From: M21208@mwvm.mitre.org
Subject: Re: "remain clear of the ARSA..."
Organization: The MITRE Corporation, McLean VA 22102
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 1992 07:47:07 GMT

In article <7480324@hpnmdla.sr.hp.com>
glenb@hpnmdla.sr.hp.com (Glen Baker) writes:
 
>
>   "Monterey Approach Cessna 8436Z off of Carmel Valley 1000 for 4500"
>
>   "36Z Monterey Approach remain clear of the ARSA"
>
> Right. Now I'm faced with some real nifty alternatives:
>
>   1) Fly down the valley, skirt the ARSA by hugging the hills, fly
>      under the marine layer, out to sea, and wait for Approach to pull
>      their heads out.
>
>   2) Turn around within the confines of the valley, below 2500 MSL and
>      head east (actually not as bad as it sounds, the valley *is*
>      wide enough, it's just sorta annoying and requires a bit of
>      attention").
>
>   3) "Monterey Approach 36Z. Say date. Say time. Say initials."
>
> What's the "right" thing to do??
>
As with so many other ATC-pilot interaction problems, a phone call or visit to
the tower might do wonders.  (FAA facilities are listed under US Government,
Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, and then finally
 the facility name.)  They will no doubt have a procedures specialist who
should be able to answer any questions you may have, and it should also be
possible for you to sit down with the ARSA controllers and watch for a while
if you want.  It can be a very enlightening experience, and for that reason
the FAA generally encourages such visits.  Give it a try.
 
Now, for a more general answer to "Why are ARSA controllers such a nuisance
sometimes?"  When ARSAs were sold to an unsuspecting public, it was very much
on the basis that radio contact was the only requirement for entry.  One could
possible extend that to "further permission not required", and many pilots
took it just that way.  Now, look at it from the controller's point of view.
He/she is legally responsible for providing specific services to aircraft in
the ARSA, including separation from other traffic.  To do that, some minimal
information is required, like altitude, location, and some idea of intentions.
Now, you're sitting in a dark room when you hear "Mudflap Approach, Skyhawk
1234P" over the radio.  For all you know, he's four inches outside the ARSA,
forgot to turn on his transponder, has one of your airliners boresighted, and
doesn't see it yet.  If you respond with "Skyhawk 1234P, Mudflap Approach, go
ahead", by the rules you have just accepted separation responsibility for the
near mid-air that's about to occur.  Starting to figure out why they're not
too keen on letting unidentified voices on the radio into the ARSA without
a bit of chat first?
 
The controllers are really in a box - they don't want to delay you without good
reason, but they are held responsible for any aircraft they accept into the
ARSA, and prudence requires that they be careful about it.  In situations where
ATC workload is high, they have to provide service to as many aircraft as they
can without allowing themselves to get completely swamped and end up not
providing a reasonable standard of service to *anybody.*  That may dictate
temporary refusal to accept more aircraft.  The ATC handbook does not have
any provisions which allow controllers to "give up" when it gets busy, although
ARSA services are occasionally suspended on a more formal basis to accommodate
air shows or other concentrations of aircraft which can be planned for in
advance.
 
 
Newsgroups: rec.aviation