Missed Approach and Class B Airspace

[BillTIZ]

At a pilot meeting this question came up. What is your answer?

Practice approach, under the hood, in VFR conditions, CFII is the safety pilot. Talking to and radar identified by Approach Control. Request the RNAV approach with full published missed approach procedure to include two turns in holding at the missed holding point. Clearance received from ATC. "Cleared RNAV Rwy 35 Approach, Maintain VFR, contact tower"

The initial leg of the approach requires an at or above 3000MSL to a fix about 1nm outside of Class B floor at 3000MSL, turn and start descent. The missed approach requires a climb to 3000MSL and comes within 2nm laterally of Class B 2000MSL floor. The floor of the overlying Class B along the missed approach course is 3000MSL, does this clearance to execute the approach include permission to "enter the Class B" during the missed approach?

I have my opinion which I will hold until later. My opinion differed from the CFII conducting the lesson. I was not the student.

 

[jsstevens]

The controller didn’t say the magic words:”Cleared into class B”. My answer is no.

 

[flyingron]

A practice approach with the words "cleared for the approach" is an IFR procedure (you darned well be legal to operate IFR), and that clearance is good enough for class B airspace.

If you area a VFR pilot requesting practice approaches, you should have been told "MAINTAIN VFR, PRACTICE APPROACH APPROVED, NO SEPARATION SERVICES PROVIDED." You do not have a clearance and are not authorized to enter class B airspace either on the approach or missed.

If the controller said what you said, it was probably a bad clearance.

 

[flyingron]

The controller didn’t say the magic words:”Cleared into class B”. My answer is no.

Wrong answer. IFR aircraft do not need any magic words other than "CLEARED." VFR conditions do not negate that a place can be operating under Instrument Flight Rules.

 

[jsstevens]

Wrong answer. IFR aircraft do not need any magic words other than "CLEARED." VFR conditions do not negate that a place can be operating under Instrument Flight Rules.

but the clearance included “Maintain VFR” so are they not still VFR?

 

[BillTIZ]

I agree with FlyingRon, it was a poor clearance. The controller did not use all the "proper" terminology. According to the way the scenario was explained, the controller said "Cleared for the approach, not cleared for the practice approach. He did say, "Maintain VFR", he did not say, "no traffic separation provided".

My answer was, no class B approval received, remain clear. The CFII felt he did have Class B clearance as the request included the full missed approach procedure with holding. But, CYA, the CFII did stop the climb at 2700MSL until out from under the Class B shelf. Terrain or towers were not a factor.

There was no discussion that the flight went back to "approach control frequency" or that he retained the squawk code during the missed approach after leaving Class D airspace. Getting back to approach frequency could have quickly resolved the airspace question.

 

[Hang 4]

Filed and flying under IFR flight plan or VFR? - OK the former, I'd expect a "cleared into the Bravo" for the latter.

 

[flyingron]

but the clearance included “Maintain VFR” so are they not still VFR?

It's a bad clearance. Cleared for the approach should not be accompanied with MAINTAIN VFR.

 

[Roller]

The controller didn’t say the magic words:”Cleared into class B”. My answer is no.

If it’s a VFR practice aprch and you’re not on a IFR clearance

You’re just another VFR airplane

 

[asicer]

Hm, so the initial leg dives below the class B floor? That's not a problem. The missed is 3000MSL, which happens to also be the floor of the overlying class B? "My altimeter says 2999MSL".

ATC did not issue a "CRAFT", so probably not IFR.

 

[bentmettle]

but the clearance included “Maintain VFR” so are they not still VFR?

locally, maintain VFR seems to mean "I don't care what altitude you are at, don't hit anything", particularly with respect to going missed.
And based on the timing of when it was used - as the instruction for the missed, I think it's meant in exactly that manner.

It may be a bad clearance, but it doesn't seem to be uncommon, either.

I'd probably be asking for an explicit Bravo clearance en route to the missed.

 

[flyingron]

Hm, so the initial leg dives below the class B floor? That's not a problem. The missed is 3000MSL, which happens to also be the floor of the overlying class B? "My altimeter says 2999MSL".

ATC did not issue a "CRAFT", so probably not IFR.

ATC does not need to issue a CRAFT for an IFR clearance any more than you are required to issue a full flight plan.

27K: Looks like CJR is IFR, can I get IFR at 6000?
ZIN: Cleared direct Culpeper, maintain 6000.

 

[RussR]

In my day job, I fly for FAA Flight Check. When we do inspections at airports in and near Class B airspace, it is some of the most coordinated work I've ever seen. We have people collocated with the FAA Air Traffic System Command Center. Our schedulers coordinate with ATC on a daily basis. I call ATC on the phone prior to takeoff. ATC ensures a supervisor is on duty during our inspection as an extra set of eyes. They receive briefing sheets of our routes, procedures, and altitudes.

We operate VFR to the maximum extent possible. When flying approaches, we usually receive either "cleared for the approach", "approved as requested", or sometimes "practice approach approved".

In EVERY case, even with all the coordination and attention, we STILL make sure to hear the words "cleared into the Bravo". Because unless you're IFR, it's required. Nothing is assumed.

"Cleared for the approach, maintain VFR" regardless of whether it's correct phraseology, certainly doesn't make you IFR due to the very wording of the clearance.

 

[Salty]

If you are “cleared for the approach, maintain vfr”, is it ok to fly the approach below the minimum altitudes defined in the approach?

 

[bentmettle]

If you are “cleared for the approach, maintain vfr”, is it ok to fly the approach below the minimum altitudes defined in the approach?

I'd work backwards - if the purpose of flying the approach is to be able to log it, which of the segments are required to be flown as published to be loggable?

The missed isn't required to be loggable. But Most of the other segments are, so you don't get a ton of flexibility.

This isn't a primary source, but it's readable

FAA Clarifies Logging of Instrument Approach Procedures

“What constitutes a ‘loggable’ instrument approach?” is the question that the FAA addressed in a recent InFo statement. The statement was issued after recent requests for clarification and legal interpretations concerning the six instrument approach procedures (IAPs) that an instrument rated...

pilot-protection-services.aopa.org

 

[bbchien]

Note the controller did NOT say, "Cleared for the option".

 

[bentmettle]

The approach controller, if this was an approach into a controlled field, isn’t giving a landing clearance. So one wouldn’t ever expect to have them mention option. Or of I misunderstand how you mean it?

 

[asicer]

ATC does not need to issue a CRAFT for an IFR clearance any more than you are required to issue a full flight plan.

27K: Looks like CJR is IFR, can I get IFR at 6000?
ZIN: Cleared direct Culpeper, maintain 6000.

The times I've said that they've given me a CRAFT.

Also, I did mention "probably" in my post.

 

[midlifeflyer]

The times I've said that they've given me a CRAFT.

Also, I did mention "probably" in my post.

When we say “not a CRAFT” are we referring to the mnemonic or the content?

 

[Larry in TN]

An IFR clearance would include "Cleared to [destination or clearance limit fix] via [routing]. Maintain [altitude]"

 

[asicer]

When we say “not a CRAFT” are we referring to the mnemonic or the content?

For me, I was on VFR flight following when I noticed there were some clouds in my way. Rather than go around them I keyed up the mic, explained the clouds in the way and asked for an approach. The controller came back and said "give me a minute". About a dozen miles or so away from the IAF, she says "Cessna 123, cleared KXXX, IFIXX, direct, maintain current altitude, stay on this frequency, squawk <my current code>".

But while typing this out, I just realized that the OP's exact scenario showed up in my inbox a couple weeks ago. Unfortunately I'm not a member and my trash folder only goes back 7 days, so I don't have the free version of the video any more.

(EDIT: Ok, not exact but very similar. I just remembered that the video scenario had them busting a cloud rather than class B)

170. Colorado Clearance Confusion - PilotWorkshops

There’s nothing ambiguous about an approach clearance—or is there? Can a wily instructor you employed for an Instrument Proficiency Check trip you into self-doubt with one, well-timed question? Then again, maybe the CFII is just as unsure as you are—and both of you are flying blind. Scenarios in...

pilotworkshop.com

 

[Palmpilot]

I don't know whether this muddies the waters or clarifies them, but the reg only says you need a clearance before entering; it doesn't specify that it has to be an IFR clearance, and it doesn't specify a particular wording. However, I would probably play it safe by clarifying this with the controller when I received the clearance.

§ 91.131 Operations in Class B airspace.​

​

(a) Operating rules. No person may operate an aircraft within a Class B airspace area except in compliance with § 91.129 and the following rules:​

​

(1) The operator must receive an ATC clearance from the ATC facility having jurisdiction for that area before operating an aircraft in that area.​

​

(2) Unless otherwise authorized by ATC, each person operating a large turbine engine-powered airplane to or from a primary airport for which a Class B airspace area is designated must operate at or above the designated floors of the Class B airspace area while within the lateral limits of that area.​

​

(3) Any person conducting pilot training operations at an airport within a Class B airspace area must comply with any procedures established by ATC for such operations in that area....​

 

[midlifeflyer]

Like @RussR, I never assume a Class B clearance when I am VFR. Two examples I’ve mentioned in the past. These are copy and paste.

The first is similar to the OP.
We were doing practice approaches under VFR at an airport just outside the Class B surface area (ILS 26 KCFO née KFTG for anyone interested in looking). Reporting the missed, we were instructed to proceed direct to SKIPI for the hold. That's about as clear an assumed B clearance as I can think and, as it turned out, that's what was meant. Nevertheless, my readback included, "confirm cleared into Class B." The controller's response was, "oh yeah, I guess I gotta say that. Cleared into the Class Bravo.”

The second…
In the spring of 2015, my flying club had a group trip to Charlotte to visit the aviation museum on the east side of the airport. For those unfamiliar, KCLT has 3 N-S runways and a E-W runway that is rarely used.

Our 14 airplanes, some VFR and some on IFR flight plans were coming in at about the same time and, as we approached, VFR, I kept my eye on the altitudes of the Class B wedding cake. I could hear a couple of "Cleared into the Class B" here and there. As we approached the segment that would put us into the Class B at our altitude, I still hadn't hear it for our aircraft. Since my rule is to never assume the clearance, I keyed the mike and said, "Approach. 16J. Confirm cleared into the Class Bravo." The controller, who was doing an absolutely fantastic job of sequencing us for landing during a busy "push time" responded, "Everyone I am talking to is cleared into the Class B."

Yes, arguably in both it would be a reasonable assumption, nearly a certainty, that Class B entry was approved. But I figure it this way. I have two choices.

1. Assume you are cleared and take the risk of being wrong and dealing with that "some FAA counsel sitting at a desk."​

2. Take 6 seconds of precious airtime to say, "Confirm cleared in to Class B."​

I choose #2.

 

[iamtheari]

Yes, arguably in both it would be a reasonable assumption, nearly a certainty, that Class B entry was approved. But I figure it this way. I have two choices.
1. Assume you are cleared and take the risk of being wrong and dealing with that "some FAA counsel sitting at a desk."2. Take 6 seconds of precious airtime to say, "Confirm cleared in to Class B."I choose #2.

How many instances are there in which a pilot was given a phone number to call (or worse) because he asked too many times whether he was cleared into Class B airspace? Now compare that to the number of instances when a pilot got a phone number because he should have asked but didn't. It's like Pascal's Wager except with more immediate results. If it's me, I'm asking.

 

[midwestpa24]

This isn't that difficult, there are only two options.

If you are on an IFR clearance, then Class B clearance is automatic as part of the IFR clearance.

If you are not on an IFR clearance, and are operating VFR, you must hear the words "Cleared into the Class Bravo". There is no gray area, and it does not matter if you are vectored or given an altitude that would cause you to enter the Class B, you must hear those words.

 

[JAX]

Form the controller perspective and rule book:

A VFR practice approach does not authorize a published missed. The published missed must be specifically requested and approved by the controller. During the published missed, the VFR aircraft is provided hybrid VFR/IFR separation IAW 7110.65 4-8-11 b2. The Class B portion of the rule book has a note that pilots should inform ATC if a control instruction will put them in the Bravo. Different facilities may interpret differently. Ask if unsure.

 

[AlphaPilotFlyer]

I think its getting more complicated than need be, at least as I understand the original question.... to get a practice approach in B airspace you would first have to get the bravo VFR clearance. that clearance can be as simple as, "cleared into bravo... maintain VFR" or include additional items such as maintain certain altitudes or headings, ect.. There's no missed approach procedure on a VFR or visual clearance per-se, tower will give instructions. Suggest you specifically request the published miss when checking in, but they may issue other instructions. Don't surprise them with a go-around call over the runway, give them a heads up. But again, you don't need multiple bravo clearances unless initial clearance dictates (at least my opinion from doing it multiple times).


Although practice approaches are technically allowed B airports, the airport authority can prohibit it from ground ops side (meaning if you land and ask for something like taxi back for takeoff, you will/can get admonished or told to stop at FBO for landing fees, ect.., maybe a referral to FAA but don't think that would go far as the violation would be mostly a municipal issue. I actually got pulled over in a C182 on taxiway in LAX after landing at 2am after a practice ILS even though controllers had no issue (it was when I contacted clearance delivery for VFR departure that got me)..... airport authority Kojac read me the riot act, a real jerk. However, It did say no training operations allowed in LAX AFD pages.

Anyways, I don't recommend landing after the approach unless you are sure the airport doesn't have an issue with it. ..at least check AFD. Another thing I may mention, as a guy who's has flown single engines to widebodies into big airports all over the world, it's dangerous as far as I am concerned as you are the least of their (ATC and other planes) worries in terms of wake turbulence or jet blast on the ground, not to mention you throw a wrench into the ATC cogs and you often hear it in the controller's voice. Be extra diligent.

 

[RussR]

But again, you don't need multiple bravo clearances unless initial clearance dictates (at least my opinion from doing it multiple times).

I don't know if the permanence of one Class B clearance given multiple excursions into and out of the Bravo has been tested in FAA enforcements or appeals on such. To be safe, as a matter of routine during an inspection (which may take us in and out of the Bravo 10 or more times in a hour or so), I will say "request (or confirm) cleared into the Bravo for the duration of the inspection". I have to believe a positive response would cover all possible scenarios.

 

[AlphaPilotFlyer]

Agreed, as always good to CYA, but since you never left radio contact with ATC and they are the ones telling you what to do, likely over kill. I do agree once on the ground the clock resets. I can’t believe there are many MA procedures that are out of bravo airspace at B airports…. Would expect flying a MA to hold then vectors back for another approach would keep you in bravo…. If they vector you out than back in to B it’s on their discretion to issue another formal bravo clearance…. Otherwise they’d likely tell you to remain clear of bravo…. Essentially, go away.

Flying into B airports we have been told it’s our responsibility to remain in B if off a STAR or visual approach or on vector….. this can be daunting as B airspace is not depicted on nav display…. many get nasty grams from Faa when they don’t so it seems ATC is reporting them.

 

[midlifeflyer]

I think its getting more complicated than need be, at least as I understand the original question.... to get a practice approach in B airspace you would first have to get the bravo VFR clearance. that clearance can be as simple as, "cleared into bravo... maintain VFR" or include additional items such as maintain certain altitudes or headings, ect.. There's no missed approach procedure on a VFR or visual clearance per-se, tower will give instructions. Suggest you specifically request the published miss when checking in, but they may issue other instructions. Don't surprise them with a go-around call over the runway, give them a heads up. But again, you don't need multiple bravo clearances unless initial clearance dictates (at least my opinion from doing it multiple times).


Although practice approaches are technically allowed B airports, the airport authority can prohibit it from ground ops side (meaning if you land and ask for something like taxi back for takeoff, you will/can get admonished or told to stop at FBO for landing fees, ect.., maybe a referral to FAA but don't think that would go far as the violation would be mostly a municipal issue. I actually got pulled over in a C182 on taxiway in LAX after landing at 2am after a practice ILS even though controllers had no issue (it was when I contacted clearance delivery for VFR departure that got me)..... airport authority Kojac read me the riot act, a real jerk. However, It did say no training operations allowed in LAX AFD pages.

Anyways, I don't recommend landing after the approach unless you are sure the airport doesn't have an issue with it. ..at least check AFD. Another thing I may mention, as a guy who's has flown single engines to widebodies into big airports all over the world, it's dangerous as far as I am concerned as you are the least of their (ATC and other planes) worries in terms of wake turbulence or jet blast on the ground, not to mention you throw a wrench into the ATC cogs and you often hear it in the controller's voice. Be extra diligent.

Ummm… after saying it’s getting more complicated than need be, I think you may have added a lot more complexity than there was before.

 

[BillTIZ]

I think its getting more complicated than need be, at least as I understand the original question.... to get a practice approach in B airspace you would first have to get the bravo VFR clearance. that clearance can be as simple as, "cleared into bravo... maintain VFR" or include additional items such as maintain certain altitudes or headings, ect.. There's no missed approach procedure on a VFR or visual clearance per-se, tower will give instructions. Suggest you specifically request the published miss when checking in, but they may issue other instructions. Don't surprise them with a go-around call over the runway, give them a heads up. But again, you don't need multiple bravo clearances unless initial clearance dictates (at least my opinion from doing it multiple times).


Although practice approaches are technically allowed B airports, the airport authority can prohibit it from ground ops side (meaning if you land and ask for something like taxi back for takeoff, you will/can get admonished or told to stop at FBO for landing fees, ect.., maybe a referral to FAA but don't think that would go far as the violation would be mostly a municipal issue. I actually got pulled over in a C182 on taxiway in LAX after landing at 2am after a practice ILS even though controllers had no issue (it was when I contacted clearance delivery for VFR departure that got me)..... airport authority Kojac read me the riot act, a real jerk. However, It did say no training operations allowed in LAX AFD pages.

Anyways, I don't recommend landing after the approach unless you are sure the airport doesn't have an issue with it. ..at least check AFD. Another thing I may mention, as a guy who's has flown single engines to widebodies into big airports all over the world, it's dangerous as far as I am concerned as you are the least of their (ATC and other planes) worries in terms of wake turbulence or jet blast on the ground, not to mention you throw a wrench into the ATC cogs and you often hear it in the controller's voice. Be extra diligent.

The approach was not in B Airspace, the airport is not in B airspace, the missed approach procedure as published infringes on B airspace. The airport and approach underlies B airspace.

 

[AlphaPilotFlyer]

My bad, I was referring to practice approaches within B airports…..this was common training for IFR students when I was CFI and few ILS approaches existed …. We commonly flew to big airports TCA’s (now called B airspace) at 2am for approaches.

 

[Martin Pauly]

The approach was not in B Airspace, the airport is not in B airspace, the missed approach procedure as published infringes on B airspace. The airport and approach underlies B airspace.

"Infringes in B airspace"... It reminded me that in your original post, you mentioned that the missed approach comes within 2nm laterally of Class B airspace.

The thing with airspace is: you're either in it, or you're not. If I fly a published route or procedure that keeps me two or more miles outside of Class B, I wouldn't worry about the airspace. I'd focus on flying the procedure or route as published.

- Martin

 

[4RNB]

It sounds like the OP was not in the plane. Me thinks arguing the semantics is wasted breath because of this.
Knowing the airport and approach would make this clearer.

 

[Clip4]

It's a bad clearance. Cleared for the approach should not be accompanied with MAINTAIN VFR.

§ 91.173 ATC clearance and flight plan required.
No person may operate an aircraft in controlled airspace under IFR unless that person has—

(a) Filed an IFR flight plan; and

(b) Received an appropriate ATC clearance.

An "air traffic control clearance" is authorization for an aircraft to proceed under conditions specified by air traffic control. (Remain VFR is a specified condition)

"CLEARED APPROACH" means ATC authorization for an aircraft to execute a specific instrument approach procedure to an airport, such as "Cleared ILS Runway Three Six Approach". Remain VFR (I have not issued you an IFR clearance)

The verbiage you provided is a recently updated directive to controllers to aid in eliminating pilot confusion because somebody somewhere didn’t understand how the system worked or somebody claimed it meant something else.

 

[TommyG]

Comes within 2nm of the B. So, no you are into the B for the missed approach, and you weren’t cleared into the B.

A practice approach is not anIFR clearance that will grant you access to the B.

 

[flyingron]

The verbiage you provided is a recently updated directive to controllers to aid in eliminating pilot confusion because somebody somewhere didn’t understand how the system worked or somebody claimed it meant something else.

The verbiage I provided has been in 7110.65 for over a decade. Popups have been considered an abbreviated plan filing for even longer (back for the five decades I've been flying).

 

[Palmpilot]

The verbiage I provided has been in 7110.65 for over a decade. Popups have been considered an abbreviated plan filing for even longer (back for the five decades I've been flying).

Confirmed by the Pilot/Controller Glossary:

ABBREVIATED IFR FLIGHT PLANS− An authorization by ATC requiring pilots to submit only that information needed for the purpose of ATC. It includes only a small portion of the usual IFR flight plan information. In certain instances, this may be only aircraft identification, location, and pilot request. Other information may be requested if needed by ATC for separation/control purposes. It is frequently used by aircraft which are airborne and desire an instrument approach or by aircraft which are on the ground and desire a climb to VFR-on-top.​