|37000 Feet||Browse and search NASA's
Aviation Safety Reporting System
|Local Time Of Day||1201 To 1800|
|Locale Reference||atc facility : ord|
|Altitude||msl bound lower : 6000|
msl bound upper : 10500
|Controlling Facilities||tracon : ord|
|Operator||general aviation : personal|
|Make Model Name||Small Aircraft, Low Wing, 1 Eng, Fixed Gear|
|Flight Phase||cruise other|
|Route In Use||enroute : on vectors|
|Function||flight crew : single pilot|
|Qualification||pilot : private|
pilot : instrument
|Experience||flight time last 90 days : 15|
flight time total : 210
|Affiliation||government : faa|
|Function||controller : departure|
|Qualification||controller : radar|
|Anomaly||inflight encounter : vfr in imc|
inflight encounter : weather
non adherence : far
|Independent Detector||other flight crewa|
|Resolutory Action||controller : issued new clearance|
|Primary Problem||Flight Crew Human Performance|
|Air Traffic Incident||Pilot Deviation|
I departed VFR from lan to etb. The decision to go VFR was based on a WX briefing received from lan FSS, reported a forecast for ord and mke 100 broken 250 broken vu, with a slight chance of 50 broken, light snow beginning at xx+5. Departing exl, I climbed to 10500' VFR in clear skies. My intention was to go around the southern edge of lake michigan, remaining within gliding distance of the shore. I contacted chicago center over the lake. I believe he said 4 mi west of chett. Shortly thereafter I encountered a layer of clouds just above my altitude, and so descended to 8500'. As I turned northbound, conditions continued to deteriorate. I requested an IFR clearance along V7 and was told it was not available at my altitude. I requested lower, and was told to remain VFR outside the TCA. I descended to approximately 7100' MSL, by my altimeter, 100' outside the TCA. Just north of meigs field, I turned further right to about 020 degrees in an attempt to remain both VFR and clear of the TCA. I was able to see the water below and so requested either an IFR clearance or permission to enter the TCA. Again, permission was denied. I then indicated I was unable to maintain VFR northbound and was initiating a turn to 180 degrees. I was told I could get an IFR if I could climb to 10000' to re-enter chicago center's airspace. I indicated I could not make the climb VFR and was heading south. After proceeding south for about 2 mins, I was instructed to descend to 6000', turn right to 360 degrees and given an IFR clearance. Visibility below the clouds was good, and I was in IMC for only a short time. I continued to west bend on the IFR clearance, cancelling with the field in sight xx. I believe this situation occurred for a number of reason: first, a WX forecast that turned out to be incorrect (possible 50 broken was actually 50 overcast). Second, my attempt to go VFR in order to avoid vectoring from chicago center. Third, a lack of willingness on the part of the chicago approach controller to give me an IFR clearance back up to 10000' and center's airspace, or permission to enter the TCA. I cannot imagine traffic was too great for either occurrence at the time, as the controller did not call any traffic to me, either while I was VFR or after I received the IFR clearance. I do not believe I violated the TCA, but it was close. I would hope that there could be some way for approach and center to work close together so that another pilot facing deteriorating WX could receiving permission to do something! A final comment: the controller who denied my requests 3 times was not the same one who gave me my instrument clearance. The second controller was very helpful and cooperative, as are most of those I have experienced.
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: IN FLT WX ENCOUNTER. DENIED IFR CLRNC.
Narrative: I DEPARTED VFR FROM LAN TO ETB. THE DECISION TO GO VFR WAS BASED ON A WX BRIEFING RECEIVED FROM LAN FSS, RPTED A FORECAST FOR ORD AND MKE 100 BROKEN 250 BROKEN VU, WITH A SLIGHT CHANCE OF 50 BROKEN, LIGHT SNOW BEGINNING AT XX+5. DEPARTING EXL, I CLBED TO 10500' VFR IN CLEAR SKIES. MY INTENTION WAS TO GO AROUND THE SOUTHERN EDGE OF LAKE MICHIGAN, REMAINING WITHIN GLIDING DISTANCE OF THE SHORE. I CONTACTED CHICAGO CENTER OVER THE LAKE. I BELIEVE HE SAID 4 MI W OF CHETT. SHORTLY THEREAFTER I ENCOUNTERED A LAYER OF CLOUDS JUST ABOVE MY ALT, AND SO DSNDED TO 8500'. AS I TURNED NBND, CONDITIONS CONTINUED TO DETERIORATE. I REQUESTED AN IFR CLRNC ALONG V7 AND WAS TOLD IT WAS NOT AVAILABLE AT MY ALT. I REQUESTED LOWER, AND WAS TOLD TO REMAIN VFR OUTSIDE THE TCA. I DSNDED TO APPROX 7100' MSL, BY MY ALTIMETER, 100' OUTSIDE THE TCA. JUST N OF MEIGS FIELD, I TURNED FURTHER RIGHT TO ABOUT 020 DEGS IN AN ATTEMPT TO REMAIN BOTH VFR AND CLR OF THE TCA. I WAS ABLE TO SEE THE WATER BELOW AND SO REQUESTED EITHER AN IFR CLRNC OR PERMISSION TO ENTER THE TCA. AGAIN, PERMISSION WAS DENIED. I THEN INDICATED I WAS UNABLE TO MAINTAIN VFR NBOUND AND WAS INITIATING A TURN TO 180 DEGS. I WAS TOLD I COULD GET AN IFR IF I COULD CLB TO 10000' TO RE-ENTER CHICAGO CENTER'S AIRSPACE. I INDICATED I COULD NOT MAKE THE CLB VFR AND WAS HDG S. AFTER PROCEEDING S FOR ABOUT 2 MINS, I WAS INSTRUCTED TO DSND TO 6000', TURN RIGHT TO 360 DEGS AND GIVEN AN IFR CLRNC. VISIBILITY BELOW THE CLOUDS WAS GOOD, AND I WAS IN IMC FOR ONLY A SHORT TIME. I CONTINUED TO WEST BEND ON THE IFR CLRNC, CANCELLING WITH THE FIELD IN SIGHT XX. I BELIEVE THIS SITUATION OCCURRED FOR A NUMBER OF REASON: FIRST, A WX FORECAST THAT TURNED OUT TO BE INCORRECT (POSSIBLE 50 BROKEN WAS ACTUALLY 50 OVCST). SECOND, MY ATTEMPT TO GO VFR IN ORDER TO AVOID VECTORING FROM CHICAGO CENTER. THIRD, A LACK OF WILLINGNESS ON THE PART OF THE CHICAGO APCH CTLR TO GIVE ME AN IFR CLRNC BACK UP TO 10000' AND CENTER'S AIRSPACE, OR PERMISSION TO ENTER THE TCA. I CANNOT IMAGINE TFC WAS TOO GREAT FOR EITHER OCCURRENCE AT THE TIME, AS THE CTLR DID NOT CALL ANY TFC TO ME, EITHER WHILE I WAS VFR OR AFTER I RECEIVED THE IFR CLRNC. I DO NOT BELIEVE I VIOLATED THE TCA, BUT IT WAS CLOSE. I WOULD HOPE THAT THERE COULD BE SOME WAY FOR APCH AND CENTER TO WORK CLOSE TOGETHER SO THAT ANOTHER PLT FACING DETERIORATING WX COULD RECEIVING PERMISSION TO DO SOMETHING! A FINAL COMMENT: THE CTLR WHO DENIED MY REQUESTS 3 TIMES WAS NOT THE SAME ONE WHO GAVE ME MY INSTRUMENT CLRNC. THE SECOND CTLR WAS VERY HELPFUL AND COOPERATIVE, AS ARE MOST OF THOSE I HAVE EXPERIENCED.
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.