Narrative:

On sep/xa/99, I flew from N62 to 19N IFR, in my BE33. 19N is my home base. It's called camden county airport in berlin, nj. N62 is a small field 5 NM north of ptw. I had flown the route many times before. Hurricane had been reduced to a tropical storm and was at the virginia/north carolina border. There was a strong easterly flow of moist air. A convective SIGMET was in effect for the route of flight. Radar showed convective activity 30 NM south of philadelphia moving north. I filed an IFR flight plan with a routing ptw V143 ard rbv direct, because I've gotten that routing in the past. The clearance was ptw ard gxu direct. I received a void time clearance on the phone from phl approach and departed on time XA50 local. No convective activity showed on my stormscope at any time during the flight, on 100 mi range. My ground speed across phl airspace was 115 KTS, so progress was slower than usual, but otherwise unremarkable. Upon being handed off to mcguire approach on 120.25, mcguire advised me (as usual) that 19N had no WX reporting. He gave me the WX at mcguire which was unremarkable. The only part I copied was the wind direction of 100 degrees. He asked me what type of approach I would like. The approachs available at 19N are: VOR B (no GPS overlay) to 570 ft AGL, requires circling. GPS 5 with IAF's at vcn (in atlantic city's airspace) and ood (in philadelphia airspace). Final altitude is 470 ft AGL, straight in. GPS 23 with IAF at cobus (I think philadelphia airspace, not sure). Final altitude to 670 ft AGL, straight in, and circling is permitted at that altitude. I learned to fly at 19N and knew well the difficulties of night circling approachs at that airport. LLWS is very common, and the airport is surrounded by trees so sight of it is easily lost during circling. The runway lights cannot be activated until I am within a mi of the airport. I requested a fly over at MVA to see if a visual was possible. I then asked the controller if he could vector me for the GPS 5 approach and he said no, which I expected. I told the controller at that time (shortly after initial contact) that, if a visual was not possible, I would be requesting the GPS 5 from either ood or vcn, his choice. He got back to me and advised me that phl would not cooperate because they were unfamiliar with the approach. I requested the GPS 5 from vcn. He apparently went on the landline while I reprogrammed my GPS. This time I activated it to fly direct vcn, then inbound on the approach, but stayed on the vector heading. I did this because I was sure the approach would be approved. The controller got back to me and said that atlantic city would not authorize that approach and I could not fly it. I asked for the initials of controllers in philadelphia and atlantic city that were refusing these approachs and mcguire advised me that they could not give that information. Then mcguire asked me my intentions. I was struggling with unprogramming the GPS approach, to get the GPS out of approach mode. I requested the GPS 23 approach, figuring on a straight-in landing with some tailwind component. I was given a vector to the east to keep me in mcguire's airspace, and he asked me where the IAF was. I understood at this time that I could expect the GPS 23. The time now was XB35 and I switched fuel tanks. He mentioned holey by name, so afterwards I thought me must have had the approach chart. He told me to go to holey for the approach. I reprogrammed the GPS to go to cobus. I told him I needed to go to cobus (which is the only IAF authority/authorized for this approach). He told me phl would not permit this approach. He suggested the VOR approach off of vcn, atlantic city would apparently authority/authorized that. I didn't want to do the circling, and of course VOR approachs are not precise unless some means of cobbling up a GPS route is used. Furthermore, by now, I had again passed the airport northbound and would have to pass it again sbound to shoot the VOR approach. At this point I had been refused 4 approachs: GPS 5 vectors, GPS 5 ood IAF, GPS 5 vcn IAF, GPS 23 cobus IAF. I declined the VOR approach and said I was going to cobus for the GPS 23 approach and told him he could write me up if he wanted. 7 mi short of cobus I told him where cobus was (7 mi on present heading) and told him I would report over cobus. I reported over cobus, then holey. On short final I realized the tailwind component was too strong for the landing, so I circled to 5. The WX was right at minimums. I canceled IFR with mcguire during the circle. All during the time I was talking to mcguire the controller was professional. Later in the flight he became apologetic. He offered a phone number for phl approach so I could sort it out later, but I told him I already had it. I told him I would call the procedures specialist at phl. The controller told me that the problem was that the GPS approachs were new. I told him they were in effect for over a yr. The controller said that the coordination between FAA facilities could not be worked out. I responded that his supervisor should create a LOA with the other facilities sorting out these problems. He offered the excuse that most of the arrs they handle to 19N were visual approachs. I had no response to that.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: A BE33 PLT MAKES AN ALLEGED UNAUTH IFR GPS APCH INTO HIS HOME FIELD AT CAMDEN CITY ARPT, 19N, NJ.

Narrative: ON SEP/XA/99, I FLEW FROM N62 TO 19N IFR, IN MY BE33. 19N IS MY HOME BASE. IT'S CALLED CAMDEN COUNTY ARPT IN BERLIN, NJ. N62 IS A SMALL FIELD 5 NM N OF PTW. I HAD FLOWN THE RTE MANY TIMES BEFORE. HURRICANE HAD BEEN REDUCED TO A TROPICAL STORM AND WAS AT THE VIRGINIA/NORTH CAROLINA BORDER. THERE WAS A STRONG EASTERLY FLOW OF MOIST AIR. A CONVECTIVE SIGMET WAS IN EFFECT FOR THE RTE OF FLT. RADAR SHOWED CONVECTIVE ACTIVITY 30 NM S OF PHILADELPHIA MOVING N. I FILED AN IFR FLT PLAN WITH A ROUTING PTW V143 ARD RBV DIRECT, BECAUSE I'VE GOTTEN THAT ROUTING IN THE PAST. THE CLRNC WAS PTW ARD GXU DIRECT. I RECEIVED A VOID TIME CLRNC ON THE PHONE FROM PHL APCH AND DEPARTED ON TIME XA50 LCL. NO CONVECTIVE ACTIVITY SHOWED ON MY STORMSCOPE AT ANY TIME DURING THE FLT, ON 100 MI RANGE. MY GND SPD ACROSS PHL AIRSPACE WAS 115 KTS, SO PROGRESS WAS SLOWER THAN USUAL, BUT OTHERWISE UNREMARKABLE. UPON BEING HANDED OFF TO MCGUIRE APCH ON 120.25, MCGUIRE ADVISED ME (AS USUAL) THAT 19N HAD NO WX RPTING. HE GAVE ME THE WX AT MCGUIRE WHICH WAS UNREMARKABLE. THE ONLY PART I COPIED WAS THE WIND DIRECTION OF 100 DEGS. HE ASKED ME WHAT TYPE OF APCH I WOULD LIKE. THE APCHS AVAILABLE AT 19N ARE: VOR B (NO GPS OVERLAY) TO 570 FT AGL, REQUIRES CIRCLING. GPS 5 WITH IAF'S AT VCN (IN ATLANTIC CITY'S AIRSPACE) AND OOD (IN PHILADELPHIA AIRSPACE). FINAL ALT IS 470 FT AGL, STRAIGHT IN. GPS 23 WITH IAF AT COBUS (I THINK PHILADELPHIA AIRSPACE, NOT SURE). FINAL ALT TO 670 FT AGL, STRAIGHT IN, AND CIRCLING IS PERMITTED AT THAT ALT. I LEARNED TO FLY AT 19N AND KNEW WELL THE DIFFICULTIES OF NIGHT CIRCLING APCHS AT THAT ARPT. LLWS IS VERY COMMON, AND THE ARPT IS SURROUNDED BY TREES SO SIGHT OF IT IS EASILY LOST DURING CIRCLING. THE RWY LIGHTS CANNOT BE ACTIVATED UNTIL I AM WITHIN A MI OF THE ARPT. I REQUESTED A FLY OVER AT MVA TO SEE IF A VISUAL WAS POSSIBLE. I THEN ASKED THE CTLR IF HE COULD VECTOR ME FOR THE GPS 5 APCH AND HE SAID NO, WHICH I EXPECTED. I TOLD THE CTLR AT THAT TIME (SHORTLY AFTER INITIAL CONTACT) THAT, IF A VISUAL WAS NOT POSSIBLE, I WOULD BE REQUESTING THE GPS 5 FROM EITHER OOD OR VCN, HIS CHOICE. HE GOT BACK TO ME AND ADVISED ME THAT PHL WOULD NOT COOPERATE BECAUSE THEY WERE UNFAMILIAR WITH THE APCH. I REQUESTED THE GPS 5 FROM VCN. HE APPARENTLY WENT ON THE LANDLINE WHILE I REPROGRAMMED MY GPS. THIS TIME I ACTIVATED IT TO FLY DIRECT VCN, THEN INBOUND ON THE APCH, BUT STAYED ON THE VECTOR HDG. I DID THIS BECAUSE I WAS SURE THE APCH WOULD BE APPROVED. THE CTLR GOT BACK TO ME AND SAID THAT ATLANTIC CITY WOULD NOT AUTHORIZE THAT APCH AND I COULD NOT FLY IT. I ASKED FOR THE INITIALS OF CTLRS IN PHILADELPHIA AND ATLANTIC CITY THAT WERE REFUSING THESE APCHS AND MCGUIRE ADVISED ME THAT THEY COULD NOT GIVE THAT INFO. THEN MCGUIRE ASKED ME MY INTENTIONS. I WAS STRUGGLING WITH UNPROGRAMMING THE GPS APCH, TO GET THE GPS OUT OF APCH MODE. I REQUESTED THE GPS 23 APCH, FIGURING ON A STRAIGHT-IN LNDG WITH SOME TAILWIND COMPONENT. I WAS GIVEN A VECTOR TO THE E TO KEEP ME IN MCGUIRE'S AIRSPACE, AND HE ASKED ME WHERE THE IAF WAS. I UNDERSTOOD AT THIS TIME THAT I COULD EXPECT THE GPS 23. THE TIME NOW WAS XB35 AND I SWITCHED FUEL TANKS. HE MENTIONED HOLEY BY NAME, SO AFTERWARDS I THOUGHT ME MUST HAVE HAD THE APCH CHART. HE TOLD ME TO GO TO HOLEY FOR THE APCH. I REPROGRAMMED THE GPS TO GO TO COBUS. I TOLD HIM I NEEDED TO GO TO COBUS (WHICH IS THE ONLY IAF AUTH FOR THIS APCH). HE TOLD ME PHL WOULD NOT PERMIT THIS APCH. HE SUGGESTED THE VOR APCH OFF OF VCN, ATLANTIC CITY WOULD APPARENTLY AUTH THAT. I DIDN'T WANT TO DO THE CIRCLING, AND OF COURSE VOR APCHS ARE NOT PRECISE UNLESS SOME MEANS OF COBBLING UP A GPS RTE IS USED. FURTHERMORE, BY NOW, I HAD AGAIN PASSED THE ARPT NBOUND AND WOULD HAVE TO PASS IT AGAIN SBOUND TO SHOOT THE VOR APCH. AT THIS POINT I HAD BEEN REFUSED 4 APCHS: GPS 5 VECTORS, GPS 5 OOD IAF, GPS 5 VCN IAF, GPS 23 COBUS IAF. I DECLINED THE VOR APCH AND SAID I WAS GOING TO COBUS FOR THE GPS 23 APCH AND TOLD HIM HE COULD WRITE ME UP IF HE WANTED. 7 MI SHORT OF COBUS I TOLD HIM WHERE COBUS WAS (7 MI ON PRESENT HDG) AND TOLD HIM I WOULD RPT OVER COBUS. I RPTED OVER COBUS, THEN HOLEY. ON SHORT FINAL I REALIZED THE TAILWIND COMPONENT WAS TOO STRONG FOR THE LNDG, SO I CIRCLED TO 5. THE WX WAS RIGHT AT MINIMUMS. I CANCELED IFR WITH MCGUIRE DURING THE CIRCLE. ALL DURING THE TIME I WAS TALKING TO MCGUIRE THE CTLR WAS PROFESSIONAL. LATER IN THE FLT HE BECAME APOLOGETIC. HE OFFERED A PHONE NUMBER FOR PHL APCH SO I COULD SORT IT OUT LATER, BUT I TOLD HIM I ALREADY HAD IT. I TOLD HIM I WOULD CALL THE PROCS SPECIALIST AT PHL. THE CTLR TOLD ME THAT THE PROB WAS THAT THE GPS APCHS WERE NEW. I TOLD HIM THEY WERE IN EFFECT FOR OVER A YR. THE CTLR SAID THAT THE COORD BTWN FAA FACILITIES COULD NOT BE WORKED OUT. I RESPONDED THAT HIS SUPVR SHOULD CREATE A LOA WITH THE OTHER FACILITIES SORTING OUT THESE PROBS. HE OFFERED THE EXCUSE THAT MOST OF THE ARRS THEY HANDLE TO 19N WERE VISUAL APCHS. I HAD NO RESPONSE TO THAT.

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.