Small aircraft encounters WX conditions that require a divert due to fuel. Pilot has coordination pr...

Narrative:

I was the pilot on an IFR direct flight from madison, wi, to charleston, sc. We encountered strong headwinds that made my fuel estimate wrong and I found it necessary to land for refueling. I advised the ZTL controller that there would be a change in the flight plan and that I planned to land at greenville. I picked greenville because it was on the route. I was at 7000 ft when I advised center of the change in flight plan and about 40 mi from greenville. I requested lower on the initial call. I didn't get a lower clearance and asked 2 more times if I could begin the descent. I was finally told that he could not give me lower until I switched to tri-city approach. When I was asked to switch to tri-city approach, I was about 10 mi from the field and at 7000 ft. The field elevation is 1400 ft. Tri-city controller immediately indicated that ZTL had been trying to get in touch with me and that I had ignored the call. That bothered me because it could not have been true and I advised the tri-city controller that I had been talking to atlanta to request lower. I finally said that whatever happened was past and that I am here now. I believe that the controller said cleared for the visual approach and descend at pilot's discretion. I indicated that I would have trouble getting low enough to make the field but would try. After some time the controller indicated that I had been cleared to 5000 ft. I was at about 2800 ft at the time. I attempted to climb. He asked what were my intentions. I advised that I was now almost at 5000 ft and over the field. I would cancel IFR and request vectors to the field. He did not give vectors, gave the wrong frequency for unicom and asked that I contact the facility when I was on the ground and gave me the telephone number. I landed normally. When I called the facility, I was told they had a shift change and the controller had left for the day. He had left no messages and to disregard the matter. The balance of the flight to charleston was normal. Lessons: I have found that controllers are very helpful. This is the first controller I have encountered with an attitude. The initial accusation followed by argument should not have happened. I don't believe I read back the clearance. I will be much more careful about readbacks to avoid confusion about assigned altitudes. Fortunately the WX was good VFR and there was no traffic in the area.

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: SMA ENCOUNTERS WX CONDITIONS THAT REQUIRE A DIVERT DUE TO FUEL. PLT HAS COORD PROBS WITH ARTCC AND TRACON, WITH PLT DSNDING BELOW ASSIGNED ALT.

Narrative: I WAS THE PLT ON AN IFR DIRECT FLT FROM MADISON, WI, TO CHARLESTON, SC. WE ENCOUNTERED STRONG HEADWINDS THAT MADE MY FUEL ESTIMATE WRONG AND I FOUND IT NECESSARY TO LAND FOR REFUELING. I ADVISED THE ZTL CTLR THAT THERE WOULD BE A CHANGE IN THE FLT PLAN AND THAT I PLANNED TO LAND AT GREENVILLE. I PICKED GREENVILLE BECAUSE IT WAS ON THE RTE. I WAS AT 7000 FT WHEN I ADVISED CTR OF THE CHANGE IN FLT PLAN AND ABOUT 40 MI FROM GREENVILLE. I REQUESTED LOWER ON THE INITIAL CALL. I DIDN'T GET A LOWER CLRNC AND ASKED 2 MORE TIMES IF I COULD BEGIN THE DSCNT. I WAS FINALLY TOLD THAT HE COULD NOT GIVE ME LOWER UNTIL I SWITCHED TO TRI-CITY APCH. WHEN I WAS ASKED TO SWITCH TO TRI-CITY APCH, I WAS ABOUT 10 MI FROM THE FIELD AND AT 7000 FT. THE FIELD ELEVATION IS 1400 FT. TRI-CITY CTLR IMMEDIATELY INDICATED THAT ZTL HAD BEEN TRYING TO GET IN TOUCH WITH ME AND THAT I HAD IGNORED THE CALL. THAT BOTHERED ME BECAUSE IT COULD NOT HAVE BEEN TRUE AND I ADVISED THE TRI-CITY CTLR THAT I HAD BEEN TALKING TO ATLANTA TO REQUEST LOWER. I FINALLY SAID THAT WHATEVER HAPPENED WAS PAST AND THAT I AM HERE NOW. I BELIEVE THAT THE CTLR SAID CLRED FOR THE VISUAL APCH AND DSND AT PLT'S DISCRETION. I INDICATED THAT I WOULD HAVE TROUBLE GETTING LOW ENOUGH TO MAKE THE FIELD BUT WOULD TRY. AFTER SOME TIME THE CTLR INDICATED THAT I HAD BEEN CLRED TO 5000 FT. I WAS AT ABOUT 2800 FT AT THE TIME. I ATTEMPTED TO CLB. HE ASKED WHAT WERE MY INTENTIONS. I ADVISED THAT I WAS NOW ALMOST AT 5000 FT AND OVER THE FIELD. I WOULD CANCEL IFR AND REQUEST VECTORS TO THE FIELD. HE DID NOT GIVE VECTORS, GAVE THE WRONG FREQ FOR UNICOM AND ASKED THAT I CONTACT THE FACILITY WHEN I WAS ON THE GND AND GAVE ME THE TELEPHONE NUMBER. I LANDED NORMALLY. WHEN I CALLED THE FACILITY, I WAS TOLD THEY HAD A SHIFT CHANGE AND THE CTLR HAD LEFT FOR THE DAY. HE HAD LEFT NO MESSAGES AND TO DISREGARD THE MATTER. THE BAL OF THE FLT TO CHARLESTON WAS NORMAL. LESSONS: I HAVE FOUND THAT CTLRS ARE VERY HELPFUL. THIS IS THE FIRST CTLR I HAVE ENCOUNTERED WITH AN ATTITUDE. THE INITIAL ACCUSATION FOLLOWED BY ARGUMENT SHOULD NOT HAVE HAPPENED. I DON'T BELIEVE I READ BACK THE CLRNC. I WILL BE MUCH MORE CAREFUL ABOUT READBACKS TO AVOID CONFUSION ABOUT ASSIGNED ALTS. FORTUNATELY THE WX WAS GOOD VFR AND THERE WAS NO TFC IN THE AREA.

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.

Attributes
ACN	426235
Time
Date	199901
Day	Sun
Local Time Of Day	1201 To 1800
Place
Locale Reference	airport : gcy
State Reference	TN
Altitude	msl bound lower : 2800 msl bound upper : 5000
Environment
Flight Conditions	VMC
Light	Daylight
Aircraft 1
Operator	general aviation : personal
Make Model Name	Any Unknown or Unlisted Aircraft Manufacturer
Flight Phase	descent other
Flight Plan	IFR
Person 1
Affiliation	Other
Function	flight crew : single pilot
Qualification	pilot : instrument
Experience	flight time last 90 days : 30 flight time total : 1900 flight time type : 1600
ASRS Report	426235
Person 2
Affiliation	government : faa
Function	controller : radar
Events
Anomaly	altitude deviation : excursion from assigned altitude other anomaly other
Independent Detector	other controllera other flight crewa
Resolutory Action	other
Consequence	faa : reviewed incident with flight crew
Supplementary
Air Traffic Incident	Intra Facility Coordination Failure Inter Facility Coordination Failure other

Small aircraft encounters WX conditions that require a divert due to fuel. Pilot has coordination problems with ARTCC and TRACON, with pilot descending below assigned altitude.