HELI PLT REFUSES ATCT CTLR DEP ROUTING AFTER TKOF DUE TO THE POTENTIAL OF INTERFERENCE WITH FIXED WING ACFT IN THE TFC PATTERN AND ON APCH TO LAND. CTLR REQUESTED RPTR TO CALL THE TWR.

Date: 2001-10 · Aircraft: Bell 47

Anomalies: atc-issue-all-types|deviation-discrepancy-procedural-published-material-policy

Synopsis

HELI PLT REFUSES ATCT CTLR DEP ROUTING AFTER TKOF DUE TO THE POTENTIAL OF INTERFERENCE WITH FIXED WING ACFT IN THE TFC PATTERN AND ON APCH TO LAND. CTLR REQUESTED RPTR TO CALL THE TWR.

Narrative

FAR PART 91.126(B)(2); REGARDING OPS AT AN ARPT IN CLASS G AIRSPACE; STATES 'EACH PLT OF A HELI SHALL AVOID THE FLOW OF FIXED WING ACFT.' FAR 91.127(A); REGARDING OPS AT AN ARPT IN CLASS E AIRSPACE; STATES; '...EACH PERSON OPERATING AN ACFT ON OR IN THE VICINITY OF AN ARPT IN A CLASS E AIRSPACE AREA MUST COMPLY WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF 91.126.' FAR 91.129(A); REGARDING OPS IN CLASS D AIRSPACE; STATES; '...EACH PERSON MUST COMPLY WITH 91.126 AND 91.127.' AND; FAR 91.129(F)(2) REITERATES THAT '...EACH PLT MUST AVOID THE FLOW OF FIXED WING TFC; IF OPERATING A HELI.' I WAS REFUSED DEP AND ARR PATHS WHICH WOULD HAVE BEEN IN ACCORDANCE WITH THESE SECTIONS OF THE FARS. INSTEAD; I WAS PUT IN A DANGEROUS TFC SIT BY THE HWD LCL CTLR WHILE FLYING MY BELL-47 HELI IN THE LCL TFC PATTERN AT HWD FOLLOWING MY REQUEST TO THE LCL CTLR FOR A DEP FROM THE PATTERN THAT WOULD HAVE KEPT ME CLR OF THE NUMEROUS AIRPLANES THAT WERE IN THE R AND L TFC PATTERNS FOR RWYS 28R&L; RESPECTIVELY. UPON RETURN TO HWD APPROX 20 MINS LATER; I WAS ALSO REFUSED AN ARR PATH THAT WOULD HAVE KEPT ME CLR OF THE AIRPLANE TFC. INSTEAD; THE CTLR INSTRUCTED ME TO FLY ACROSS THE FINAL APCH OF BOTH RWYS TO THE OTHER SIDE OF THE ARPT AND TO EXPECT AN ARR PATH THAT WOULD HAVE HAD ME FLYING THROUGH THE R DOWNWIND TFC. I ELECTED TO DECLINE THESE INSTRUCTIONS WHICH WOULD HAVE MIXED ME AGAIN WITH NUMEROUS AIRPLANES IN A BUSY PATTERN. THE CTLR DID NOT APPRECIATE WHAT SHE TOOK FOR AN UNCOOPERATIVE ATTITUDE ON MY PART. WE DEBATED THE ISSUE ON THE TWR FREQ. I FINALLY MANAGED TO ARRIVE AT MY INTENDED LNDG AREA WITH AN ARR THAT WAS ACCEPTABLE TO US BOTH. ABOUT 10 MINS LATER; I CALLED FOR ANOTHER TKOF AND REQUESTED MY PREFERRED DEP. I WAS GIVEN THE SAME DEP THAT HAD PREVIOUSLY LED TO AN UNSAFE MIX OF AIRPLANES AND HELI. I DECLINED THAT CLRNC AND ASKED AGAIN FOR THE NON INTERFERING DEP ONLY TO BE TOLD TO CALL THE TWR TO DISCUSS A POSSIBLE VIOLATION. AT NO TIME DID I OPERATE OR MANEUVER THE HELI OTHER THAN IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CTLR'S CLRNCS. I DID; AS PIC; DECLINE AN ARR CLRNC AND A SUBSEQUENT DEP CLRNC WITH THE WORDS 'UNABLE TO COMPLY' AND; IN EACH CASE; REQUESTED AN ALTERNATE THAT WOULD HAVE KEPT ME CLR OF THE FIXED WING TFC AND IN ACCORDANCE WITH FAR 91.129. CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING INFO: RPTR STATED THAT SHE HAD NOT HEARD BACK FROM THE TWR SUPVR AS TO THE OUTCOME OF HIS REVIEW AND INVESTIGATION OF THIS MATTER. HOWEVER; SHE DID SAY THAT THE CTLR WAS NEW TO THE FACILITY AND THAT OVER A PERIOD OF YRS; THE OTHER CTLRS DID USE THE ROUTING SHE HAD REQUESTED AND WAS USED TO FLYING.

Source: NASA Aviation Safety Reporting System (public domain). Reports are voluntary submissions and are not verified by NASA.