|37000 Feet||Browse and search NASA's
Aviation Safety Reporting System
|Local Time Of Day||0601 To 1200|
|Locale Reference||atc facility : sea|
|Altitude||msl bound lower : 3000|
msl bound upper : 3000
|Controlling Facilities||tracon : sea|
|Operator||general aviation : personal|
|Make Model Name||Small Aircraft, Low Wing, 1 Eng, Retractable Gear|
|Flight Phase||climbout : intermediate altitude|
|Function||flight crew : single pilot|
|Qualification||pilot : instrument|
pilot : commercial
|Experience||flight time total : 1000|
|Anomaly||non adherence : far|
other anomaly other
|Independent Detector||other controllera|
|Resolutory Action||none taken : detected after the fact|
|Consequence||faa : investigated|
|Primary Problem||Flight Crew Human Performance|
|Air Traffic Incident||Pilot Deviation|
Had $2800 of avionics work done on autoplt of small aircraft. Have flown since 1982 out of bfi, where aircraft tied down, and never violated TCA. On this date, my sole purpose of flight was to take aircraft out and check out in-flight behavior of autoplt before using in INS conditions. Departed bfi standard white center departure from runway 13R. Maintained at or below 800' to reservoir, at which point started a climb toward bremerton national airport. Engaged autoplt, then heading. Aircraft flew pitch rather than rate of climb in FPM. I was alone west/O passenger and less than 2 hours of fuel. Aircraft flew at exceptionally fast rate of climb (OAT was 45 degrees F). I must have clipped the edge of the 70/30 TCA west of bfi. I attribute this to a momentary lapse in concentration while observing the autoplt perform both attitude hold and standard rate of turns. I am not even 100% sure of when I entered TCA, except that on landing I was asked to call the tower, who advised that center observed my violation. I learned from this mistake that in a gradual step-up TCA, such as we have overhead of bfi, these check out procedures are best left to a distance further out from the center of TCA where rapid step-up and step-down allowances don't exist. A second set of pilot eyes in the cockpit would also have avoided this mishap. It won't happen again. Callback conversation with reporter revealed the following: FAA has sent letter and threatened suspension.
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: SMA PLT ON DEP FROM FIELD UNDERLYING TCA CLIMBED OUT TOO FAST AND PENETRATED TCA AIRSPACE.
Narrative: HAD $2800 OF AVIONICS WORK DONE ON AUTOPLT OF SMA. HAVE FLOWN SINCE 1982 OUT OF BFI, WHERE ACFT TIED DOWN, AND NEVER VIOLATED TCA. ON THIS DATE, MY SOLE PURPOSE OF FLT WAS TO TAKE ACFT OUT AND CHK OUT INFLT BEHAVIOR OF AUTOPLT BEFORE USING IN INS CONDITIONS. DEPARTED BFI STANDARD WHITE CENTER DEP FROM RWY 13R. MAINTAINED AT OR BELOW 800' TO RESERVOIR, AT WHICH POINT STARTED A CLB TOWARD BREMERTON NATL ARPT. ENGAGED AUTOPLT, THEN HDG. ACFT FLEW PITCH RATHER THAN RATE OF CLB IN FPM. I WAS ALONE W/O PAX AND LESS THAN 2 HRS OF FUEL. ACFT FLEW AT EXCEPTIONALLY FAST RATE OF CLB (OAT WAS 45 DEGS F). I MUST HAVE CLIPPED THE EDGE OF THE 70/30 TCA W OF BFI. I ATTRIBUTE THIS TO A MOMENTARY LAPSE IN CONCENTRATION WHILE OBSERVING THE AUTOPLT PERFORM BOTH ATTITUDE HOLD AND STANDARD RATE OF TURNS. I AM NOT EVEN 100% SURE OF WHEN I ENTERED TCA, EXCEPT THAT ON LNDG I WAS ASKED TO CALL THE TWR, WHO ADVISED THAT CENTER OBSERVED MY VIOLATION. I LEARNED FROM THIS MISTAKE THAT IN A GRADUAL STEP-UP TCA, SUCH AS WE HAVE OVERHEAD OF BFI, THESE CHK OUT PROCS ARE BEST LEFT TO A DISTANCE FURTHER OUT FROM THE CENTER OF TCA WHERE RAPID STEP-UP AND STEP-DOWN ALLOWANCES DON'T EXIST. A SECOND SET OF PLT EYES IN THE COCKPIT WOULD ALSO HAVE AVOIDED THIS MISHAP. IT WON'T HAPPEN AGAIN. CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING: FAA HAS SENT LETTER AND THREATENED SUSPENSION.
Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of August 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.