Narrative:

I was approaching daytona beach from the south using flight following. I was in communication with orlando approach on an assigned transponder code. I was descending toward an intended landing at daytona; when orlando approach informed me daytona approach was not answering orlando's calls for hand-off. Orlando instructed me to reset my transponder to 1200 and provided a radio frequency I was to use to contact daytona beach approach.remaining clear of daytona's class C perimeter; I continued descent and selected the radio frequency for daytona approach. I could hear the daytona controller communicating with other aircraft. When the frequency was clear; I made a call to daytona approach announcing my north number. My initial calls were not acknowledged. Remaining clear of the outer perimeter of daytona beach's class C; I continued a descent. I altered my course to the left so as to clockwise circle to outside of the class C. This was in a direction that would facilitate my integration into traffic flow landing runway 7. While conducting these maneuvers; I continued repeating my radio calls to daytona approach. After several calls I was answered by the daytona controller. I responded to his call; stated my altitude and received from the controller a radio frequency to use next. I was not instructed to remain clear of class C airspace. Having established communication with the controller; I continued through the outer perimeter of class C as I entered the radio frequency provided by the daytona controller. I could hear another daytona beach controller communicating with other aircraft on the frequency. When the frequency was clear; I called the controller with my north number. My first call was not acknowledged. I slowed my speed; lowered my landing gear; maintained a visual lookout for other aircraft while observing the traffic information provided by the ads B; and tis installed in my aircraft. I repeated my calls on the radio frequency provided the first daytona beach controller I had contact with. After several calls I was answered by the daytona beach controller; with the phrase 'stay clear of class charlie'. I replied I was already in the class C and had previously established communication with a daytona beach controller. I complied with the controller's instructions and subsequently safely landed at daytona beach. I was informed by the ground controller that I may have committed a violation.during this situation; background noises were transmitted through the controller's microphone that caused me to surmise a change in controllers had taken place. Other conversations could be overheard suggestive of training operations in the tower. It subsequently came to my attention that the tower staff was attempting to manage equipment outage and a backlog of administrative duties. It seems the only option available to individual controllers to manage their workload is to not accept both communications form aircraft and orlando approach. That should be changed. I think that the daytona 'high controller' may have been overwhelmed. This is evidenced in his inability to accept the orlando hand-off; and inability to respond to the radio calls of other aircraft. When I eventually communicated with him; I was passed on to a second controller without first being assigned a discrete transponder code. It appears he did not effectively hand off my contact and intentions to the fellow controller whose radio frequency he assigned to me. It was never in my training that a discrete transponder code should be an added criteria necessary for entry into class C. Now; it will be something I question before entering class C airspace.this airport hosts a large flight school. The flight school is a private enterprise; whose business has expanded to a point it appears to be impinging on its host airport's ability to serve the public. Perhaps limits are needed to distribute flight training activities across more airports so as not to overwhelm theresources of a geographic area. Non-communication as a means of managing workload must be stopped. If controllers cannot respond to new radio calls; the ATIS and airport notams should be updated with this information and an arrival scheduling system put into effect.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: M20 pilot reported A DAB Class C airspace incursion. Communication difficulties with DAB TRACON was cited as a contributing factor.

Narrative: I was approaching Daytona Beach from the South using Flight Following. I was in communication with Orlando Approach on an assigned transponder code. I was descending toward an intended landing at Daytona; when Orlando Approach informed me Daytona Approach was not answering Orlando's calls for hand-off. Orlando instructed me to reset my transponder to 1200 and provided a radio frequency I was to use to contact Daytona Beach Approach.Remaining clear of Daytona's Class C perimeter; I continued descent and selected the radio frequency for Daytona approach. I could hear the Daytona controller communicating with other aircraft. When the frequency was clear; I made a call to Daytona Approach announcing my N number. My initial calls were not acknowledged. Remaining clear of the outer perimeter of Daytona Beach's Class C; I continued a descent. I altered my course to the left so as to clockwise circle to outside of the Class C. This was in a direction that would facilitate my integration into traffic flow landing runway 7. While conducting these maneuvers; I continued repeating my radio calls to Daytona approach. After several calls I was answered by the Daytona controller. I responded to his call; stated my altitude and received from the controller a radio frequency to use next. I was not instructed to remain clear of Class C airspace. Having established communication with the controller; I continued through the outer perimeter of Class C as I entered the radio frequency provided by the Daytona Controller. I could hear another Daytona Beach controller communicating with other aircraft on the frequency. When the frequency was clear; I called the controller with my N number. My first call was not acknowledged. I slowed my speed; lowered my landing gear; maintained a visual lookout for other aircraft while observing the traffic information provided by the ADS B; and TIS installed in my aircraft. I repeated my calls on the radio frequency provided the first Daytona Beach controller I had contact with. After several calls I was answered by the Daytona Beach controller; with the phrase 'Stay Clear of Class Charlie'. I replied I was already in the Class C and had previously established communication with a Daytona Beach Controller. I complied with the controller's instructions and subsequently safely landed at Daytona Beach. I was informed by the ground controller that I may have committed a violation.During this situation; background noises were transmitted through the controller's microphone that caused me to surmise a change in controllers had taken place. Other conversations could be overheard suggestive of training operations in the tower. It subsequently came to my attention that the tower staff was attempting to manage equipment outage and a backlog of administrative duties. It seems the only option available to individual controllers to manage their workload is to not accept both communications form aircraft and Orlando Approach. That should be changed. I think that the Daytona 'high controller' may have been overwhelmed. This is evidenced in his inability to accept the Orlando hand-off; and inability to respond to the radio calls of other aircraft. When I eventually communicated with him; I was passed on to a second controller without first being assigned a discrete transponder code. It appears he did not effectively hand off my contact and intentions to the fellow controller whose radio frequency he assigned to me. It was never in my training that a discrete transponder code should be an added criteria necessary for entry into Class C. Now; it will be something I question before entering Class C airspace.This airport hosts a large flight school. The flight school is a private enterprise; whose business has expanded to a point it appears to be impinging on its host airport's ability to serve the public. Perhaps limits are needed to distribute flight training activities across more airports so as not to overwhelm theresources of a geographic area. Non-communication as a means of managing workload must be stopped. If controllers cannot respond to new radio calls; the ATIS and airport NOTAMs should be updated with this information and an arrival scheduling system put into effect.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site 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.