Narrative:

On an IFR training flight with an instrument instructor applicant, we were cleared to korh via the gdm VORTAC transition. After completing the full NDB 29 at korh, we went missed and contacted bradley approach, who gave us an amended clearance back to the gdm VORTAC in order to perform the full VOR a at kgdm. Approximately 5 mi from the gdm VORTAC, ZBW issued an approach clearance for the approach. The controller instructed us to fly the published missed and told us to contact CTAF. On the published missed out of kgdm, I contacted ZBW and cancelled IFR. I told the controller that I would proceed to kash VFR. The controller told me to remain on the transponder code for advisories. I accepted. In approximately 6 mi, I was instructed to contact manchester approach on 134.75. I complied. On check-in, I indicated I was level at 3000 ft VFR to kash. The manchester controller gave me the present altimeter setting at kash. With my second radio, I picked up the ATIS at kash, and established 2-WAY radio communications with kash tower 12 mi to the west of the airport. The kash tower controller instructed me to enter the left downwind 32 and report midfield. I read the instruction back to the controller. At approximately 8 mi from the airport, I reported to manchester approach that I had kash insight. Manchester approach told me to contact kash tower. Upon landing at kash, the tower controller told me to contact him by phone. He indicated that manchester approach had given me a visual approach into kash, and that I did not comply. Since I was not IFR, I did not have to comply. Moreover, manchester approach has a history of dumping pilots in on kash tower just outside, if not within, the class delta airspace area. For this reason, I contacted kash on my second radio. I feel this is a problem of miscom between ZBW and manchester approach concerning the IFR cancellation I gave over the gdm VORTAC. Supplemental information from acn 576116: we filed an IFR training flight for cfii. Upon filing flight plan, we were cleared ash radar vectors gdm taf climb 3000 ft expect 4000 ft 5 min departure XXXX squawk abcd after establishing 2-WAY communications with departure, we were given a clearance to gdm. The approach into orh require the gdm transition to orh NDB. We were cleared for the full approach to orh NDB runway 29. It appeared that mht and ZBW were confused about our initial flight plan. After completing the approach into orh, we flew missed instructions on bradley approach frequency bdl. Amended our clearance, and we were cleared for gdm VOR full approach after talking to ZBW. We were assigned missed approach instructions as published for gdm. After executing missed approach we cancelled IFR. We were advised by ZBW to remain on transponder code for TA's. After being handed to mht approach, we got the ATIS for ash, contacted mht and told them we had information, and had established 2 radio communication with ash tower. Ash advised us to enter left midfield downwind, report midfield downwind when we entered. We were then cleared #3 to land runway 3L at ash. Tower advised us to contact them when on the ground. We were told that mht assigned us a visual into ash. I feel that lack of communication between controling agencies are the issues contributing to the confusion and that the pilots followed procedure pertaining to VFR. Callback conversation with reporter revealed the following information: reporter stated the reason the tower controller was upset was because both he and the approach controller believed the instructor pilot was on an IFR approach. He said coordination always seems to be a problem when working with the tower, approach control, and the center.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: TWR AND APCH CTLRS WERE UNAWARE AN MO20 INSTRUCTOR PLT HAD CANCELLED IFR WITH ZBW ARTCC AND HANDLED THE FLT AS AN IFR ACFT.

Narrative: ON AN IFR TRAINING FLT WITH AN INST INSTRUCTOR APPLICANT, WE WERE CLRED TO KORH VIA THE GDM VORTAC TRANSITION. AFTER COMPLETING THE FULL NDB 29 AT KORH, WE WENT MISSED AND CONTACTED BRADLEY APCH, WHO GAVE US AN AMENDED CLRNC BACK TO THE GDM VORTAC IN ORDER TO PERFORM THE FULL VOR A AT KGDM. APPROX 5 MI FROM THE GDM VORTAC, ZBW ISSUED AN APCH CLRNC FOR THE APCH. THE CTLR INSTRUCTED US TO FLY THE PUBLISHED MISSED AND TOLD US TO CONTACT CTAF. ON THE PUBLISHED MISSED OUT OF KGDM, I CONTACTED ZBW AND CANCELLED IFR. I TOLD THE CTLR THAT I WOULD PROCEED TO KASH VFR. THE CTLR TOLD ME TO REMAIN ON THE XPONDER CODE FOR ADVISORIES. I ACCEPTED. IN APPROX 6 MI, I WAS INSTRUCTED TO CONTACT MANCHESTER APCH ON 134.75. I COMPLIED. ON CHK-IN, I INDICATED I WAS LEVEL AT 3000 FT VFR TO KASH. THE MANCHESTER CTLR GAVE ME THE PRESENT ALTIMETER SETTING AT KASH. WITH MY SECOND RADIO, I PICKED UP THE ATIS AT KASH, AND ESTABLISHED 2-WAY RADIO COMS WITH KASH TWR 12 MI TO THE W OF THE ARPT. THE KASH TWR CTLR INSTRUCTED ME TO ENTER THE L DOWNWIND 32 AND RPT MIDFIELD. I READ THE INSTRUCTION BACK TO THE CTLR. AT APPROX 8 MI FROM THE ARPT, I RPTED TO MANCHESTER APCH THAT I HAD KASH INSIGHT. MANCHESTER APCH TOLD ME TO CONTACT KASH TWR. UPON LNDG AT KASH, THE TWR CTLR TOLD ME TO CONTACT HIM BY PHONE. HE INDICATED THAT MANCHESTER APCH HAD GIVEN ME A VISUAL APCH INTO KASH, AND THAT I DID NOT COMPLY. SINCE I WAS NOT IFR, I DID NOT HAVE TO COMPLY. MOREOVER, MANCHESTER APCH HAS A HISTORY OF DUMPING PLTS IN ON KASH TWR JUST OUTSIDE, IF NOT WITHIN, THE CLASS DELTA AIRSPACE AREA. FOR THIS REASON, I CONTACTED KASH ON MY SECOND RADIO. I FEEL THIS IS A PROB OF MISCOM BTWN ZBW AND MANCHESTER APCH CONCERNING THE IFR CANCELLATION I GAVE OVER THE GDM VORTAC. SUPPLEMENTAL INFO FROM ACN 576116: WE FILED AN IFR TRAINING FLT FOR CFII. UPON FILING FLT PLAN, WE WERE CLRED ASH RADAR VECTORS GDM TAF CLB 3000 FT EXPECT 4000 FT 5 MIN DEP XXXX SQUAWK ABCD AFTER ESTABLISHING 2-WAY COMS WITH DEP, WE WERE GIVEN A CLRNC TO GDM. THE APCH INTO ORH REQUIRE THE GDM TRANSITION TO ORH NDB. WE WERE CLRED FOR THE FULL APCH TO ORH NDB RWY 29. IT APPEARED THAT MHT AND ZBW WERE CONFUSED ABOUT OUR INITIAL FLT PLAN. AFTER COMPLETING THE APCH INTO ORH, WE FLEW MISSED INSTRUCTIONS ON BRADLEY APCH FREQ BDL. AMENDED OUR CLRNC, AND WE WERE CLRED FOR GDM VOR FULL APCH AFTER TALKING TO ZBW. WE WERE ASSIGNED MISSED APCH INSTRUCTIONS AS PUBLISHED FOR GDM. AFTER EXECUTING MISSED APCH WE CANCELLED IFR. WE WERE ADVISED BY ZBW TO REMAIN ON XPONDER CODE FOR TA'S. AFTER BEING HANDED TO MHT APCH, WE GOT THE ATIS FOR ASH, CONTACTED MHT AND TOLD THEM WE HAD INFO, AND HAD ESTABLISHED 2 RADIO COM WITH ASH TWR. ASH ADVISED US TO ENTER L MIDFIELD DOWNWIND, RPT MIDFIELD DOWNWIND WHEN WE ENTERED. WE WERE THEN CLRED #3 TO LAND RWY 3L AT ASH. TWR ADVISED US TO CONTACT THEM WHEN ON THE GND. WE WERE TOLD THAT MHT ASSIGNED US A VISUAL INTO ASH. I FEEL THAT LACK OF COM BTWN CTLING AGENCIES ARE THE ISSUES CONTRIBUTING TO THE CONFUSION AND THAT THE PLTS FOLLOWED PROC PERTAINING TO VFR. CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING INFO: RPTR STATED THE REASON THE TWR CTLR WAS UPSET WAS BECAUSE BOTH HE AND THE APCH CTLR BELIEVED THE INSTRUCTOR PLT WAS ON AN IFR APCH. HE SAID COORD ALWAYS SEEMS TO BE A PROB WHEN WORKING WITH THE TWR, APCH CTL, AND THE CTR.

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.