Narrative:

On preflight and subsequent WX and NOTAM checks, I noted that the ILS was notamed out at destination airport and planned a visual if possible and more likely a diversion to an alternate airport. About 30-40 mi from destination, doublechked with the FBO facility responsible for the NOTAM on the ILS outage, and was informed the NOTAM was 'not in effect' and the ILS was fine and usable until later in the day when maintenance (FAA) was to work on the equipment. I received a good signal with normal idents and advised phl approach at this time about 30 mi out. As usual, phl was quite busy and really didn't have time to deal with us. I received clearance, but was told the approach was at my own risk. I tried very hard to remain polite and professional in our conversations, but feel that our flight was an annoyance to ATC as they were very busy and forgot me at least twice on the approach. As a result, I was turned late to intercept and given a lower altitude late as well. The ILS 'worked out,' but I wasn't pleased feeling like a second-class citizen. In nearly 30 yrs of commercial flying, I've often noticed a problem with ATC's handling and attitude towards satellite airports of a nearby busy hub facility. In the ILS at 40N, I feel there's a communication problem between the FBO and phl approach. Either the equipment is notamed on or off -- there shouldn't be this gray area and attitude of 'you're cleared, but it's at your own risk!'

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: BE58 PLT IS UNHAPPY WITH ATC HANDLING WHEN ATTEMPTING TO MAKE AN ILS APCH INTO 40N, A PHL SATELLITE ARPT. THE ILS HAD AN OTS NOTAM, BUT THE PLT WAS TOLD BY THE FBO THAT THE ILS WAS WORKING.

Narrative: ON PREFLT AND SUBSEQUENT WX AND NOTAM CHKS, I NOTED THAT THE ILS WAS NOTAMED OUT AT DEST ARPT AND PLANNED A VISUAL IF POSSIBLE AND MORE LIKELY A DIVERSION TO AN ALTERNATE ARPT. ABOUT 30-40 MI FROM DEST, DOUBLECHKED WITH THE FBO FACILITY RESPONSIBLE FOR THE NOTAM ON THE ILS OUTAGE, AND WAS INFORMED THE NOTAM WAS 'NOT IN EFFECT' AND THE ILS WAS FINE AND USABLE UNTIL LATER IN THE DAY WHEN MAINT (FAA) WAS TO WORK ON THE EQUIP. I RECEIVED A GOOD SIGNAL WITH NORMAL IDENTS AND ADVISED PHL APCH AT THIS TIME ABOUT 30 MI OUT. AS USUAL, PHL WAS QUITE BUSY AND REALLY DIDN'T HAVE TIME TO DEAL WITH US. I RECEIVED CLRNC, BUT WAS TOLD THE APCH WAS AT MY OWN RISK. I TRIED VERY HARD TO REMAIN POLITE AND PROFESSIONAL IN OUR CONVERSATIONS, BUT FEEL THAT OUR FLT WAS AN ANNOYANCE TO ATC AS THEY WERE VERY BUSY AND FORGOT ME AT LEAST TWICE ON THE APCH. AS A RESULT, I WAS TURNED LATE TO INTERCEPT AND GIVEN A LOWER ALT LATE AS WELL. THE ILS 'WORKED OUT,' BUT I WASN'T PLEASED FEELING LIKE A SECOND-CLASS CITIZEN. IN NEARLY 30 YRS OF COMMERCIAL FLYING, I'VE OFTEN NOTICED A PROB WITH ATC'S HANDLING AND ATTITUDE TOWARDS SATELLITE ARPTS OF A NEARBY BUSY HUB FACILITY. IN THE ILS AT 40N, I FEEL THERE'S A COM PROB BTWN THE FBO AND PHL APCH. EITHER THE EQUIP IS NOTAMED ON OR OFF -- THERE SHOULDN'T BE THIS GRAY AREA AND ATTITUDE OF 'YOU'RE CLRED, BUT IT'S AT YOUR OWN RISK!'

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.