FAR 91.130 and the Definite Article

Sorry -- a similar discussion is also occuring on a Piper owners' forum
and JKG is there, too, so I something forget who said what to whom
where!!!

Because of this:
http://www.faa.gov/atpubs/AIM/Chap4/aim0401.html#4-1-14
Once you're with them they don't expect you to "just leave".


They've forgotten about you. If they knew you were still with them they'd
have either terminated radar services or transferred communications before
you were so far inside approach control airspace.

I've switched frequencies away from Chicago Center, when I could no longer
receive them (due to low altitudes) -- and they responded by calling the
airport manager at home, and having the poor schmuck go out to the airport
we landed at, looking for us.

They really don't like to have pilots leave their freq without permission.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

On Fri, 10 Feb 2006 16:52:48 GMT, "Steven P. McNicoll"
wrote:


"Ron Rosenfeld" wrote in message
.. .

My recollection, which may be incorrect, is that this was a change from
the original wording specifically designed to ensure that the entering
pilot would be talking with the ATC facility actually controlling the
Class C
airspace.

In the original proposal establishing CCA, I don't believe that
requirement was present -- only that the pilot be talking with ATC.


Your recollection is correct. This was addressed in responses to comments
received when ARSA/Class C airspace was in the test period. The FAA
addressed it as follows:

"Specifically, aircraft arriving at any airport in an ARSA, and overflying
aircraft, prior to entering the ARSA must: (1) Establish two-way radio
communications with the ATC facility having jurisdiction over the area; and,
(2) while in the ARSA, maintain two-way radio communication with that ATC
facility."

But when it came time to implement ARSAs nationwide and incorporate them in
the FARs they didn't include that nice, clear language. The original
regulation was:


§ 91.88 Airport Radar Service Areas.

(c) Arrivals and Overflights. No person may operate an aircraft in an
airport radar service area unless two-way radio communication is established
with ATC prior to entering the area and is thereafter maintained with ATC
while within that area.


This language was corrected, I believe during airspace reclassification back
in 1993, to make it clear that contact with any ATC facility did not permit
entry into ARSA/Class C airspace, it had to be with the ATC facility having
jurisdiction over the area.


Thanks for confirming my memory of how that unfolded.
Ron (EPM) (N5843Q, Mooney M20E) (CP, ASEL, ASES, IA)

Yes.

"B a r r y" wrote in message
et...
Marco Leon wrote:
Does ATC even *do* VFR hand-offs to a
Class D tower from flight following?

"Jay Honeck" wrote in message
news:MBbHf.767954$_o.645510@attbi_s71...

I've switched frequencies away from Chicago Center, when I could no longer
receive them (due to low altitudes) -- and they responded by calling the
airport manager at home, and having the poor schmuck go out to the airport
we landed at, looking for us.

They really don't like to have pilots leave their freq without permission.


All you know for certain is that just one doesn't like it.

I've switched frequencies away from Chicago Center, when I could no
longer receive them (due to low altitudes) -- and they responded by
calling the airport manager at home, and having the poor schmuck go out
to the airport we landed at, looking for us.

They really don't like to have pilots leave their freq without
permission.


All you know for certain is that just one doesn't like it.

You really think that one controller in Chicago Center had the power and
authority to take it upon himself to call the airport manager at home and
drag his sorry heinie down to the airport, just because he was unhappy that
I lost radio contact with him?

The guy tracked me in to land at Rantoul, so he *knew* I was okay, which
eliminates the "he was concerned for my well-being" angle. So you think
this was just one guy with bean up his butt?
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

Jay Honeck wrote:



You really think that one controller in Chicago Center had the power and
authority to take it upon himself to call the airport manager at home and
drag his sorry heinie down to the airport, just because he was unhappy that
I lost radio contact with him?

The guy tracked me in to land at Rantoul, so he *knew* I was okay, which
eliminates the "he was concerned for my well-being" angle. So you think
this was just one guy with bean up his butt?


Of course not. There were several at the Center involved in this chain
of events.

"Jay Honeck" wrote in message
news:1lmHf.549388$084.128499@attbi_s22...

You really think that one controller in Chicago Center had the power and
authority to take it upon himself to call the airport manager at home and
drag his sorry heinie down to the airport, just because he was unhappy
that I lost radio contact with him?


Sure. In Aurora it takes only one person to dial a telephone number. How
many are needed in Iowa City?



The guy tracked me in to land at Rantoul, so he *knew* I was okay, which
eliminates the "he was concerned for my well-being" angle. So you think
this was just one guy with bean up his butt?


How did he *know* you were okay?

As I explained to you at that time, ATC is required to initiate a search
when there is an unexpected loss of radar contact and radio communications
with any IFR or VFR aircraft. How do you know that was not what was being
done?