I think that I busted Bravo today

orange said:
To answer somebody, this isn't a hypotheical or a troll, it happened and now I'm trying to decide as to my next course of action if any.
Click to expand...
Then my suggestion is to go over navigation, ADM, ATC communications airspace, and emergency procedures with a CFI. The ASRS is only going to help avoid certain possible legal penalties.
 
Lindberg said:
Then my suggestion is to go over navigation, ADM, ATC communications airspace, and emergency procedures with a CFI. The ASRS is only going to help avoid certain possible legal penalties.
Click to expand...
I'm all set, but thanks for the suggestion.
 
I'm a rule follower by nature but I think some people are going a little overboard here.

If I was Mr. Orange I'd file a NASA report, learn my lesson (which he already has stated he has done), and forget about it.

Because he busted a bravo for a minute by a few hundred feet over a congested area departing a uncontrolled field doesn't mean he needs to reread the AIM, go for more training, and most likely won't need to show a proactive attitude to the scary FAA inspector.

He did the smart thing by filing the report and covering himself. Now just sin no more :)
 
neilw2 said:
I'm a rule follower by nature but I think some people are going a little overboard here.

If I was Mr. Orange I'd file a NASA report, learn my lesson (which he already has stated he has done), and forget about it.

Because he busted a bravo for a minute by a few hundred feet over a congested area departing a uncontrolled field doesn't mean he needs to reread the AIM, go for more training, and most likely won't need to show a proactive attitude to the scary FAA inspector.

He did the smart thing by filing the report and covering himself. Now just sin no more :)
Click to expand...

I wouldn’t underestimate how seriously the FAA can take a Bravo bust, of all things....


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
gsengle said:
I wouldn’t underestimate how seriously the FAA can take a Bravo bust, of all things....


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

But why should he be worried if he filed a NASA report and it was a obvious mistake not a intentional violation? There is very little they can do enforcement wise with that info.

Of course he shouldn't be a d*** if the inspector calls but by filling the NASA report he already demonstrated the proactive attitude you are preaching to him.
 
neilw2 said:
But why should he be worried if he filed a NASA report and it was a obvious mistake not a intentional violation? There is very little they can do enforcement wise with that info.

Of course he shouldn't be a d*** if the inspector calls but by filling the NASA report he already demonstrated the proactive attitude you are preaching to him.
Click to expand...

Reread what I wrote. I just pointed out it would be one more way to show a proactive attitude. I didn’t preach I didn’t demand I didn’t even suggest, I made a fair observation about how that would look.

Me I’d do it, a Bravo bust isn’t a minor thing I don’t think... ymmv


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
gsengle said:
Reread what I wrote. I just pointed out it would be one more way to show a proactive attitude. I didn’t preach I didn’t demand I didn’t even suggest, I made a fair observation about how that would look.

Me I’d do it, a Bravo bust isn’t a minor thing I don’t think... ymmv


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

I got you and if that's all you meant you are exactly right. Maybe it's not you but I just see the general typical POA turn of "How could you do that, good luck dealing with all the **** that is coming your way, etc" becomes a little much.

Maybe because I fly under a Bravo every time I fly but I'm going to say something a little crazy here------ its probably not a big deal. It only would be a "big deal" if it caused loss of separation.

"To err is to be human." We all strive for 100% perfect flight every time we fly. I have never busted the Bravo but I could see doing it very easily and I have heard plenty of people bust the bravo who ATC just vectored out of there airspace- no Brasher warning, etc.

Unless he is a jerk, or he doesn't use it as a learning experience, and it didn't cause a 737 to have to had taken evasive maneuvers file the report and move on.
 
Tom-D said:
simply STFU and don't do it again.
Click to expand...
The NASA Form is anonymous (you get a receipt, but they don't know who you are).

Also if the OP is running ForeFlight on the iPad, then get the Tracklog, upload to FF Web and you'll be able to precisely verify yes/no on the Bravo.
 
I definitely learned not to be so dependent on the magenta line because it could malfunction, and then what. Going forward, I will write down the headings off the FF screen before taking off just in case FF becomes inaccessible. I should have turned to about 175* after takeoff of RWY 9 to get me to the outer ring but I flew maybe 120.

I have the urge to do it again this coming weekend to do it right.
 
neilw2 said:
I'm a rule follower by nature but I think some people are going a little overboard here.

If I was Mr. Orange I'd file a NASA report, learn my lesson (which he already has stated he has done), and forget about it.

Because he busted a bravo for a minute by a few hundred feet over a congested area departing a uncontrolled field doesn't mean he needs to reread the AIM, go for more training, and most likely won't need to show a proactive attitude to the scary FAA inspector.

He did the smart thing by filing the report and covering himself. Now just sin no more :)
Click to expand...
I don't think anyone was piling on the OP or preaching to him about rereading the AIM or getting more training. Maybe I was a little too negative in my tone, but I just wanted to make the OP aware that there might be more involved here than a possible Bravo bust and to plan his moves carefully.

I'm glad to see that he is moving ahead and taking positive steps to get back on the horse. Kudos to Mr. Orange! :thumbsup:
 
neilw2 said:
But why should he be worried if he filed a NASA report and it was a obvious mistake not a intentional violation? There is very little they can do enforcement wise with that info.

Of course he shouldn't be a d*** if the inspector calls but by filling the NASA report he already demonstrated the proactive attitude you are preaching to him.
Click to expand...
Filing a NASA report will not stop you from being violated. It will only waive the certificate suspension.
 
Kritchlow said:
Filing a NASA report will not stop you from being violated. It will only waive the certificate suspension.
Click to expand...

Hmm...That's an important distinction that I wasn't aware of. So if you were "violated" what else would they do to you? Could they demand more training, etc?
 
Right now some Newark approach dude is reading this thread and laughing “you think I got time to write up a 200 ft violation where no aircraft sep was lost...please.” :D
 
orange said:
I definitely learned not to be so dependent on the magenta line because it could malfunction, and then what. Going forward, I will write down the headings off the FF screen before taking off just in case FF becomes inaccessible. I should have turned to about 175* after takeoff of RWY 9 to get me to the outer ring but I flew maybe 120.

I have the urge to do it again this coming weekend to do it right.
Click to expand...
Better idea,,Move to a place where you can fly and not worry about this cheap scat.
 
neilw2 said:
Hmm...That's an important distinction that I wasn't aware of. So if you were "violated" what else would they do to you? Could they demand more training, etc?
Click to expand...
The biggest thing that I can think of at the moment is a permanent mark on your record. If someone wanted to go to the airlines it would show up. Not sure if insurance companies ever look at that type of thing.
 
Tom-D said:
simply STFU and don't do it again.
Click to expand...

That.

Fearless Tower said:
If you aren’t ADS-B equipped, departed from an uncontrolled field and landed at an uncontrolled field, then if they wanted to pursue it, they’d need to pull any CTAF audio tapes and correlate the timing of your radio calls with the radar track, or have someone at the FBO be able to identify you.
Click to expand...

A good reason not to use your call sign at uncontrolled fields.


I would say I wouldn't bother with the NASA, but seeing you already posted on a public forum about it from your registered account, presuming you arnt using good VPNs, TOR, burner email, and never posted anything leading to who you are, well the in the shadows ship has sailed so I'd file it.


For ADM

3497c4425afc9214ac5c3845c7e19f62776aabad_1_402x500.JPG
 
Last edited:
neilw2 said:
Hmm...That's an important distinction that I wasn't aware of. So if you were "violated" what else would they do to you? Could they demand more training, etc?
Click to expand...
They can tell you to get more training.

Bit the big thing is the issue/violation is in your record. And the ASRS is like a one time get out of jail free card. If you screw up again, they can throw the book at you/either suspend or revoke.
 
Kritchlow said:
The biggest thing that I can think of at the moment is a permanent mark on your record. If someone wanted to go to the airlines it would show up. Not sure if insurance companies ever look at that type of thing.
Click to expand...
Insurance companies definitely ask.
 
Velocity173 said:
Right now some Newark approach dude is reading this thread and laughing “you think I got time to write up a 200 ft violation where no aircraft sep was lost...please.” :D
Click to expand...
Like I said, those guys are apparently buried under a pile of RUUDY 6 PDs
 
gsengle said:
I wouldn’t underestimate how seriously the FAA can take a Bravo bust, of all things....
Click to expand...
If I found that I was not where I thought I was and facing the prospect of picking my way between towers at 200agl, I would consider that an emergency, and I would climb. If I had the approach freq I'd let them know. But if the FAA did get involved here,I don't think they'd see this as a simple bravo just. YMMV.
 
First hand from a TRACON Safety Lead responding to a question regarding airspace busts...if you bust airspace and ATC can see you made an immediate correction and it did not result in a deviations or loss of separation, not every controller is sitting there trigger happy to bust pilots and gonna add to their workload to track you down if it was no harm no foul.

Now, cause a problem or blow all the way through airspace like an oblivious dumbarse, different story.

Not every cop pulls over every speeder they see...lacking any immediate follow up by ATC to obtain more information by contacting your arrival airport, go forth and bust no more...I would STFU and move on.
 
Last edited:
Fearless Tower said:
Like I said, those guys are apparently buried under a pile of RUUDY 6 PDs
Click to expand...

I’m sure they are. And in those cases they’re legit write ups because they deviated off an assigned route. In the OP’s case, he’s got a few things going for him.

First, his mode C was never verified with Newark. Even if it were verified, less than 300 ft from reported, is fine. He dimed himself out on here so I guess that makes the altitude a moot point though. Second, unless he busted sep (worst case 1.5 miles / 500 vert) or the controller or another pilot had to take alternate action, it’s not even an official airspace write up (MOR). About the closest aircraft that would be going past him would be the Bridge Visual to 29 and I don’t see that being a factor. Finally, controllers hate paperwork with a passion and for the most part, don’t like policing the skies.

If they wanted to file something on him, they could’ve easily pushed a tag on his 1200 code followed him to JFK, then key up the landline and say “hey, who’s the 4567 that you just taged up heading eastbound?” Then, he would have gotten a Brasher.
 
Last edited:
orange said:
I definitely learned not to be so dependent on the magenta line because it could malfunction, and then what. Going forward, I will write down the headings off the FF screen before taking off just in case FF becomes inaccessible. I should have turned to about 175* after takeoff of RWY 9 to get me to the outer ring but I flew maybe 120.
Click to expand...
That's the right approach right there. Learn from our mistakes.
I flew out of Linden a few times, I agree, not a good spot to be, especially climbing out of rwy 09 with all the freaking fuel tanks there and chimneys and dock cranes everywhere.

So yes, I agree with your solution. I do the same. I study the chart HEAVILY before flying. No rush. Kinda like "dream flying" or "finger flying". I memorize that after taking off from 09, I need to make an immediate right turn S or SW and stay below 800. I note landmarks too. Though it helped me to have a local pilot buddy in the right seat. I followed his good advice to avoid busting the airspace.

I bet you're not the only one who has ever made a mistake over Linden. And you won't be the last either. :) I am sure EWR twr is used to it and unless there was a loss of separation, it should be a non-event.
The much more "friendlier and nicier FAA" nowadays is trying to go with encouragement of education and training than punishing for life.

Go forth and sin no more! :)
 
File the NASA form... if the aircraft has ADS-B Out, the incursion is stored on a hard drive somewhere with the tail number attached.

I wouldn't count on the local controller "not saying anything" at all, these days... some analyst in a back room who's three months behind, could eventually get around to reviewing the automatically spewed incursion and track data that's certainly being stored for CYA purposes somewhere. Disk space is cheap.
 
denverpilot said:
File the NASA form... if the aircraft has ADS-B Out, the incursion is stored on a hard drive somewhere with the tail number attached.

I wouldn't count on the local controller "not saying anything" at all, these days... some analyst in a back room who's three months behind, could eventually get around to reviewing the automatically spewed incursion and track data that's certainly being stored for CYA purposes somewhere. Disk space is cheap.
Click to expand...
Took like a month after my PD for the FAA to call me... Of course I was on an IFR flight plan and got the Brasher warning.
 
denverpilot said:
File the NASA form... if the aircraft has ADS-B Out, the incursion is stored on a hard drive somewhere with the tail number attached.

I wouldn't count on the local controller "not saying anything" at all, these days... some analyst in a back room who's three months behind, could eventually get around to reviewing the automatically spewed incursion and track data that's certainly being stored for CYA purposes somewhere. Disk space is cheap.
Click to expand...
Exactly right. It didn’t used to be that way, but I believe it changed some years back. Now they can violate you retroactively, as some manager reviews stuff from the past.
 
Tom-D said:
Why should he raise attention to himself if no one noticed.?
Click to expand...
Filing a NASA form isn't "raising attention to yourself" - nobody from the FAA will ever know, UNLESS someone did notice this and they are investigating it. Then it's his get-out-of-jail-free card. Situations like this are exactly what the NASA form was designed for.
 
mryan75 said:
Situations like this are exactly what the NASA form was designed for.
Click to expand...

Not exactly IMO...from AOPA Article: "the ASRS enables pilots to identify safety hazards in operating practices, chart terminology, weather briefings, instruments, emergency procedures, medical issues, or any other aspect of flying...to qualify for the waiver, the conduct must have been inadvertent and not deliberate, and it must not involve a lack of qualifications or competency"

https://www.aopa.org/news-and-media...16/nasa-report-your-get-out-of-jail-free-card

Not to bag on the OP as we all make mistakes...but in terms of the NASA applicability iPad glare, inability to decipher chart, and loss of situational awareness resulting in a Bravo bust is most certainly "lack of qualifications and competency" in regard to the NASA get outta jail free notion...it was not a bust from confusion over procedures or interpretation
 
Shawn said:
Not exactly IMO...from AOPA Article: "the ASRS enables pilots to identify safety hazards in operating practices, chart terminology, weather briefings, instruments, emergency procedures, medical issues, or any other aspect of flying...to qualify for the waiver, the conduct must have been inadvertent and not deliberate, and it must not involve a lack of qualifications or competency"

https://www.aopa.org/news-and-media...16/nasa-report-your-get-out-of-jail-free-card

Not to bag on the OP as we all make mistakes...but in terms of the NASA applicability iPad glare, inability to decipher chart, and loss of situational awareness resulting in a Bravo bust is most certainly "lack of qualifications and competency" in regard to the NASA get outta jail free notion...it was not a bust from confusion over procedures or interpretation
Click to expand...


Here's an excerpt from the actual advisory circular:

"The violation did not involve a criminal offense, accident, or action under 49 U.S.C. § 44709, which discloses a lack of qualification or competency, which is wholly excluded from this policy;..."​

"Lack of competency" could refer to ANY pilot error. We can only hope that His Majesty the Administrator will only go to such lengths when it's really necessary.
 
Shawn said:
Not exactly IMO...from AOPA Article: "the ASRS enables pilots to identify safety hazards in operating practices, chart terminology, weather briefings, instruments, emergency procedures, medical issues, or any other aspect of flying...to qualify for the waiver, the conduct must have been inadvertent and not deliberate, and it must not involve a lack of qualifications or competency"

https://www.aopa.org/news-and-media...16/nasa-report-your-get-out-of-jail-free-card

Not to bag on the OP as we all make mistakes...but in terms of the NASA applicability iPad glare, inability to decipher chart, and loss of situational awareness resulting in a Bravo bust is most certainly "lack of qualifications and competency" in regard to the NASA get outta jail free notion...it was not a bust from confusion over procedures or interpretation
Click to expand...
I think this is really pushing the concept of competency beyond recognizable bounds. Inability to read a chart because of glare has nothing to do with whether one has the necessary skills, training, or qualifications. And I would submit that a deliberate act, even one undertaken out of confusion over a procedure or interpretation of the regs, might sooner be construed as not qualifying for immunity than an accidental bust due to inability to read a chart because of lighting conditions.

As I wrote before, I'd be more concerned here about the low flying part of the OP's story, assuming (as it seems from his description) that it was over land. All this is moot now as the OP has filed his ASRS and the chips will fall wherever they will. Most likely the OP would have heard by now if there was going to be any followup by the FSDO, though there is always a small chance some QA person will discover the radar track later and follow up... hopefully not though.
 
Velocity173 said:
If they wanted to file something on him, they could’ve easily pushed a tag on his 1200 code followed him to JFK, then key up the landline and say “hey, who’s the 4567 that you just taged up heading eastbound?” Then, he would have gotten a Brasher.
Click to expand...
@Velocity173, what's a 4567?
 
Last edited:
GeorgeC said:
@Velocity173, what's a 4567?
Click to expand...

Just making up a random beacon code as an example. If the op contacted JFK, most likely they squawked him up, got radar and then shipped him to tower. All Newark would have to follow his code until JFK. Then, call JFK tower on the landline and inform them that the aircraft had a possible PD and to call Newark after landing.

Like I said above, unless he broke sep, or someone else took alternate to avoid the OP, they don’t care. There’s no required report for his violation on the ATC side and no point in following the OP to issue a Brasher.
 
Ah, I thought it was some ATC slang, disregard.
 
GeorgeC said:
Ah, I thought it was some ATC slang, disregard.
Click to expand...

Nah, just giving a possible example on how that scenario could have gone. The way the software is designed, you can’t see a tag in another facilities airspace, only their code. If it’s an NAS code you can do a search in the flight data computer and get the ID. If it’s a local code, which was most likely used, only way of knowing who it is, is to call on the landline.

Now that we are going with ADS-B, everyone can see us without squawking the code. ;)
 
He guys I need your help, this pic is from my flight log from yesterday, the quick question is: DID I BUST THIS AIRSPACE???

You can see my GPS location with the altitude.

Please help!

Thank you.

IMG_0186.jpg
 
Old Thread: Hello . There have been no replies in this thread for 365 days.
Content in this thread may no longer be relevant.
Perhaps it would be better to start a new thread instead.
Back
Top