Narrative:

We departed arlington, tx, airport VFR for a training flight to practice IFR approachs at act. Approximately 30 DME northeast of act, I contacted ZFW and requested the VOR R32 approach via the 15 DME arc. They advised us to contact act approach. The request was repeated to them for the practice approach. They advised us to 'stand by.' we repeatedly called as we flew the arc, but no response until we were southeast of the VOR. Routine communication with other aircraft by approach control was being conducted, but they would not respond to our calls. The ATIS did contain some information relative to the temporary restr area, but the altitudes were not clear, and we elected to fly the arc at 5000 ft to be, what we thought, well above the area. I feel that if approach would have responded more timely to our calls, and if ZFW would have advised us about the temporary restr area, the confusion would not have existed, and we would have remained well clear of the area. Approach control advised, by telephone, that approach radar observed our flight path from our initial call until after we exited the restr area, but no explanation was offered as to why the controller did not respond to our calls. Corrective action suggestion: disseminate information more widely for temporary restr areas, especially for VFR pilots. Local (and all area) controllers inform all aircraft operating near the affected area, upon initial contact. IFR approach charts be cancelled, that are affected by the temporary restr area. Call from jet aircraft be acknowledged more quickly by ATC.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: FLC OF CPR LTT JET ACFT INADVERTENTLY PENETRATED A TEMPORARY RESTRICTED AREA WHILE MAKING A DME INST PROC ARC IN VFR CONDITIONS WITHOUT CLRNC.

Narrative: WE DEPARTED ARLINGTON, TX, ARPT VFR FOR A TRAINING FLT TO PRACTICE IFR APCHS AT ACT. APPROX 30 DME NE OF ACT, I CONTACTED ZFW AND REQUESTED THE VOR R32 APCH VIA THE 15 DME ARC. THEY ADVISED US TO CONTACT ACT APCH. THE REQUEST WAS REPEATED TO THEM FOR THE PRACTICE APCH. THEY ADVISED US TO 'STAND BY.' WE REPEATEDLY CALLED AS WE FLEW THE ARC, BUT NO RESPONSE UNTIL WE WERE SE OF THE VOR. ROUTINE COM WITH OTHER ACFT BY APCH CTL WAS BEING CONDUCTED, BUT THEY WOULD NOT RESPOND TO OUR CALLS. THE ATIS DID CONTAIN SOME INFO RELATIVE TO THE TEMPORARY RESTR AREA, BUT THE ALTS WERE NOT CLR, AND WE ELECTED TO FLY THE ARC AT 5000 FT TO BE, WHAT WE THOUGHT, WELL ABOVE THE AREA. I FEEL THAT IF APCH WOULD HAVE RESPONDED MORE TIMELY TO OUR CALLS, AND IF ZFW WOULD HAVE ADVISED US ABOUT THE TEMPORARY RESTR AREA, THE CONFUSION WOULD NOT HAVE EXISTED, AND WE WOULD HAVE REMAINED WELL CLR OF THE AREA. APCH CTL ADVISED, BY TELEPHONE, THAT APCH RADAR OBSERVED OUR FLT PATH FROM OUR INITIAL CALL UNTIL AFTER WE EXITED THE RESTR AREA, BUT NO EXPLANATION WAS OFFERED AS TO WHY THE CTLR DID NOT RESPOND TO OUR CALLS. CORRECTIVE ACTION SUGGESTION: DISSEMINATE INFO MORE WIDELY FOR TEMPORARY RESTR AREAS, ESPECIALLY FOR VFR PLTS. LCL (AND ALL AREA) CTLRS INFORM ALL ACFT OPERATING NEAR THE AFFECTED AREA, UPON INITIAL CONTACT. IFR APCH CHARTS BE CANCELLED, THAT ARE AFFECTED BY THE TEMPORARY RESTR AREA. CALL FROM JET ACFT BE ACKNOWLEDGED MORE QUICKLY BY ATC.

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.