Narrative:

The flight originated at van nuys. We departed vny en route to corona on V-186 at 3500 ft (odd +500 ft for eastbound). We utilized burbank's radar service. On return from corona, my friend (also a commercially rated pilot) requested 4500 ft on V-186 (to vny) with ontario approach. (Even +500 ft for wbound.) I did not think anything of the altitude request at the time, not realizing it would take us through the corner of the TCA. We were enjoying the unusually clear conditions and talking to each other a lot. These were probably the biggest factors that distracted us from recognizing the upcoming infraction. As we left ontario's airspace we were instructed to contact burbank approach and (I thought) to squawk 1200. After contacting burbank, they instructed us to 'identify' (there was a certain urgency to the controller's voice). We did so and then were instructed to squawk 'ecga' -- the code ontario had assigned us. As it is unusual to get a request to 'identify' a '1200' squawk, I began to reexamine the events of the flight. It was at this point that I realized we had just 'clipped' the corner of the lax TCA. When burbank gave us the 'ecga' squawk (again), we were over el monte airport. Then burbank asked us to verify that our destination was vny. At the time I thought they were verifying our aircraft and destination (for identify purposes) as an aircraft that violated the TCA. However, at no time were we told that we violated the TCA or were instructed to telephone anyone upon landing. Upon retrospect, I believe they were not trying to reestablish radar contact with us after I mistakenly squawked '1200' but it was this 'reident' that alerted me that we passed through the TCA. Had this not happened, I don't believe we would've realized the infraction ever took place (or at least until much later). Nevertheless, technically speaking we violated lax's terminal control area. It is my opinion, and the opinion of many of my pilot friends, that the portion of V-186 that 'cuts' through the corner of the TCA creates a conflict. As I have not frequently flown over this region, I have not established ground references for that portion of the TCA, and therefore have no navigation by navaids provided. I believe this is a frequent occurrence with a large number of aircraft. Possibly so frequent the FAA 'recognizes' it and does not pursue these 'corner violations'. Maybe that tiny portion of the TCA should be removed and V-186 could be outside the TCA. Just a suggestion.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: SMA FLYING AIRWAY CLIPS CORNER OF TCA, PENETRATES THE FLOOR.

Narrative: THE FLT ORIGINATED AT VAN NUYS. WE DEPARTED VNY ENRTE TO CORONA ON V-186 AT 3500 FT (ODD +500 FT FOR EBOUND). WE UTILIZED BURBANK'S RADAR SVC. ON RETURN FROM CORONA, MY FRIEND (ALSO A COMMERCIALLY RATED PLT) REQUESTED 4500 FT ON V-186 (TO VNY) WITH ONTARIO APCH. (EVEN +500 FT FOR WBOUND.) I DID NOT THINK ANYTHING OF THE ALT REQUEST AT THE TIME, NOT REALIZING IT WOULD TAKE US THROUGH THE CORNER OF THE TCA. WE WERE ENJOYING THE UNUSUALLY CLR CONDITIONS AND TALKING TO EACH OTHER A LOT. THESE WERE PROBABLY THE BIGGEST FACTORS THAT DISTRACTED US FROM RECOGNIZING THE UPCOMING INFRACTION. AS WE LEFT ONTARIO'S AIRSPACE WE WERE INSTRUCTED TO CONTACT BURBANK APCH AND (I THOUGHT) TO SQUAWK 1200. AFTER CONTACTING BURBANK, THEY INSTRUCTED US TO 'IDENT' (THERE WAS A CERTAIN URGENCY TO THE CTLR'S VOICE). WE DID SO AND THEN WERE INSTRUCTED TO SQUAWK 'ECGA' -- THE CODE ONTARIO HAD ASSIGNED US. AS IT IS UNUSUAL TO GET A REQUEST TO 'IDENT' A '1200' SQUAWK, I BEGAN TO REEXAMINE THE EVENTS OF THE FLT. IT WAS AT THIS POINT THAT I REALIZED WE HAD JUST 'CLIPPED' THE CORNER OF THE LAX TCA. WHEN BURBANK GAVE US THE 'ECGA' SQUAWK (AGAIN), WE WERE OVER EL MONTE ARPT. THEN BURBANK ASKED US TO VERIFY THAT OUR DEST WAS VNY. AT THE TIME I THOUGHT THEY WERE VERIFYING OUR ACFT AND DEST (FOR IDENT PURPOSES) AS AN ACFT THAT VIOLATED THE TCA. HOWEVER, AT NO TIME WERE WE TOLD THAT WE VIOLATED THE TCA OR WERE INSTRUCTED TO TELEPHONE ANYONE UPON LNDG. UPON RETROSPECT, I BELIEVE THEY WERE NOT TRYING TO REESTABLISH RADAR CONTACT WITH US AFTER I MISTAKENLY SQUAWKED '1200' BUT IT WAS THIS 'REIDENT' THAT ALERTED ME THAT WE PASSED THROUGH THE TCA. HAD THIS NOT HAPPENED, I DON'T BELIEVE WE WOULD'VE REALIZED THE INFRACTION EVER TOOK PLACE (OR AT LEAST UNTIL MUCH LATER). NEVERTHELESS, TECHNICALLY SPEAKING WE VIOLATED LAX'S TERMINAL CTL AREA. IT IS MY OPINION, AND THE OPINION OF MANY OF MY PLT FRIENDS, THAT THE PORTION OF V-186 THAT 'CUTS' THROUGH THE CORNER OF THE TCA CREATES A CONFLICT. AS I HAVE NOT FREQUENTLY FLOWN OVER THIS REGION, I HAVE NOT ESTABLISHED GND REFS FOR THAT PORTION OF THE TCA, AND THEREFORE HAVE NO NAV BY NAVAIDS PROVIDED. I BELIEVE THIS IS A FREQUENT OCCURRENCE WITH A LARGE NUMBER OF ACFT. POSSIBLY SO FREQUENT THE FAA 'RECOGNIZES' IT AND DOES NOT PURSUE THESE 'CORNER VIOLATIONS'. MAYBE THAT TINY PORTION OF THE TCA SHOULD BE REMOVED AND V-186 COULD BE OUTSIDE THE TCA. JUST A SUGGESTION.

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.