Narrative:

In 9/89, at approximately XX10 chicago local time, I approached the chicago TCA. I called 119.45, as indicated on the sectional chart, and reported northwest of valparaiso, in. I received a squawk code of 5130 and verified altitude at 3100'. Was advised by ATC to maintain altitude. I remained on 119.45 and proceeded into the TCA. I was handed off to meigs tower; was asked by meigs ATC to identify. Was told by meigs ATC that I was not in their airspace and was switched back to 119.45. I informed ATC on 119.45 of meigs response re: my position, and reaffirmed landing chicago-wheeling. ATC acknowledged and advised a heading of 360 degrees. At same point, either mdw approach (119.45) or after a handoff to glenview tower, I was advised to descend to 1900'; I complied. After have established 2-WAY communication with glenview, I received no vectors for my approach to chicago-wheeling. Repeated call-ups to glenview were not acknowledged, even though radio communication was light. At initial call-up to glenview, I advised glenview tower that I was landing chicago-wheeling. When I established radio contact with pwk tower, I was told to turn 360 degrees to avoid ord control zone. After flying 360 degrees, pwk controller advised me to turn 320 degrees for approach into pwk. Pwk told me to land 12L. I acknowledged with my aircraft # and 'understand 12L.' I continued inbound for 12L, and was reminded by ATC that 'there are 2 runways, you are cleared for the 1 on the left.' was cleared to land 12L. I acknowledged 'identify, cleared to land 12L.' on short final over 12L, ATC urgently advised me to 'go around, you are on the wrong runway.' as I pwred out, I responded, 'identify was on final for 12L as cleared.' ATC responded with 'left turn for runway 16.' I acknowledged with 'identify turning left.' ATC: 'cleared to land 16.' I acknowledged as 'identify, cleared to land 16.' I called back stating I was having difficulty getting lined up for 16 (because of close turn in) and reported that I must extend downwind. ATC acknowledged and repeated, 'cleared to land 16.' after landing, tower gave no indication why there was a conflict. I did not see the aircraft attempting to land on 12L, but my passenger reported an aircraft on his side and lower. After calling ground, I was advised to call ord tower at 601-eebh. I called and talked with mr X, area manager. Mr X said an air carrier large transport pilot said small aircraft experienced an 'altitude deviation 5 mi northeast.' mr X asked many questions. I responded to the best of my recollection, and provided my name, address, phone # and pilot certificate #. Approximately 1 hour later, I received a call at pwk from mr Y (chicago center?). He was surprised when I said I had a squawk code. I was unable to provide him with the # at that time, but told him it was still set in the transponder. I also said I was surprised that I was not handed off to ord approach, since I was near their airspace. Mr Y said someone would definitely call me the next day, so I provided a work # and hours. No one called on thur, fri or mon. So far,I have not been contacted about this alleged incident. In my opinion, the alleged incident was due, in part, to being improperly handled inside the TCA. Although I am a low time pilot, my primary training was at cmh, which is an arsa. I am used to being controled in an arsa, and felt that the contact with ATC and squawk meant I was being controled through the TCA. Callback conversation with reporter revealed the following: reporter states ATC rep called and said they had reviewed the incident and determined that there was no TCA violation. They seemed greatly relieved. Reporter commented that she went into this situation as a 102 hour pilot, but came out of it as a very affirmative pilot who requests vectors around controled airspace.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: SMA PLT RECEIVED SQUAWK CODE AND WAS ADVISED TO MAINTAIN ALT. WAS INSIDE, BUT BELOW TCA BOUNDARY. LATER GIVEN VECTORS AND HANDOFF, THEN ASKED TO CALL ORD TWR.

Narrative: IN 9/89, AT APPROX XX10 CHICAGO LCL TIME, I APCHED THE CHICAGO TCA. I CALLED 119.45, AS INDICATED ON THE SECTIONAL CHART, AND RPTED NW OF VALPARAISO, IN. I RECEIVED A SQUAWK CODE OF 5130 AND VERIFIED ALT AT 3100'. WAS ADVISED BY ATC TO MAINTAIN ALT. I REMAINED ON 119.45 AND PROCEEDED INTO THE TCA. I WAS HANDED OFF TO MEIGS TWR; WAS ASKED BY MEIGS ATC TO IDENT. WAS TOLD BY MEIGS ATC THAT I WAS NOT IN THEIR AIRSPACE AND WAS SWITCHED BACK TO 119.45. I INFORMED ATC ON 119.45 OF MEIGS RESPONSE RE: MY POS, AND REAFFIRMED LNDG CHICAGO-WHEELING. ATC ACKNOWLEDGED AND ADVISED A HDG OF 360 DEGS. AT SAME POINT, EITHER MDW APCH (119.45) OR AFTER A HDOF TO GLENVIEW TWR, I WAS ADVISED TO DSND TO 1900'; I COMPLIED. AFTER HAVE ESTABLISHED 2-WAY COM WITH GLENVIEW, I RECEIVED NO VECTORS FOR MY APCH TO CHICAGO-WHEELING. REPEATED CALL-UPS TO GLENVIEW WERE NOT ACKNOWLEDGED, EVEN THOUGH RADIO COM WAS LIGHT. AT INITIAL CALL-UP TO GLENVIEW, I ADVISED GLENVIEW TWR THAT I WAS LNDG CHICAGO-WHEELING. WHEN I ESTABLISHED RADIO CONTACT WITH PWK TWR, I WAS TOLD TO TURN 360 DEGS TO AVOID ORD CTL ZONE. AFTER FLYING 360 DEGS, PWK CTLR ADVISED ME TO TURN 320 DEGS FOR APCH INTO PWK. PWK TOLD ME TO LAND 12L. I ACKNOWLEDGED WITH MY ACFT # AND 'UNDERSTAND 12L.' I CONTINUED INBND FOR 12L, AND WAS REMINDED BY ATC THAT 'THERE ARE 2 RWYS, YOU ARE CLRED FOR THE 1 ON THE LEFT.' WAS CLRED TO LAND 12L. I ACKNOWLEDGED 'IDENT, CLRED TO LAND 12L.' ON SHORT FINAL OVER 12L, ATC URGENTLY ADVISED ME TO 'GO AROUND, YOU ARE ON THE WRONG RWY.' AS I PWRED OUT, I RESPONDED, 'IDENT WAS ON FINAL FOR 12L AS CLRED.' ATC RESPONDED WITH 'LEFT TURN FOR RWY 16.' I ACKNOWLEDGED WITH 'IDENT TURNING LEFT.' ATC: 'CLRED TO LAND 16.' I ACKNOWLEDGED AS 'IDENT, CLRED TO LAND 16.' I CALLED BACK STATING I WAS HAVING DIFFICULTY GETTING LINED UP FOR 16 (BECAUSE OF CLOSE TURN IN) AND RPTED THAT I MUST EXTEND DOWNWIND. ATC ACKNOWLEDGED AND REPEATED, 'CLRED TO LAND 16.' AFTER LNDG, TWR GAVE NO INDICATION WHY THERE WAS A CONFLICT. I DID NOT SEE THE ACFT ATTEMPTING TO LAND ON 12L, BUT MY PAX RPTED AN ACFT ON HIS SIDE AND LOWER. AFTER CALLING GND, I WAS ADVISED TO CALL ORD TWR AT 601-EEBH. I CALLED AND TALKED WITH MR X, AREA MGR. MR X SAID AN ACR LGT PLT SAID SMA EXPERIENCED AN 'ALT DEVIATION 5 MI NE.' MR X ASKED MANY QUESTIONS. I RESPONDED TO THE BEST OF MY RECOLLECTION, AND PROVIDED MY NAME, ADDRESS, PHONE # AND PLT CERTIFICATE #. APPROX 1 HR LATER, I RECEIVED A CALL AT PWK FROM MR Y (CHICAGO CENTER?). HE WAS SURPRISED WHEN I SAID I HAD A SQUAWK CODE. I WAS UNABLE TO PROVIDE HIM WITH THE # AT THAT TIME, BUT TOLD HIM IT WAS STILL SET IN THE XPONDER. I ALSO SAID I WAS SURPRISED THAT I WAS NOT HANDED OFF TO ORD APCH, SINCE I WAS NEAR THEIR AIRSPACE. MR Y SAID SOMEONE WOULD DEFINITELY CALL ME THE NEXT DAY, SO I PROVIDED A WORK # AND HRS. NO ONE CALLED ON THUR, FRI OR MON. SO FAR,I HAVE NOT BEEN CONTACTED ABOUT THIS ALLEGED INCIDENT. IN MY OPINION, THE ALLEGED INCIDENT WAS DUE, IN PART, TO BEING IMPROPERLY HANDLED INSIDE THE TCA. ALTHOUGH I AM A LOW TIME PLT, MY PRIMARY TRNING WAS AT CMH, WHICH IS AN ARSA. I AM USED TO BEING CTLED IN AN ARSA, AND FELT THAT THE CONTACT WITH ATC AND SQUAWK MEANT I WAS BEING CTLED THROUGH THE TCA. CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING: RPTR STATES ATC REP CALLED AND SAID THEY HAD REVIEWED THE INCIDENT AND DETERMINED THAT THERE WAS NO TCA VIOLATION. THEY SEEMED GREATLY RELIEVED. RPTR COMMENTED THAT SHE WENT INTO THIS SITUATION AS A 102 HR PLT, BUT CAME OUT OF IT AS A VERY AFFIRMATIVE PLT WHO REQUESTS VECTORS AROUND CTLED AIRSPACE.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of August 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.