Narrative:

I was the lead plane in a flight of 2 aircraft performing air- to-air photography. The photographer was on board my aircraft and he was taking pictures of the canadair challenger 604, which was the other aircraft in our flight of 2. Upon completion of our flight over lake meade (east of the las vegas class B airspace), it was decided that we would try to obtain permission from las approach control for a low pass down runway 19L or runway 19R in formation together to try to get a few pictures with 'the strip' to the west in the backgnd. I made the initial contact with approach control, explained that we were a flight of 2 aircraft, a beech baron, and a challenger 604, and that we would like to make a low pass down either runway 19R or runway 19L for a photo shoot. I was told to squawk a certain code, then after a brief time was told radar contact was made, and that we were cleared to enter the class B airspace. Shortly thereafter, we were told to contact approach on another frequency. At this point, it was assumed that our request for the low pass was understood and was approved. After making contact with the next controller, we were given a heading to fly, and then the controller asked if we were a flight of 2 barons. I said no, that instead we were a baron and a canadair challenger 604. Soon thereafter we were told that our traffic to follow was a piper malibu turning final for runway 19L (2-3 mi out, I believe). I acknowledged and we were given another heading to fly. In the course of the next few mins we were passed along to 1 or 2 more approach controllers. Our airspeed was approximately 170 KTS (because of the challenger jet) and we converged onto the malibu traffic (we never had them in sight, but were flying the headings given us by approach). When it became apparent to approach that the spacing was not good, they asked us if our intentions were to land. I said no, that it was to make a low pass in order to take some photos. His reaction then was that this was the first he knew of our intentions, and that he thought we were coming in to land. At this time he broke us off from our approach and began vectoring us to the west and north. During the course of being vectored clear of other traffic (a few of which were closer than I would like -- less than 1 mi), we were handed off to a couple more approach controllers. It was decided at this point that the best thing to do was break off the formation and come in separately to land. However, the challenger tried to break it off but was told to stay with us a little longer by approach control. After a short time, we were allowed to break the formation, and were given vectors by approach to land. Both myself and the challenger then made uneventful lndgs. In retrospect, I realize now that what I should have done was call the controllers before the flight so that it could have been coordinated as well as preapproved with them prior to the flight. It was my intention and belief that upon contact with the first controller I had made clear what it was we were wanting to do, and that we were a flight of a baron and a challenger jet. And, it was also my belief that when he cleared us into the las class B, he not only understood our wishes, but had approved them as well. It was my feeling that we would request the low pass down runway 19L or runway 19R with the initial controller, but if they could not grant us permission at that time he would let us know. So, therefore, when we were given clearance into the airspace and vectors to the airport, it was assumed that our request was understood and approved. If we were to have been told 'request denied due to traffic flow,' that would have been fine, and we would have broke the formation and requested separate landing clrncs. But, that was never said. Therefore, we assumed everything was ok with the approach controllers, and that our intentions were understood and approved.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: APCH CTL COORD FOR A FORMATION FLT.

Narrative: I WAS THE LEAD PLANE IN A FLT OF 2 ACFT PERFORMING AIR- TO-AIR PHOTOGRAPHY. THE PHOTOGRAPHER WAS ON BOARD MY ACFT AND HE WAS TAKING PICTURES OF THE CANADAIR CHALLENGER 604, WHICH WAS THE OTHER ACFT IN OUR FLT OF 2. UPON COMPLETION OF OUR FLT OVER LAKE MEADE (E OF THE LAS VEGAS CLASS B AIRSPACE), IT WAS DECIDED THAT WE WOULD TRY TO OBTAIN PERMISSION FROM LAS APCH CTL FOR A LOW PASS DOWN RWY 19L OR RWY 19R IN FORMATION TOGETHER TO TRY TO GET A FEW PICTURES WITH 'THE STRIP' TO THE W IN THE BACKGND. I MADE THE INITIAL CONTACT WITH APCH CTL, EXPLAINED THAT WE WERE A FLT OF 2 ACFT, A BEECH BARON, AND A CHALLENGER 604, AND THAT WE WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A LOW PASS DOWN EITHER RWY 19R OR RWY 19L FOR A PHOTO SHOOT. I WAS TOLD TO SQUAWK A CERTAIN CODE, THEN AFTER A BRIEF TIME WAS TOLD RADAR CONTACT WAS MADE, AND THAT WE WERE CLRED TO ENTER THE CLASS B AIRSPACE. SHORTLY THEREAFTER, WE WERE TOLD TO CONTACT APCH ON ANOTHER FREQ. AT THIS POINT, IT WAS ASSUMED THAT OUR REQUEST FOR THE LOW PASS WAS UNDERSTOOD AND WAS APPROVED. AFTER MAKING CONTACT WITH THE NEXT CTLR, WE WERE GIVEN A HDG TO FLY, AND THEN THE CTLR ASKED IF WE WERE A FLT OF 2 BARONS. I SAID NO, THAT INSTEAD WE WERE A BARON AND A CANADAIR CHALLENGER 604. SOON THEREAFTER WE WERE TOLD THAT OUR TFC TO FOLLOW WAS A PIPER MALIBU TURNING FINAL FOR RWY 19L (2-3 MI OUT, I BELIEVE). I ACKNOWLEDGED AND WE WERE GIVEN ANOTHER HDG TO FLY. IN THE COURSE OF THE NEXT FEW MINS WE WERE PASSED ALONG TO 1 OR 2 MORE APCH CTLRS. OUR AIRSPD WAS APPROX 170 KTS (BECAUSE OF THE CHALLENGER JET) AND WE CONVERGED ONTO THE MALIBU TFC (WE NEVER HAD THEM IN SIGHT, BUT WERE FLYING THE HDGS GIVEN US BY APCH). WHEN IT BECAME APPARENT TO APCH THAT THE SPACING WAS NOT GOOD, THEY ASKED US IF OUR INTENTIONS WERE TO LAND. I SAID NO, THAT IT WAS TO MAKE A LOW PASS IN ORDER TO TAKE SOME PHOTOS. HIS REACTION THEN WAS THAT THIS WAS THE FIRST HE KNEW OF OUR INTENTIONS, AND THAT HE THOUGHT WE WERE COMING IN TO LAND. AT THIS TIME HE BROKE US OFF FROM OUR APCH AND BEGAN VECTORING US TO THE W AND N. DURING THE COURSE OF BEING VECTORED CLR OF OTHER TFC (A FEW OF WHICH WERE CLOSER THAN I WOULD LIKE -- LESS THAN 1 MI), WE WERE HANDED OFF TO A COUPLE MORE APCH CTLRS. IT WAS DECIDED AT THIS POINT THAT THE BEST THING TO DO WAS BREAK OFF THE FORMATION AND COME IN SEPARATELY TO LAND. HOWEVER, THE CHALLENGER TRIED TO BREAK IT OFF BUT WAS TOLD TO STAY WITH US A LITTLE LONGER BY APCH CTL. AFTER A SHORT TIME, WE WERE ALLOWED TO BREAK THE FORMATION, AND WERE GIVEN VECTORS BY APCH TO LAND. BOTH MYSELF AND THE CHALLENGER THEN MADE UNEVENTFUL LNDGS. IN RETROSPECT, I REALIZE NOW THAT WHAT I SHOULD HAVE DONE WAS CALL THE CTLRS BEFORE THE FLT SO THAT IT COULD HAVE BEEN COORDINATED AS WELL AS PREAPPROVED WITH THEM PRIOR TO THE FLT. IT WAS MY INTENTION AND BELIEF THAT UPON CONTACT WITH THE FIRST CTLR I HAD MADE CLR WHAT IT WAS WE WERE WANTING TO DO, AND THAT WE WERE A FLT OF A BARON AND A CHALLENGER JET. AND, IT WAS ALSO MY BELIEF THAT WHEN HE CLRED US INTO THE LAS CLASS B, HE NOT ONLY UNDERSTOOD OUR WISHES, BUT HAD APPROVED THEM AS WELL. IT WAS MY FEELING THAT WE WOULD REQUEST THE LOW PASS DOWN RWY 19L OR RWY 19R WITH THE INITIAL CTLR, BUT IF THEY COULD NOT GRANT US PERMISSION AT THAT TIME HE WOULD LET US KNOW. SO, THEREFORE, WHEN WE WERE GIVEN CLRNC INTO THE AIRSPACE AND VECTORS TO THE ARPT, IT WAS ASSUMED THAT OUR REQUEST WAS UNDERSTOOD AND APPROVED. IF WE WERE TO HAVE BEEN TOLD 'REQUEST DENIED DUE TO TFC FLOW,' THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN FINE, AND WE WOULD HAVE BROKE THE FORMATION AND REQUESTED SEPARATE LNDG CLRNCS. BUT, THAT WAS NEVER SAID. THEREFORE, WE ASSUMED EVERYTHING WAS OK WITH THE APCH CTLRS, AND THAT OUR INTENTIONS WERE UNDERSTOOD AND APPROVED.

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.