Narrative:

VFR-ADIZ flight plan was filed out to huo VOR and additional flight plan return from huo to cdw airport. The purpose of the flight was instruction. Flight outbound to huo was uneventful. While maneuvering, I was squawking 1200 and monitoring ny approach on 127.60. I could hear other airplanes calling on this congested frequency for entry into the ADIZ, and they were being told to contact ny on 132.55. When we desired to return to the airport I called on 132.55 with my request and was answered with my callsign and given a discrete transponder code. No other information was given. We proceeded to return to caldwell. Approximately 10 NM from caldwell (well within the ADIZ) I heard the controller yell at another aircraft for entry into the ADIZ without a clearance, despite the fact that the other aircraft had a discrete code. This made me nervous as to our status, so I queried the controller with our callsign, 'ny approach skyhawk' the controller answered 'cessna just hold on a few minutes I'll get to you shortly.' at this point I felt that the controller was not aware of our location within the ADIZ. I then answered 'ny approach skyhawk we are within the ADIZ already please confirm our status.' the answer came through weakly, 'skyhawk your transmission is very weak and unreadable.' I then tried contacting ny approach on 127.60 and could not get a response. At this point I was only 6 to 8 NM from cdw so I contacted the tower and was given clearance to land. I feel the approach controllers, tower controllers, and FSS briefers all have different interpretations of the requirements of the NOTAMS which establishes the ny ADIZ tfr. It has become impossible for pilots to comply with procedures which are completely unpublished. I do not feel that I violated the NOTAM because I had a discrete code and was in communication with ATC while within the ADIZ. However, I feel that some controllers (not all) are treating the ADIZ like a class B which requires a specific clearance to enter. I feel that the controller I was speaking with had this interpretation, and was not aware that I had entered 'his' ADIZ, despite giving me a squawk code. The procedures seem to change hourly with shift changes. For example, I know of many aircraft which have departed and arrived into the ADIZ talking only to tower controllers, yet at other times the tower controllers will not allow this. I feel it is irresponsible of the FAA and the tsa to issue NOTAMS such as this one without establishing procedures for pilots and controllers to follow. In this case it is particularly irresponsible since the FAA had plenty of time to think about it before issuing the NOTAM, yet they decided to issue it effectively immediately without any warning or guidance. Ultimately it becomes a safety of flight issue because the normal channels of communication are broken down. An additional factor in this instance was the controller's failure to state what he expected me to do. If he wanted me to remain clear of the ADIZ, he should have said so. Instead, I complied with the stated requirements of the ADIZ which state that a flight plan, beacon code, and two-way communications with ATC are all that is required.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: C172 INSTRUCTOR AND STUDENT WERE WITHIN NY ADIZ WITHOUT SPECIFIC CLRNC TO ENTER THE ADIZ. THE N90 CTLR WAS HANDLING HEAVY TFC, TOLD THE PLT HE WAS UNREADABLE, AND THEN TO STANDBY.

Narrative: VFR-ADIZ FLT PLAN WAS FILED OUT TO HUO VOR AND ADDITIONAL FLT PLAN RETURN FROM HUO TO CDW ARPT. THE PURPOSE OF THE FLT WAS INSTRUCTION. FLT OUTBOUND TO HUO WAS UNEVENTFUL. WHILE MANEUVERING, I WAS SQUAWKING 1200 AND MONITORING NY APCH ON 127.60. I COULD HEAR OTHER AIRPLANES CALLING ON THIS CONGESTED FREQUENCY FOR ENTRY INTO THE ADIZ, AND THEY WERE BEING TOLD TO CONTACT NY ON 132.55. WHEN WE DESIRED TO RETURN TO THE ARPT I CALLED ON 132.55 WITH MY REQUEST AND WAS ANSWERED WITH MY CALLSIGN AND GIVEN A DISCRETE XPONDER CODE. NO OTHER INFO WAS GIVEN. WE PROCEEDED TO RETURN TO CALDWELL. APPROX 10 NM FROM CALDWELL (WELL WITHIN THE ADIZ) I HEARD THE CTLR YELL AT ANOTHER ACFT FOR ENTRY INTO THE ADIZ WITHOUT A CLRNC, DESPITE THE FACT THAT THE OTHER ACFT HAD A DISCRETE CODE. THIS MADE ME NERVOUS AS TO OUR STATUS, SO I QUERIED THE CTLR WITH OUR CALLSIGN, 'NY APCH SKYHAWK' THE CTLR ANSWERED 'CESSNA JUST HOLD ON A FEW MINUTES I'LL GET TO YOU SHORTLY.' AT THIS POINT I FELT THAT THE CTLR WAS NOT AWARE OF OUR LOCATION WITHIN THE ADIZ. I THEN ANSWERED 'NY APCH SKYHAWK WE ARE WITHIN THE ADIZ ALREADY PLEASE CONFIRM OUR STATUS.' THE ANSWER CAME THROUGH WEAKLY, 'SKYHAWK YOUR XMISSION IS VERY WEAK AND UNREADABLE.' I THEN TRIED CONTACTING NY APCH ON 127.60 AND COULD NOT GET A RESPONSE. AT THIS POINT I WAS ONLY 6 TO 8 NM FROM CDW SO I CONTACTED THE TWR AND WAS GIVEN CLRNC TO LAND. I FEEL THE APCH CTLRS, TWR CTLRS, AND FSS BRIEFERS ALL HAVE DIFFERENT INTERPRETATIONS OF THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE NOTAMS WHICH ESTABLISHES THE NY ADIZ TFR. IT HAS BECOME IMPOSSIBLE FOR PLTS TO COMPLY WITH PROCS WHICH ARE COMPLETELY UNPUBLISHED. I DO NOT FEEL THAT I VIOLATED THE NOTAM BECAUSE I HAD A DISCRETE CODE AND WAS IN COM WITH ATC WHILE WITHIN THE ADIZ. HOWEVER, I FEEL THAT SOME CTLRS (NOT ALL) ARE TREATING THE ADIZ LIKE A CLASS B WHICH REQUIRES A SPECIFIC CLRNC TO ENTER. I FEEL THAT THE CTLR I WAS SPEAKING WITH HAD THIS INTERPRETATION, AND WAS NOT AWARE THAT I HAD ENTERED 'HIS' ADIZ, DESPITE GIVING ME A SQUAWK CODE. THE PROCS SEEM TO CHANGE HOURLY WITH SHIFT CHANGES. FOR EXAMPLE, I KNOW OF MANY ACFT WHICH HAVE DEPARTED AND ARRIVED INTO THE ADIZ TALKING ONLY TO TWR CTLRS, YET AT OTHER TIMES THE TWR CTLRS WILL NOT ALLOW THIS. I FEEL IT IS IRRESPONSIBLE OF THE FAA AND THE TSA TO ISSUE NOTAMS SUCH AS THIS ONE WITHOUT ESTABLISHING PROCS FOR PLTS AND CTLRS TO FOLLOW. IN THIS CASE IT IS PARTICULARLY IRRESPONSIBLE SINCE THE FAA HAD PLENTY OF TIME TO THINK ABOUT IT BEFORE ISSUING THE NOTAM, YET THEY DECIDED TO ISSUE IT EFFECTIVELY IMMEDIATELY WITHOUT ANY WARNING OR GUIDANCE. ULTIMATELY IT BECOMES A SAFETY OF FLT ISSUE BECAUSE THE NORMAL CHANNELS OF COM ARE BROKEN DOWN. AN ADDITIONAL FACTOR IN THIS INSTANCE WAS THE CTLR'S FAILURE TO STATE WHAT HE EXPECTED ME TO DO. IF HE WANTED ME TO REMAIN CLR OF THE ADIZ, HE SHOULD HAVE SAID SO. INSTEAD, I COMPLIED WITH THE STATED REQUIREMENTS OF THE ADIZ WHICH STATE THAT A FLT PLAN, BEACON CODE, AND TWO-WAY COMS WITH ATC ARE ALL THAT IS REQUIRED.

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.