TFR Violation Beaufort, SC 4/23/2023 Blue Angles Air Show

[wombat]

Agreed.   

I think we all agree that checking in if it's been 'too long' is a good habit.   But how long is too long?  I don't know of anywhere that has any guidance other than 91.183.

 

Saying someone violated 91.13 for failing to do so in a timely manner after just 9 minutes since their last radio call doesn't seem right to me though.   Why don't the regulations just tell us how long is too long?   I don't want another airspace overlay that gives a time in minutes between mandatory two-way radio communications checkins.

  Is this something you are supposed to pick up in your IFR training?   It should be in 91.167 – 91.199. https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-14/chapter-I/subchapter-F/part-91/subpart-B/subject-group-ECFRef6e8c57f580cfd And if so, it should be one of the requirements listed in 61.65 - Instrument rating requirements. https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-14/chapter-I/subchapter-D/part-61/subpart-B/section-61.65 But exactly where is it in the regs?  But maybe the FAA thinks that "Long enough to fly into an active TFR" is too long and is a violation of 91.13?   I don't know, but I do know I never want that to be me!

 

The AIM has some things to say about radio communications failure in chapter 6, section 4-1.  , https://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/atpubs/aim_html/chap6_section_4.html Specifically it says "pilots are expected to exercise good judgment in whatever action they elect to take"... But that's only if the pilot has realized that they are in that situation.

[GeeBee]

Some time back someone made a post about how to pass the time on a cross country and my comment was, "If you feel you have nothing to do you're doing it wrong". That applies here. Flying IFR is no an excuse to go brain dead. One of the jobs you should be tracking is "what airspace am I in and who should I be talking to". It is not unusual for light aircraft traffic to get away from a controller and you should query when you think something is amiss.

[Hank]

1 minute ago, GeeBee said:

Some time back someone made a post about how to pass the time on a cross country and my comment was, "If you feel you have nothing to do you're doing it wrong". That applies here. Flying IFR is no an excuse to go brain dead. One of the jobs you should be tracking is "what airspace am I in and who should I be talking to". It is not unusual for light aircraft traffic to get away from a controller and you should query when you think something is amiss.

True, but to me, it's not unusual for ATC to not speak to me for 10-15 minutes. I do hear them speaking to other aircraft during that time, so I know my radio works.

I've only checked in to make sure I didn't miss a handoff on a few rare, isolated occasions. 

[wombat]

50 minutes ago, GeeBee said:

Some time back someone made a post about how to pass the time on a cross country and my comment was, "If you feel you have nothing to do you're doing it wrong". That applies here. Flying IFR is no an excuse to go brain dead. One of the jobs you should be tracking is "what airspace am I in and who should I be talking to". It is not unusual for light aircraft traffic to get away from a controller and you should query when you think something is amiss.

If you feel like you have nothing to do, it's probably because you are flying a Cessna 150 with a headwind.  Not much more frustrating than to look at stop-and-go traffic on the interstate under me that is still passing me.   

[exM20K]

3 hours ago, wombat said:

@exM20K 9 minutes?   I'm a Western States (excluding California) pilot.... I get 9 minute blocks without hearing ATC talk to anyone else on the radio let alone talking to me.   Now I do know there is a difference between flying out here and flying on the crowded Eastern Seaboard, and 9 minutes is acceptable out here but not out there.   But how much wiggle room is there?   3 minutes?  90 seconds?

That whole V1 / V3 / V37 corridor carries a ton of traffic from the mid-atlantic and northeast to florida. see for yourself on flightaware/ foreflight.

obviously not all in approach airspace, but here's the current view

[McMooney]

flying from houston to vegas a few years back, there would be periods of at least 45mins without atc comms;  whenever i checked in they'd just say there wasn't much happening

Edited April 26, 2023 by McMooney

[kortopates]

I personally don’t see any relevance in the question of how long between radio calls is too long. The only relevant point here is why did the pilot failed to respond when ATC was trying to contact him? Had he switched frequencies believing he was out of range? Was he trying to re-establish communication? Apparently not. In fact the quoted pilot remarks sounds like the he thought ATC communications were optional. Thus far I can’t imagine the pilot was legally instrument current to be flying IFR. I am sure there is more to the story we have yet to hear and i’d bet there is more going on than missed radio calls.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[ArtVandelay]

Good point  - and on that clear Sunday afternoon I bet it was even more congested.  
That makes it even less understandable that he was not communicating.  He was only at 4,000 ft on what others have described as a "severe clear" day.  It is likely that VFR traffic was near him during parts of the trip - ATC would have been trying to alert him to VFR traffic that was not under their control.
The IFR Enroute Low charts clearly show which ARTCC he should have been communicating with - boundaries and frequencies.  If it gets too quiet you just dial in one of the listed frequencies and check in - if it is the wrong one and they hear you, they will direct you to the correct.  If they don't hear you, then you try another nearby frequency.  

Should have been monitoring guard.

[jaylw314]

6 hours ago, GeeBee said:

It is not unusual when I think it gets too quiet to do a radio check. Did one last Saturday with BHM approach.

I had a funny a few years ago, I hadn't heard from ATC for a while and asked for a radio check.  The controller laughed and suggested in the future to ask for an altimeter check, it sounds less anxious 

As to the TFR, most of the popup ones do suggest if you're squawking a discrete code and have permission from ATC you're okay, but I'd still be nervous enough to be double checking.  I had an IFR flight last year where I got routed through an R area, and, for the life of me, I couldn't remember if I could enter and R area with ATC permission, so I asked.  Turns out you can't, but ATC had somehow forgotten I was on an IFR plan and had expected me to skirt around it. 

[EricJ]

Penetrating an airshow TFR during a performance is a bit riskier than penetrating a TFR for a stadium sports event.

Personally I'm interested in hearing more about these Blue Angles that were mentioned.

[Shadrach]

On 4/26/2023 at 9:45 AM, GeeBee said:

For starters if you lose comm IFR, the first rule is "If VFR conditions exist land as soon as practicable". Apparently the weather was quite good. Second the AIM "suggests" that you monitor guard. Now the AIM is not regulatory, but the NTSB in various violation appeals considers it "careless" not to follow its meme. So there is not a lot of wiggle room here.

Isn’t that in the case of com failure? Simply missing a hand off, or being out of reception range before the hand off occurs (which is quite possible @ 4,000msl) does not mandate an immediate landing. It mandates that one reestablish communication, which is what happened here, though I don’t think the pilot initiated it in a timely manner. 84 or not, I can envision a scenario where a hand off is made that is not received that then leads to this situation..

[Pinecone]

If he was on the wrong frequency, he could be hearing approach/center and other airplanes, but nothing for him.

[GeeBee]

Don't know how to make it any clearer. It is your responsibility to maintain listening watch:

 

§ 91.183  IFR communications.

Unless otherwise authorized by ATC, the  pilot in command of each  aircraft operated under  IFR in controlled airspace must ensure that a continuous watch is maintained on the appropriate frequency and must report the following as soon as possible - 

(a) The time and altitude of passing each designated reporting point, or the reporting points specified by  ATC, except that while the  aircraft is under radar control, only the passing of those reporting points specifically requested by  ATC need be reported; 

(b) Any unforecast weather conditions encountered; and 

(c) Any other information relating to the safety of flight.

[Shadrach]

Lots of theories about this situation. The simplest is the likely explanation. He either missed a call because he did not hear it or he did not receive it. It’s happened to me. You can still hear airplanes on freq but you cannot receive center and they cannot receive you. You either ask another plane to relay or you call the next sector. If this is what happened, he waited quite a while before trying to figure out what happened to ATC. Nevertheless, he clearly called up Savannah for a reason. 

I have a hard time believing that he was just some dottering old fool that “didn’t plan on talking to ATC”.
I think there was simply a comm issue and he didn’t notice nor rectify it as rapidly as he should have. He was clearly caught off guard when he called Savannah and not prepared to articulate what happened.

[wombat]

@GeeBee Don't know that it was unclear to anyone. But there is an open question of how long you can go without positive radio contact with ATC before action is required of you.  

My statement on this is that if he was flying his assigned clearance, his offense is not that of violating the TFR.  Maybe he was violating 91.183, but that depends on how long it had been since he last talked to ATC.  Also maybe depending on why he hadn't been talking to them.

That being said, it sounds like the time he was out of contact was a lot more than 9 minutes. (When ATC does talk to him, they say the incident was "20 miles ago")  And from the times of the events (26 minutes after the hour ATC was asking for other planes to help, and at 36 after the hour they finally talk to him) And I trust that ATC has been trying to contact him on all of the 'reasonable' frequencies for quite some time.    But as an example of how this could happen in a way where this pilot isn't at fault, if you were flying North past KPDX on IFR, at 9,000' and you've been hearing ATC the whole time, but they just hadn't said anything to you personally after you passed Salem.....How long would you wait before saying anything?  The IFR low charts say it's all Seattle Center... But below 10,000 you need to be talking to Cascade Approach or Portland Approach depending on the location.  But you can still hear ATC talking to all the same folks going from Cali to Seattle or Alaska.  And if you were 1,000' higher, you'd be on the right frequency.   It's possible (although in my opinion, unlikely) that N91396's pilot did nothing wrong; the controller *could* have missed handing him off to Charlston Approach, and he was on the correct Center frequency and hearing traffic the whole time, just didn't make an active call to make sure they remember he's on frequency.   So before I join camp "N91396 should be forcibly sold out from under this dude" I'd like to know more about what happened.

[Hank]

11 minutes ago, wombat said:

That being said, it sounds like the time he was out of contact was a lot more than 9 minutes. (When ATC does talk to him, they say the incident was "20 miles ago")

At 150 knots, my math says that 20 miles pass by in 8 minutes. That's a fair approximation for many Mooney groundspeeds, but may be a few knots lower at 4000 msl.

[wombat]

@Hank Thanks for pointing that out.    I assume that ATC tried to talk to him for a while before he actually entered the TFR, and they had other aircraft trying to talk to him before he entered it as well.

But I've certainly had times when I was flying towards a TFR (Firefighting TFRs over the Cascades) and while I knew about them, ATC wouldn't necessarily say anything until maybe five minutes before.   And even then I've had to remind ATC that the TFRs are 3 dimensional and they have a top, which I was usually above. 

So all said.....  possible pilot deviation.  But I don't know enough.    

[Ragsf15e]

6 hours ago, jaylw314 said:

I had a funny a few years ago, I hadn't heard from ATC for a while and asked for a radio check.  The controller laughed and suggested in the future to ask for an altimeter check, it sounds less anxious 

As to the TFR, most of the popup ones do suggest if you're squawking a discrete code and have permission from ATC you're okay, but I'd still be nervous enough to be double checking.  I had an IFR flight last year where I got routed through an R area, and, for the life of me, I couldn't remember if I could enter and R area with ATC permission, so I asked.  Turns out you can't, but ATC had somehow forgotten I was on an IFR plan and had expected me to skirt around it. 

Are you sure?  Do you mean P area, not R?  Restricted Areas can be cold when not being used and ATC can let you through. Prohibited areas on the other hand, they can’t.  Example R-5306A on the east coast is typically cold on weekends and ATC can clear you through.  Out west I have to file around R-6714, but when it’s cold they clear me direct destination right through it.

[jaylw314]

39 minutes ago, Ragsf15e said:

Are you sure?  Do you mean P area, not R?  Restricted Areas can be cold when not being used and ATC can let you through. Prohibited areas on the other hand, they can’t.  Example R-5306A on the east coast is typically cold on weekends and ATC can clear you through.  Out west I have to file around R-6714, but when it’s cold they clear me direct destination right through it.

Nope, I'm not sure!  I've never planned any route through R airspace before (nor do I plan to), so it's not something I've thought about   It was R-2513 over Hunter Liggett, and ATC's response when I asked was that I definitely needed to stay out of it, so I suppose that simply could have meant they weren't going to give me permission through it even if they could have...  I guess that's pretty much the same as most TFR's

Edited April 27, 2023 by jaylw314

[GeeBee]

 

9 hours ago, wombat said:

But as an example of how this could happen in a way where this pilot isn't at fault, if you were flying North past KPDX on IFR, at 9,000' and you've been hearing ATC the whole time, but they just hadn't said anything to you personally after you passed Salem.....How long would you wait before saying anything? 

The operative language is "listening watch". Not transmitting but listening. In your example, you can hear and that is good enough.

 

7 hours ago, Ragsf15e said:

Restricted Areas can be cold when not being used and ATC can let you through. Prohibited areas on the other hand, they can’t.

Ragsf15e is correct. The ILS 33 at KMTN takes you right through R-4001B. "Cleared ILS 33" is a clearance to go through the restricted airspace. "Cleared River Visual 18" at KDCA however does not allow you to blow through P-56 although many test that theory.....and lose.

 

[wombat]

@GeeBee No, at 9,000' you need to be listening to Cascade Approach or Portland Approach, not Seattle Center.   If you are listening to Seattle Center which is the charted frequency, you are not watching the appropriate frequency.  But if the controller missed the handoff call, how would the pilot know?   Now controllers are very good at their jobs, and they usually try multiple times.  But mistakes happen to both pilots and controllers.

 

 

[GeeBee]

29 minutes ago, wombat said:

@GeeBee No, at 9,000' you need to be listening to Cascade Approach or Portland Approach, not Seattle Center.   If you are listening to Seattle Center which is the charted frequency, you are not watching the appropriate frequency.  But if the controller missed the handoff call, how would the pilot know?   Now controllers are very good at their jobs, and they usually try multiple times.  But mistakes happen to both pilots and controllers.

 

 

 The point is, you are listening on the last assigned frequency and you can hear them. Appropriate is the last assigned. If you are in doubt or you believe the controller missed a handoff you can ask them. If you get no response you can call on guard that is what it is for. It is entirely possible, Cascade approach radar is down and Seattle has taken the airspace. Go with assigned, if you lose them, find someone. You are over thinking this.

[wombat]

@GeeBee This is the question I've been asking a lot over the last few days here....How long of not having an interaction with them can I wait before asking them before it's a violation?

If someone is flying North over KCVO (Corvallis, WA) at 9,000' on an IFR flight and is on 125.8 and 5 minutes ago was the last time they had to respond to a radio call from Seattle Center, are they in violation?    FYI, they are not on the correct frequency for that altitude, but it's not charted on the IFR charts. They should be on Cascade Approach on 127.5.

There are several reasons why someone could not have switched over and without knowing what that reason was we don't know if there was a pilot deviation.    

"Last Assigned" is not necessarily the appropriate frequency.  I've had flights where I was unable to receive ATC in some locations due to their transmitter failing and had to switch to a different frequency (and wait a few miles) before I could talk to them again.

I'm not overthinking this, these incidents happen and we have to be able to deal with them.   Just because you have not experienced it doesn't mean it doesn't happen.

[rbp]

The whole point of the "R" in an IFR clearance is to provide a route to the clearance limit in case of lost comms. if there's a TFR active en route that the pilots not supposed to go through, he should have been routed around it earlier

[Ragsf15e]

8 hours ago, jaylw314 said:

Nope, I'm not sure!  I've never planned any route through R airspace before (nor do I plan to), so it's not something I've thought about   It was R-2513 over Hunter Liggett, and ATC's response when I asked was that I definitely needed to stay out of it, so I suppose that simply could have meant they weren't going to give me permission through it even if they could have...  I guess that's pretty much the same as most TFR's

Actually I agree with you in that I wouldn’t plan a route through a restricted area since you probably won’t get it anyway and it could be hot.  However, if there’s one in your way, it never hurts to ask if it’s “cold”. If it is, atc is allowed to clear you through.

The one near Yakima i mentioned, R-6714, even has its status on the Yakima atis so you have an idea.

Many of them are hot a lot of the time though, so don’t count on going through.