Narrative:

I was flying over phx airport along the biltmore-east corridor for a landing at dvt. I was under the control of approach with their authority/authorized to be in the class B airspace. Directly over phx, I was told to contact approach on 120.70. Upon check- in, I was told to fly 330 degrees and maintain 4500 ft, for which I complied. Having passed to the north of phx and approaching dvt, I called approach. Without having any knowledge of my request, ATC cleared me to 3500 ft. A period of time passed without communication. Recognizing that I was getting close to dvt and expecting a handoff to dvt tower, I started to contact approach to facilitate that xfer. It was at this time approach called and told me to squawk 1200 from my previously assigned code and contact tower. This positioned me in a direct contradiction with downwind traffic for runway 25. At my current rate of speed, it would have been virtually impossible to avoid the dvt airspace. I immediately called tower to report my position and desires, reporting 3.3 NM south of the field (inadvertently reporting runway 27) for landing dvt. Tower noted that I was not in sight and if I was 3.3 NM south of the field, I was well inside their airspace and in violation. I tried to explain that I was under control of phx approach until I called. (This was not a deliberate and intentional act on my behalf to be in this position.) the controller was quite rude and again said that my explanation was not acceptable and I was in violation. The tower had no indication of me approaching dvt until I reported and could not see me until I turned wing high eastbound. I turned east to avoid penetration of the dvt airspace. Ground control asked that I call the tower after parking. I called tower as instructed. I was asked my name, address, etc. I asked why they wanted this information and they said for possible pilot deviation. I again said that I was instructed by ATC to fly as I did and they were responsible for my entry. The Q&a specialist said that he understood and that this happens all the time from phx approach. He further stated that it wasn't unusual to have traffic report on base leg for landing without prior notification from either arriving aircraft or ATC. He wanted the information so that it could be addressed with phx approach. He noted that this process was necessary to make the system 'better' for the pilots. I stated to the specialist that I was confused how I could be in violation if ATC had not released me until the time immediately prior to my reporting. My frustrations are as follows: over the previous 2 days, I landed at midland international and el paso international airports. In both instances, I was transitioned to tower from approach control. I had flight following from victoria, tx, to el paso, tx, being xferred from one controller to another as I moved from airspace to airspace. As I traversed through the tucson, az, airspace, I was transitioned as my position changed. My first contact with phx was over casa grande airport approximately 30 NM south of phx on 123.7. I was xferred to 120.7 over phx. While I try to anticipate the unexpected, it would seem a reasonable presumption that ATC would contact dvt tower. Had phx approach contacted tower as to my position, intentions and current transponder code, the entire mishap would have been avoided. If what the Q&a specialist says is true (about this happening all the time), then ATC must be aware that a problem exists and a remedy needs to be found before tragedy strikes. It seems odd that we have an ATC system that is very much concerned with safety yet a simple handoff is not available. In light of the fact that dvt is very near phx, I would think this would be SOP. In the very least, the arriving pilot should be made aware of the fact the VFR handoff would not be available and the arriving pilot should anticipate the 1200 code in 'X' NM. Callback conversation with reporter revealed the following information: reporter stated that the true attitude of the controller makes him quite concerned that he will be violated. Consequently he did not feel comfortable to use the hotline or to make further contact with ATC through FSDO.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: PLT OF A MOONEY 201 ON VECTORS FROM APCH WITH RADAR ADVISORIES IS ISSUED A SQUAWK 1200 AND CONTACT TWR WHEN WITHIN THE CLASS D AIRSPACE OF THAT TWR. LCL CTLR CHASTISES THE PLT.

Narrative: I WAS FLYING OVER PHX ARPT ALONG THE BILTMORE-EAST CORRIDOR FOR A LNDG AT DVT. I WAS UNDER THE CTL OF APCH WITH THEIR AUTH TO BE IN THE CLASS B AIRSPACE. DIRECTLY OVER PHX, I WAS TOLD TO CONTACT APCH ON 120.70. UPON CHK- IN, I WAS TOLD TO FLY 330 DEGS AND MAINTAIN 4500 FT, FOR WHICH I COMPLIED. HAVING PASSED TO THE N OF PHX AND APCHING DVT, I CALLED APCH. WITHOUT HAVING ANY KNOWLEDGE OF MY REQUEST, ATC CLRED ME TO 3500 FT. A PERIOD OF TIME PASSED WITHOUT COM. RECOGNIZING THAT I WAS GETTING CLOSE TO DVT AND EXPECTING A HDOF TO DVT TWR, I STARTED TO CONTACT APCH TO FACILITATE THAT XFER. IT WAS AT THIS TIME APCH CALLED AND TOLD ME TO SQUAWK 1200 FROM MY PREVIOUSLY ASSIGNED CODE AND CONTACT TWR. THIS POSITIONED ME IN A DIRECT CONTRADICTION WITH DOWNWIND TFC FOR RWY 25. AT MY CURRENT RATE OF SPD, IT WOULD HAVE BEEN VIRTUALLY IMPOSSIBLE TO AVOID THE DVT AIRSPACE. I IMMEDIATELY CALLED TWR TO RPT MY POS AND DESIRES, RPTING 3.3 NM S OF THE FIELD (INADVERTENTLY RPTING RWY 27) FOR LNDG DVT. TWR NOTED THAT I WAS NOT IN SIGHT AND IF I WAS 3.3 NM S OF THE FIELD, I WAS WELL INSIDE THEIR AIRSPACE AND IN VIOLATION. I TRIED TO EXPLAIN THAT I WAS UNDER CTL OF PHX APCH UNTIL I CALLED. (THIS WAS NOT A DELIBERATE AND INTENTIONAL ACT ON MY BEHALF TO BE IN THIS POS.) THE CTLR WAS QUITE RUDE AND AGAIN SAID THAT MY EXPLANATION WAS NOT ACCEPTABLE AND I WAS IN VIOLATION. THE TWR HAD NO INDICATION OF ME APCHING DVT UNTIL I RPTED AND COULD NOT SEE ME UNTIL I TURNED WING HIGH EBOUND. I TURNED E TO AVOID PENETRATION OF THE DVT AIRSPACE. GND CTL ASKED THAT I CALL THE TWR AFTER PARKING. I CALLED TWR AS INSTRUCTED. I WAS ASKED MY NAME, ADDRESS, ETC. I ASKED WHY THEY WANTED THIS INFO AND THEY SAID FOR POSSIBLE PLTDEV. I AGAIN SAID THAT I WAS INSTRUCTED BY ATC TO FLY AS I DID AND THEY WERE RESPONSIBLE FOR MY ENTRY. THE Q&A SPECIALIST SAID THAT HE UNDERSTOOD AND THAT THIS HAPPENS ALL THE TIME FROM PHX APCH. HE FURTHER STATED THAT IT WASN'T UNUSUAL TO HAVE TFC RPT ON BASE LEG FOR LNDG WITHOUT PRIOR NOTIFICATION FROM EITHER ARRIVING ACFT OR ATC. HE WANTED THE INFO SO THAT IT COULD BE ADDRESSED WITH PHX APCH. HE NOTED THAT THIS PROCESS WAS NECESSARY TO MAKE THE SYS 'BETTER' FOR THE PLTS. I STATED TO THE SPECIALIST THAT I WAS CONFUSED HOW I COULD BE IN VIOLATION IF ATC HAD NOT RELEASED ME UNTIL THE TIME IMMEDIATELY PRIOR TO MY RPTING. MY FRUSTRATIONS ARE AS FOLLOWS: OVER THE PREVIOUS 2 DAYS, I LANDED AT MIDLAND INTL AND EL PASO INTL ARPTS. IN BOTH INSTANCES, I WAS TRANSITIONED TO TWR FROM APCH CTL. I HAD FLT FOLLOWING FROM VICTORIA, TX, TO EL PASO, TX, BEING XFERRED FROM ONE CTLR TO ANOTHER AS I MOVED FROM AIRSPACE TO AIRSPACE. AS I TRAVERSED THROUGH THE TUCSON, AZ, AIRSPACE, I WAS TRANSITIONED AS MY POS CHANGED. MY FIRST CONTACT WITH PHX WAS OVER CASA GRANDE ARPT APPROX 30 NM S OF PHX ON 123.7. I WAS XFERRED TO 120.7 OVER PHX. WHILE I TRY TO ANTICIPATE THE UNEXPECTED, IT WOULD SEEM A REASONABLE PRESUMPTION THAT ATC WOULD CONTACT DVT TWR. HAD PHX APCH CONTACTED TWR AS TO MY POS, INTENTIONS AND CURRENT XPONDER CODE, THE ENTIRE MISHAP WOULD HAVE BEEN AVOIDED. IF WHAT THE Q&A SPECIALIST SAYS IS TRUE (ABOUT THIS HAPPENING ALL THE TIME), THEN ATC MUST BE AWARE THAT A PROB EXISTS AND A REMEDY NEEDS TO BE FOUND BEFORE TRAGEDY STRIKES. IT SEEMS ODD THAT WE HAVE AN ATC SYS THAT IS VERY MUCH CONCERNED WITH SAFETY YET A SIMPLE HDOF IS NOT AVAILABLE. IN LIGHT OF THE FACT THAT DVT IS VERY NEAR PHX, I WOULD THINK THIS WOULD BE SOP. IN THE VERY LEAST, THE ARRIVING PLT SHOULD BE MADE AWARE OF THE FACT THE VFR HDOF WOULD NOT BE AVAILABLE AND THE ARRIVING PLT SHOULD ANTICIPATE THE 1200 CODE IN 'X' NM. CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING INFO: RPTR STATED THAT THE TRUE ATTITUDE OF THE CTLR MAKES HIM QUITE CONCERNED THAT HE WILL BE VIOLATED. CONSEQUENTLY HE DID NOT FEEL COMFORTABLE TO USE THE HOTLINE OR TO MAKE FURTHER CONTACT WITH ATC THROUGH FSDO.

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.