Narrative:

Pal-waukee airport and glenview naval air base are 4 mi apart. Glenview being east of pal-waukee. Small transport X had requested an eastbound heading while I was on the ground at pal- waukee. I was cleared for takeoff on runway 24 at pal-waukee and just after liftoff was told by pal-waukee tower to turn left to the east and contact glenview tower on 126.2. I called glenview immediately prior to completing my turn to the east and was told to stand by. I called them again when I was just southeast of pal-waukee heading east and was again told to stand by. When I was approximately 1 mi west of glenview I called again informing glenview tower that I would be coming over the top. Glenview tower then issued me TAS and the remainder of the flight in their air traffic area was uneventful. I was en route chicago meigs airport and upon landing was advised to call the tower supervisor at glenview. As I discussed the situation with the tower supervisor, she indicated that I had violated their air traffic area by popping up overhead when they were busy. Although the tower supervisor completed a report, contending that I was in violation, they eventually decided not to proceed with it. During the conversation, she indicated that the west edge of their air traffic area was the ns tollway, although it is not published anywhere. When I inquired about what she thought I should have done, since I was following my last issued ATC instructions, she simply stated to stay out of their air traffic area. I have since discussed the situation with the springfield illinois flight standards district office and the dupage, illinois flight standards district office (who covers the area). Both offices indicated that I had proceeded correctly and did not violate any FARS. The springfield FSDO officer contacted pal-waukee tower regarding their procedure for eastbound VFR traffic. They indicated that they simply turn the aircraft east and instruct them to contact glenview tower. The rest is up to the pilot. In addition, when asked if it would cause problems if an aircraft turned abruptly or began circling in order to avoid glenview, they replied that it would. The FAA officer inquired about their air traffic area and they indicated a LOA used the n-s tollway between the airports as a dividing line. They also stated they have a direct line to glenview tower, but it is rarely used. The dupage FSDO officer contacted 1 of the top chicago approach controllers on duty to verify if I had in fact established communication with the glenview tower when they advised me to stand by. He stated that I had established communication meaning it was legal to enter the air traffic area. The FSDO advised me that my actions were correct in this situation and it would have been incorrect for me to maneuver otherwise without contacting pal-waukee again. The officer also told me that there is no official dividing line between the 2 atas, but they both have a standard 5 mi radius, meaning the 2 airports share airspace. The problem is when both airports are busy, an aircraft could be released from 1 controller and become a hazard to the other airport without doing anything incorrect. Since fixed wing aircraft cannot stop in midair to wait for a busy controller, I feel the towers, since their airspace overlap, should use the direct line already in place to obtain authorization for a VFR aircraft to proceed toward the other airport prior to clearing it for takeoff. I feel this would eliminate the occasional hazardous situation when one or both of the airports happen to be busy.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: SMT X UNAUTH UNCOORD AIRSPACE ENTRY. PLTDEV.

Narrative: PAL-WAUKEE ARPT AND GLENVIEW NAVAL AIR BASE ARE 4 MI APART. GLENVIEW BEING E OF PAL-WAUKEE. SMT X HAD REQUESTED AN EBOUND HDG WHILE I WAS ON THE GND AT PAL- WAUKEE. I WAS CLRED FOR TKOF ON RWY 24 AT PAL-WAUKEE AND JUST AFTER LIFTOFF WAS TOLD BY PAL-WAUKEE TWR TO TURN L TO THE E AND CONTACT GLENVIEW TWR ON 126.2. I CALLED GLENVIEW IMMEDIATELY PRIOR TO COMPLETING MY TURN TO THE E AND WAS TOLD TO STAND BY. I CALLED THEM AGAIN WHEN I WAS JUST SE OF PAL-WAUKEE HDG E AND WAS AGAIN TOLD TO STAND BY. WHEN I WAS APPROX 1 MI W OF GLENVIEW I CALLED AGAIN INFORMING GLENVIEW TWR THAT I WOULD BE COMING OVER THE TOP. GLENVIEW TWR THEN ISSUED ME TAS AND THE REMAINDER OF THE FLT IN THEIR ATA WAS UNEVENTFUL. I WAS ENRTE CHICAGO MEIGS ARPT AND UPON LNDG WAS ADVISED TO CALL THE TWR SUPVR AT GLENVIEW. AS I DISCUSSED THE SITUATION WITH THE TWR SUPVR, SHE INDICATED THAT I HAD VIOLATED THEIR ATA BY POPPING UP OVERHEAD WHEN THEY WERE BUSY. ALTHOUGH THE TWR SUPVR COMPLETED A RPT, CONTENDING THAT I WAS IN VIOLATION, THEY EVENTUALLY DECIDED NOT TO PROCEED WITH IT. DURING THE CONVERSATION, SHE INDICATED THAT THE W EDGE OF THEIR ATA WAS THE NS TOLLWAY, ALTHOUGH IT IS NOT PUBLISHED ANYWHERE. WHEN I INQUIRED ABOUT WHAT SHE THOUGHT I SHOULD HAVE DONE, SINCE I WAS FOLLOWING MY LAST ISSUED ATC INSTRUCTIONS, SHE SIMPLY STATED TO STAY OUT OF THEIR ATA. I HAVE SINCE DISCUSSED THE SITUATION WITH THE SPRINGFIELD ILLINOIS FLT STANDARDS DISTRICT OFFICE AND THE DUPAGE, ILLINOIS FLT STANDARDS DISTRICT OFFICE (WHO COVERS THE AREA). BOTH OFFICES INDICATED THAT I HAD PROCEEDED CORRECTLY AND DID NOT VIOLATE ANY FARS. THE SPRINGFIELD FSDO OFFICER CONTACTED PAL-WAUKEE TWR REGARDING THEIR PROC FOR EBOUND VFR TFC. THEY INDICATED THAT THEY SIMPLY TURN THE ACFT E AND INSTRUCT THEM TO CONTACT GLENVIEW TWR. THE REST IS UP TO THE PLT. IN ADDITION, WHEN ASKED IF IT WOULD CAUSE PROBLEMS IF AN ACFT TURNED ABRUPTLY OR BEGAN CIRCLING IN ORDER TO AVOID GLENVIEW, THEY REPLIED THAT IT WOULD. THE FAA OFFICER INQUIRED ABOUT THEIR ATA AND THEY INDICATED A LOA USED THE N-S TOLLWAY BTWN THE ARPTS AS A DIVIDING LINE. THEY ALSO STATED THEY HAVE A DIRECT LINE TO GLENVIEW TWR, BUT IT IS RARELY USED. THE DUPAGE FSDO OFFICER CONTACTED 1 OF THE TOP CHICAGO APCH CTLRS ON DUTY TO VERIFY IF I HAD IN FACT ESTABLISHED COM WITH THE GLENVIEW TWR WHEN THEY ADVISED ME TO STAND BY. HE STATED THAT I HAD ESTABLISHED COM MEANING IT WAS LEGAL TO ENTER THE ATA. THE FSDO ADVISED ME THAT MY ACTIONS WERE CORRECT IN THIS SITUATION AND IT WOULD HAVE BEEN INCORRECT FOR ME TO MANEUVER OTHERWISE WITHOUT CONTACTING PAL-WAUKEE AGAIN. THE OFFICER ALSO TOLD ME THAT THERE IS NO OFFICIAL DIVIDING LINE BTWN THE 2 ATAS, BUT THEY BOTH HAVE A STANDARD 5 MI RADIUS, MEANING THE 2 ARPTS SHARE AIRSPACE. THE PROBLEM IS WHEN BOTH ARPTS ARE BUSY, AN ACFT COULD BE RELEASED FROM 1 CTLR AND BECOME A HAZARD TO THE OTHER ARPT WITHOUT DOING ANYTHING INCORRECT. SINCE FIXED WING ACFT CANNOT STOP IN MIDAIR TO WAIT FOR A BUSY CTLR, I FEEL THE TWRS, SINCE THEIR AIRSPACE OVERLAP, SHOULD USE THE DIRECT LINE ALREADY IN PLACE TO OBTAIN AUTHORIZATION FOR A VFR ACFT TO PROCEED TOWARD THE OTHER ARPT PRIOR TO CLRING IT FOR TKOF. I FEEL THIS WOULD ELIMINATE THE OCCASIONAL HAZARDOUS SITUATION WHEN ONE OR BOTH OF THE ARPTS HAPPEN TO BE BUSY.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of July 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.