When do you really have permission to enter Bravo airspace?

EdFred said:
All I am saying is there are a ton of other regs that are written "except as provided in xx.xxx..." and 91.131 is not. No where in 91.131 does it say, "unless you are IFR" or "unless some other agency says so" or "except as provided in 91.181"
Click to expand...

I am comfortable that "Center" ATC is the ATC having Jurisdiction over the area and that a Class B clearance is implied with the IFR clearance. If you are not, then get the "Cleared through Bravo Airspace" on the tape.

Having said that, next time you are in or around Class B, and they have a spare minute, ASK them. I am sure they will be glad to give you an answer.

91.131 is more restrictive than 91.181. The way I read 91.131, there is no provision in it allowing for anyone except CVGs controllers to clear me through CVGs airspace. So, I can comply with 91.181, but I am technically not complying with 91.131 because there is nothing in 131 that says there are exceptions (except for the non applicable 129 in this case) by anything else.
Click to expand...

All this boils down to your interpretation of "The operator must receive an ATC clearance from the ATC facility having jurisdiction for that area before operating an aircraft in that area."

I say Center and an IFR clearance trumps CVG. You aren't convinced. Drop a dime and call the CVG or Indianapolis Supervisor and ask them what it means.

The same idea applies to Class C and Class D airspace when you get right down to it. If a flight path is going to encroach on those airspaces, you can bet that Center ATC has already coordinated with those respective controlling authorities before they let you enter.
 
Last edited:
Greg Bockelman said:
The same idea applies to Class C and Class D airspace when you get right down to it. If a flight path is going to encroach on those airspaces, you can bet that Center ATC has already coordinated with those respective controlling authorities before they let you enter.
Click to expand...

...and that point is proven everytime you fly an approach and are told to "Contact Tower on..."

All I ever hear is "Cleared to land, runway..."
 
Greg Bockelman said:
I am comfortable that "Center" ATC is the ATC having Jurisdiction over the area and that a Class B clearance is implied with the IFR clearance. If you are not, then get the "Cleared through Bravo Airspace" on the tape.

Having said that, next time you are in or around Class B, and they have a spare minute, ASK them. I am sure they will be glad to give you an answer.



All this boils down to your interpretation of "The operator must receive an ATC clearance from the ATC facility having jurisdiction for that area before operating an aircraft in that area."

I say Center and an IFR clearance trumps CVG. You aren't convinced. Drop a dime and call the CVG or Indianapolis Supervisor and ask them what it means.

The same idea applies to Class C and Class D airspace when you get right down to it. If a flight path is going to encroach on those airspaces, you can bet that Center ATC has already coordinated with those respective controlling authorities before they let you enter.
Click to expand...


C and D: As soon as they say "hello", I'm allowed into the airspace. 91.129, 91.130
B: Need to be granted permission to enter according to 91.131

I also didn't get clearance from ZID. I got it from the GRR TRACON. I understand the real life operations, but it is NOT what 91.131 says.
 
Ed,

Write a letter to Counsel... maybe you'll end up getting all the ATC controllers to clear you into the Bravo when you're IFR someday.
 
EdFred said:
I also didn't get clearance from ZID. I got it from the GRR TRACON. I understand the real life operations, but it is NOT what 91.131 says.
Click to expand...

That is a matter of opinion. I think it is covered by 91.131(a)(1). You don't. Until you resolve THAT for yourself, by whatever means, you are going to be in conflict. :yesnod:
 
So next time, I take off I can just ask GRR Tracon if am cleared into (pick a) Bravo airspace? 91.131 does not address VFR or IFR. Maybe I just want VFR flight following next time.
 
TMetzinger said:
Ed,

Write a letter to Counsel... maybe you'll end up getting all the ATC controllers to clear you into the Bravo when you're IFR someday.
Click to expand...

I am still waiting on them to answer letters from three and four years ago.
 
EdFred said:
C and D: As soon as they say "hello", I'm allowed into the airspace. 91.129, 91.130
B: Need to be granted permission to enter according to 91.131

I also didn't get clearance from ZID. I got it from the GRR TRACON. I understand the real life operations, but it is NOT what 91.131 says.
Click to expand...

Well, I don't think GRR is a controlling agency that can trump CVG Class B, but I DO think Indianapolis Center is. Ask the question as a point of information.

And from this point forward, I think you are arguing for the sake of argument. :D I can't add any more than I have already added.
 
Greg Bockelman said:
Well, I don't think GRR is a controlling agency that can trump CVG Class B, but I DO think Indianapolis Center is. Ask the question as a point of information.

And from this point forward, I think you are arguing for the sake of argument. :D I can't add any more than I have already added.
Click to expand...

I wasn't cleared by center, I was cleared by a TRACON 160 miles away. ZID I could buy since they are around and above CVG, but GRR...not even close to being the controlling agency. I do have a problem with the wording of 131
 
It seems to me that it's not up to us as pilots to tell the FAA which controllers have jurisdiction over which airspace. The FAA makes that decision, and as long as they continue to treat the agency originating an IFR clearance as having jurisdiction over any and all class B airspace involved, that's good enough for me.

Could the reg be better written? Certainly, but that applies to so many regs...

Having participated in union contract negotiations, I'm here to tell you that getting language with legal consequences to accurately reflect the intent is NOT EASY!
 
EdFred said:
So next time, I take off I can just ask GRR Tracon if am cleared into (pick a) Bravo airspace? 91.131 does not address VFR or IFR. Maybe I just want VFR flight following next time.
Click to expand...

VFR flight following does not provide you with a clearance that enters Class B airspace.
 
roncachamp said:
VFR flight following does not provide you with a clearance that enters Class B airspace.
Click to expand...

I never said it did, but if GRR can clear me into CVG airspace, they should be able to do it VFR or IFR. Again, the wording of 91.131 sucks.
 
IFR: You are on a clearance the whole time you are in controlled airspace (or the whole flight is illegal). Doesn't matter whether E, D, C, B, A or some sort of SUA. If you follow your clearance and the ATC instructions you get, you are good. Coordination between sectors is ATC's issue, not yours.

VFR: As a pilot I am going to make the assumption that if I hear the "magic words" I am ok, no matter what controller I am speaking with. If a Class D controller tells me I have been cleared into the Class B, I'm not going to respoind with, "oh yeah, read me yor LOI!" My working hypothesis is that the Class D controller is simply acting as a relay.

When I saw the title of this thread, I thought it was going to be another "do you really have to hear the 'magic words'" thread (a question I think the FAA Chief Counsel recently answered here http://www.faa.gov/about/office_org...nterpretations/data/interps/2010/Doremire.pdf)

But I guess that one can never underestimate the ability of a group of internet pilots to spend 52 posts dealing with answers in search of a question.
 
roncachamp said:
How would they do that VFR?
Click to expand...

Same way they did IFR?

There had some behind the scenes "is this going to be ok for you?" that I did not know about between GRR, AZO, SBN, ZID, CVG to allow GRR to give me permission to enter CVGs airspace. If it can be done IFR, then they should be able to do it for me VFR.

"7DS, maintin VFR at ot below 7,500, fly heading 170 (or whatever it would be), cleared into the the Cincinatti Bravo, contact Kalamazoo Approach on..."
 
Greg Bockelman said:
Out of curiosity, how did GRR do that? What was the verbiage?
Click to expand...

Well according the everyone here as soon as they said "as filed" I was cleared into the Bravo. So, if they did all the behind the scenes coordination IFR, they should be able to do it VFR and change it from "as filed" to "into the Bravo"

a phone call is a phone call (or however it's done) right?
 
EdFred said:
Well according the everyone here as soon as they said "as filed" I was cleared into the Bravo. So, if they did all the behind the scenes coordination IFR, they should be able to do it VFR and change it from "as filed" to "into the Bravo"

a phone call is a phone call (or however it's done) right?
Click to expand...

Ahh. I think I see PART of the problem. While GRR recited the clearance, they did not ISSUE the clearance. It came from Indy Center. Or whatever center covers GRR. So GRR wasn't the facility with jurisdiction, it was Indy Center.

IOW, GRR did NOT issue the clearance through CVG Class B.
 
Given how many reroutes I get with fairly consistent regularity, I'd suspect that there's not as much behind the scenes coordination as one might think.

This makes it interesting if you have a lost comms incident and then continue your flight "as filed" through areas where you clearly would not normally be allowed.
 
Well on this side of things, it appears that GRR did issue the clearance.

GRR is underneath ZAU airspace.
 
Ted DuPuis said:
This makes it interesting if you have a lost comms incident and then continue your flight "as filed" through areas where you clearly would not normally be allowed.
Click to expand...

I imagine if you were filed through areas where you "clearly would not normally be allowed" you would not get an "as filed" clearance. :eek:
 
EdFred said:
Same way they did IFR?

There had some behind the scenes "is this going to be ok for you?" that I did not know about between GRR, AZO, SBN, ZID, CVG to allow GRR to give me permission to enter CVGs airspace. If it can be done IFR, then they should be able to do it for me VFR.

"7DS, maintin VFR at ot below 7,500, fly heading 170 (or whatever it would be), cleared into the the Cincinatti Bravo, contact Kalamazoo Approach on..."
Click to expand...

If the host computer accepts your filed route of "direct," then you're good to go. Controllers usually don't coordinate your direct routing under IFR unless an LOA exists between the next facility which requires coordination for overflights or arrivals on routes other than those listed in the LOA.

Very rarely will controllers issue a pointout and receive approval from another controller for a VFR in underlying Class Bravo airspace, they will just initiate a radar handoff to the facility with Class Bravo jurisdiction and issue a frequency change. Note ATC pointouts and traffic advisories are two different things entirely.

We could go back and forth about this all day. The reg isn't written very well, but that doesn't mean you are not authorized to enter the Bravo under IFR. With the exception of speed restrictions and required equipment, flying through Bravo airspace under IFR is the same as flying through Echo airspace under IFR.
 
Greg Bockelman said:
I imagine if you were filed through areas where you "clearly would not normally be allowed" you would not get an "as filed" clearance. :eek:
Click to expand...
No, I've gotten cleared as filed where it would be impinging on O'Hare's Class B. Just north of Indianapolis I heard, as I expected, that I would need to be rerouted (though I was also given the option of descending, IIRC).
 
EdFred said:
There's a reason I left the IFR part out. However, there is nothing in part 91 that goes against 91.131. Technically I was never cleared by the controlling agency as stated in 91.131 which does not limit it to VFR or IFR.
Click to expand...

You were cleared ;) You just weren't privy to the conversation. The controlling agency, who owns the airspace, was most certainly contacted and gave an ok.. and then allowed the referring agency to handle you in transit.. I've transited Class B airspace with clearance for a few minutes and never actually talked to approach.

So.. think about WHY you wont typically hear "cleared into the bravo" when IFR and why you MUST hear it when VFR?

When IFR, your separation from other IFR aircraft is ATC's job. If weather permits (IFR plan in VMC, for instance) you still have a duty to keep an eye out in case ATC goofs up, but in theory, in IFR in IMC, the only folks up there are IFR, and ATC will keep the tin cans from running over each other.

As airspace goes, Class B is considered "positive control airspace". Every aircraft within Class B is ATC's responsibility to separate. Every single one. Which is why when VFR into Class B, the cloud clearance requirements are relaxed. In theory you dont need to keep an eye out for planes popping out of cloud banks because ATC and their radar scopes are keeping you and them safely apart.

If you are IFR, they already have you in the system. They are already separating you. You are part of their workload.

If you are VFR, they have to say "yea.. I can handle one more plane.. I can safely separate you positively from each and every other plane in my sector" and have to give you a clearance to come in. Accepting that clearance means that you, the PIC, acknowledge they are now primarily responsible for separating you from other traffic.
 
EdFred said:
Same way they did IFR?

There had some behind the scenes "is this going to be ok for you?" that I did not know about between GRR, AZO, SBN, ZID, CVG to allow GRR to give me permission to enter CVGs airspace. If it can be done IFR, then they should be able to do it for me VFR.

"7DS, maintin VFR at ot below 7,500, fly heading 170 (or whatever it would be), cleared into the the Cincinatti Bravo, contact Kalamazoo Approach on..."
Click to expand...

Of course, because IFR is the same as VFR, how silly of me.
 
EdFred said:
Same way they did IFR?
Click to expand...
The big difference is that VFR you're not already flying a clearance (flight following is not a clearance). GRR cannot "clear" you through the CVG airspace under VFR because they can't clear you anywhere beyond their own airspace.
 
EdFred said:
I never said it did, but if GRR can clear me into CVG airspace, they should be able to do it VFR or IFR.
Click to expand...

It seems to me that what controllers can and can't do is up to the FAA, and that is spelled out elsewhere than in Part 91.

Again, the wording of 91.131 sucks.
Click to expand...

So what are you going to do about it?
 
EdFred said:
Well according the everyone here as soon as they said "as filed" I was cleared into the Bravo.
Click to expand...

The words "as filed" have nothing to do with it, because the FAA still considers you to be cleared to operate in any class B airspace along your route of flight even if you don't get what you filed. Seems to me that the operative word is "cleared," combined with whatever routing they assign you.
 
Greg Bockelman said:
I imagine if you were filed through areas where you "clearly would not normally be allowed" you would not get an "as filed" clearance. :eek:
Click to expand...

I routinely get a clearance that would take me right through P-40. At the same place every time, I get a "Have new routing..."

If I lost comms before that point, I could certainly navigate around it knowing the reroute they'd be likely give me.
 
Ted DuPuis said:
I routinely get a clearance that would take me right through P-40. At the same place every time, I get a "Have new routing..."

If I lost comms before that point, I could certainly navigate around it knowing the reroute they'd be likely give me.
Click to expand...

Why do you keep filing that way if you know you'll be rerouted? Why don't you file that "new routing" instead?
 
roncachamp said:
Why do you keep filing that way if you know you'll be rerouted? Why don't you file that "new routing" instead?
Click to expand...

Because when you do, the main computer spits out the routing over P-40.

Keep in mind that P-40 only goes up so high and it used to be routine to fly over it at the appropriate altitudes when the overlying R-space was cold.

But it's rare to get that now, even when the site is cold they still route you around it.
 
roncachamp said:
Why do you keep filing that way if you know you'll be rerouted? Why don't you file that "new routing" instead?
Click to expand...

Because I know that people like you are sitting in front of their control screens, bored out of their minds, and I want to give you something to do. You don't need to thank me, it's just another public service I provide.

Turning the sarcasm off, it goes something like what Tim said.

It's actually R-5803 and R-5801 that I get very close to when I file direct from Williamsport (KIPT) to Rock Hill (KUZA). The standard re-route I get is SCAPE -> HRG -> MRB -> direct. That takes me between those little R-zones and P-40.

If I file that route in the first place, I'll get told (at the same place by the same controllers) "Have new routing advise ready to copy." Except then it won't be that routing that I like, it will be something like EMI BAL V93 PXT V16 RIC direct. That goes around the east side, is longer, and less convenient.

At that point, I start a polite conversation with the controller explaining why I want the routing I filed, and how if I filed direct that's what I'd normally get anyway. I've plugged it in both ways and the west side route is shorter. Were I coming from the Boston area, following the coast line to PXT or so might make sense, but not from Williamsport.

Summary: I've learned I'm getting a reroute anyway, so I might as well file direct and negotiate later. I'm going to have to one way or another.
 
Ted DuPuis said:
Summary: I've learned I'm getting a reroute anyway, so I might as well file direct and negotiate later. I'm going to have to one way or another.
Click to expand...

So when you file and are cleared direct expecting to get "SCAPE -> HRG -> MRB -> direct" along the way, do you set up the GPS flight plan for what you filed or what you expect?. :D
 
gismo said:
So when you file and are cleared direct expecting to get "SCAPE -> HRG -> MRB -> direct" along the way, do you set up the GPS flight plan for what you filed or what you expect?. :D
Click to expand...

Now that's a good question! :rofl:

To give a serious answer: I always set the GPS up for how I'm cleared. If it's a complicated routing with a lot of waypoints I'll only put the first, second, and last in to get started and then add the rest en-route.

What I theoretically ought to do for these routes I do regularly is actually take advantage of the feature to safe flight plans so I can just dial in the flight plan and take advantage of it. The reason I don't do it is that I find they so frequently change things up a bit that it's not worth it.

Whenever I'm heading west or north of here anyway, I just end up filing direct and get it 99% of the time. If I get a reroute, it's different every time so there's no point in trying to anticipate it.
 
Read the rules for the DC special zone, then go listen to what ATC does in the real world...
The controller's recording is what you will be judged by, not some sheethouse lawyers interpretation...



denny-o
 
While we are in discussion of Class B airspace I came across this today while researching something else.

www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/agc/pol_adjudication/agc200/interpretations/data/interps/2010/Doremire.pdf


 
Another hash from the Chief Counsel's office, hot on the heels of Mangiamele. Sounds like Lorelei Peter is saying a heading and altitude assignment from ATC in controlled airspace under the jurisdiction of the controller making the assignment is not an "ATC instruction." I'd like to see what happens when someone says "no" in that situation and a "deal" occurs.
 
Ron Levy said:
Another hash from the Chief Counsel's office, hot on the heels of Mangiamele. Sounds like Lorelei Peter is saying a heading and altitude assignment from ATC in controlled airspace under the jurisdiction of the controller making the assignment is not an "ATC instruction." I'd like to see what happens when someone says "no" in that situation and a "deal" occurs.
Click to expand...

If they're issued in airspace where ATC has responsibility for separation, then they are valid ATC instructions. Outside of such airspace a "deal" cannot occur.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top