|37000 Feet||Browse and search NASA's
Aviation Safety Reporting System
|Local Time Of Day||1201 To 1800|
|Locale Reference||atc facility : tvt|
|Altitude||msl bound lower : 7000|
msl bound upper : 7000
|Controlling Facilities||tracon : cmh|
tracon : cak
|Operator||general aviation : corporate|
|Make Model Name||Small Transport, Low Wing, 2 Recip Eng|
|Flight Phase||cruise other|
|Function||flight crew : single pilot|
|Qualification||pilot : cfi|
pilot : commercial
pilot : instrument
|Experience||flight time last 90 days : 100|
flight time total : 1700
flight time type : 75
|Affiliation||government : faa|
|Function||controller : departure|
|Qualification||controller : radar|
|Anomaly||inflight encounter other|
other anomaly other
|Independent Detector||other flight crewa|
|Primary Problem||ATC Human Performance|
|Air Traffic Incident||Inter Facility Coordination Failure|
I took off mt vernon (knox county) airport on an IFR clearance to cgf and climbed to a cruise altitude of 7000' after being cleared by cmh departure. Our flight plan requested altitude was 9000', however 7000' was the highest that was available to us. Approaching tvt VOR, cmh handed us off to cak approach. I contacted cak approach and they were not aware of our flight plan. I in turn contacted cmh again and they told us to contact cak, which I did, after cmh used a landline to forward our information. After being with cak for several mins, they requested that we descend and maintain 4000'. Because we had just leveled at a lower than flight plan required altitude, and the fact that there was considerable turbulence below a scattered-broken cumulus level, I stated that we could not accept that altitude and said that we would accept anything above 7000'. Cak approach said to maintain 7000' for the time being and within 10 mi made us descend to 5000 and then 4000'. I feel that the miscoms between approach/departure control facs led up to my initially having to decline an altitude that was not practical under the circumstances. Perhaps if the facility knew that we had just leveled and had already accepted an altitude below what we initially filed they would have been more flexible.
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: PLT OF SMA TWIN FLYING TWR ENRTE FLT PLAN RPTS THAT CMH DEP CTLR DID NOT COORD HANDOFF TO CAK APCH. PLT ALSO COMPLAINS ABOUT ALT ASSIGNMENTS DURING TRIP.
Narrative: I TOOK OFF MT VERNON (KNOX COUNTY) ARPT ON AN IFR CLRNC TO CGF AND CLBED TO A CRUISE ALT OF 7000' AFTER BEING CLRED BY CMH DEP. OUR FLT PLAN REQUESTED ALT WAS 9000', HOWEVER 7000' WAS THE HIGHEST THAT WAS AVAILABLE TO US. APCHING TVT VOR, CMH HANDED US OFF TO CAK APCH. I CONTACTED CAK APCH AND THEY WERE NOT AWARE OF OUR FLT PLAN. I IN TURN CONTACTED CMH AGAIN AND THEY TOLD US TO CONTACT CAK, WHICH I DID, AFTER CMH USED A LANDLINE TO FORWARD OUR INFO. AFTER BEING WITH CAK FOR SEVERAL MINS, THEY REQUESTED THAT WE DSND AND MAINTAIN 4000'. BECAUSE WE HAD JUST LEVELED AT A LOWER THAN FLT PLAN REQUIRED ALT, AND THE FACT THAT THERE WAS CONSIDERABLE TURB BELOW A SCATTERED-BROKEN CUMULUS LEVEL, I STATED THAT WE COULD NOT ACCEPT THAT ALT AND SAID THAT WE WOULD ACCEPT ANYTHING ABOVE 7000'. CAK APCH SAID TO MAINTAIN 7000' FOR THE TIME BEING AND WITHIN 10 MI MADE US DSND TO 5000 AND THEN 4000'. I FEEL THAT THE MISCOMS BTWN APCH/DEP CTL FACS LED UP TO MY INITIALLY HAVING TO DECLINE AN ALT THAT WAS NOT PRACTICAL UNDER THE CIRCUMSTANCES. PERHAPS IF THE FAC KNEW THAT WE HAD JUST LEVELED AND HAD ALREADY ACCEPTED AN ALT BELOW WHAT WE INITIALLY FILED THEY WOULD HAVE BEEN MORE FLEXIBLE.
Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of July 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.