Sport Pilot Operation in Class B Airspace

[FlyingForFun]

Delete

[Nomore767]

Just a thought from a non-pilot that has several customers that fly the big stuff. First, not one of the big iron pilots that I've spoken to think that 172s and Archers should be landing at a Class B airport. They cite the approach speeds of the big guys is faster than many GA planes running at full throttle. Is this a fair assessment?

And secondary to this, it seems to me that an area that is populous enough to have a Class B airport would have a lot of other airports in the area that would be more GA friendly. Is this a case of "I have the right to land at most Class B airports, there for I will" not regarding the disparity between aircraft, or should GA pilots flying slow airplanes, relative to the big stuff, use discretion when considering what airport to land at?

I'm not trying to be contrarian here, I'm just relaying what my airline pilot flying customers told me when we were discussing GA flying in the mix with the big jets.

David

David,

I would agree with your airline pilot friends ( I'm a retired airline guy myself).
Whilst you can parse the rules and regs regarding Class B airspace and airports, simply having a logbook endorsement doesn't necessarily bring up to the speed of operations in these areas.
I've seen C172s at JFK and EWR at times and I presume they were flying freight or picking someone up. The advantage of doing this, in my view, is sometimes moot as the FBO is tucked away somewhere and has long taxi times, long waits and difficulty remaining in view to ATC especially at night. It's difficult enough during the day, madness at night.
The November issue of Flying magazine has a "I Learned About Flying from That" piece about a GA guy and his CFI operating out of ORD. As a new airline FO I can tell you O'Hare is a busy place with different sets of rules for waiting, metering, standard taxi routes etc…it's not just calling for taxi and getting progressive.
If you really NEED to go into a big airport and you're qualified then, the big fee not withstanding, you should. But certainly take someone who's had experience, and not just your best buddy CFI. As another poster said, there are usually far better reliever airports designed to accommodate GA as close to downtown as they can get you and who are better able to handle you.
Approach at ORD has traffic right at minimum separation…giving speeds of 180kts to the marker quite often. With approach speeds greater than the max cruise speeds of GA airplanes, the controller will require a huge separation to fit you in. They may have you fly close in and then dump you at the very end of the runway, which may be 13000 feet long, say clear to land and buh-bye. Your problems are only beginning as you try to navigate to the FBO.
When I flew Twin Otters for a Commuter airline, going into DCA we were left high then dumped in and expected to land short of the main runway and hold. Definitely STOL and definitely demanding. Could you do this in a GA airplane? Think about it.
Flying in the airspace is another thing. The vast majority of controllers are great and will really try to help you but…be smart and pick
the least busiest times. Airlines operate at hubs in banks of flights. Once the rush is over they will be better able to accommodate.
Flying through or over the Class B is a good learning experience. Just listening to the rapid fire ATC transmissions would be good. They don't tolerate long call signs and mouthy read backs, they're handing multiple flights at close to 200 kts and you are a potential bug on someone's windshield. With experience you can build up the confidence to be able to fit in and take advantage of their top notch ATC service and maybe even eventually land at a big airport.
I found a forum where this issue was brought up.
http://www.studentpilot.com/interact/fo ... ing-at-EWR

In my youth I often flew in a Twin Comanche with my Dad, who was a charter pilot in the UK, into Heathrow and Gatwick. They would have him keep his speed to max cruise right up to close in base and then give him landing clearance and urge him off the runway ASAP.
Just after we cleared a 747 would roll past and looked massive!!

It's all part of the learning curve, and with training and practice it can be fun and rewarding. But it's playing with the big boys in the big league. It's the real deal with little margin for error and no time for you to figure things out if you're not sure.

For me, I'll fly through the airspace but definitely would avoid landing at one by choice.

Cheers, Howard

[MrMorden]

Just a thought from a non-pilot that has several customers that fly the big stuff. First, not one of the big iron pilots that I've spoken to think that 172s and Archers should be landing at a Class B airport. They cite the approach speeds of the big guys is faster than many GA planes running at full throttle. Is this a fair assessment?

And secondary to this, it seems to me that an area that is populous enough to have a Class B airport would have a lot of other airports in the area that would be more GA friendly. Is this a case of "I have the right to land at most Class B airports, there for I will" not regarding the disparity between aircraft, or should GA pilots flying slow airplanes, relative to the big stuff, use discretion when considering what airport to land at?

I'm not trying to be contrarian here, I'm just relaying what my airline pilot flying customers told me when we were discussing GA flying in the mix with the big jets.

David

Those are valid points, but... these are public use airports, paid for with tax dollars. The pilot flying a 172 has as much right to use of the airport as a passenger in a 787. The class Bs all have ATC services to provide separation, so the different approach speeds don't matter as much since the tower will move planes around to keep everybody apart.

What it boils down to is that the big guys don't want to be inconvenienced by waiting around for slower traffic. Tough titty. If they want exclusive access, let them privatize the class B airports and have the major air carriers shoulder the entire cost. I bet they'd complain about that even more than the rare Cessna in the pattern...

[3Dreaming]

I used to fly a 172 into a class B airspace twenty five years ago. I was picking up time sensitive material for the printing industry. It was my experience that they mostly stuck me on a different runway out of the way of the big boys. The only time this was not the case is if I rode in with someone who had to shoot an approach. Now they send it by satellite or over the internet.

[Nomore767]

Just a thought from a non-pilot that has several customers that fly the big stuff. First, not one of the big iron pilots that I've spoken to think that 172s and Archers should be landing at a Class B airport. They cite the approach speeds of the big guys is faster than many GA planes running at full throttle. Is this a fair assessment?

And secondary to this, it seems to me that an area that is populous enough to have a Class B airport would have a lot of other airports in the area that would be more GA friendly. Is this a case of "I have the right to land at most Class B airports, there for I will" not regarding the disparity between aircraft, or should GA pilots flying slow airplanes, relative to the big stuff, use discretion when considering what airport to land at?

I'm not trying to be contrarian here, I'm just relaying what my airline pilot flying customers told me when we were discussing GA flying in the mix with the big jets.

David

Those are valid points, but... these are public use airports, paid for with tax dollars. The pilot flying a 172 has as much right to use of the airport as a passenger in a 787. The class Bs all have ATC services to provide separation, so the different approach speeds don't matter as much since the tower will move planes around to keep everybody apart.

What it boils down to is that the big guys don't want to be inconvenienced by waiting around for slower traffic. Tough titty. If they want exclusive access, let them privatize the class B airports and have the major air carriers shoulder the entire cost. I bet they'd complain about that even more than the rare Cessna in the pattern...

Andy,

Quite true. But…whilst you may have the 'right' to fly into the airport, everyone else has the right to assume that you're up to speed with procedures, ability, and technique to match the challenge. I would simply say if you're 'truly qualified' and competent to really operate into the airport then you could and you should. But if you've simply got a fresh logbook sign-off and feel ready to rock and roll then you may find yourself quickly out of your depth, and that's not good for everyone else.
Most big hubs are operating at or close to saturation already. Introducing a C172 just because it has the 'right' is perhaps not wise if they cause problems. Indeed if they end up closing the big airports because of this then a disservice has been done to those up to speed and fully competent GA pilots who need regular access.
There's no good reason a fully competent and up to speed GA pilot couldn't operate really well at a big airport. But anything less is an incident waiting to happen and we don't need that.

Many airports, like PHL for example, have designated GA runways which are close to the FBOs and which are excellent for accommodating all types of GA traffic along with the 'big boys'. Also in Philadelphia, KPNE is an excellent reliever airport AND has restrictions the other way, trying to keep jets that are too big out of this reliever operation and direct them to KPHL.

Cheers, Howard

[dstclair]

Well stated Howard. This comes down to what you 'can' do versus what you 'should' do. Also, I've not found landing in the Class B airport in small planes (DFW, IAH, etc) was ever more practical in terms of in/out convenience, cost (fuel and landing fees) and access to the general surrounding area. There is a much higher probability that one would cause issues of some sort and end up on the 6 pm news. "Light Sport Aircraft causes major delays at ORD that ripple through the nation". GA doesn't need headlines like this.

[drseti]

About 30 years ago, I had occasional consulting work with USAF SAMSO, whose offices were on the airport at LAX. A reliever airport was not an option. I'd fly (IFR) in my Beechcraft, and mix it up with the big guys. It was stressful, as I'd often be told to maintain best airspeed to the threshold, with traffic often a heavy at my six o'clock and five miles.

I'd come in screaming down the glideslope, gear and flaps up, at 150 kts, chop power and raise the nose at 200' over the numbers, slow down to gear extension speed, drop the gear, slow further to flap speed, drop the flaps, land long with still thousands of feet of runepway ahead of me, brake agressively, turn off onto a diagonal high-speed taxiway, and watch a heavy zoom by from behind me. Not recommended for the low-time pilot!

[MrMorden]

Andy,

Quite true. But…whilst you may have the 'right' to fly into the airport, everyone else has the right to assume that you're up to speed with procedures, ability, and technique to match the challenge. I would simply say if you're 'truly qualified' and competent to really operate into the airport then you could and you should. But if you've simply got a fresh logbook sign-off and feel ready to rock and roll then you may find yourself quickly out of your depth, and that's not good for everyone else.
Most big hubs are operating at or close to saturation already. Introducing a C172 just because it has the 'right' is perhaps not wise if they cause problems. Indeed if they end up closing the big airports because of this then a disservice has been done to those up to speed and fully competent GA pilots who need regular access.
There's no good reason a fully competent and up to speed GA pilot couldn't operate really well at a big airport. But anything less is an incident waiting to happen and we don't need that.

Many airports, like PHL for example, have designated GA runways which are close to the FBOs and which are excellent for accommodating all types of GA traffic along with the 'big boys'. Also in Philadelphia, KPNE is an excellent reliever airport AND has restrictions the other way, trying to keep jets that are too big out of this reliever operation and direct them to KPHL.

Cheers, Howard

Totally agree that one should be proficient, current, and competent to enter any airspace or conduct operations at any airport they fly to. To me that's a given, and applies equally to anything from a private grass strip to JFK.

[MrMorden]

Well stated Howard. This comes down to what you 'can' do versus what you 'should' do. Also, I've not found landing in the Class B airport in small planes (DFW, IAH, etc) was ever more practical in terms of in/out convenience, cost (fuel and landing fees) and access to the general surrounding area. There is a much higher probability that one would cause issues of some sort and end up on the 6 pm news. "Light Sport Aircraft causes major delays at ORD that ripple through the nation". GA doesn't need headlines like this.

I would never choose to fly to a Class B. Too much operational complexity, wake turbulence concerns, etc. My only point is that any pilot in a properly equipped aircraft that has the skills and ability to conduct operations at any public airport should be free to do so.

There are a couple of very slow ultralights and at least one powered parachute at my home field. Their operations are sometimes inconvenient to me because they are so slow and I have had to extend pattern legs, delay departure, or even make a 360° turn to avoid running them over. But they have as much right to fly there as I do, I just see the Class B issues as analogous to that situation.

[Nomore767]

Well stated Howard. This comes down to what you 'can' do versus what you 'should' do. Also, I've not found landing in the Class B airport in small planes (DFW, IAH, etc) was ever more practical in terms of in/out convenience, cost (fuel and landing fees) and access to the general surrounding area. There is a much higher probability that one would cause issues of some sort and end up on the 6 pm news. "Light Sport Aircraft causes major delays at ORD that ripple through the nation". GA doesn't need headlines like this.

I would never choose to fly to a Class B. Too much operational complexity, wake turbulence concerns, etc. My only point is that any pilot in a properly equipped aircraft that has the skills and ability to conduct operations at any public airport should be free to do so.

There are a couple of very slow ultralights and at least one powered parachute at my home field. Their operations are sometimes inconvenient to me because they are so slow and I have had to extend pattern legs, delay departure, or even make a 360° turn to avoid running them over. But they have as much right to fly there as I do, I just see the Class B issues as analogous to that situation.

Andy, I agree.

However, the thread starter mentioned getting the logbook endorsement so that he could fly into the Class B airspace and my point was simply that the endorsement in itself may not be enough without some real time experience.
Most definitely actually landing at one of the big airports would require a lot more in my view. Paul's example of his experience is pretty accurate regarding landing at the big airport. The approach will most likely be totally unstable, max speed till short final, 'can you make the first turn-off?' (and be held to it as they'll have crossing traffic), you'll need to be able to do rapid fire ATC transmissions and so on. These are the skills required, not necessarily a simple logbook endorsement.

Transitting the Class B airspace is a bit easier but again, depending on traffic, it can get demanding very quickly and be overwhelming. Some experience after gaining the endorsement is key and would be useful. The kind of thing a pilot should do during a BFR.

They may indeed have the 'right' to fly there, but everyone else in the airspace has the right to expect that the Sport pilot has the skill and ability to operate safely and successfully, beyond a written endorsement.

Cheers, Howard.

[FlyingForFun]

Delete

[MrMorden]

Well stated Howard. This comes down to what you 'can' do versus what you 'should' do. Also, I've not found landing in the Class B airport in small planes (DFW, IAH, etc) was ever more practical in terms of in/out convenience, cost (fuel and landing fees) and access to the general surrounding area. There is a much higher probability that one would cause issues of some sort and end up on the 6 pm news. "Light Sport Aircraft causes major delays at ORD that ripple through the nation". GA doesn't need headlines like this.

I would never choose to fly to a Class B. Too much operational complexity, wake turbulence concerns, etc. My only point is that any pilot in a properly equipped aircraft that has the skills and ability to conduct operations at any public airport should be free to do so.

There are a couple of very slow ultralights and at least one powered parachute at my home field. Their operations are sometimes inconvenient to me because they are so slow and I have had to extend pattern legs, delay departure, or even make a 360° turn to avoid running them over. But they have as much right to fly there as I do, I just see the Class B issues as analogous to that situation.

Andy, I agree.

However, the thread starter mentioned getting the logbook endorsement so that he could fly into the Class B airspace and my point was simply that the endorsement in itself may not be enough without some real time experience.
Most definitely actually landing at one of the big airports would require a lot more in my view. Paul's example of his experience is pretty accurate regarding landing at the big airport. The approach will most likely be totally unstable, max speed till short final, 'can you make the first turn-off?' (and be held to it as they'll have crossing traffic), you'll need to be able to do rapid fire ATC transmissions and so on. These are the skills required, not necessarily a simple logbook endorsement.

Transitting the Class B airspace is a bit easier but again, depending on traffic, it can get demanding very quickly and be overwhelming. Some experience after gaining the endorsement is key and would be useful. The kind of thing a pilot should do during a BFR.

They may indeed have the 'right' to fly there, but everyone else in the airspace has the right to expect that the Sport pilot has the skill and ability to operate safely and successfully, beyond a written endorsement.

Cheers, Howard.

Agreed. The logbook endorsement would let one transit the airspace, but I don't think there is any way for a Sport Pilot to legally land at a class B per the FARs (at least, not the ones listed as prohibited for operations by SPs...not sure if that list includes all class Bs).

[VL Roberts]

About 30 years ago, I had occasional consulting work with USAF SAMSO, whose offices were on the airport at LAX. A reliever airport was not an option. I'd fly (IFR) in my Beechcraft, and mix it up with the big guys. It was stressful, as I'd often be told to maintain best airspeed to the threshold, with traffic often a heavy at my six o'clock and five miles.

I'd come in screaming down the glideslope, gear and flaps up, at 150 kts, chop power and raise the nose at 200' over the numbers, slow down to gear extension speed, drop the gear, slow further to flap speed, drop the flaps, land long with still thousands of feet of runepway ahead of me, brake agressively, turn off onto a diagonal high-speed taxiway, and watch a heavy zoom by from behind me. Not recommended for the low-time pilot!

Your story is a good example of why one should never let ATC "fly" their aircraft. All you have to do at a Class B airport is follow directions and operate your aircraft normally.

[drseti]

I should have emphasized that I know (and every pilot should know) the word "unable." If I had felt at all unsafe in complying with the LAX ATC instructions, I would not have hesitated to use it.

[VL Roberts]

I should have emphasized that I know (and every pilot should know) the word "unable." If I had felt at all unsafe in complying with the LAX ATC instructions, I would not have hesitated to use it.

What I don't like about your story is that new pilots , who don't know any better , may believe it and become too wary of landing at a Class B airport unless they think they're Chuck Yeager.

What instruction from LAX ATC would you "unable"? The "best speed" until threshold ? What number on the airspeed indicator corresponds to best speed ? " Best speed" has no meaning other than a controllers wishful thinking that you weren't making his job more difficult. ATC is not permitted to assign a speed inside the final approach fix or less than 5 miles from the RWY (whichever is closer).

So what does one do at a hectic class B airport when on approach and you've got the feeling that the controller wants you to go fast? You fly a stabilized approach the way you've been trained to fly an approach at the speed recommended in your POH.

As a pilot, you do your job and don't worry about the controllers job. There has been more than enough fatal accidents as a result of a pilot trying to please a controller.