<< >> NASA ASRS Report 548113, May 2002

BE36 departing bct on IFR clearance turns to a different heading than the one assigned to comply with a noise abatement procedure.

Attributes
ACN	548113
Time
Date	200205
Day	Wed
Local Time Of Day	1201 To 1800
Place
Locale Reference	navaid : pbi.vortac
State Reference	FL
Altitude	agl single value : 1600
Environment
Flight Conditions	Marginal
Weather Elements	Rain
Light	Daylight
Aircraft 1
Controlling Facilities	tracon : pbi.tracon
Operator	general aviation : personal
Make Model Name	Bonanza 36
Operating Under FAR Part	Part 91
Flight Phase	climbout : intermediate altitude
Flight Plan	IFR
Aircraft 2
Controlling Facilities	tracon : pbi.tracon
Make Model Name	Cessna 210 Centurion / Turbo Centurion 210C, 210D
Operating Under FAR Part	Part 135
Flight Phase	cruise : level
Route In Use	departure : on vectors
Flight Plan	IFR
Person 1
Affiliation	government : faa
Function	controller : departure
Qualification	controller : radar
Experience	controller radar : 30 flight time total : 4000
ASRS Report	548113
Person 2
Affiliation	other
Function	flight crew : single pilot
Events
Anomaly	conflict : airborne less severe non adherence : clearance non adherence : required legal separation other spatial deviation
Independent Detector	other controllera
Resolutory Action	controller : issued new clearance controller : separated traffic flight crew : returned to original clearance
Consequence	faa : reviewed incident with flight crew faa : investigated
Supplementary
Problem Areas	Chart Or Publication Flight Crew Human Performance Airport
Primary Problem	Flight Crew Human Performance
Air Traffic Incident	Pilot Deviation

Narrative:

Aircraft #1 departed bct IFR with an issued climb out heading of 050 degrees that was issued by bct ATCT. Aircraft #1 was radar idented and issued a climb to 5000 ft. I then observed aircraft #1 turning to the left and heading northbound. I asked the aircraft #1 the heading he was on -- his response was 010 degrees. I asked why he was heading that way. Aircraft #1 responded because of 'noise abatement procedures.' I immediately instructed the aircraft to turn to 050 degrees and asked the aircraft #1 to verify what heading was issued by bct ATCT. Aircraft #1 verified that he was issued 050 degrees. When aircraft #1 turned north, aircraft #2 was IFR at 3000 ft swbound. If the heading correction was not made, these aircraft would have conflicted. The problem is the bct airport manager's office has posted, distributed, and published a noise abatement program that contradicts ATC instruction. The FAA has issued a ucr concerning the issue, and airport district office has been notified. However, bct airport management disregards safety with their lack of concern. This could have been a midair collision.

Related reports:

• S80 turns to wrong assigned heading departing lga.
• A PC12 pilot, departing toa, intercepted a VOR radial after ...
• An LR31 pilot departing teb runway 1 did not turn to the ass...
• A pilot departing on the midway 4 SID runway 4 experienced c...

	Enter your search terms Submit search form
	Web www.37000feet.com

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: BE36 DEPARTING BCT ON IFR CLRNC TURNS TO A DIFFERENT HDG THAN THE ONE ASSIGNED TO COMPLY WITH A NOISE ABATEMENT PROC.

Narrative: ACFT #1 DEPARTED BCT IFR WITH AN ISSUED CLBOUT HDG OF 050 DEGS THAT WAS ISSUED BY BCT ATCT. ACFT #1 WAS RADAR IDENTED AND ISSUED A CLB TO 5000 FT. I THEN OBSERVED ACFT #1 TURNING TO THE L AND HDG NBOUND. I ASKED THE ACFT #1 THE HDG HE WAS ON -- HIS RESPONSE WAS 010 DEGS. I ASKED WHY HE WAS HEADING THAT WAY. ACFT #1 RESPONDED BECAUSE OF 'NOISE ABATEMENT PROCS.' I IMMEDIATELY INSTRUCTED THE ACFT TO TURN TO 050 DEGS AND ASKED THE ACFT #1 TO VERIFY WHAT HDG WAS ISSUED BY BCT ATCT. ACFT #1 VERIFIED THAT HE WAS ISSUED 050 DEGS. WHEN ACFT #1 TURNED N, ACFT #2 WAS IFR AT 3000 FT SWBOUND. IF THE HDG CORRECTION WAS NOT MADE, THESE ACFT WOULD HAVE CONFLICTED. THE PROB IS THE BCT ARPT MGR'S OFFICE HAS POSTED, DISTRIBUTED, AND PUBLISHED A NOISE ABATEMENT PROGRAM THAT CONTRADICTS ATC INSTRUCTION. THE FAA HAS ISSUED A UCR CONCERNING THE ISSUE, AND ARPT DISTRICT OFFICE HAS BEEN NOTIFIED. HOWEVER, BCT ARPT MGMNT DISREGARDS SAFETY WITH THEIR LACK OF CONCERN. THIS COULD HAVE BEEN A MIDAIR COLLISION.

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.