Skylane 182/RG Turbo Skylane/RG
Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Private
Flight Crew Last 90 Days 23; Flight Crew Total 434; Flight Crew Type 310
Situational Awareness; Distraction; Communication Breakdown; Confusion
ATC Issue All Types; Airspace Violation All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter VFR In IMC
Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action; Flight Crew Exited Penetrated Airspace
Aircraft; Airspace Structure; Human Factors; Weather
We carried full fuel which would give us 4.5 hours of flight time. Our route was planned to follow the shoreline of and transit the Chicago B airspace via the VFR corridor along the lake and then continue direct to BMG. The weather en route was forecast for a mix of VFR and Marginal VFR. I had a CFII in the right seat for support on this flight. My IFR certification; as well as my instructor's; were current and all applicable equipment on board was current for IFR use. Due to the icing Airmet in the area of our intended flight; and due to the overcast conditions and marginal VFR en route; I elected not to file IFR on this leg of the flight. Both our departure airport and destination airport were VMC and tops were at 5;500. During a previous flight I flew in Chicago's B Airspace in this aircraft; which is not certified for known icing; on an IFR flight plan with icing conditions; the Approach controllers had vectored us into icing conditions where we started to pick up some rime ice. In order to avoid a repeat of this dangerous situation we decided to remain VFR on this flight. After departure; we climbed to a cruise altitude of 3;000 and picked up VFR flight following. We continued en route and climbed above the broken layer for better visibility. The broken layer was now complete overcast with tops at about 5;000 MSL and bases at about 1;000 AGL. We climbed to 7;500 and were handed off to controllers for flight following. With about 2 minutes of flight before entering Chicago's 30 mile veil; we were handed off to Chicago Approach control. I immediately contacted Chicago Approach and requested VFR flight following to transit the Bravo.The response was 'This is Chicago; we don't do VFR flight following'. I responded by requesting IFR handling through the Bravo. The controller did not immediately respond to my request which made me think he was putting together an IFR clearance for us. The next communication from the controller was 'You are already in the Bravo turn 090 and descend immediately below the bravo. Well this was a surprise and not a good situation. I fly through [other] Bravo's on a regular basis and had never been denied VFR flight following. Below us was an overcast layer with tops at about 5;000. The floor of the Bravo he wanted us to get to was 3;600. So he was giving us a solution that we couldn't execute without an IFR clearance. Even if we had a clearance; there was an icing Airmet in effect and temperatures at altitude were in the mid to low 30's. We turned 090 and started a descent looking for a hole in the clouds over the lake where ceilings were broken. We were not able to maintain the 090 heading and descend due to cloud cover. We found a hole on a more southerly heading and worked our way through very marginal conditions to get in the broken layer. As we zig zagged around the clouds we were vectored even further out over the lake until we were way beyond any hope of a power off glide in the event of an emergency. I would estimate that we were up to 15 miles off shore cruising at 3500 feet. The accident chain was forming before my eyes and the controller could have cared less as he read me the 800 number to copy so I could call in about my possible deviation. We were then instructed to descend to 2500 despite the floor of the Bravo being 3600; which reduced our power off glide even further.I believe the root cause of this problem was the Chicago Controller's unwillingness to assist a GA aircraft. On this morning; the safest way to transit Chicago's airspace for a small airplane without Flight into Known Icing (FIKI) equipment; was VFR on top. I don't know why we were denied this handling and vectored into a risky situation. In the future; it would be helpful to get handed off to Chicago Approach sooner so we would have time to work out a solution if needed.
C182 pilot reported Class B Airspace violation.