Pilot of training flight failed to fly assigned heading of 150 degrees. Flew runway heading of 110 degrees. Departing aircraft was observed in conflict passing 300' overhead.

Home

Browse by month

Random

Latest

About

Contact

Attributes
ACN	177090
Time
Date	199104
Day	Thu
Local Time Of Day	0601 To 1200
Place
Locale Reference	airport : vrb
State Reference	FL
Environment
Flight Conditions	Mixed
Light	Daylight
Aircraft 1
Controlling Facilities	tower : vrb
Operator	general aviation : instructional
Make Model Name	Small Aircraft, Low Wing, 1 Eng, Fixed Gear
Flight Phase	climbout : initial climbout : takeoff
Flight Plan	IFR
Aircraft 2
Operator	other
Make Model Name	Small Transport, Low Wing, 2 Recip Eng
Flight Phase	climbout : initial climbout : takeoff
Route In Use	departure other
Flight Plan	IFR
Person 1
Affiliation	Other
Function	flight crew : single pilot instruction : instructor
Experience	flight time last 90 days : 100 flight time total : 1400 flight time type : 1000
ASRS Report	177009
Person 2
Affiliation	Other
Function	instruction : trainee
Qualification	pilot : student
Events
Anomaly	conflict : airborne less severe other spatial deviation
Independent Detector	other other : unspecified cockpit
Resolutory Action	none taken : anomaly accepted
Consequence	Other
Miss Distance	horizontal : 600 vertical : 300
Supplementary
Primary Problem	Flight Crew Human Performance
Air Traffic Incident	Pilot Deviation

Narrative:

This was an INS training flight. We were told to taxi into position and hold. The controller told us we were cleared for takeoff and were given a heading of 050 degrees. I did not hear the heading and at that moment requested a squawk code. Controller advised we would be given a squawk when airborne. This comment caught me by surprise because we were squawking VFR and the control zone was in effect. After departure we flew heading 110 degrees (runway heading). The control zone was in effect, however, after takeoff we were in and out of the clouds. An small transport was cleared for takeoff about 4 mins after us and given runway heading. This led to about a 300' vertical sep. As mentioned earlier, we were in and out of the clouds at this point. I did see the small transport pass over us. My student at the time of takeoff had the communications. His reply to the controller on the takeoff clearance was, 'roger.' I believe my preoccupation with getting a squawk code led me to miss the assigned heading. I feel there would have been less confusion if the squawk had been given with the clearance (during the initial call to clearance delivery).

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: PLT OF TRAINING FLT FAILED TO FLY ASSIGNED HEADING OF 150 DEGREES. FLEW RWY HEADING OF 110 DEGREES. DEPARTING ACFT WAS OBSERVED IN CONFLICT PASSING 300' OVERHEAD.

Narrative: THIS WAS AN INS TRNING FLT. WE WERE TOLD TO TAXI INTO POS AND HOLD. THE CTLR TOLD US WE WERE CLRED FOR TKOF AND WERE GIVEN A HDG OF 050 DEGS. I DID NOT HEAR THE HDG AND AT THAT MOMENT REQUESTED A SQUAWK CODE. CTLR ADVISED WE WOULD BE GIVEN A SQUAWK WHEN AIRBORNE. THIS COMMENT CAUGHT ME BY SURPRISE BECAUSE WE WERE SQUAWKING VFR AND THE CTL ZONE WAS IN EFFECT. AFTER DEP WE FLEW HDG 110 DEGS (RWY HDG). THE CTL ZONE WAS IN EFFECT, HOWEVER, AFTER TKOF WE WERE IN AND OUT OF THE CLOUDS. AN SMT WAS CLRED FOR TKOF ABOUT 4 MINS AFTER US AND GIVEN RWY HDG. THIS LED TO ABOUT A 300' VERT SEP. AS MENTIONED EARLIER, WE WERE IN AND OUT OF THE CLOUDS AT THIS POINT. I DID SEE THE SMT PASS OVER US. MY STUDENT AT THE TIME OF TKOF HAD THE COMS. HIS REPLY TO THE CTLR ON THE TKOF CLRNC WAS, 'ROGER.' I BELIEVE MY PREOCCUPATION WITH GETTING A SQUAWK CODE LED ME TO MISS THE ASSIGNED HDG. I FEEL THERE WOULD HAVE BEEN LESS CONFUSION IF THE SQUAWK HAD BEEN GIVEN WITH THE CLRNC (DURING THE INITIAL CALL TO CLRNC DELIVERY).

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.