Narrative:

On aug/thu/04, I was approaching bettles from directly north with second PA18 piper aircraft traveling with me. The local WX advisory on 122.9 reported poor visibility due to smoke. My partner called zan on 124.6 for a special VFR clearance to land and this was granted. Zan asked if we could maintain visual separation from one another and we advised 'no problem.' there were no other aircraft in the pattern, approaching, or close to approaching. We reported our approach and arrival on CTAF and undoubtedly many local pilots and lodge owners were listening while sitting in front of their unicom base receivers. The lndgs were without incident or conflict of any aircraft of any kind. Upon parking and exiting the 2 aircraft, both my partner and I were approached by a local air taxi operator who complained he could not get his clients out and wanted to know why we could violate the minimums when coming into bettles. We advised the complaining pilot we had been granted a 'special.' he allowed that this was not possible since the 'official' WX was less than visibilities minimums. I told the complaining pilot that we had well over a mi on approach since the VOR tower was clearly visible from over a mi out, and that he could confirm that we had a 'special' by calling zan. He was argumentative and belligerent. When we left bettles later in the day after taking on fuel, we had 4 mi and 1400 ft from the WX advisory. We called for a 'special' anyway, to zan, just to be safe, and this was granted, even though the WX was above minimums. The conflict here may be a misunderstanding for bettles' local pilots, regarding if zan can give a 'special' at their discretion or if they need permission/confirmation from the (non FAA) local contract WX advisor. If we had been granted a 'special' and confirmed we could maintain visual separation to zan, we believed it was a fully a correct, safe, and authority/authorized approach and landing.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: FLT OF 2 PA18 ACFT, AFTER LNDG BTT, ARE CHALLENGED BY A LCL AIR TAXI OPERATOR FOR LNDG IN POOR VISIBILITY.

Narrative: ON AUG/THU/04, I WAS APCHING BETTLES FROM DIRECTLY N WITH SECOND PA18 PIPER ACFT TRAVELING WITH ME. THE LCL WX ADVISORY ON 122.9 RPTED POOR VISIBILITY DUE TO SMOKE. MY PARTNER CALLED ZAN ON 124.6 FOR A SPECIAL VFR CLRNC TO LAND AND THIS WAS GRANTED. ZAN ASKED IF WE COULD MAINTAIN VISUAL SEPARATION FROM ONE ANOTHER AND WE ADVISED 'NO PROB.' THERE WERE NO OTHER ACFT IN THE PATTERN, APCHING, OR CLOSE TO APCHING. WE RPTED OUR APCH AND ARR ON CTAF AND UNDOUBTEDLY MANY LCL PLTS AND LODGE OWNERS WERE LISTENING WHILE SITTING IN FRONT OF THEIR UNICOM BASE RECEIVERS. THE LNDGS WERE WITHOUT INCIDENT OR CONFLICT OF ANY ACFT OF ANY KIND. UPON PARKING AND EXITING THE 2 ACFT, BOTH MY PARTNER AND I WERE APCHED BY A LCL AIR TAXI OPERATOR WHO COMPLAINED HE COULD NOT GET HIS CLIENTS OUT AND WANTED TO KNOW WHY WE COULD VIOLATE THE MINIMUMS WHEN COMING INTO BETTLES. WE ADVISED THE COMPLAINING PLT WE HAD BEEN GRANTED A 'SPECIAL.' HE ALLOWED THAT THIS WAS NOT POSSIBLE SINCE THE 'OFFICIAL' WX WAS LESS THAN VISIBILITIES MINIMUMS. I TOLD THE COMPLAINING PLT THAT WE HAD WELL OVER A MI ON APCH SINCE THE VOR TWR WAS CLRLY VISIBLE FROM OVER A MI OUT, AND THAT HE COULD CONFIRM THAT WE HAD A 'SPECIAL' BY CALLING ZAN. HE WAS ARGUMENTATIVE AND BELLIGERENT. WHEN WE LEFT BETTLES LATER IN THE DAY AFTER TAKING ON FUEL, WE HAD 4 MI AND 1400 FT FROM THE WX ADVISORY. WE CALLED FOR A 'SPECIAL' ANYWAY, TO ZAN, JUST TO BE SAFE, AND THIS WAS GRANTED, EVEN THOUGH THE WX WAS ABOVE MINIMUMS. THE CONFLICT HERE MAY BE A MISUNDERSTANDING FOR BETTLES' LCL PLTS, REGARDING IF ZAN CAN GIVE A 'SPECIAL' AT THEIR DISCRETION OR IF THEY NEED PERMISSION/CONFIRMATION FROM THE (NON FAA) LCL CONTRACT WX ADVISOR. IF WE HAD BEEN GRANTED A 'SPECIAL' AND CONFIRMED WE COULD MAINTAIN VISUAL SEPARATION TO ZAN, WE BELIEVED IT WAS A FULLY A CORRECT, SAFE, AND AUTH APCH AND LNDG.

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.