|37000 Feet||Browse and search NASA's
Aviation Safety Reporting System
|Local Time Of Day||0601 To 1200|
|Locale Reference||atc facility : mer|
|Altitude||msl bound lower : 7500|
msl bound upper : 7500
|Controlling Facilities||tracon : mer|
|Operator||general aviation : personal|
|Make Model Name||Small Aircraft, Low Wing, 1 Eng, Retractable Gear|
|Flight Phase||cruise other|
|Route In Use||enroute : direct|
|Function||flight crew : single pilot|
|Qualification||pilot : instrument|
pilot : private
|Experience||flight time last 90 days : 27|
flight time total : 348
flight time type : 30
|Affiliation||government : military|
|Function||controller : approach|
|Qualification||controller : radar|
|Anomaly||non adherence : clearance|
other spatial deviation
|Independent Detector||other controllera|
|Resolutory Action||controller : issued new clearance|
|Primary Problem||Flight Crew Human Performance|
|Air Traffic Incident||Pilot Deviation|
En route from sac to hmt on IFR flight plan and clearance. VFR on top at 7500 ft, WX ceiling and visibility unlimited. Routing on clearance called for V23 from linden VOR to shafter VOR. During my IFR training, I was told that declaring 'VFR on top' allowed direct routing at pilot's discretion. I can recall specific examples my cfii gave. As a result, I opted to depart linden direct el nido direct shafter. I didn't request an amended clearance or advise ATC, not believing it to be needed/required. Castle approach questioned my routing after I was off my assigned route and I advised them of my intentions. Approach advised that I was required to fly the routing in my clearance. Castle then amended my clearance to allow me to proceed direct shafter. I would never knowingly violate the FARS, but neither have I read them and the aim cover to cover and word for word. I have relied, at least in part, on the information imparted to me by instructors. I guess I will have to be more skeptical and do more personal research into these issues in the future.
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: HDG TRACK DEV IN A NON ADHERENCE TO ATC CLRNC.
Narrative: ENRTE FROM SAC TO HMT ON IFR FLT PLAN AND CLRNC. VFR ON TOP AT 7500 FT, WX CEILING AND VISIBILITY UNLIMITED. ROUTING ON CLRNC CALLED FOR V23 FROM LINDEN VOR TO SHAFTER VOR. DURING MY IFR TRAINING, I WAS TOLD THAT DECLARING 'VFR ON TOP' ALLOWED DIRECT ROUTING AT PLT'S DISCRETION. I CAN RECALL SPECIFIC EXAMPLES MY CFII GAVE. AS A RESULT, I OPTED TO DEPART LINDEN DIRECT EL NIDO DIRECT SHAFTER. I DIDN'T REQUEST AN AMENDED CLRNC OR ADVISE ATC, NOT BELIEVING IT TO BE NEEDED/REQUIRED. CASTLE APCH QUESTIONED MY ROUTING AFTER I WAS OFF MY ASSIGNED RTE AND I ADVISED THEM OF MY INTENTIONS. APCH ADVISED THAT I WAS REQUIRED TO FLY THE ROUTING IN MY CLRNC. CASTLE THEN AMENDED MY CLRNC TO ALLOW ME TO PROCEED DIRECT SHAFTER. I WOULD NEVER KNOWINGLY VIOLATE THE FARS, BUT NEITHER HAVE I READ THEM AND THE AIM COVER TO COVER AND WORD FOR WORD. I HAVE RELIED, AT LEAST IN PART, ON THE INFO IMPARTED TO ME BY INSTRUCTORS. I GUESS I WILL HAVE TO BE MORE SKEPTICAL AND DO MORE PERSONAL RESEARCH INTO THESE ISSUES IN THE FUTURE.
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.