Busted altitude

C

Cali pilot

Filing Flight Plan
Joined
Jul 24, 2023
Messages
7
Display Name
Display name:
Cali Pilot
I was on an ifr flight plan atc says "turn left to 290 descend and maintain 1600ft till established on the rnav zulu approach cleared rnav z30". I proceeded as instructed and as i was turning left to 300 degrees lining up on the rnav approach i dipped down to 1300ft. approach atc in structed me to climb back to 1600 and gave me the current altimeter setting the faf was 1/2 mile ahead its minimum crossing altitude is 1600. I crossed it at 1600 and proceeded to contact tower and land. Nothing further came of this. But of course i am worried about a pilot deviation etc, however was never instructed to call a number etc. Is this simply a correction from atc to myself in adjusting altitude or is there more to come of this ? Thanks
 
Chances are that if you didn’t get a number to call, there was no loss of separation, and the controller is not interested in increasing their own paperwork by moving it up the chain.

Could more come of this? Maybe, but it’s not too likely if you didn’t get the Brasher warning.
 
If you can’t hold altitude on
Cali pilot said:
I was on an ifr flight plan atc says "turn left to 290 descend and maintain 1600ft till established on the rnav zulu approach cleared rnav z30". I proceeded as instructed and as i was turning left to 300 degrees lining up on the rnav approach i dipped down to 1300ft. approach atc in structed me to climb back to 1600 and gave me the current altimeter setting the faf was 1/2 mile ahead its minimum crossing altitude is 1600. I crossed it at 1600 and proceeded to contact tower and land. Nothing further came of this. But of course i am worried about a pilot deviation etc, however was never instructed to call a number etc. Is this simply a correction from atc to myself in adjusting altitude or is there more to come of this ? Thanks
Click to expand...

Those 10° intercept angles are tough.
 
My guess is that you’d be informed of a possible pilot deviation. I also know my controller at my home airport by voice and it’s my feeling that they want you to be safe so I wouldn’t worry. If you really messed up then maybe you need some more training?
 
Cali pilot said:
I was on an ifr flight plan atc says "turn left to 290 descend and maintain 1600ft till established on the rnav zulu approach cleared rnav z30". I proceeded as instructed and as i was turning left to 300 degrees lining up on the rnav approach i dipped down to 1300ft. approach atc in structed me to climb back to 1600 and gave me the current altimeter setting the faf was 1/2 mile ahead its minimum crossing altitude is 1600. I crossed it at 1600 and proceeded to contact tower and land. Nothing further came of this. But of course i am worried about a pilot deviation etc, however was never instructed to call a number etc. Is this simply a correction from atc to myself in adjusting altitude or is there more to come of this ? Thanks
Click to expand...
You won't hear anything else, no worries
 
mandm said:
My guess is that you’d be informed of a possible pilot deviation. I also know my controller at my home airport by voice and it’s my feeling that they want you to be safe so I wouldn’t worry. If you really messed up then maybe you need some more training?
Click to expand...
honest mistake training lol ok
 
To reiterate...Generally, things have to get super gnarly for a controller to advise you of a number to call. There has to be a loss of separation, or something that looks super unsafe on the scope.
 
Cali pilot said:
may i correct myself the rnav was 30 my heading was 350 sorry we are not all perfect like you Clip
Click to expand...
Ok, a 50° intercept is a a bit tougher with a little more work load. You gotta recognize it when the approach clearance is issued and plan the turn a bit earlier.

I strongly suggest you work on your proficiency.
 
Cali pilot said:
I was on an ifr flight plan atc says "turn left to 290 descend and maintain 1600ft till established on the rnav zulu approach cleared rnav z30". I proceeded as instructed and as i was turning left to 300 degrees lining up on the rnav approach i dipped down to 1300ft. approach atc in structed me to climb back to 1600 and gave me the current altimeter setting the faf was 1/2 mile ahead its minimum crossing altitude is 1600. I crossed it at 1600 and proceeded to contact tower and land. Nothing further came of this. But of course i am worried about a pilot deviation etc, however was never instructed to call a number etc. Is this simply a correction from atc to myself in adjusting altitude or is there more to come of this ? Thanks
Click to expand...
this is common, atc was telling you hey you're off we see you and giving you an opportunity to correct. no asrs needed, they are just nudging you to do the right thing
 
Cali pilot said:
I was on an ifr flight plan atc says "turn left to 290 descend and maintain 1600ft till established on the rnav zulu approach cleared rnav z30". I proceeded as instructed and as i was turning left to 300 degrees lining up on the rnav approach i dipped down to 1300ft. approach atc in structed me to climb back to 1600 and gave me the current altimeter setting the faf was 1/2 mile ahead its minimum crossing altitude is 1600. I crossed it at 1600 and proceeded to contact tower and land. Nothing further came of this. But of course i am worried about a pilot deviation etc, however was never instructed to call a number etc. Is this simply a correction from atc to myself in adjusting altitude or is there more to come of this ? Thanks
Click to expand...
Most likely the 1600 was the minimum vectoring altitude and/or minimum at the FAF. They alerted you because they don't want you to crash.
 
No warning of possible deviation, they can't take action.

But you could get a letter from the FAA about the issue and that it was investigated and closed.
 
Whenever ATC gives you a "confirm altimeter setting" or something similar ... they're probably trying to help you out.

Years ago a private jet leaving TorC in New Mexico blasted straight into the restricted airspace for White Sands (the one that NEVER goes cold or allows traffic). ATC kept calling them and telling them to turn to heading xxx, despite that they were WELL into the restricted space ... pretty nice controller trying to help that pilot out.
 
Never hurts to file an ASRS report. When they give you an altimeter reading there trying to help you out.
 
Pinecone said:
No warning of possible deviation, they can't take action.

But you could get a letter from the FAA about the issue and that it was investigated and closed.
Click to expand...

Nope, it doesn't work that way.

The OP has little to worry about as previously stated. "IF" a Brasher Warning was issued, and this went to a PD (Pilot Deviation), the FSDO investigates. Under the Compliance Program as long as the Airman is compliant, no enforcement can be brought against them. Typically it ends with counseling, or at worse a recommendation for some dual with an Instructor and the sign off emailed to the Inspector.
 
Oh hey, we've been looking for you. I'll PM you a phone number to call.
 
Doc Holliday said:
Nope, it doesn't work that way.

The OP has little to worry about as previously stated. "IF" a Brasher Warning was issued, and this went to a PD (Pilot Deviation), the FSDO investigates. Under the Compliance Program as long as the Airman is compliant, no enforcement can be brought against them. Typically it ends with counseling, or at worse a recommendation for some dual with an Instructor and the sign off emailed to the Inspector.
Click to expand...

And what part is wrong? I shortened the Brasher and never discussed WHAT action would occur.

As for the second part, I have first hand knowledge of that happening.
 
Pinecone said:
And what part is wrong? I shortened the Brasher and never discussed WHAT action would occur.

As for the second part, I have first hand knowledge of that happening.
Click to expand...

How could they have "investigated and closed" without talking to the pilot? And if the pilot was not involved, why would the pilot get a letter stating it was investigated and closed? :oops:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top