Narrative:

The pilot (PIC) rented the C-310 to shoot IFR approachs. Pilot needed a safety pilot to ride along because we did not file and we were VFR in VMC. Taxiing out to the runway at 35Q (departure airport) the pilot said we had indeed filed an IFR flight plan for this flight. We departed the airport to the north and the pilot called up approach. I thought he was going to request his IFR clearance to aln. Instead he only requested radar vectors for approachs at aln. I figured because he knew we were VMC, he did not request the clearance (IFR) so he could expedite his approachs at aln. Approach controller acknowledged us and verified vectors for the approachs and to 'maintain VFR.' he had requested 2 approachs and he was vectored for 2 approachs. On the last approach, approach control handed him off to tower. Tower cleared us for the option and told us to depart west and maintain VFR on the missed. We then would depart the area and head back to 35Q. He executed the missed but started a slow climbing turn to the south. Tower didn't inquire about the south turn. Tower did ask if we wanted to go back with st louis approach. The pilot said yes and contacted approach. He told approach he was on an IFR flight plan and wanted vectors for approach back to 35Q. I wondered why he said this because he never requested an IFR clearance. The controller agreed and stated this. The whole time the pilot thought he was on an IFR clearance. The controller then said he was busy then told us to 'squawk 1200 and radar service terminated.' the pilot then said we were in IMC and needed a clearance. This was not true. We were in VMC. The controller then issued us a new squawk code for an IFR clearance. The pilot then seemed to get flustered and, I think, realized what he had just done. He called approach back, apologized and canceled the IFR. 2 major problems: 1) this pilot didn't know the difference between getting flight following and receiving vectors for approachs compared to receiving an IFR clearance. 2) telling approach he was IMC without a clearance. He clearly set himself up with that statement. He also lied! The pilot is an ATP and meii. Corrective actions are know when you have an IFR clearance (obviously). Also, myself as safety pilot assumed he knew what he was doing. Don't assume anything. I should have asked if he planned to get the IFR clearance after we took off. The pilot violated FARS and announced it for all to hear that day. I learned my lesson and hope others will learn from this too.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: PLT OF AN SMT TWIN GIVES INCORRECT INFO TO ATC BY STATING THAT HE IS IMC AND ON AN IFR FLT PLAN.

Narrative: THE PLT (PIC) RENTED THE C-310 TO SHOOT IFR APCHS. PLT NEEDED A SAFETY PLT TO RIDE ALONG BECAUSE WE DID NOT FILE AND WE WERE VFR IN VMC. TAXIING OUT TO THE RWY AT 35Q (DEP ARPT) THE PLT SAID WE HAD INDEED FILED AN IFR FLT PLAN FOR THIS FLT. WE DEPARTED THE ARPT TO THE N AND THE PLT CALLED UP APCH. I THOUGHT HE WAS GOING TO REQUEST HIS IFR CLRNC TO ALN. INSTEAD HE ONLY REQUESTED RADAR VECTORS FOR APCHS AT ALN. I FIGURED BECAUSE HE KNEW WE WERE VMC, HE DID NOT REQUEST THE CLRNC (IFR) SO HE COULD EXPEDITE HIS APCHS AT ALN. APCH CTLR ACKNOWLEDGED US AND VERIFIED VECTORS FOR THE APCHS AND TO 'MAINTAIN VFR.' HE HAD REQUESTED 2 APCHS AND HE WAS VECTORED FOR 2 APCHS. ON THE LAST APCH, APCH CTL HANDED HIM OFF TO TWR. TWR CLRED US FOR THE OPTION AND TOLD US TO DEPART W AND MAINTAIN VFR ON THE MISSED. WE THEN WOULD DEPART THE AREA AND HEAD BACK TO 35Q. HE EXECUTED THE MISSED BUT STARTED A SLOW CLBING TURN TO THE S. TWR DIDN'T INQUIRE ABOUT THE S TURN. TWR DID ASK IF WE WANTED TO GO BACK WITH ST LOUIS APCH. THE PLT SAID YES AND CONTACTED APCH. HE TOLD APCH HE WAS ON AN IFR FLT PLAN AND WANTED VECTORS FOR APCH BACK TO 35Q. I WONDERED WHY HE SAID THIS BECAUSE HE NEVER REQUESTED AN IFR CLRNC. THE CTLR AGREED AND STATED THIS. THE WHOLE TIME THE PLT THOUGHT HE WAS ON AN IFR CLRNC. THE CTLR THEN SAID HE WAS BUSY THEN TOLD US TO 'SQUAWK 1200 AND RADAR SVC TERMINATED.' THE PLT THEN SAID WE WERE IN IMC AND NEEDED A CLRNC. THIS WAS NOT TRUE. WE WERE IN VMC. THE CTLR THEN ISSUED US A NEW SQUAWK CODE FOR AN IFR CLRNC. THE PLT THEN SEEMED TO GET FLUSTERED AND, I THINK, REALIZED WHAT HE HAD JUST DONE. HE CALLED APCH BACK, APOLOGIZED AND CANCELED THE IFR. 2 MAJOR PROBS: 1) THIS PLT DIDN'T KNOW THE DIFFERENCE BTWN GETTING FLT FOLLOWING AND RECEIVING VECTORS FOR APCHS COMPARED TO RECEIVING AN IFR CLRNC. 2) TELLING APCH HE WAS IMC WITHOUT A CLRNC. HE CLRLY SET HIMSELF UP WITH THAT STATEMENT. HE ALSO LIED! THE PLT IS AN ATP AND MEII. CORRECTIVE ACTIONS ARE KNOW WHEN YOU HAVE AN IFR CLRNC (OBVIOUSLY). ALSO, MYSELF AS SAFETY PLT ASSUMED HE KNEW WHAT HE WAS DOING. DON'T ASSUME ANYTHING. I SHOULD HAVE ASKED IF HE PLANNED TO GET THE IFR CLRNC AFTER WE TOOK OFF. THE PLT VIOLATED FARS AND ANNOUNCED IT FOR ALL TO HEAR THAT DAY. I LEARNED MY LESSON AND HOPE OTHERS WILL LEARN FROM THIS TOO.

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.