Finding ourselves this summer in southern California, with a rare three days off, my wife and I decided to visit the Monterey/Carmel area, one of our favorite West Coast fly-in vacation spots. Our plan was to depart San Diego's Montgomery Field for the 2.5-hour flight in a borrowed Mooney MSE. It was a beautiful day, so I made the decision to fly VFR. After all, this was a real opportunity to stay low and do some sightseeing up the California coastline. This meant negotiating a bushel basket of TCAs, ARSAs, and special-use airspace, but then again, I wasn't exactly a newcomer to the area. I had lived and flown in California some 20 years ago.
Boy, was I in for a shock. I have never worked so hard on any flight, IFR or VFR, weather or no weather.
Armed with the proper VFR charts, I used a preflight lunch to plan the trip, talk with some local pilots to determine a course into and out of the San Diego TCA, and decide on how I would fly the Los Angeles basin. The entire flight was to be backed up by VFR radar traffic advisories, from start to finish, or so I assumed.
Immediately after departure, air traffic control was too busy to work me as a VFR target. No problem. I continued up the coastline, dodging some military airspace. The plan, however, was to get an ATC clearance for the "Shoreline Route" west of Los Angeles International Airport between 2,500 and 4,000 feet. As advertised on the L.A. TCA chart — which, when opened, occupied most of the cockpit space available — ATC finally answered and had me all set up for my transition through the LAX area. Then, just before beginning the assigned procedure at Long Beach, the controller came back requesting that I change my route to the L.A. Special Flight Rules Area, which takes you right over LAX. This route has its own reporting procedure; there are no communications with ATC. Dumped by ATC, I suddenly found myself in some of the busiest airspace in the country, trying to quickly read the half-page of instructions on the chart, fly the airplane, and figure out what frequency to use after I got through this maze.
My skills were taxed to the limit, even though I had prepared for the flight and, more importantly, was quite familiar with the landmarks in the area. That short trip finally made me realize why so many West Coast friends and associates say they always file IFR just to avoid the hassle, a practice to which I've never subscribed. However, imagine a less experienced, out-of- town VFR-only pilot maneuvering through southern California airspace using charted procedures that are unique in the world.
The point is that TCAs and ARSAs have not been designed with general aviation aircraft operating parameters, equipment, or pilots in mind. The "upside-down wedding cake" design of the 1980s, with its generic 10- to 20- mile — and now 30-mile — circles, just doesn't work for all locations. Terrain, VFR landmarks, and the traffic patterns of reliever and outlying GA airports differ in every city.
Some time ago, AOPA initiated the concept of having user groups participate in the design of proposed TCAs. The objective, of course, was to end up with a design acceptable to all. For VFR pilots, that means boundaries defined by landmarks and navaids and reasonable ceilings and floors. We need to know how to identify where controlled-access airspace begins and ways to avoid it. New TCAs that were designed under this system started with Phoenix, followed by Tampa, Orlando, Charlotte, Houston (Hobby), Salt Lake City, Baltimore-Washington, Memphis, and Seattle.
Your association has consistently fought for using geographical landmarks to delineate the boundaries of TCAs and ARSAs. Simplified VFR corridors, transition routes, and flyways are needed to provide VFR access to and through busy airspace. AOPA has made the point that strategically placed navaids are vital if pilots are to avoid inadvertent penetrations of a TCA. No longer will we be party to a TCA design that, like the one proposed in Cincinnati, is not based on distances from a navaid located at the primary airport.
The "wedding cake" also is too tall at many TCA locations. To fly over the L.A. TCA, I would have had to climb the Mooney to above 12,500 feet msl. One key criterion for creating a TCA or ARSA is the number of aircraft using the airspace. The proposed new Denver TCA design (the comment period closes October 20) has a 12,000-foot-msl top, which is 7,000 feet agl. If Denver, which ranks sixth in the nation in air carrier operations, can live with a TCA that tops out at 7,000 feet agl, then it follows that other TCAs can and should be lowered. We began our adventuresome trip up the coast of California in San Diego at an elevation of 15 feet. The TCA there tops at 12,500 feet msl; the airport ranks thirtieth in traffic volume.
Also, let's not forget that the base altitudes of a TCA are of critical importance to those of us who fly light aircraft to and from airports within this airspace. Usually within the first arc of the primary airport (6 to 10 nautical miles), commercial aircraft have climbed to an altitude that allows general aviation aircraft to operate safely and without conflict up to about 2,500 feet. Why "sterilize" anything beyond this region by establishing lower TCA floors, depriving general aviation of needed airspace?
We, as pilots, have risen to the challenge of flying in today's airspace. We've invested in Mode C transponders and accepted additional training for operating in high density areas. More pilots are earning instrument ratings than ever before. At the same time, airlines now have equipment and noise standards that require and enable steeper climbs, not to mention the traffic alert and collision avoidance systems (TCASs) that are mandatory. The bottom line is general aviation can better coexist with the airlines in and around TCAs.
Your association continues to tackle the ongoing problem of TCAs. Along with local groups, we're currently working on Cincinnati, Raleigh-Durham (North Carolina), and Fort Lauderdale. These groups and AOPA's regional representatives are benefiting from guidance contained in a new document produced by our technical affairs department, titled "TCA Design Procedures." It's a summary of the TCA design and negotiating process that we've learned so well over the years.
Our nation's airspace is a finite resource. Everyone should have access, not just the air carriers and fare-paying passenger public. Concerned local pilots, led by AOPA, can make a difference as we continue to regain airspace access by revisiting and revising the heavy-handed government initiatives of the 1980s. By the way, Los Angeles was where this experiment of correcting past TCA design mistakes got started. Due to its complexity, the job has taken much longer. However, stay tuned; many worthwhile alternatives have been suggested, and the resolution is in sight.
Related Articles
