KSNA disneyland TFR question

[Vaillant]

Hello,

A few weeks ago I did a VFR flight from KSNA to KSBA. I asked for a northbound departure and was provided with a heading and 2000 ft. altitude, I believe. The heading was taking me right over the Disneyland TFR (which I had plan on flying over) but I was hoping to be asked to climb higher than the 3000 ft. of the TFR like I requested when contacting clearance.

However the controller was pretty busy and I was going to bust through the TFR so I decided to do a 360. That did get the attention of the controller who kindly asked me what was I doing, I quickly explained and was told to keep going on the assigned heading and cleared to a higher altitude but basically told to bust the TFR.

What should I have done in real life in this situation? Should I nag the controller instead of waiting for the instruction? Was doing a 360 the right thing? Or should I bust the TFR because that was what the controller told me to do, though I didn't want to explain myself to the FAA once landed at KSBA?!

[zerofay32]

The dumb thing about the Disney TFR's is that they are totally unnecessary IMHO. I've done some RW flying in Florida for work and to fly through (or even do some circling in) the Disney (or any) TFR all you need to do is ask the controller. However the airspace in FL is different then the airspace in SoCal so maybe getting clearance though the west coast one is harder.

(I guess I just answered my own question on the validity of the mouse TFRs.... they keep the VFR NORDO aircraft out of the area, kind of... eh, still think they're dumb )

Busy or not, as soon as the controller established me on a heading and Altitude that put me near the TFR, I would have asked what his/her intentions for me were. I'm I cleared to go through? or should I expect to be vectored somehow? Ultimately though, its up to the PIC to either get the permission or go around these types of airspace (vectors or not). Whether the 360 was the best thing to do or not I'm not sure. But the crux of the matter was letting the problem continue to the point of having to take an immediate course of action to avoid the TFR.

Also remember the Ceiling of the TFR is 3000 ft AGL so in that area you would need to be at least 3130 ft MSL to be above it.


*EDIT* Reading through some material available online, apparently the SoCal park TFR is, infact, more restrictive than the TFR for the FL park. The Cal TFR only allows operations that are 'relevant to the park' and is subject to verification. What is interesting to me is that this also excludes Aerial Survey Flights (what I do for a job).

But also in the AFDSupplement description it reads "This restriction does not apply to: (A) those aircraft authorized by ATC for operational or safety purposes, including aircraft arriving or departing from an airport using standard air traffic procedures; ..." but that all depends on what the lawyers define as 'standard air traffic procedures.'

So getting approval from the controller to fly through would be a no go in the RW. But for PE just tell the controller your flyover is 'relevant to the park' and you'll be fine!

[HRutila]

From the text of the TFR NOTAM: "THE RESTRICTIONS DO NOT APPLY TO THOSE AIRCRAFT AUTHORIZED BY AND IN CONTACT WITH ATC FOR OPERATIONAL OR SAFETY OF FLIGHT PURPOSES"

Aircraft departing SNA are in contact with ATC at least until they leave the Class C. The TFR does not apply to them.

[HRutila]

The operational purpose, by the way, is departing the SNA Class C.

[Vaillant]

Thank you so much for the reply, good to know that ATC can have you go through a TFR. That is what I was not sure of.