 |
37000 Feet | Browse and search NASA's Aviation Safety Reporting System |
|
A BE95 training flight leaves its assigned altitude and heading when the trainee follows to the expected clearance prior to receiving clearance to do so near mrlin intersection, fl.
| Attributes | |
| ACN | 534906 |
| Time | |
| Date | 200201 |
| Day | Mon |
| Local Time Of Day | 0601 To 1200 |
| Place | |
| Locale Reference | intersection : mrln |
| State Reference | FL |
| Altitude | msl bound lower : 6000 msl bound upper : 7000 |
| Environment | |
| Flight Conditions | VMC |
| Light | Daylight |
| Aircraft 1 | |
| Controlling Facilities | artcc : zma.artcc tower : crw.tower |
| Operator | general aviation : instructional |
| Make Model Name | Travelair 95 |
| Operating Under FAR Part | Part 91 |
| Navigation In Use | other vortac |
| Flight Phase | climbout : intermediate altitude |
| Flight Plan | IFR |
| Person 1 | |
| Affiliation | other |
| Function | instruction : instructor |
| Qualification | pilot : cfi pilot : atp |
| Experience | flight time last 90 days : 133.2 flight time total : 5300 flight time type : 85.3 |
| ASRS Report | 534906 |
| Person 2 | |
| Function | flight crew : single pilot |
| Events | |
| Anomaly | altitude deviation : excursion from assigned altitude non adherence : clearance other anomaly other other spatial deviation |
| Independent Detector | other controllera |
| Resolutory Action | controller : issued new clearance controller : issued advisory |
| Consequence | faa : reviewed incident with flight crew |
| Supplementary | |
| Problem Areas | Flight Crew Human Performance Environmental Factor |
| Primary Problem | Flight Crew Human Performance |
| Air Traffic Incident | Pilot Deviation |
Narrative:
As a flight instructor, I was working with an instrument rated pilot who was working on his CFI airplane rating. The 2 of us and 3 passenger (two of which are also pilots) were going to the bahamas on vacation. We had been cleared to 6000 ft and given a vector to join a VOR course and had been told to expect 9000 ft 10 mins after departure and to expect to follow a VOR radial. The CFI student, who was flying, wrongly interpreted this to mean that after 10 mins he was cleared to climb to the expected altitude and take up the assigned routing. He at one point read back to the controller that he was climbing to 9000 ft. I thought that perhaps I had missed a call from the controller clearing us to climb above the initial altitude restr of 6000 ft and, when the controller did not question the announced intention to climb to 9000 ft, I also did not remark about it. On reaching just short of 7000 ft, the controller directed us to level at 7000 ft and indicated that we should have stopped at 6000 ft. In the chicago area, most instrument instruction is conducted with the instructor simulating being the controller since chicago approach control has no desire to support practice instrument training. Filing IFR is a very tedious process and involves many delays because the airspace is so crowded. Therefore, I do not believe instrument students get enough practice working in the real ATC environment. I have resolved to make it a point to take my instrument students to south bend on a more regular basis. It will make for longer flts but it will give them the chance to become familiar with ATC procedures and terminology.
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: A BE95 TRAINING FLT LEAVES ITS ASSIGNED ALT AND HDG WHEN THE TRAINEE FOLLOWS TO THE EXPECTED CLRNC PRIOR TO RECEIVING CLRNC TO DO SO NEAR MRLIN INTXN, FL.
Narrative: AS A FLT INSTRUCTOR, I WAS WORKING WITH AN INST RATED PLT WHO WAS WORKING ON HIS CFI AIRPLANE RATING. THE 2 OF US AND 3 PAX (TWO OF WHICH ARE ALSO PLTS) WERE GOING TO THE BAHAMAS ON VACATION. WE HAD BEEN CLRED TO 6000 FT AND GIVEN A VECTOR TO JOIN A VOR COURSE AND HAD BEEN TOLD TO EXPECT 9000 FT 10 MINS AFTER DEP AND TO EXPECT TO FOLLOW A VOR RADIAL. THE CFI STUDENT, WHO WAS FLYING, WRONGLY INTERPED THIS TO MEAN THAT AFTER 10 MINS HE WAS CLRED TO CLB TO THE EXPECTED ALT AND TAKE UP THE ASSIGNED ROUTING. HE AT ONE POINT READ BACK TO THE CTLR THAT HE WAS CLBING TO 9000 FT. I THOUGHT THAT PERHAPS I HAD MISSED A CALL FROM THE CTLR CLRING US TO CLB ABOVE THE INITIAL ALT RESTR OF 6000 FT AND, WHEN THE CTLR DID NOT QUESTION THE ANNOUNCED INTENTION TO CLB TO 9000 FT, I ALSO DID NOT REMARK ABOUT IT. ON REACHING JUST SHORT OF 7000 FT, THE CTLR DIRECTED US TO LEVEL AT 7000 FT AND INDICATED THAT WE SHOULD HAVE STOPPED AT 6000 FT. IN THE CHICAGO AREA, MOST INST INSTRUCTION IS CONDUCTED WITH THE INSTRUCTOR SIMULATING BEING THE CTLR SINCE CHICAGO APCH CTL HAS NO DESIRE TO SUPPORT PRACTICE INST TRAINING. FILING IFR IS A VERY TEDIOUS PROCESS AND INVOLVES MANY DELAYS BECAUSE THE AIRSPACE IS SO CROWDED. THEREFORE, I DO NOT BELIEVE INST STUDENTS GET ENOUGH PRACTICE WORKING IN THE REAL ATC ENVIRONMENT. I HAVE RESOLVED TO MAKE IT A POINT TO TAKE MY INST STUDENTS TO SOUTH BEND ON A MORE REGULAR BASIS. IT WILL MAKE FOR LONGER FLTS BUT IT WILL GIVE THEM THE CHANCE TO BECOME FAMILIAR WITH ATC PROCS AND TERMINOLOGY.
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.