|37000 Feet||Browse and search NASA's
Aviation Safety Reporting System
|Local Time Of Day||0601 To 1200|
|Locale Reference||airport : olm|
|Altitude||agl bound lower : 0|
agl bound upper : 0
|Controlling Facilities||tracon : mia|
|Operator||general aviation : personal|
|Make Model Name||Small Aircraft, Low Wing, 1 Eng, Fixed Gear|
|Flight Phase||climbout : takeoff|
|Function||flight crew : single pilot|
|Qualification||pilot : atp|
pilot : commercial
pilot : instrument
pilot : flight engineer
|Experience||flight time last 90 days : 185|
flight time total : 17666
flight time type : 30
|Anomaly||inflight encounter : vfr in imc|
non adherence : far
|Independent Detector||other flight crewa|
|Resolutory Action||none taken : detected after the fact|
|Primary Problem||Flight Crew Human Performance|
|Air Traffic Incident||Pilot Deviation|
I received a WX briefing by phone from the sea FSS at approximately xa hours local time for my proposed trip to psp with a refuel stop at sac from olympia, wa. The only WX of note in the briefing was of fog at olm. As I recall the report was indefinite ceiling, visibility 1 mi. Due to the report I filed an IFR flight plan from olm-sac with sea FSS. As I drove to the airport and passed the approach end to runway 17, the departure runway, the visibility was quite good away from the airport and restr toward the airport although I could see most of the runway lights. I taxied away from my hangar at the southeast end of the field at approximately xb and the visibility was about 1/4 mi. As I continued taxiing nwbnd the visibility improved as I neared the warm up pad for runway 17. In the warm up area I attempted to call sea approach and clearance but was unable. At this time the sky was getting lighter and I could see clear patches of dawn sky and stars. Visibility had improved down the runway to better than 1/2 mi and out beyond the approach lights visibility was better than 1 mi. I decided at this point I could depart VFR under local conditions. Local conditions being visibility 1/2 mi or better and the sky visible through ground for, gaze, blowing dust, etc. Unfortunately, in reviewing the situation later I discovered that this is not allowed under far part 91 operations. I was misapplying a rule for air carrier operations as I am a pilot for air carrier. I cleared the approach path to runway 17 visually, made an advisory call on olm tower frequency, tower closed, and departed at approximately xc. I contacted sea approach in the air and the flight continued. After the fact I determined that my flight departure was not legal under the far part 91. However, I feel a contributing factor was that the controling facility, sea approach, does not have a remote at the sight. The olm tower operates 0800-2000 daily. The olm airport for my departure at xc is considered to be a control zone, but west/O a remote for direct contact with the controling facility on the ground prior to departure.
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: ACFT DEPARTRED UNCONTROLLED ARPT IN IMC UNDER VFR FLT RULES.
Narrative: I RECEIVED A WX BRIEFING BY PHONE FROM THE SEA FSS AT APPROX XA HRS LCL TIME FOR MY PROPOSED TRIP TO PSP WITH A REFUEL STOP AT SAC FROM OLYMPIA, WA. THE ONLY WX OF NOTE IN THE BRIEFING WAS OF FOG AT OLM. AS I RECALL THE RPT WAS INDEFINITE CEILING, VISIBILITY 1 MI. DUE TO THE RPT I FILED AN IFR FLT PLAN FROM OLM-SAC WITH SEA FSS. AS I DROVE TO THE ARPT AND PASSED THE APCH END TO RWY 17, THE DEP RWY, THE VISIBILITY WAS QUITE GOOD AWAY FROM THE ARPT AND RESTR TOWARD THE ARPT ALTHOUGH I COULD SEE MOST OF THE RWY LIGHTS. I TAXIED AWAY FROM MY HANGAR AT THE SE END OF THE FIELD AT APPROX XB AND THE VISIBILITY WAS ABOUT 1/4 MI. AS I CONTINUED TAXIING NWBND THE VISIBILITY IMPROVED AS I NEARED THE WARM UP PAD FOR RWY 17. IN THE WARM UP AREA I ATTEMPTED TO CALL SEA APCH AND CLRNC BUT WAS UNABLE. AT THIS TIME THE SKY WAS GETTING LIGHTER AND I COULD SEE CLEAR PATCHES OF DAWN SKY AND STARS. VISIBILITY HAD IMPROVED DOWN THE RWY TO BETTER THAN 1/2 MI AND OUT BEYOND THE APCH LIGHTS VISIBILITY WAS BETTER THAN 1 MI. I DECIDED AT THIS POINT I COULD DEPART VFR UNDER LCL CONDITIONS. LCL CONDITIONS BEING VISIBILITY 1/2 MI OR BETTER AND THE SKY VISIBLE THROUGH GND FOR, GAZE, BLOWING DUST, ETC. UNFORTUNATELY, IN REVIEWING THE SITUATION LATER I DISCOVERED THAT THIS IS NOT ALLOWED UNDER FAR PART 91 OPS. I WAS MISAPPLYING A RULE FOR ACR OPS AS I AM A PLT FOR ACR. I CLRED THE APCH PATH TO RWY 17 VISUALLY, MADE AN ADVISORY CALL ON OLM TWR FREQ, TWR CLOSED, AND DEPARTED AT APPROX XC. I CONTACTED SEA APCH IN THE AIR AND THE FLT CONTINUED. AFTER THE FACT I DETERMINED THAT MY FLT DEP WAS NOT LEGAL UNDER THE FAR PART 91. HOWEVER, I FEEL A CONTRIBUTING FACTOR WAS THAT THE CTLING FAC, SEA APCH, DOES NOT HAVE A REMOTE AT THE SIGHT. THE OLM TWR OPERATES 0800-2000 DAILY. THE OLM ARPT FOR MY DEP AT XC IS CONSIDERED TO BE A CTL ZONE, BUT W/O A REMOTE FOR DIRECT CONTACT WITH THE CTLING FAC ON THE GND PRIOR TO DEP.
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.