Narrative:

1s0, pierce county, wa airport lies under the 5000 ft base ring of the seattle class B airspace. Due to the national emergency of 9/tue/01, that would put the airport within the enhanced class B airspace, with VFR operations prohibited. While enroute to the airport. IFR in VFR conditions, at the controller's request to reported the airport in sight, to which he asked if I wanted a visual approach or if I wanted to cancel IFR. I replied that I'd cancel IFR, if that was allowed. He replied that there was a lot of confusion over that, but it was allowed. My cancellation was received along with termination of radar services. A frequency change and the directions to continue the present squawk code. The conversation between us indicated that he had my departure IFR strip in front of him, and I advised that I'd keep that squawk and talk to him on the way out. He acknowledged, and I proceeded to land. As it was a drop and go, we were back at the end of the runway for departure within 10 mins. An attempt to contact the controller on the ground went unanswered. I was on the same frequency as prior to landing, an it is the same frequency as is published for seattle departure. So I departed with the previously issued direction to maintain the old squawk code and called again immediately after take off. He immediately replied and issued the clearance as filed. However, he used the phrase released for departure. Alone with a void time, and to advise when I was airborne. I read back the clearance, advised I was airborne at that time, was radar identified and continued on. The controller said nothing about my being airborne. It was only upon reflecting on the departure later in the flight that I became concerned about the phrase released for departure when I was actually airborne. As this is being written, I still don't know for sure if there was a problem. It sounded as if the direction to maintain the squawk was a clearance to depart VFR with that squawk in that airspace. The arrival was VFR and the departure VFR, both in airspace that had been declared no VFR. It seems to me that, when a pilot is told to disregard a published restr, some explanation should be given, especially when the controller himself states that there has been confusion regarding that restr. I'm still left with the question of when is VFR ok in airspace restricted against VFR operations.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: PIPER 31T PLT TKOF VFR UNDER AN IFR FLT PLAN PRIOR TO RELEASE FOR DEP DUE TO UNABLE TO GET RESPONSE FROM CTLR ON THE GND AT THE UNCONTROLLED ARPT IN ENHANCED CLASS BE AIRSPACE.

Narrative: 1S0, PIERCE COUNTY, WA ARPT LIES UNDER THE 5000 FT BASE RING OF THE SEATTLE CLASS B AIRSPACE. DUE TO THE NATIONAL EMER OF 9/TUE/01, THAT WOULD PUT THE ARPT WITHIN THE ENHANCED CLASS B AIRSPACE, WITH VFR OPS PROHIBITED. WHILE ENROUTE TO THE AIRPORT. IFR IN VFR CONDITIONS, AT THE CTLR'S REQUEST TO RPTED THE ARPT IN SIGHT, TO WHICH HE ASKED IF I WANTED A VISUAL APCH OR IF I WANTED TO CANCEL IFR. I REPLIED THAT I'D CANCEL IFR, IF THAT WAS ALLOWED. HE REPLIED THAT THERE WAS A LOT OF CONFUSION OVER THAT, BUT IT WAS ALLOWED. MY CANCELLATION WAS RECEIVED ALONG WITH TERMINATION OF RADAR SERVICES. A FREQ CHANGE AND THE DIRECTIONS TO CONTINUE THE PRESENT SQUAWK CODE. THE CONVERSATION BETWEEN US INDICATED THAT HE HAD MY DEP IFR STRIP IN FRONT OF HIM, AND I ADVISED THAT I'D KEEP THAT SQUAWK AND TALK TO HIM ON THE WAY OUT. HE ACKNOWLEDGED, AND I PROCEEDED TO LAND. AS IT WAS A DROP AND GO, WE WERE BACK AT THE END OF THE RWY FOR DEP WITHIN 10 MINS. AN ATTEMPT TO CONTACT THE CTLR ON THE GND WENT UNANSWERED. I WAS ON THE SAME FREQ AS PRIOR TO LNDG, AN IT IS THE SAME FREQ AS IS PUBLISHED FOR SEATTLE DEP. SO I DEPARTED WITH THE PREVIOUSLY ISSUED DIRECTION TO MAINTAIN THE OLD SQUAWK CODE AND CALLED AGAIN IMMEDIATELY AFTER TAKE OFF. HE IMMEDIATELY REPLIED AND ISSUED THE CLRNC AS FILED. HOWEVER, HE USED THE PHRASE RELEASED FOR DEP. ALONE WITH A VOID TIME, AND TO ADVISE WHEN I WAS AIRBORNE. I READ BACK THE CLRNC, ADVISED I WAS AIRBORNE AT THAT TIME, WAS RADAR IDENTIFIED AND CONTINUED ON. THE CTLR SAID NOTHING ABOUT MY BEING AIRBORNE. IT WAS ONLY UPON REFLECTING ON THE DEP LATER IN THE FLT THAT I BECAME CONCERNED ABOUT THE PHRASE RELEASED FOR DEP WHEN I WAS ACTUALLY AIRBORNE. AS THIS IS BEING WRITTEN, I STILL DON'T KNOW FOR SURE IF THERE WAS A PROB. IT SOUNDED AS IF THE DIRECTION TO MAINTAIN THE SQUAWK WAS A CLRNC TO DEPART VFR WITH THAT SQUAWK IN THAT AIRSPACE. THE ARR WAS VFR AND THE DEP VFR, BOTH IN AIRSPACE THAT HAD BEEN DECLARED NO VFR. IT SEEMS TO ME THAT, WHEN A PLT IS TOLD TO DISREGARD A PUBLISHED RESTR, SOME EXPLANATION SHOULD BE GIVEN, ESPECIALLY WHEN THE CTLR HIMSELF STATES THAT THERE HAS BEEN CONFUSION REGARDING THAT RESTR. I'M STILL LEFT WITH THE QUESTION OF WHEN IS VFR OK IN AIRSPACE RESTRICTED AGAINST VFR OPS.

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.