Narrative:

I'm filing this report on the advice of my union representative. It seems that the FAA may try to turn this routine operation into some kind of incident. We were holding on the taxiway at tpa waiting for a thunderstorm to the north to pass. It was dry and VFR on the field. ZJX was only allowing departures on a 360 degree heading (which was our direction of flight). We elected to taxi onto the runway and check the radar picture. Not only was there a clear corridor through the WX, but we could also see it visually. After determining that I, the first officer, felt comfortable departing, the captain elected to depart and made the takeoff. We are both ex-military, combat veterans. We flew on a 360 degree heading, flew between 2 buildups, and elected to stay low (2500 ft) under the WX. We encountered no chop, no precipitation, and stayed VFR the entire way. After passing through the WX, we climbed to our cruise altitude and continued to phl without incident. It seems that an FAA examiner, riding jump seat on another carrier, decided that we took off into a level 5 thunderstorm and were unsafe. You can draw your own conclusions, but once again, the FAA is overstepping its authority/authorized. This operation was totally safe -- I would repeat the same departure again. Supplemental information from acn 274678: the problem is, this FAA inspector does not seem to have the cognitive ability to determine when it is safe to takeoff from an airport when there is convective activity in the area. This situation can be corrected by retraining or replacing incompetent FAA inspectors.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: FAA INVESTIGATION OPENED ON A FLC THAT DEPARTED TPA IN PROX OF TSTM ACTIVITY.

Narrative: I'M FILING THIS RPT ON THE ADVICE OF MY UNION REPRESENTATIVE. IT SEEMS THAT THE FAA MAY TRY TO TURN THIS ROUTINE OP INTO SOME KIND OF INCIDENT. WE WERE HOLDING ON THE TXWY AT TPA WAITING FOR A TSTM TO THE N TO PASS. IT WAS DRY AND VFR ON THE FIELD. ZJX WAS ONLY ALLOWING DEPS ON A 360 DEG HDG (WHICH WAS OUR DIRECTION OF FLT). WE ELECTED TO TAXI ONTO THE RWY AND CHK THE RADAR PICTURE. NOT ONLY WAS THERE A CLR CORRIDOR THROUGH THE WX, BUT WE COULD ALSO SEE IT VISUALLY. AFTER DETERMINING THAT I, THE FO, FELT COMFORTABLE DEPARTING, THE CAPT ELECTED TO DEPART AND MADE THE TKOF. WE ARE BOTH EX-MIL, COMBAT VETERANS. WE FLEW ON A 360 DEG HDG, FLEW BTWN 2 BUILDUPS, AND ELECTED TO STAY LOW (2500 FT) UNDER THE WX. WE ENCOUNTERED NO CHOP, NO PRECIPITATION, AND STAYED VFR THE ENTIRE WAY. AFTER PASSING THROUGH THE WX, WE CLBED TO OUR CRUISE ALT AND CONTINUED TO PHL WITHOUT INCIDENT. IT SEEMS THAT AN FAA EXAMINER, RIDING JUMP SEAT ON ANOTHER CARRIER, DECIDED THAT WE TOOK OFF INTO A LEVEL 5 TSTM AND WERE UNSAFE. YOU CAN DRAW YOUR OWN CONCLUSIONS, BUT ONCE AGAIN, THE FAA IS OVERSTEPPING ITS AUTH. THIS OP WAS TOTALLY SAFE -- I WOULD REPEAT THE SAME DEP AGAIN. SUPPLEMENTAL INFO FROM ACN 274678: THE PROB IS, THIS FAA INSPECTOR DOES NOT SEEM TO HAVE THE COGNITIVE ABILITY TO DETERMINE WHEN IT IS SAFE TO TKOF FROM AN ARPT WHEN THERE IS CONVECTIVE ACTIVITY IN THE AREA. THIS SIT CAN BE CORRECTED BY RETRAINING OR REPLACING INCOMPETENT FAA INSPECTORS.

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.