|37000 Feet||Browse and search NASA's
Aviation Safety Reporting System
|Local Time Of Day||0601 To 1200|
|Locale Reference||atc facility : lan|
|Altitude||msl bound lower : 2200|
msl bound upper : 2200
|Controlling Facilities||tracon : lan|
|Operator||general aviation : instructional|
|Make Model Name||Any Unknown or Unlisted Aircraft Manufacturer|
|Operating Under FAR Part||Part 91|
|Flight Phase||cruise other|
|Function||instruction : instructor|
|Qualification||pilot : cfi|
pilot : atp
pilot : commercial
|Experience||flight time last 90 days : 200|
flight time total : 5000
flight time type : 100
|Function||flight crew : single pilot|
|Qualification||pilot : student|
|Anomaly||other anomaly other|
other anomaly other
|Independent Detector||other controllera|
|Resolutory Action||controller : issued new clearance|
|Primary Problem||Navigational Facility|
|Air Traffic Incident||other|
I was performing a stage check for another instructor's student. We were on the cross country portion. The flight planning call for us to pass close to the lan class C airspace. As this was a stage check I waited to see if the student would call lan. The student was west of his planned course which would place us in the class C airspace. I was following our course with a king 135 GPS unit. This unit has a feature you can use to identify your position relative to a given facility. However, the unit gives your position in relation to the closest VOR. Another GPS unit we use gives your position relative to airport. Due to this I believed the position being given to me on the GPS was in reference to the airport, but it was really in reference to the VOR, which in this case was west of the airport. Therefore, I thought we were farther away from the lan airport and class C airspace than we really were. The student finally decided to call land and the 2-WAY communication was established at 9 or 10 NM. The ATC controller gave us a squawk and at no time stated we had violated class C airspace. However, misreading the GPS made this a close call. I believe that it is important when working with several different GPS units to learn all the differences in these units and to review the operation of these units on a regular basis. I have reviewed the difference of these 2 units and have learned how to set up the GPS so that it will give the position to closest airport as well as VOR. Callback conversation with reporter revealed the following information: reporter participated in structured callback. He was flying a katana. There has been no follow up on the incident. He is quite pleased with the use of GPS and considers it very helpful navigation.
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: INSTRUCTOR WITH STUDENT PLT ON PHASE CHK IS UNFAMILIAR WITH TYPE OF GPS IN USE REGARDING THE GND REF USED FOR NAV (VOR VERSUS ARPT) AND HAS UNAUTH AIRSPACE ENTRY INTO CLASS C.
Narrative: I WAS PERFORMING A STAGE CHK FOR ANOTHER INSTRUCTOR'S STUDENT. WE WERE ON THE XCOUNTRY PORTION. THE FLT PLANNING CALL FOR US TO PASS CLOSE TO THE LAN CLASS C AIRSPACE. AS THIS WAS A STAGE CHK I WAITED TO SEE IF THE STUDENT WOULD CALL LAN. THE STUDENT WAS W OF HIS PLANNED COURSE WHICH WOULD PLACE US IN THE CLASS C AIRSPACE. I WAS FOLLOWING OUR COURSE WITH A KING 135 GPS UNIT. THIS UNIT HAS A FEATURE YOU CAN USE TO IDENT YOUR POS RELATIVE TO A GIVEN FACILITY. HOWEVER, THE UNIT GIVES YOUR POS IN RELATION TO THE CLOSEST VOR. ANOTHER GPS UNIT WE USE GIVES YOUR POS RELATIVE TO ARPT. DUE TO THIS I BELIEVED THE POS BEING GIVEN TO ME ON THE GPS WAS IN REF TO THE ARPT, BUT IT WAS REALLY IN REF TO THE VOR, WHICH IN THIS CASE WAS W OF THE ARPT. THEREFORE, I THOUGHT WE WERE FARTHER AWAY FROM THE LAN ARPT AND CLASS C AIRSPACE THAN WE REALLY WERE. THE STUDENT FINALLY DECIDED TO CALL LAND AND THE 2-WAY COM WAS ESTABLISHED AT 9 OR 10 NM. THE ATC CTLR GAVE US A SQUAWK AND AT NO TIME STATED WE HAD VIOLATED CLASS C AIRSPACE. HOWEVER, MISREADING THE GPS MADE THIS A CLOSE CALL. I BELIEVE THAT IT IS IMPORTANT WHEN WORKING WITH SEVERAL DIFFERENT GPS UNITS TO LEARN ALL THE DIFFERENCES IN THESE UNITS AND TO REVIEW THE OP OF THESE UNITS ON A REGULAR BASIS. I HAVE REVIEWED THE DIFFERENCE OF THESE 2 UNITS AND HAVE LEARNED HOW TO SET UP THE GPS SO THAT IT WILL GIVE THE POS TO CLOSEST ARPT AS WELL AS VOR. CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING INFO: RPTR PARTICIPATED IN STRUCTURED CALLBACK. HE WAS FLYING A KATANA. THERE HAS BEEN NO FOLLOW UP ON THE INCIDENT. HE IS QUITE PLEASED WITH THE USE OF GPS AND CONSIDERS IT VERY HELPFUL NAV.
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.