to handle the aircraft simply state unable vfr flight following and send them on their way, instead of providing the pilot with a false sense of security.
Click to expand...

From what I read, he was still getting flight following, but whatever controller was working him just didn't want to provide him separation services any longer. I don't find this any different that vectoring an aircraft out of the way that is flying right up an arrival or departure corridor. If it makes his job easier (it would be really crummy to have a deal with a VFR!) to ask him to descend below the class B so he can concentrate on separating other traffic, then so be it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top