 |
37000 Feet | Browse and search NASA's Aviation Safety Reporting System |
|
Pilot of light transport complains of ATC coordination on departure.
| Attributes | |
| ACN | 123015 |
| Time | |
| Date | 198909 |
| Day | Sun |
| Local Time Of Day | 1201 To 1800 |
| Place | |
| Locale Reference | airport : cid |
| State Reference | IA |
| Altitude | msl bound lower : 5700 msl bound upper : 6200 |
| Environment | |
| Flight Conditions | VMC |
| Light | Daylight |
| Aircraft 1 | |
| Controlling Facilities | tracon : cid tracon : phf |
| Operator | common carrier : air carrier |
| Make Model Name | Light Transport, Low Wing, 2 Turboprop Eng |
| Flight Phase | climbout : intermediate altitude cruise other |
| Route In Use | departure other |
| Flight Plan | IFR |
| Aircraft 2 | |
| Operator | general aviation : personal |
| Make Model Name | Small Aircraft, High Wing, 1 Eng, Fixed Gear |
| Flight Phase | cruise other |
| Person 1 | |
| Affiliation | company : air carrier |
| Function | flight crew : captain oversight : pic |
| Qualification | pilot : atp |
| Experience | flight time last 90 days : 275 flight time total : 12000 flight time type : 600 |
| ASRS Report | 123015 |
| Person 2 | |
| Affiliation | company : air carrier |
| Function | flight crew : first officer |
| Qualification | pilot : commercial pilot : instrument |
| Events | |
| Anomaly | conflict : airborne less severe other anomaly other other spatial deviation |
| Independent Detector | other controllera |
| Resolutory Action | flight crew : took evasive action other |
| Consequence | Other |
| Miss Distance | horizontal : 6000 vertical : 0 |
| Supplementary | |
| Primary Problem | Ambiguous |
| Air Traffic Incident | other |
Narrative:
Sep/sun/89, pm EST, flight cid to mci. After takeoff, climbing out of 5000', I had the copilot tell departure to cancel our IFR. We had already been cleared to 11,000. As soon as the copilot called, departure said we could squawk 1200 as asked, but now we have traffic 12 O'clock eastbound at 6200, 2 to 3 mi. By now we were about 5700, 230 degree on the heading given by departure and still climbing 2000+ FPM. (Not very long to 6200' or even level off would be close.) we did a small s-turn to get a view in front and around our windshield poles and immediately saw the single engine high wing aircraft, so we turned 270-280 and had no problem with the other aircraft. Contributing factors: 6200' eastbound traffic at level flight. The controller said that the 1200 squawk was ok and only then did he start to tell us of the 7200' eastbound aircraft while we were still climbing. Also, he asked if we were going to level or keep climbing or turn, etc, never allowing us the time to tell him we had the traffic. At no time did we feel that we had a conflict with the other aircraft. Perceptions, factors on performance: the eastbound aircraft for level flight was at the wrong altitude (6200 east). I am not sure if departure was talking to the eastbound traffic. The chatter on the frequency could have been less or more to the point or a warning given sooner. Things would have gone better with departure.
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: PLT OF LTT COMPLAINS OF ATC COORD ON DEP.
Narrative: SEP/SUN/89, PM EST, FLT CID TO MCI. AFTER TKOF, CLIMBING OUT OF 5000', I HAD THE COPLT TELL DEP TO CANCEL OUR IFR. WE HAD ALREADY BEEN CLRED TO 11,000. AS SOON AS THE COPLT CALLED, DEP SAID WE COULD SQUAWK 1200 AS ASKED, BUT NOW WE HAVE TFC 12 O'CLOCK EBND AT 6200, 2 TO 3 MI. BY NOW WE WERE ABOUT 5700, 230 DEG ON THE HDG GIVEN BY DEP AND STILL CLIMBING 2000+ FPM. (NOT VERY LONG TO 6200' OR EVEN LEVEL OFF WOULD BE CLOSE.) WE DID A SMALL S-TURN TO GET A VIEW IN FRONT AND AROUND OUR WINDSHIELD POLES AND IMMEDIATELY SAW THE SINGLE ENGINE HIGH WING ACFT, SO WE TURNED 270-280 AND HAD NO PROBLEM WITH THE OTHER ACFT. CONTRIBUTING FACTORS: 6200' EBND TFC AT LEVEL FLT. THE CTLR SAID THAT THE 1200 SQUAWK WAS OK AND ONLY THEN DID HE START TO TELL US OF THE 7200' EBND ACFT WHILE WE WERE STILL CLIMBING. ALSO, HE ASKED IF WE WERE GOING TO LEVEL OR KEEP CLIMBING OR TURN, ETC, NEVER ALLOWING US THE TIME TO TELL HIM WE HAD THE TFC. AT NO TIME DID WE FEEL THAT WE HAD A CONFLICT WITH THE OTHER ACFT. PERCEPTIONS, FACTORS ON PERFORMANCE: THE EBND ACFT FOR LEVEL FLT WAS AT THE WRONG ALT (6200 E). I AM NOT SURE IF DEP WAS TALKING TO THE EBND TFC. THE CHATTER ON THE FREQ COULD HAVE BEEN LESS OR MORE TO THE POINT OR A WARNING GIVEN SOONER. THINGS WOULD HAVE GONE BETTER WITH 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.