Denny Cunningham
(Top Gun)
06/15/17 03:24 AM
Class E Airspace Question

Well, this was kinda flattering, I guess-- more than 20 years since I retired, and I got pulled (via conference call) into a meeting at FAA HQ this morning. They wanted my opinion on the following hypothetical:


Imagine there's an airport that has instrument approaches and weather reporting, but no tower. That airport is at the center of a chunk of Class E airspace, and this Class E airspace has extensions to protect the instrument approaches. There is a private airfield underlying one of these extensions.

The weather reporting at the primary airport is reporting the weather to be IFR.

Can a pilot legally depart the private airstrip, and climb through the overlying Class E extension, without contacting the controlling facility? It is assumed that the pilot can comply (or, at least, claim to comply) with the required VFR weather minima for Class E airspace as he does so.


I gave an answer, which (it turns out) was the same as the answer they received from Flight Standards (and which clearly didn't sit well with some of the attendees). But I'm curious as to what the folks here think.


Thanks!

DC


Gil Buettner [KAUW]
(Top Gun)
06/15/17 09:06 AM
Re: Class E Airspace Question

I am not sure of the correct answer, but as long as I could comply with visibility and cloud clearance requirements, I would do it.

Scott Dyer [HPN/NY]
(Top Gun)
06/15/17 09:13 AM
Re: Class E Airspace Question

Denny -- I'll say that the VFR departure is inappropriate and the pilot would need to obtain a Special VFR clearance. Although the departure meets the requirements of 91.155 for VFR flight in Class E airspace at the satellite airport, the override of 91.157 applies to "the airspace contained by the upward extension of the lateral boundaries of the controlled airspace designated to the surface of an airport". (Note it says "an airport" and not "the airport", thus it is not limited to Class E airspace defined by reference to the airport of departure.)

The AIM in 4-4-6 expressly references SVFR within Class E airspace (although we normally think of it only as applicable to Class B, C and D surface areas).

Nothing in 4-4-6 or the FARs reference the weather conditions at the satellite airport of departure as being determinative, whereas outside of the "lateral boundaries of the controlled airspace designated to the surface of an airport" the normal 91.155 rules apply and s/he'd be good to go VFR.


Andy Alson (HPN/NY)
(THE TOP GUN!)
06/15/17 11:33 AM
Re: Class E Airspace Question

Scott,

Section 155(d) says you can't "take off or land an aircraft, or enter the traffic pattern of an airport, under VFR, within the lateral boundaries of the surface areas of Class B, Class C, Class D, or Class E airspace designated for an airport--"

Question is is this limitation referring to landing or taking off or entering the traffic pattern of the primary airport in the Class E airspace. Or taking off from a satellite airport. I'd argue the former.

Is this any different than a situation where the airport (a non towered airport in designated Class E airspace) is 0/0 in ground fog with the tops of the fog at 200 feet over the airport with CAVU above. Can you cruise VFR over the airport at 2000 ft AGL in the class E airspace without a special VFR clearance? Why is that any different taking off from the satellite airport in CAVU conditions?

Andy


Andy Alson (HPN/NY)
(THE TOP GUN!)
06/15/17 11:47 AM
Re: Class E Airspace Question

In addition 91.157 talks about when and where a special VFR operation MAY be conducted, not when it is required.

Scott Dyer [HPN/NY]
(Top Gun)
06/15/17 11:56 AM
Re: Class E Airspace Question

Andy -- Your last point first: Special VFR "may" be authorized under 91.157, traffic permitting: it is not mandatory that ATC grant SVFR clearances. .157 is permissive, in that otherwise 91.155(d) would prohibit VFR ops in that Class D or E absent the .157 exception for SVFR.

155(d) talks about being in the lateral confines of Class E designated for "an airport", not necessarily the satellite airport of departure, and requires cloud/vis minimums at "that airport", i.e., the airport for which the Class E is designated. So I think that supports the argument that the a plain VFR departure is not authorized.

And, while one might VFR cruise over an undercast in the last scenario, one isn't potentially climbing through IFR departures into the Class E surface area airport in so doing. (Although, that VFR overflight situation you brought up muddies the waters on a reading prohibiting a satellite airport VFR departure.)


Andy Alson (HPN/NY)
(THE TOP GUN!)
06/15/17 01:05 PM
Re: Class E Airspace Question

Another situation - I've been inbound from the TZ bridge with the airport reporting good VFR conditions with low clouds between the bridge and the airport within the Class D area. When I've requested a special VFR clearance to ease my cloud clearance requirements heading to the good VFR traffic pattern I've been told by the tower that they can't provide a special VFR clearance when the airport is reporting VFR conditions even if it might be needed within the Class D area. Isn't this the other side of the same question? Of course their "can't" may really be just didn't feel like it.

Scott Dyer [HPN/NY]
(Top Gun)
06/15/17 02:00 PM
Re: Class E Airspace Question

Andy -- I had a similar experience years ago, probably in the early '90s....coming from Eastern LI to HPN VFR, the wx was worsening and I was down to 1,000' or so over the Sound (which I didn't like much) in lowering vis, probably 3-5 mi). I asked for a SVFR into BDR, but was told BDR was reporting VFR so no SVFR.

Anyway, to your point.....155(c) prohibits operating beneath the ceiling under VFR within the lateral boundaries of controlled airspace designated to the surface for an airport when the ceiling is less than 1,000 feet. So, without SVFR, unless you can maintain VFR under all of the .155 conditions (including the (c) language about not operating under a ceiling of less than 1,000', you can't operate in the "D" in your example. Of course you almost certainly can avoid flying below a 1,000' ceiling if you bob and weave a bit.

I'm reading the 1,000' ceiling requirement in (c) as being as reported at the surface area airport....especially since there isn't language in (c) parallel to that in (d) relating to visibility (i.e., allowing for flight visibility to suffice if there is no reported ground visibility).

This question is particularly interesting in Denny's example, as the Class E extends up to and including 17,999' MSL. In the Class D situations, at least there's a top around 2,500' AGL...


Andy Alson (HPN/NY)
(THE TOP GUN!)
06/15/17 02:14 PM
Re: Class E Airspace Question

So if you're gonna let me bob and weave to avoid being below a 1000 ft ceiling in the actual spot in which I'm flying even though the airport has a 900 ft ceiling right over the airport, then why can't I do the same thing with VFR conditions vs the need for Special VFR conditions right over the weather reporting airport?

Russell Holton
(AVSIG Member)
06/15/17 02:48 PM
Re: Class E Airspace Question

Quote:

Can a pilot legally depart the private airstrip, and climb through the overlying Class E extension, without contacting the controlling facility? It is assumed that the pilot can comply (or, at least, claim to comply) with the required VFR weather minima for Class E airspace as he does so.




Question from the peanut gallery: Assuming that it would be legal for the pilot to do this if the weather was VFR everywhere, how is the pilot supposed to know that he/she has to do things differently because the central airport is IFR? What was done might not be "legal" but I'm not sure how enforceable unless someone could make a case for "should have known".

Also, is the central airport considered "uncontrolled"? You said "no tower", so I'm guessing there's no report tower either.


Denny Cunningham
(Top Gun)
06/15/17 04:00 PM
Re: Class E Airspace Question

Quote:

...how is the pilot supposed to know that he/she has to do things differently because the central airport is IFR?




I asked the same question, but didn't receive a satisfactory answer.


Quote:

Also, is the central airport considered "uncontrolled"?




Central airport is what we used to call 'uncontrolled", I guess the term "non-towered" is preferred today; in any case, there's no Class D.


Quote:

You said "no tower", so I'm guessing there's no report tower either.




Not sure what you meant by "no report tower either". Just assume there's an accredited weather observer of some sort at the central airport. It used to be pretty common to have various employees, anybody from airport manager to lineboys, certified to take observations at non-towered airports served by a Part 135 operator. I imagine most of that is automated these days.


For the record, Gil, my response was pretty much the same as yours-- I told 'em that, first, if it's good VFR where I'm at, it wouldn't occur to me to check the weather at a non-towered airport six or seven miles away. But even if I did for some reason, and found out it was zero-zero there, it wouldn't prompt me to request any sort of ATC clearance, so long as I was confident I could remain VFR after departure.


Good discussion, guys, I appreciate it. I plan to talk to my HQ contact over the weekend, present some of the ideas presented here, hopefully gain some insight into what prompted the question and see if the muckety-mucks came up with any sort of definitive answer.


Russell Holton
(AVSIG Member)
06/15/17 04:13 PM
Re: Class E Airspace Question

Quote:

Quote:

You said "no tower", so I'm guessing there's no report tower either.




Not sure what you meant by "no report tower either".




Gahhh, I meant to say "remote tower". Dang fingers...


sreyoB yrraL
(AVSIG Member)
06/15/17 05:29 PM
Re: Class E Airspace Question

Quote:

This question is particularly interesting in Denny's example, as the Class E extends up to and including 17,999' MSL. In the Class D situations, at least there's a top around 2,500' AGL...



Wouldn't the airspace above the top of the Class D be Class E, or higher? I wouldn't think there would be any situations where it is not within the CONUS. (Though I have seen it at remote islands in the middle of oceans, i.e. FJDG and FHAW)


Gil Buettner [KAUW]
(Top Gun)
06/15/17 06:41 PM
Re: Class E Airspace Question

Quote:



For the record, Gil, my response was pretty much the same as yours-- I told 'em that, first, if it's good VFR where I'm at, it wouldn't occur to me to check the weather at a non-towered airport six or seven miles away. But even if I did for some reason, and found out it was zero-zero there, it wouldn't prompt me to request any sort of ATC clearance, so long as I was confident I could remain VFR after departure.




When I got to work this morning I asked my boss. He was positive that you need a Special VFR. He based it on his experience at his father's private airport a few miles northwest of Rhinelander, WI, which is Class E.

Of course... he is basing it on what he was told and what is commonly done there, not on any FAR interpretation.


Scott Dyer [HPN/NY]
(Top Gun)
06/15/17 06:59 PM
Re: Class E Airspace Question

Quote:

So if you're gonna let me bob and weave to avoid being below a 1000 ft ceiling in the actual spot in which I'm flying even though the airport has a 900 ft ceiling right over the airport, then why can't I do the same thing with VFR conditions vs the need for Special VFR conditions right over the weather reporting airport?




Andy -- I was working off your hypo, which I thought had HPN VFR while there were lower clouds to the west in the Class D. If HPN were below IFR, you'd need SVFR or an IFR clearance in your hypo.


Andy Alson (HPN/NY)
(THE TOP GUN!)
06/15/17 07:03 PM
Re: Class E Airspace Question

Sorry, you're right. HPN was definitely VFR at the time.

Scott Dyer [HPN/NY]
(Top Gun)
06/15/17 07:11 PM
Re: Class E Airspace Question

Quote:

I told 'em that, first, if it's good VFR where I'm at, it wouldn't occur to me to check the weather at a non-towered airport six or seven miles away. But even if I did for some reason, and found out it was zero-zero there, it wouldn't prompt me to request any sort of ATC clearance, so long as I was confident I could remain VFR after departure.




Some *accomplished* pilots (remember them?) might haul out a sectional before departure to see what manner of airspace overlies the departure airport. ;-) Some of those would note that it's a Class E surface area....which ought to prompt some curiosity as to the weather at the Class E surface area airport. All good things to learn on a pre-departure briefing.

Now, even with that knowledge, I myself am not convinced that the regs require the departing VFR pilot to talk to any controlling ATC facility (SVFR or otherwise)....but I think the language of 91.155 and 91.157 are better interpreted to require SVFR in the situation you mentioned.

And, yes, fun to get into the regs like this. Good to be back discussing such topics!


Scott Dyer [HPN/NY]
(Top Gun)
06/15/17 07:14 PM
Re: Class E Airspace Question

Quote:

Quote:

This question is particularly interesting in Denny's example, as the Class E extends up to and including 17,999' MSL. In the Class D situations, at least there's a top around 2,500' AGL...



Wouldn't the airspace above the top of the Class D be Class E, or higher? I wouldn't think there would be any situations where it is not within the CONUS. (Though I have seen it at remote islands in the middle of oceans, i.e. FJDG and FHAW)




Larry -- No Class D in Denny's example. It's a Class E surface area, so the overlying airspace (assuming not restricted or prohibited) is Class A, above 17,999' MSL.


sreyoB yrraL
(AVSIG Member)
06/15/17 08:05 PM
Re: Class E Airspace Question

Quote:

No Class D in Denny's example.



I was replying to, "In the Class D situations, at least there's a top around 2,500' AGL..."


Scott Dyer [HPN/NY]
(Top Gun)
06/16/17 08:49 AM
Re: Class E Airspace Question

Larry - That was my point, that Class E or higher would overlay a Class B . I'm not aware of Class G above D in the contiguous US.

Gil Buettner [KAUW]
(Top Gun)
06/16/17 11:26 AM
Re: Class E Airspace Question

Quote:

Larry - That was my point, that Class E or higher would overlay a Class B . I'm not aware of Class G above D in the contiguous US.




I think it is Class G above FL 600.


Scott Dyer [HPN/NY]
(Top Gun)
06/16/17 12:42 PM
Re: Class E Airspace Question

Gil -- Certainly. But FL600 isn't immediately overlying Class D!

Jeff Hartmann CIC
(Top Gun)
06/17/17 12:07 PM
Re: Class E Airspace Question

Glad you guys remember all those letters, I don't think I have flown VFR in 15 years....except to fly the hours off of Tom's RV-12.

I think I may renew my CFI just to relearn all that crap :-).


Randy Sohn
(Gradn Exlated Ordre of teh Fyling Fingres)
06/18/17 03:06 PM
Re: Class E Airspace Question

Quote:

Glad you guys remember all those letters




Jeff, same thought, PRECISELY!

best, randy


Scott Dunham (RDU)
(Top Gun)
06/22/17 08:50 PM
Re: Class E Airspace Question

...class G above FL600...

Nope, class E. You can get an IFR clearance for VFR on top up there if you want. :-)


Scott Dunham (RDU)
(Top Gun)
06/22/17 09:07 PM
Re: Class E Airspace Question

The controller that refused an SVFR clearance on the basis that the airport was reporting VFR even if you weren't was wrong - this is what the 7110 says:

b. SVFR operations may be authorized for aircraft operating in or transiting a Class B, Class C, Class D, or Class E surface area when the primary airport is reporting VFR but the pilot advises that basic VFR cannot be maintained.
NOTE:
The basic requirements for issuance of a SVFR clearance in subpara a apply with the obvious exception that weather conditions at the controlling airport are not required to be less than basic VFR minima.


Andy Alson (HPN/NY)
(THE TOP GUN!)
06/22/17 09:31 PM
Re: Class E Airspace Question

Thanks, Scott. That's good to know.

Andy


Scott Dunham (RDU)
(Top Gun)
06/22/17 09:38 PM
Re: Class E Airspace Question

Humble opinion: I could make an argument that 91.155's "that airport" means "the one you're actually taking off or landing at" while "an airport" could still mean the one with weather reporting. And 91.157 does allow the pilot's observation of at least a mile visibility to be determinative at a satellite airport, so even if the whole area was scuzzy but 0/0 at the primary airport, ATC could still issue an SVFR departure clearance for a satellite airport inside the class E surface area if necessary.

Scott Dunham (RDU)
(Top Gun)
06/22/17 09:39 PM
Re: Class E Airspace Question

Well, only if you get your mitts on a surplus U2...

Denny Cunningham
(Top Gun)
06/26/17 02:48 AM
Re: Class E Airspace Question

Talked to the guy at FAA HQ that originally broached the question (he's actually retired FAA now, working for a contractor). He gave me some more details; here's my understanding of the situation as he explained it to me:


The airport in question is Walla Walla, Washington (KALW), which has a tower, but reverts to Class E when the tower is closed. There is a private strip underneath one of the Class E extensions, and the doctor that owns that strip got gigged by the feds for departing his strip when the tower was closed, but the weather reporting at KALW was showing the field to be IFR. The doc claimed he was VFR; the feds said the doc needed a clearance, either IFR or SVFR, to operate in the Class E under those conditions.

The doc said they were wrong. Upon further review, it appears that the doc was right, although perhaps not for the reasons he thought he was.

Turns out, there are actually six (!) different types of Class E airspace, E1 through E6, depending on what elements were used in determining why Class E protection of the airspace was necessary. The Class E that encircles the Walla Walla airport is E2, which is specifically associated with the airport. I think he said it was based on a 4.3nm radius (with some cutouts), and that the lateral dimensions are the same as the Class D when the tower is open. Of course, that airspace goes to the surface.

However, the Class E EXTENSIONS are not E2, they're E4-- and they do not go to the surface, but begin at a designated altitude above the surface (700 feet, IIRC). They exist not because of the airport, but because of the instrument approach.

Apparently, weather reporting at the airport pertains to the E2 portion, but not the E4 portions. So, reported weather at Walla Walla is not relevant to a pilot operating from the private airstrip located under the E4 extension. As long as he can maintain VFR, he's good. If he can't maintain VFR, an IFR clearance is required-- but SVFR is not an option.

Why? Because according to the 7110.65, "SVFR operations may be authorized for aircraft operating in or transiting a Class B, Class C, Class D, or Class E surface area...". The E4 extensions under discussion don't go to the surface, so the controller is prohibited from issuing a SVFR.


BTW, the phone call that prompted my original post came after the folks at HQ asked a FSDO pilot for an opinion, and he told them "If you ask ten different pilots, you'll get ten different answers." They decided to ask a few, and found out he was right. So, they're now developing guidance for both pilots and controllers, on this and similar subjects. They're working with AOPA to find the best way to disseminate the information to the pilot contingent.


Scott Dunham (RDU)
(Top Gun)
06/26/17 07:29 AM
Re: Class E Airspace Question

The charted extensions at ALW are marked by red dashed lines, which according to the VFR chart legend denote class E to the surface, with the area nearby being red-shaded border indicating a 700-foot floor of controlled airspace. I assume the airport in question is Page (9W2), which is inside the red-dashed area so looks to be class E to the surface. If it really started at 700 agl, the red dashed lines would be superfluous because they're inside the red shaded area. Are they saying that the charting is wrong?

Scott Dyer [HPN/NY]
(Top Gun)
06/26/17 10:00 AM
Re: Class E Airspace Question

Denny -- I certainly didn't see that distinction coming!

Andy Alson (HPN/NY)
(THE TOP GUN!)
06/26/17 12:18 PM
Re: Class E Airspace Question

I agree with Scott that the magenta (or red?) dashed lines indicate class E down to the surface. If the airport is either Weller Canyon (my guess) or Page (which doesn't show as a private airport) it is not in the Class D at all, which would mean that the towered airport has no control over that airspace at all. The tower only has control over the Class D airspace associated with the airport and can't issue any clearance outside that airspace since all the Class E airspace does is create different weather minimums for VFR flight than in the nearby Class G airspace.

The discussion of different types of Class E airspace is irrelevent since the tower only has control over Class D airspace.

If the pilot meets the VFR requirements for Class E airspace he should be good to go no matter what the weather is in the Class D airspace nearby.

If the FAA wants the tower to have control over the extensions they need to chart it with blue dashed lines denoting the Class D airspace and tower control rather than with the magenta lines that only denote different weather minimums.

At least that's what it looks like to me.

Andy


Andy Alson (HPN/NY)
(THE TOP GUN!)
06/26/17 12:36 PM
Re: Class E Airspace Question

Looking back in the thread I see that the situation under discussion occurred when the tower was closed, sorry. But that shouldn't change the end result. He's flying in Class E airspace and if he can maintain VFR weather minimums he shouldn't need any type of IFR or SVFR clearance. Here's he not even in what would have been the Class D if the tower was operating so it's very clear. I maintain it should be the same even if he's in the part of the Class E that would have been D if the tower was operating. If that's not what the FAA has in mind probably need to change some of the language in the FARs.

Denny Cunningham
(Top Gun)
06/26/17 02:19 PM
Re: Class E Airspace Question

Quote:

Are they saying that the charting is wrong?




He didn't say that specifically, but if even the chartmakers don't understand the nuances of the various Class E designations, that's another part of the awareness problem that they need to address.


Denny Cunningham
(Top Gun)
06/26/17 02:34 PM
Re: Class E Airspace Question

Quote:

If that's not what the FAA has in mind probably need to change some of the language in the FARs.




My understanding was pretty much the same as yours-- but apparently, it's NOT what they have in mind, which is why the FAA assigned a contractor to review the topic. He indicated we'd probably be seeing some changes to the 7110.65, AIM, etc.; maybe FAR's will be affected as well, I dunno.


Denny Cunningham
(Top Gun)
06/26/17 02:38 PM
Re: Class E Airspace Question

Quote:

Denny -- I certainly didn't see that distinction coming!




Yeah, me neither-- when he started out with, "Are you familiar with the E1 through E6 designations?", I knew I was in trouble!


Scott Dunham (RDU)
(Top Gun)
06/26/17 02:41 PM
Re: Class E Airspace Question

I'm in the UK until Friday and doing this on a phone, so somewhat limited in my research ability (and unable to dredge up the original airspace action...), but if that extension is not supposed to go to the surface it really doesn't need to be charted at all - the whole area is already 700 AGL.

Homework to follow...


Ray Tackett
(Top Gun)
06/26/17 03:21 PM
Class E Airspace Question

... even if the chartmakers don't understand the nuances ...

Might well be the case. Years ago, I reported a couple of errors on the NY
sectional. I had an excellent conversation with the cartographer who phoned
me, and he got the problems corected. However, he was an expert
cartographer, not a pilot, a controller, or an airspace specialist.


Denny Cunningham
(Top Gun)
06/26/17 04:33 PM
Re: Class E Airspace Question

I may be compounding the confusion by the terminology I've used in this thread: the AIM section on Class E (3-2-9) differentiates between "Extension to a surface area" and "Airspace used for transition". I've been loosely using the term "extension", but the area they're talking about is (I think) more accurately described as "transition". I did learn the difference 49 years ago, but apparently it slipped my mind after the change to alphabet airspace....

Regardless, I just don't see evidence anywhere in the AIM section regarding Class E that supports the idea that a pilot operating VFR in Class E has even a communications requirement, let alone a clearance requirement.

For instance, the section on "extensions" specifically says: "The extensions provide controlled airspace to contain standard instrument approach procedures without imposing a communications requirement on pilots operating under VFR." Those extensions are considered part of the surface area-- it would seem that, since communications aren't required there for VFR flights, they wouldn't be required in the transition areas, either.



Tom Charlton
(Top Gun)
06/27/17 11:05 AM
Attachment
Re: Sectional Chart

Quote:

Turns out, there are actually six (!) different types of Class E airspace, E1 through E6


Hi Denny,
Ha . . . who knew? (Rhetorical question)<grin>

Depiction of KALW and 9W2 on sectional chart:


Regards,
Tom Charlton (who doesn’t get no stinking specials with his Piper Cub)


Andy Alson (HPN/NY)
(THE TOP GUN!)
06/27/17 12:19 PM
Re: Sectional Chart

Just to make it more fun, looking at 9W2 in Foreflight, a remark posted there states "no opns durg periods walla walla offl wx report indcs conds below vfr mins unless spl vfr atc clnc is rcvd prior to entering ctlz or depg airport".

No way to tell when this was created or by whom, or why. Wouldn't seem to be regulatory as far as I can tell anyway. It doesn't appear in the A/FD. I don't know where Foreflight gets the "Comments" it shows. Could this have been created in response to the FAA inquiry about the flight in question?

But interesting in this discussion.

Andy


Kcid LlirreM
(Top Gun)
06/27/17 12:40 PM
Re: Sectional Chart

the fact that it mentions control Zone (ctlz) makes me wonder if the FAA is even involved.

Scott Dunham (RDU)
(Top Gun)
06/27/17 01:18 PM
Re: Class E Airspace Question

Who says you can't do homework on a phone?

The HQ bunnies seem a bit confused - according to the Federal Register entry for that airspace, the extensions go to the surface. I assume the FAA considers both the 4.3 nm class D/E area and the surface area extensions to be class E surface area associated with the airport, so I'm leaning toward SVFR required to take off/land anywhere in it if ALW is reporting less than VFR.

The "tower authority" limited to class D argument strikes me as a red herring, since a VFR tower is essentially issuing SVFR clearances by delegation from the overlying IFR control facility. If the wx requires SVFR, the pilot has to get it from somebody - and the extensions are surface whether the ATCT is open or not.


Andy Alson (HPN/NY)
(THE TOP GUN!)
06/27/17 01:48 PM
Re: Class E Airspace Question

Just wondering how you'd read section 91.157(c)(2) which seems to say that to take off SVFR you'd need to have 1sm ground visibility which is defined as visibility from the cockpit of the aircraft at a satellite airport that does not have weather reporting capabilities? Why would that be necessary to say if the weather at the primary airport is supposed to be controlling for takeoff at the satellite? Seems this says that you could take off in SVFR even when the primary airport was 0/0. If that's true why would it stop you from taking off VFR with unlimited vis there?

Wouldn't this section say that vis at the primary airport controls for takeoffs there, but vis at the satellite airport controls for takeoffs at that field?


Denny Cunningham
(Top Gun)
06/27/17 03:38 PM
Re: Sectional Chart

Thanks for the uploading the graphic, Tom!

I received an email this morning with a link to where the E1 through E6 stuff is found (reference to this document is also found in the Federal Register link Scott posted):

7400.11A

It's a big download (1500 pages), but it appears the Class E stuff starts at section 6000. For those who want to play along at home, here's what it says specifically about Walla Walla's Class E. which appears to be a combination of E2, E4, and E5:

1. ANM WA E2 Walla Walla, WA
Walla Walla Regional Airport, WA
(lat. 46°05'43' N., long. 118°17'09'' W.)
That airspace extending upward from the surface within a 4.3-mile radius of the Walla Walla Regional Airport.

2. ANM WA E4 Walla Walla, WA
Walla Walla Regional Airport, WA
(lat. 46°05'43'' N., long. 118°17'09'' W.)
That airspace extending upward from the surface within 2.7 miles each side of the Walla Walla 215° bearing from the airport extending from the 4.3-mile radius of Walla Walla Regional Airport to 7.5 miles southwest of the airport, and within 4.1 miles each side of the Walla Walla 35° bearing from the airport extending from the 4.3-mile radius of Walla Walla Regional Airport to 13.4 miles northeast of the airport.

3. ANM WA E5 Walla Walla, WA
Walla Walla Regional Airport, WA
(lat. 46°05'43'' N., long. 118°17'09'' W.)
Walla Walla Regional Airport, point in space coordinates
(lat. 46°03'27'' N., long. 118°12'20'' W.)
That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface bounded by a line beginning at lat. 45°52'29'' N., long. 118°23'027'' W.; to lat. 45°49'51'' N., long. 118°26'02'' W.; to lat. 45°57'17'' N., long. 118°40'49'' W.; to lat. 46°10'22'' N., long. 118°27'48'' W.; to lat. 46°08'46'' N., long. 118°24'32'' W.; to lat. 46°14'38'' N., long. 118°18'44'' W.; to lat. 46°16'07'' N., long.
118°21'47'' W.; to lat. 46°29'20'' N., long. 118°08'35'' W.; to lat. 46°22'02'' N., long. 117°53'24'' W.; to lat. 46°14'25'' N., long. 118°01'11'' W.; and that airspace within a 13.4-mile radius of point in space coordinates at lat. 46°03'27'' N., long. 118°12'20'' W., from the 052° bearing from the Walla Walla Regional Airport clockwise to the 198° bearing.


Denny Cunningham
(Top Gun)
06/27/17 03:43 PM
Re: Sectional Chart

Quote:

Just to make it more fun, looking at 9W2 in Foreflight, a remark posted there states "no opns durg periods walla walla offl wx report indcs conds below vfr mins unless spl vfr atc clnc is rcvd prior to entering ctlz or depg airport".

Andy




That's interesting, I'll pass it on. As Kcid said, the reference to a control zone makes me wonder if the feds had anything to do with the note-- sounds like something the airstrip owner might have added after he got gigged.


Denny Cunningham
(Top Gun)
06/27/17 03:47 PM
Re: Class E Airspace Question

Quote:

The HQ bunnies seem a bit confused...




Good points, Scott, thanks. I'll pass 'em on and post if I hear anything back.


Scott Dunham (RDU)
(Top Gun)
06/27/17 04:56 PM
Re: Class E Airspace Question

Turn that around: if the primary airport is below VFR, you need an SVFR clearance to operate below the ceiling in the class E surface area. That's what's being controlled by the wx at the primary airport.

Having established that SVFR is required within the surface area, they're trying to keep you from departing the satellite airport with 1/2 mile visibility just because the primary airport is, for example, reporting 1 1/2 miles. They're expecting the pilot to assess local conditions and determine that SVFR minima exist at the satellite airport.


Russell Holton
(AVSIG Member)
06/27/17 05:47 PM
Re: Sectional Chart

Quote:

For those who want to play along at home, here's what it says specifically about Walla Walla's Class E. which appears to be a combination of E2, E4, and E5:




As if the unforgiving gods of fate and lift weren't bad enough. It's good to be a non-pilot.


Richard Palm (PAO)
(Top Gun)
06/28/17 01:46 PM
Re: Class E Airspace Question

Great thread!


Contact Us AVSIG

Powered by UBB.threads™ 6.5.5

Logout   Main Index    AVSIG Aviation Forum