Narrative:

Around pm on the indicated date I departed from san carlos airport on the sse direction of the airport's single runway. Winds were light and visibility good. I was in my own 140 mph sel aircraft, with which I am quite familiar. I have marked my intended flight track on the enclosed copy of the TCA chart. Shortly after turning onto the left crosswind for departure, my communication radio tuned to tower frequency was swamped by a consumer radio broadcast...at about 1000 ft. This effect had occurred in the same vicinity on arrival the day before, though it has not happened in the previous 6 to 10 flts into san carlos over the last 6 months. The square on the map indicates the approximately area of interference. The radio interference was a distraction, since it created uncertainty as to whether I could hear tower communications while at the air traffic area. At point 'a' on the map san carlos tower gave me a 'frequency change ok.' by point 'B' I had called oakland departure, requested flight following, been given an altitude restr, and after a brief delay, a squawk. At point C I was advised 'radar contact, 23/4 mi south of hayward airport...traffic XXX...remain at or below 2000 ft until advised'. This is the sticky part and the reason for my report. By my own navigation, based on as many as a hundred trips in this general area over 30 yrs, I believe my position at the time was a couple of mi clear of the hayward air traffic area to the south. On a clear night such as this, the san mateo bridge and dumbarton bridges stand out like illuminated grid lines on the blackness of the bay. I set my course to intersect fremont area on the east side of the bay at the mid point between these 2 references. But the fix from the departure put me inside hayward's airspace at 2000 ft, an unauthorized intrusion, if true. That location would have been about where I have inscribed arcs in the hayward air traffic area, an area visibly directly over the freeway leading to the san mateo bridge, and not a location which would be visually confused with my intended path. I couldn't debate the matter at the time with the controller because of other radio traffic, but I believe that the position stated by the ATC, was in error by a couple of mi, for reasons unknown. Perhaps he said, or intended to say 'south of hayward airport air traffic area'. The fact that his erroneous statement is a matter of record puts me in legal jeopardy, I believe. The termination of radar service was also odd, tough I monitored the radio attentively and exclusively on the departure frequency, I was neither handed off nor terminated. Finally, knowing I would lose contact when I was well south of mount diablo, I requested a frequency change. The irritable response was: 'we terminated you a long time ago.' in general TRSA communications with VFR arrs and departures to/from the east for palo alto and san carlos are marked by recurring incidents of this sort. Although VFR traffic is required to communicate, the approach/departure people sometimes are irritable and impatient with their captive clients and not infrequently omit handoffs (for arrs too). If I weren't required to deal with them, I'd take my business elsewhere. On the other hand, people at oakland have been very helpful and supportive on other occasions. I think, on balance, that they are sometimes just too busy for VFR traffic. Whether that was a factor in the incident, I do not know.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: SMA PVT PLT'S RPT ON RADAR ADVISORY SVC AND DEP CTLR'S BEHAVIOR AGGRESSION UNPROFESSIONAL ATTITUDE. SUGGESTS THAT RADAR POS GIVEN BY CTLR WAS IN ERROR.

Narrative: AROUND PM ON THE INDICATED DATE I DEPARTED FROM SAN CARLOS ARPT ON THE SSE DIRECTION OF THE ARPT'S SINGLE RWY. WINDS WERE LIGHT AND VISIBILITY GOOD. I WAS IN MY OWN 140 MPH SEL ACFT, WITH WHICH I AM QUITE FAMILIAR. I HAVE MARKED MY INTENDED FLT TRACK ON THE ENCLOSED COPY OF THE TCA CHART. SHORTLY AFTER TURNING ONTO THE L XWIND FOR DEP, MY COM RADIO TUNED TO TWR FREQ WAS SWAMPED BY A CONSUMER RADIO BROADCAST...AT ABOUT 1000 FT. THIS EFFECT HAD OCCURRED IN THE SAME VICINITY ON ARR THE DAY BEFORE, THOUGH IT HAS NOT HAPPENED IN THE PREVIOUS 6 TO 10 FLTS INTO SAN CARLOS OVER THE LAST 6 MONTHS. THE SQUARE ON THE MAP INDICATES THE APPROX AREA OF INTERFERENCE. THE RADIO INTERFERENCE WAS A DISTR, SINCE IT CREATED UNCERTAINTY AS TO WHETHER I COULD HEAR TWR COMS WHILE AT THE ATA. AT POINT 'A' ON THE MAP SAN CARLOS TWR GAVE ME A 'FREQ CHANGE OK.' BY POINT 'B' I HAD CALLED OAKLAND DEP, REQUESTED FLT FOLLOWING, BEEN GIVEN AN ALT RESTR, AND AFTER A BRIEF DELAY, A SQUAWK. AT POINT C I WAS ADVISED 'RADAR CONTACT, 23/4 MI S OF HAYWARD ARPT...TFC XXX...REMAIN AT OR BELOW 2000 FT UNTIL ADVISED'. THIS IS THE STICKY PART AND THE REASON FOR MY RPT. BY MY OWN NAV, BASED ON AS MANY AS A HUNDRED TRIPS IN THIS GENERAL AREA OVER 30 YRS, I BELIEVE MY POS AT THE TIME WAS A COUPLE OF MI CLR OF THE HAYWARD ATA TO THE S. ON A CLR NIGHT SUCH AS THIS, THE SAN MATEO BRIDGE AND DUMBARTON BRIDGES STAND OUT LIKE ILLUMINATED GRID LINES ON THE BLACKNESS OF THE BAY. I SET MY COURSE TO INTERSECT FREMONT AREA ON THE E SIDE OF THE BAY AT THE MID POINT BTWN THESE 2 REFS. BUT THE FIX FROM THE DEP PUT ME INSIDE HAYWARD'S AIRSPACE AT 2000 FT, AN UNAUTH INTRUSION, IF TRUE. THAT LOCATION WOULD HAVE BEEN ABOUT WHERE I HAVE INSCRIBED ARCS IN THE HAYWARD ATA, AN AREA VISIBLY DIRECTLY OVER THE FREEWAY LEADING TO THE SAN MATEO BRIDGE, AND NOT A LOCATION WHICH WOULD BE VISUALLY CONFUSED WITH MY INTENDED PATH. I COULDN'T DEBATE THE MATTER AT THE TIME WITH THE CTLR BECAUSE OF OTHER RADIO TFC, BUT I BELIEVE THAT THE POS STATED BY THE ATC, WAS IN ERROR BY A COUPLE OF MI, FOR REASONS UNKNOWN. PERHAPS HE SAID, OR INTENDED TO SAY 'S OF HAYWARD ARPT ATA'. THE FACT THAT HIS ERRONEOUS STATEMENT IS A MATTER OF RECORD PUTS ME IN LEGAL JEOPARDY, I BELIEVE. THE TERMINATION OF RADAR SVC WAS ALSO ODD, TOUGH I MONITORED THE RADIO ATTENTIVELY AND EXCLUSIVELY ON THE DEP FREQ, I WAS NEITHER HANDED OFF NOR TERMINATED. FINALLY, KNOWING I WOULD LOSE CONTACT WHEN I WAS WELL S OF MOUNT DIABLO, I REQUESTED A FREQ CHANGE. THE IRRITABLE RESPONSE WAS: 'WE TERMINATED YOU A LONG TIME AGO.' IN GENERAL TRSA COMS WITH VFR ARRS AND DEPS TO/FROM THE E FOR PALO ALTO AND SAN CARLOS ARE MARKED BY RECURRING INCIDENTS OF THIS SORT. ALTHOUGH VFR TFC IS REQUIRED TO COMMUNICATE, THE APCH/DEP PEOPLE SOMETIMES ARE IRRITABLE AND IMPATIENT WITH THEIR CAPTIVE CLIENTS AND NOT INFREQUENTLY OMIT HDOFS (FOR ARRS TOO). IF I WEREN'T REQUIRED TO DEAL WITH THEM, I'D TAKE MY BUSINESS ELSEWHERE. ON THE OTHER HAND, PEOPLE AT OAKLAND HAVE BEEN VERY HELPFUL AND SUPPORTIVE ON OTHER OCCASIONS. I THINK, ON BALANCE, THAT THEY ARE SOMETIMES JUST TOO BUSY FOR VFR TFC. WHETHER THAT WAS A FACTOR IN THE INCIDENT, I DO NOT KNOW.

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.