Class E surface area extension to airport

[xnvyflyer]

Ok you guys, here's what we have. There's an airport in San Diego County (Palomar) that is of the impression that they have the right to deny access to the Class E surface area extension to VFR aircraft in VMC when the airport is calling the wx IMC.

The story goes like this. If the marine layer (no that's not the nasty chick that screws jarheads) rolls in from the coast like it always does, it will cover the airport long before the Class E which is much further inland. The Class E can remain CAVU to the hilt yet they think they have the right to deny access.

There is no wording in the AIM/FAR or the controller's handbook which says anything about them being able to do this. As far as I can tell, there isn't even a comms requirement in any Class E anywhere if operating VFR.

If anybody has knowledge to the contrary, I'd love to hear it.

Additionally, I am trying to get a good FAA contact (without going through my local FSDO). Anybody have good contact info for somebody in the FAA that has a clue?

Cheers

 

[HH-60H]

I don't understand how tower would have any control over class E airspace, but maybe that is my ignorance showing through.

Besides, when VFR, you are responsible for cloud clearances, not the tower of an adjacent airspace.

 

[Fly Navy]

AIM:

Chapter 3-2-6 Class E Airspace

2. Extension to a surface area. There are Class E airspace areas that serve as extensions to Class B, Class C, and Class D surface areas designated for an airport. Such airspace provides controlled airspace to contain standard instrument approach procedures without imposing a communications requirement on pilots operating under VFR.

http://www.faa.gov/airports_airtraffic/air_traffic/publications/atpubs/aim/Chap3/aim0302.html

Be aware that if you are operating VFR in controlled airspace that is legally IFR, that could get you in trouble (not to mention probably not a bright idea). Just because you can maintain VMC doesn't mean you are VFR.

AIM:

Chapter 3-1-4 Basic VFR Weather Minimums

a. No person may operate an aircraft under basic VFR when the flight visibility is less, or at a distance from clouds that is less, than that prescribed for the corresponding altitude and class of airspace.

http://www.faa.gov/airports_airtraffic/air_traffic/publications/atpubs/aim/Chap3/aim0301.html

 

[HH-60H]

AIM:

Chapter 3-2-6 Class E Airspace

2. Extension to a surface area. There are Class E airspace areas that serve as extensions to Class B, Class C, and Class D surface areas designated for an airport. Such airspace provides controlled airspace to contain standard instrument approach procedures without imposing a communications requirement on pilots operating under VFR.

http://www.faa.gov/airports_airtraffic/air_traffic/publications/atpubs/aim/Chap3/aim0302.html

Unfortunately, that doesn't specifically address his issue, it only implies the answer.

 

[Fly Navy]

Well, if he's operating VFR in class E, there is no communications requirement... I'm pretty sure even if it's say a Class D calling IFR, but the Class E extension is actually VFR... well, he's legal. I could be wrong though... been a while since I've been in the weeds with that stuff.

Also, just because something is legal to do, doesn't mean it is smart or safe to do. For example, flying through an active MOA VFR. Yep, it's legal... but not necessarily smart. There is a reason that Class E extension exists, to facilitate an instrument approach. If the field is calling IFR... guess what they're doing... and guess where you're flying through...

 

[HH-60H]

Well, if he's operating VFR in class E, there is no communications requirement... I'm pretty sure even if it's say a Class D calling IFR, but the Class E extension is actually VFR... well, he's legal. I could be wrong though... been a while since I've been in the weeds with that stuff.

I am not arguing the answer, I think all of us are correct. Unfortunately, now that I am getting back into GA I am learning that things aren't so cut and dry as I thought they were back in flight school.

For instance, the AIM is not regulatory in nature. It was written to provide explanations and examples of the FARs. It's the FARs themselves that are the actual rules. So, the AIM may only cover specific issues that the authors felt would be useful or common to the average pilot reading them.

So, in this case, to argue a point with an ATC facility xnvyflyr needs an actual regulatory reference. I think FAR Part 91 would cover this issue. However, I notice a conspicuous absence of information covering operations in Class E airspace. So, the AIM, and other "pilot-friendly" sources of info like the Advisory Circulars and the Handbook of Aeronautical Knowledge are interpreting and clarifying the rules for operating in Class E by the ABSENCE of regulations in the FAR Part 91.

I am not a big student of the FARs, so I may be missing something in Part 91 or some other Part that may hold the answer.

 

[et1nuke]

I don't understand how tower would have any control over class E airspace, but maybe that is my ignorance showing through.

Besides, when VFR, you are responsible for cloud clearances, not the tower of an adjacent airspace.

I agree, how is the TOWER denying access to the airspace anyhow. I've never had any experience with zealous towers micro-managing airspace, if anything I'd think possibly a recommendation. Most of the time it seems they hardly want to interact with you unless they have separate approach freqs. Of course I've been flying in Hawaii more recently and some of the towers you need to call and give a wake-up to them before your arrival (e.g. Molokai)

 

[NavAir42]

AIM:

Chapter 3-2-6 Class E Airspace

2. Extension to a surface area. There are Class E airspace areas that serve as extensions to Class B, Class C, and Class D surface areas designated for an airport. Such airspace provides controlled airspace to contain standard instrument approach procedures without imposing a communications requirement on pilots operating under VFR.

http://www.faa.gov/airports_airtraffic/air_traffic/publications/atpubs/aim/Chap3/aim0302.html

Be aware that if you are operating VFR in controlled airspace that is legally IFR, that could get you in trouble (not to mention probably not a bright idea). Just because you can maintain VMC doesn't mean you are VFR.

AIM:

Chapter 3-1-4 Basic VFR Weather Minimums

a. No person may operate an aircraft under basic VFR when the flight visibility is less, or at a distance from clouds that is less, than that prescribed for the corresponding altitude and class of airspace.

http://www.faa.gov/airports_airtraffic/air_traffic/publications/atpubs/aim/Chap3/aim0301.html

I think this is a case of a pilot reading the AIM one way and a controller reading it another. I tend to side with the pilots on this one for obvious reasons, but it's not pilots who get to decide who gets a flight violation or not. I couldn't find anything more to elaborate in the FAR either.

There's got to be a FAR Buddha that can be called somewhere in the FAA right?

For now, if Palomar is calling IFR and claiming adjacent class E extension, I don't think I'd fight the tower on it and find another way around.

 

[Nose]

some of the towers you need to call and give a wake-up to them before your arrival (e.g. Molokai)

I've had to do this three times in my career at NAS Norfolk! All three were late at night, returning from either FCLPs or the boat. The second time, I had to declare an emergency with approach after circling the field for 10 mins calling the tower. On rollout the jack-nut in the tower called me (sounding like he just woke up) and demanded to know my callsign. I replied "If you were awake when I checked in, you'd know it!" He left me alone after that.

 

[insanebikerboy]

91.126, .127, and .173 cover it.

The tower (and field) may be IMC but the extension area isn't. Since any VFR aircraft don't have to be talking to anyone they don't need permission to go through there, and .127 specifies communication only when passing within 4 miles of the airport. The extension areas are outside of the Class D ring (usually 4 miles) so the tower has no jurisdiction over VFR aircraft in that extension area (outside of 4 miles).

Anyways, if anyone should have control over the extension area it would be approach as they'd be the one clearing people, but again, that only applies to IFR traffic.

 

[Fly Navy]

Looks like we are all on the same page here. Again, if the field is IFR, they're probably routing approaches through that Class E extension... I'd probably avoid it.

 

[KSUFLY]

91.126, .127, and .173 cover it.

The tower (and field) may be IMC but the extension area isn't. Since any VFR aircraft don't have to be talking to anyone they don't need permission to go through there, and .127 specifies communication only when passing within 4 miles of the airport. The extension areas are outside of the Class D ring (usually 4 miles) so the tower has no jurisdiction over VFR aircraft in that extension area (outside of 4 miles).

Anyways, if anyone should have control over the extension area it would be approach as they'd be the one clearing people, but again, that only applies to IFR traffic.

That's absolutely correct. If you are VFR, the only times you have to make radio calls is class B, C, and D. Class C and D you only have to make radio contact. Class B you have to obtain a clearance into the airspace. Towers have no jurisdiction over the surrounding class E airspace. In fact, most times if you call a tower and you are passing the field (outside the class D) they don't even care. They may give you a traffic call but for the most part they will just say to report clear.

When VFR you can fly from class E airport to class E airport without a radio at all. I've done it many times and you just have to have a better look out scan for other traffic. But a radio is not required for VFR flight.

 

[e6bflyer]

Agree with above. Think about it, there is no specific requirement for operating VFR in class E airspace, even though other aircraft may be operating IFR. It is up to the VFR aircraft to maintain his own separation from other aircraft. I may ask this one to the tracon guru who does our IGS every year just to be sure.

 

[HH-60H]

91.126, .127, and .173 cover it.

Again this is an interpretation of these parts. None of these specifically address xnvyflyr's problem. Although I do believe this a correct interpretation.

The tower (and field) may be IMC but the extension area isn't.

None of the parts you listed address this at all.

Since any VFR aircraft don't have to be talking to anyone they don't need permission to go through there

Taken by itself, this is not true, VFR aircraft are required to communicate in Class B, C, and D, airspace (as described in Parts .129, .130. and .131). Even if you mean only in Class E and G, no part says this specifically, it just ISN'T said anywhere (that I can find)

and .127 specifies communication only when passing within 4 miles of the airport.

True, but it only weakly implies the answer to xnvyflyr's answer.

The extension areas are outside of the Class D ring (usually 4 miles) so the tower has no jurisdiction over VFR aircraft in that extension area (outside of 4 miles).

I agree, but where does it say that?

I agree that everything you said is the pilot commonly understood interpretations of operations in Class E airspace. Unfortunately, xnvyflyr is dealing with the Feds (FAA) and ATC types at that, so he needs official regulations (FARs) or official interpretations (decisions by the FAA Chief Legal Counsel). It's all a bunch of painful legalese, but that's what you need when you deal with the FAA or its representatives (FSDO, DPE, ATC, etc.)

 

[Fly Navy]

Honestly... good discussion. This is the sort of thing I like to see here.