Flight following cancelled while entering Class D

[IndyPilot]

So here is the scenario: I was flying south of Milwaukee this week at 3000 feet toward the Lake Michigan coastline towards the Chicago VFR corridor while talking to Milwaukee Approach on VFR flight following. Just as I entered the Kenosha class D airspace, Milwaukee advised me that I was leaving their airspace and needed to squawk 1200. Keep in mind I was at 3000 and the top of Kenosha is 3200. I advised approach that I was just entering class D and they left me with the comment that I better be talking to tower.

Does this seem wrong to anyone? Can they do this and would I be responsible for violating class D since I had not had a chance to coordinate with Kenosha tower first?

By the way, nothing came of it...I'm just curious.

[surreal1221]

No, it doesn't sound wrong.

What it sounds like happened is approach didn't communicate you with the tower, or tower didn't approve a point out to approach.

Leaving approach to release you back to VFR, and for you to take the initiative to contact TWR for further flight following.

Sounds silly, but sometimes these things happen.

And no, I wouldn't expect any violation as you were in communication with "ATC" while not the TWR, but you were in communication.

[falconvalley]

Milwaukee has a habit of having nothing to do with Kenosha except for IFR and VFR practice approaches. There are a couple of controllers here who don't really care for VFR aircraft.

[MusketeerMan]

This sounds a little familiar to what we have in NorCal here with Travis Approach when going into Napa airport. Travis Approach will let you fly right into Napa's class D without handing you off to the tower or giving you any advisories. Apparently there is no LOA (letter of agreement) between the 2, so Travis doesn't give a rip if you bust it...it's up to you to ask for a frequency change before you enter the delta.

[queeno]

Originally Posted by IndyPilot

So here is the scenario: I was flying south of Milwaukee this week at 3000 feet toward the Lake Michigan coastline towards the Chicago VFR corridor while talking to Milwaukee Approach on VFR flight following. Just as I entered the Kenosha class D airspace, Milwaukee advised me that I was leaving their airspace and needed to squawk 1200. Keep in mind I was at 3000 and the top of Kenosha is 3200. I advised approach that I was just entering class D and they left me with the comment that I better be talking to tower.

Does this seem wrong to anyone? Can they do this and would I be responsible for violating class D since I had not had a chance to coordinate with Kenosha tower first?

By the way, nothing came of it...I'm just curious.

yes the controller was wrong, when you are on VFR FF and the controller dose not tell you to stay clear of the class D then its the controllers job to call the tower for your overflight, if the controller dose not want to do this then they should terminate FF with enough time for you to call the class D controller,dumping a aircraft on the boundry on another controllers airspace like this is bull s@@t. this controller was being lazy and if something did come of it the controller would be at fault. but it dose not suprise me that it was MKE they have a lot of weak sisters working there.

[JimmyK]

Originally Posted by surreal1221

...or tower didn't approve a point out to approach.

Point Out is a radar term used when one radar controller wants to transfer radar contact to another if the aircraft will or may enter the other controllers airspace or other protected airspace but communications will not be transfered. The term used to descride what were talking about here is APREQ, which is short for Approval Request. Workload permitting, a controller providing VFR flight following should be able to call the tower and get an APREQ for the aircraft to proceed through the class D surface area thus saving the pilot from having to call and get the permission themselves.

[PWK_Pilot]

I have flown that route a few times recently- I took some friends the other day to MKE and then flew S[the 2500ft corridor] over the city of Chicago. 119.65 is almost always the freq I get after departing and for VFR flightfollowing. It is normal for ATC to tell you " you are 5nm E of ENW- you are leaving my airspace- 1200 etc....." next time try going to 120.55[chicago dep] for further following and they will keep you till around the bahai temple and then you should go to 119.45[MDW app] and they will take you[most of the time- I have once got an "unable VFR"] past the city and further S of GYY.

hope that helps and be safe

PilotPete
based at PWK

[exleardriver]

i'm not so sure the controller was wrong. if you were simply using vfr flight following, then you were selecting your own vfr altitude, correct? that's your prerogative. it was simply time for him to tell you to squawk vfr now that you were leaving his airspace. the fact that you were going to enter the class d at that altitude was not his fault. you are expected to know that you should probably be at 3,500 feet to clear the class d top..that's not the prior controller's job, hence why he said 'you'd better be talking to tower then' when you advised him. it's not the responsibility of the controller to advise when you're about to bust airspace outside of his jurisdiction..although he could do so if he had the time and desire to do so. why not have selected the vfr altitude of 3,500 in the first place? if you wanted/needed to remain at 3,000 for some reason, when he tried to cancel you, you could have asked if he could arrange a transition through the class d..but at the last second, he probably wouldn't. sometimes you have to ask for the next transition when on vfr flight following..being on it doesn't guarantee that controller to controller will hand you off to your destination. hope this helps. if unsure that they will..then ask. and ask with plenty of time for them to handle the transition.

[queeno]

you need to read the 7110.65, if a controller is providing VFR FF and dose not tell the pilot to remain clear of class D then its the controllers job to coordinate the over flight with the tower, not the pilots ,and to have a pilot on the edge of class D airspace and to dump them off is Bull S$$T and being laze.in this case the controller could have been given an airspace deal.your giving wrong info on this ive been controlling the last 27 years so i know.

[Wolfy]

Originally Posted by MusketeerMan

This sounds a little familiar to what we have in NorCal here with Travis Approach when going into Napa airport. Travis Approach will let you fly right into Napa's class D without handing you off to the tower or giving you any advisories. Apparently there is no LOA (letter of agreement) between the 2, so Travis doesn't give a rip if you bust it...it's up to you to ask for a frequency change before you enter the delta.

^Reason I don't descend in to Skypark until over Scagg's VOR.

[exleardriver]

Originally Posted by queeno

you need to read the 7110.65, if a controller is providing VFR FF and dose not tell the pilot to remain clear of class D then its the controllers job to coordinate the over flight with the tower, not the pilots ,and to have a pilot on the edge of class D airspace and to dump them off is Bull S$$T and being laze.in this case the controller could have been given an airspace deal.your giving wrong info on this ive been controlling the last 27 years so i know.

i can perhaps half agree with you. without a copy of 7110.65 in front of me, i'll assume that after '27 years' of controlling that your atc vfr ff handling information is correct...but that still doesn't relieve the pilot of his/her responsibility to ensure that he/she is not in violation should the controller err for whatever reason.

for example, a controller might issue me a vector while conducting practice instrument approaches, vfr, which would lead me into clouds. it's my responsibility to refuse the vector, possibly request a local ifr clearance or request/suggest a suitable heading that will prevent me from violating applicable cloud clearance requirements of 91.155(a). i cannot simply fly into clouds under vfr just because a controller assigns me a heading. it's my responsibility to refuse the heading and provide a basis for refusal. by the same token, if the controller has dropped the ball, and i recognize it, in this case i need to climb above if i have not received a clearance to transition this class d airspace per 91.129(c)(1).

[queeno]

a clrn in not needed to enter class D or class C airspace only radio contact and a radar controller dose not have to tell a pilot on VFR FF that thay can fly through class D its the CONTROLLERS JOB UNDER THE RULES TO COORDINATE THE OVER FLIGHT WITH THE TOWER, IF THE CONTROLLER DOSENT WANT TO MAKE THIS CALL THEN THEY NEED TO TELL THE PILOT TO REMAIN CLEAR OFF THAT AIRSPACE.if the radar controller drops the ball its the controllers falt not the pilot, your using apples and oranges with you vfr vector and clouds clrn, its 2 diffrent events.heres the wording from the 7110.65.

2-1-16. SURFACE AREAS
a. Coordinate with the appropriate nonapproach control tower on an individual aircraft basis before issuing a clearance which would require flight within a surface area for which the tower has responsibility unless otherwise specified in a letter of agreement.
REFERENCE-
FAAO 7210.3, Letters of Agreement, Para 4-3-1.
14 CFR Section 91.127, Operating on or in the Vicinity of an Airport in Class E Airspace.
P/CG Term- Surface Area.
b. Coordinate with the appropriate control tower for transit authorization when you are providing radar traffic advisory service to an aircraft that will enter another facility's airspace.
NOTE-
The pilot is not expected to obtain his/her own authorization through each area when in contact with a radar facility.
c. Transfer communications to the appropriate facility, if required, prior to operation within a surface area for which the tower has responsibility.
REFERENCE-
FAAO 7110.65, Radio Communications Transfer, Para 2-1-17.
FAAO 7110.65, Surface Area Restrictions, Para 3-1-11.
FAAO 7110.65, Application, Para 7-6-1.
14 CFR Section 91.129, Operations in Class D Airspace.

i think 2-1-16b and the note says it all .

[exleardriver]

Originally Posted by queeno

a clrn in not needed to enter class D or class C airspace only radio contact and a radar controller dose not have to tell a pilot on VFR FF that thay can fly through class D its the CONTROLLERS JOB UNDER THE RULES TO COORDINATE THE OVER FLIGHT WITH THE TOWER, IF THE CONTROLLER DOSENT WANT TO MAKE THIS CALL THEN THEY NEED TO TELL THE PILOT TO REMAIN CLEAR OFF THAT AIRSPACE.if the radar controller drops the ball its the controllers falt not the pilot, your using apples and oranges with you vfr vector and clouds clrn, its 2 diffrent events.heres the wording from the 7110.65.

2-1-16. SURFACE AREAS
a. Coordinate with the appropriate nonapproach control tower on an individual aircraft basis before issuing a clearance which would require flight within a surface area for which the tower has responsibility unless otherwise specified in a letter of agreement.
REFERENCE-
FAAO 7210.3, Letters of Agreement, Para 4-3-1.
14 CFR Section 91.127, Operating on or in the Vicinity of an Airport in Class E Airspace.
P/CG Term- Surface Area.
b. Coordinate with the appropriate control tower for transit authorization when you are providing radar traffic advisory service to an aircraft that will enter another facility's airspace.
NOTE-
The pilot is not expected to obtain his/her own authorization through each area when in contact with a radar facility.
c. Transfer communications to the appropriate facility, if required, prior to operation within a surface area for which the tower has responsibility.
REFERENCE-
FAAO 7110.65, Radio Communications Transfer, Para 2-1-17.
FAAO 7110.65, Surface Area Restrictions, Para 3-1-11.
FAAO 7110.65, Application, Para 7-6-1.
14 CFR Section 91.129, Operations in Class D Airspace.

i think 2-1-16b and the note says it all .

correct. a clearance is not required prior to entering into class d, poor word choice on my part. establishing communications prior to entering, the actual wording of 91.129(c)(1) is required however. for whatever reason, according to the original poster, he was told frequency change approved ("they left me with the comment that i better be talking to tower") and to squawk vfr. the pilot could have simply climbed the couple hundred feet to get above and later filled out a nasa form per 91.25 and explained the issue. no enforcement action would have been taken, and perhaps the controller's action would be investigated. the poster's remark 'just as i entered' is a subjective one. it could possibly be that he had not yet in fact crossed and had time to establish two-way communications, unless he/she had a mapping gps, which showed his 'precise' position relative to the class d boundary.

The pilot is not expected to obtain his/her own authorization through each area when in contact with a radar facility.

as he/she was no longer in contact, the approach controller ultimately placed the burden of contacting the class d tower in this case squarely on the pilot. thank you for posting from 7110.65..it is helpful to read it. i might have googled it last night when i posted, but it was the middle of the night and i was tired. at any rate, assuming the pilot actually did request vfr ff and has accurately described the events that transpired, my only disagreement at this point is an argument that the pilot should take no action. whether he/she makes an effort to remain clear or contact the class d tower after entering is his/her call. the pilot must do one or the other..and then cover their self by promptly filling out a nasa form upon landing if wanting to make sure that he/she does not become violated for a mishandling of an airspace transition for which the pilot was not directly at fault.

[queeno]

i give up you win

[exleardriver]

Originally Posted by queeno

i give up you win

hi queeno..this has been a good, thought-provoking discussion of this scenario. i hope you've taken no offense, as i've meant none nor taken any myself. your perspective reshaped my original stance on this issue. my hope, as a professional flight instructor, is that other pilots who read such a thread would at the very least realize that a controller has a busy, difficult job, must likewise make quick decisions as pilots and don't necessarily always make the best ones on a given moment. same, pilots aren't ever relieved of their own responsibility to make the most prudent decisions as well 'in the moment'.

'two wrongs don't make a right' might be applicable here. not sure where you've felt i completely disagreed with you. as a controller, what action should the pilot have taken once approach told him to squawk vfr? we both agree i'd think that in the air is not the time and place for pilots/controllers to debate regulations..that call should be handled over the telephone. should the pilot have refused the vfr ff cancellation and insisted on the controller handling the transition or switched to the class d tower and requested transition, knowingly already in that airspace so far as he/she knew? sounds like a good example for filling out a nasa form, just to be sure, in any case. your perspective as a controller is certainly why we're here. this is a sub-forum for learning from controllers. i've debated with you, and as such, have learned something.