Narrative:

We were being vectored from the north for a visual approach to runway 27 at mem. During the descent from 4;000 ft to 3;000 ft the controller told us we were re-entering class B airspace and that we had been out of class B airspace for about 1 mile. The threat was (and continues to be) the lack of a practical; real-time means for pilots to detect where they are in relation to the base of class B airspace around an airport. It is totally impractical (too attention consuming during a critical phase of flight) to try to monitor on the efb the aircraft's position relative to the varying radials; dmes and altitudes. Suggestions from a piloting standpoint: 1) slow to 200 KTS whenever approaching a class B airspace. The downside of this approach is increased delays at airports; as class B starts a considerable distance from airports. 2) never descend before it is required to make altitude restrictions on the approach. The downside here is the increased potential for being high/fast if there is any misjudgment. From an automation standpoint; enhance automation; showing class B airspace on the pfd or; perhaps better (to avoid excessive data on the pfd); showing aircraft location on a moving map on the class B page of the efb. From a regulatory standpoint: simplify the speed requirement; perhaps to be similar to that used by canada (200 KTS if below 3;000 AGL within 10 miles of an airport).

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: Wide Body Aircraft Captain is informed by ATC aircraft is reentering Class B after having been out of it. Reporter comments on the difficulty of monitoring Class B in the flight deck with current instruments.

Narrative: We were being vectored from the north for a visual approach to Runway 27 at MEM. During the descent from 4;000 FT to 3;000 FT the Controller told us we were re-entering Class B airspace and that we had been out of Class B airspace for about 1 mile. The threat was (and continues to be) the lack of a practical; real-time means for pilots to detect where they are in relation to the base of Class B airspace around an airport. It is totally impractical (too attention consuming during a critical phase of flight) to try to monitor on the EFB the aircraft's position relative to the varying radials; DMEs and altitudes. Suggestions from a piloting standpoint: 1) Slow to 200 KTS whenever approaching a Class B airspace. The downside of this approach is increased delays at airports; as Class B starts a considerable distance from airports. 2) Never descend before it is required to make altitude restrictions on the approach. The downside here is the increased potential for being high/fast if there is any misjudgment. From an automation standpoint; enhance automation; showing Class B airspace on the PFD or; perhaps better (to avoid excessive data on the PFD); showing aircraft location on a moving map on the Class B page of the EFB. From a regulatory standpoint: simplify the speed requirement; perhaps to be similar to that used by Canada (200 KTS if below 3;000 AGL within 10 miles of an airport).

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of July 2013 and automatically converted to unabbreviated mixed upper/lowercase text. This report is for informational purposes with no guarantee of accuracy. See NASA's ASRS site for official report.