GA small aircraft questions legality of military controller assigning altitude not in accordance wit...

Attributes
ACN	102704
Time
Date	198901
Day	Mon
Local Time Of Day	1801 To 2400
Place
Locale Reference	atc facility : suu airport : sac airport : apc
State Reference	CA
Altitude	msl bound lower : 3000 msl bound upper : 5500
Environment
Flight Conditions	VMC
Light	Night
Aircraft 1
Controlling Facilities	tracon : suu
Operator	general aviation : instructional
Make Model Name	Small Aircraft, High Wing, 1 Eng, Fixed Gear
Flight Phase	cruise other
Route In Use	enroute : direct
Flight Plan	None
Person 1
Affiliation	Other
Function	instruction : instructor
Qualification	pilot : atp pilot : cfi
Experience	flight time last 90 days : 30 flight time total : 15000 flight time type : 1500
ASRS Report	102704
Person 2
Affiliation	Other
Function	instruction : trainee
Events
Anomaly	other anomaly other other spatial deviation
Independent Detector	other flight crewa
Resolutory Action	controller : issued new clearance none taken : anomaly accepted
Consequence	Other
Supplementary
Primary Problem	Ambiguous
Air Traffic Incident	other

Narrative:

After departing sac exec, runway 20, started right turn to 230 degrees (tower open). Got release from tower to talk to travis approach, as flight would take us through their airspace. After contact and radar identify, asked for 3000' MSL en route altitude, or whatever they would like us at for traffic, flight following radar traffic sep service. After about 5 mins they requested we either climb to 5500' or depart the area to the west because of 8 or 9 heavy's in the travis pattern. We said we'd like to climb to 5500' and fly direct to apc. We shortly thereafter contacted the controller again to confirm 5500' because of the hemispherical rule and he confirmed 5500'. We climbed to 5500' as per instructions and continued at this altitude for about 15 mins before being released to descend toward napa airport. Our concern is that even though we were instructed to fly at 5500' by ATC, we were not obligated to even contact approach or tower because we were above their air traffic area.

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: GA SMA QUESTIONS LEGALITY OF MIL CTLR ASSIGNING ALT NOT IN ACCORDANCE WITH HEADING ALT RULE WHILE TRANSITING A MIL ALERT AREA.

Narrative: AFTER DEPARTING SAC EXEC, RWY 20, STARTED RIGHT TURN TO 230 DEGS (TWR OPEN). GOT RELEASE FROM TWR TO TALK TO TRAVIS APCH, AS FLT WOULD TAKE US THROUGH THEIR AIRSPACE. AFTER CONTACT AND RADAR IDENT, ASKED FOR 3000' MSL ENRTE ALT, OR WHATEVER THEY WOULD LIKE US AT FOR TFC, FLT FOLLOWING RADAR TFC SEP SVC. AFTER ABOUT 5 MINS THEY REQUESTED WE EITHER CLB TO 5500' OR DEPART THE AREA TO THE W BECAUSE OF 8 OR 9 HVY'S IN THE TRAVIS PATTERN. WE SAID WE'D LIKE TO CLB TO 5500' AND FLY DIRECT TO APC. WE SHORTLY THEREAFTER CONTACTED THE CTLR AGAIN TO CONFIRM 5500' BECAUSE OF THE HEMISPHERICAL RULE AND HE CONFIRMED 5500'. WE CLBED TO 5500' AS PER INSTRUCTIONS AND CONTINUED AT THIS ALT FOR ABOUT 15 MINS BEFORE BEING RELEASED TO DSND TOWARD NAPA ARPT. OUR CONCERN IS THAT EVEN THOUGH WE WERE INSTRUCTED TO FLY AT 5500' BY ATC, WE WERE NOT OBLIGATED TO EVEN CONTACT APCH OR TWR BECAUSE WE WERE ABOVE THEIR ATA.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of August 2007 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.

GA small aircraft questions legality of military controller assigning altitude not in accordance with heading altitude rule while transiting a military alert area.