Pilot Deviation Career Ending?

K

Kenjit

Filing Flight Plan
Joined
Nov 17, 2019
Messages
5
Display Name
Display name:
Kenjit
Hey guys I'm new to this form so please excuse me as I am very worried about a mistake I made. Before going deep into my mistake I would like to say that its completely my fault and am trying to get training done with my instructor over the mistake. I've filed an ASAP report as well as the NASA ASRS.

Okay so I go to an aviation uni, and I flew on my commercial solo XC, was an amazing flight and I had fun throughout except for when I was getting ready to depart my second airport (my first time there) I briefed the taxi instructions given to me by ATC and also where I was gonna do my run-up. When I was ready I looked up at the hold short line and taxied forward. After stopping I immediately felt something was off when i could see the runway threshold and my initial realization is that I was somewhere I wasn’t supposed to be. I had past the hold short line by at least my tail, I wasn’t on the actual runway itself but about 1/3 of the way on the displaced threshold. My immediate reaction was to turn left and vacate. Thankfully no one was on short final. I got the “possible pilot deviation call...” The guy was very understanding and I complied fully and stated that it was very much my mistake.

Im waiting on the FSDO guy to call me now and I’ve been so depressed lately its killing me.

How do you guys think this will end? Are there any suggestions? Thanks and I hope everyone can learn from this mistake.
 
Chances are pretty good that the FSDO will have a discussion with you and that will be the end of it. The key is to be polite and not argumentative. Treat it as a learning experience.

It is definitely not career ending. It will be an interview question for sure. And again, if you have gotten far enough to do an interview, they are looking to how you answer the question.
 
Greg Bockelman said:
Chances are pretty good that the FSDO will have a discussion with you and that will be the end of it. The key is to be polite and not argumentative. Treat it as a learning experience.

It is definitely not career ending. It will be an interview question for sure. And again, if you have gotten far enough to do an interview, they are looking to how you answer the question.
Click to expand...

Thanks so much i feel so much better, i just want to get some feedback before the call.
 
You'll get a call in about 3-5wks. The wait will most likely drive you nuts. When it happened to me (different deviation) the first thing my CFII said was to keep flying. We talked over what to change. The call was about 4wks later. They offered to visit me but I opted to see the FSDO and learn what I could. The ASI handling mine asked for driver's license, medical, pilot license, pilot logs and all aircraft logs. We talked about what happened and what I would do to remedy it. They reviewed all the logs. No remedial action. No additional training flights needed. I was PPL and you are commerical so maybe they will want you to do a few hours with a CFI on taxi, instructions, etc.

Stop worrying. Get your logs in order. Heck, go finish your commercial ride if you can :)
 
As the others said, just be polite and humble and own the mistake as a learning experience. Be able to explain what you will be doing from now on to prevent this from happening.
 
Welcome, get ready for some remedial training . Being your first mistake the FAA will be looking at your attitude,trying to ensure you learn from that mistake.
 
Kenjit said:
am trying to get training done with my instructor over the mistake.
Click to expand...
No guaranties, of course, but this is one the very best things you can do to demonstrate the "compliant attitude" the FAA is looking for with the current Compliance Program.
 
While it may sound silly, one thing you can do between now (before the FSDO contacts you) is initiate your own "remedial training" with an instructor, and have him focus entirely on the mistake itself. Admittedly there's not much you can do that's "remedial" other than review the regulations and even "practice" holding short a few times at unfamiliar airports, but the action helps the FSDO assess your attitude. And after all what kind of remedial training will the FSDO come up with that's going to be much different than that? I think they generally are sympathetic to errors and really want to see a compliant attitude and the effort to fix the problem.

I made an unintentional "mistake" (clipped airspace) 30 years ago and called the phone number. I fessed up, responded to all of their requests, met with the inspector along with an instructor and the three of us devised a remedial training program. The entire process was very cordial, fair, and easily accomplished. It really just amounted to a financial penalty to pay for the instructor and two hours in the aircraft and review what I already really knew but had been a little careless about. The violation was subsequently expunged from the record.

Looking back, I think I could have devised my own remedial steps, executed them, documented it and shown up with that completed and logged, and I think that action would have gone a long way to making the inspector's task easy for him. I do know of others who have done this with success.

Technical question: Isn't the ASAP process applicable to just air carriers? I'm not familiar with the process.
 
It's unfortunate that too many tower controllers are anxious to find any mistake, by a pilot, like a cop in a speed trap small town. That's one reason that, when I can, I try to avoid airports with control towers and use uncontrolled fields. It is possible that he didn't report this to higher up the FAA chain or maybe he gave it to the supervisor and it may have ended there. I wouldn't count on it however, don't know if there is a quota of pilot violations that controllers have, but some act like it.

Moving out on the runway without clearance is serious, but you weren't on the runway. And clearance or not, always look before pulling out.
I think the advice to listen politely and co operate with any letter you get from FAA is the right advice. Good luck.

I once was taking off at my home airport on a not busy day, only one other plane beginning to taxi down as I was at the hold line. I got clearance and took off. Immediately the air cop said, "possible pilot deviation, call this number". Now legal people tell us not to make those calls, and I cant recall if I did or not. But finally I found out the major violation in his mind was when he cleared me for takeoff,that is what I did and he claimed I didn't repeat his clearance, just took off. Im not sure I said my N number or not, the jet was talking on the frequency, Anyway, he also made a mistake , used to wrong N number referring to me. When I talked to the supervisor about it , I asked the recording be preserved, and I pointed out the "possible controller deviation", At that point they dropped it and I didn't hear any more, except not long after I aborted a takeoff and they demanded to know the reason.
The guys at Oshkosh are 99% nice as well as competent, but sadly its not that way everywhere and every controller. A long time ago it used to be friendly here.
 
One other small piece of advice, when dealing with a cop or controller or building inspector, something may seem trivial to us, but remember,to the bureaucrat he sees himself and his title and his salary as really important.
 
Last edited:
Bill Greenwood said:
It's unfortunate that too many tower controllers are anxious to find any mistake, by a pilot, like a cop in a speed trap small town. That's one reason that, when I can, I try to avoid airports with control towers and use uncontrolled fields. It is possible that he didn't report this to higher up the FAA chain or maybe he gave it to the supervisor and it may have ended there. I wouldn't count on it however, don't know if there is a quota of pilot violations that controllers have, but some act like it.

Moving out on the runway without clearance is serious, but you weren't on the runway. And clearance or not, always look before pulling out.
I think the advice to listen politely and co operate with any letter you get from FAA is the right advice. Good luck.

I once was taking off at my home airport on a not busy day, only one other plane beginning to taxi down as I was at the hold line. I got clearance and took off. Immediately the air cop said, "possible pilot deviation, call this number". Now legal people tell us not to make those calls, and I cant recall if I did or not. But finally I found out the major violation in his mind was when he cleared me for takeoff,that is what I did and he claimed I didn't repeat his clearance, just took off. Im not sure I said my N number or not, the jet was talking on the frequency, Anyway, he also made a mistake , used to wrong N number referring to me. When I talked to the supervisor about it , I asked the recording be preserved, and I pointed out the "possible controller deviation", At that point they dropped it and I didn't hear any more, except not long after I aborted a takeoff and they demanded to know the reason.
The guys at Oshkosh are 99% nice as well as competent, but sadly its not that way everywhere and every controller. A long time ago it used to be friendly here.
Click to expand...

It helps to know what your talking about during a discussion. There’s just way too much conjecture here.
 
Bill Greenwood said:
One other small piece of advice, when dealing with a cop or controller or building inspector, something may seem trivial to us, but remember,to the bureaucrat he sees himself and his title and his salary as vital.
Click to expand...

Suggest you take the time to read up on the FAA’s Compliance Philosophy program.
 
Doc Holliday said:
Suggest you take the time to read up on the FAA’s Compliance Philosophy program.
Click to expand...
"I'm from the government, I'm here to help"

Sorry, but as long as the guy across from you has the power to take away your privileges, you'd be foolish to not always be aware of that fact.
 
Salty said:
"I'm from the government, I'm here to help"

Sorry, but as long as the guy across from you has the power to take away your privileges, you'd be foolish to not always be aware of that fact.
Click to expand...

Where did I mention something contrary?

Have you ever bothered to read the Compliance Philosophy?
 
Doc Holliday said:
Where did I mention something contrary?

Have you ever bothered to read the Compliance Philosophy?
Click to expand...
The problem is you aren't actually saying anything, so I have no idea what you think others are missing in their understanding of the compliance philosophy.
 
Bill Greenwood said:
It's unfortunate that too many tower controllers are anxious to find any mistake, by a pilot, like a cop in a speed trap small town. That's one reason that, when I can, I try to avoid airports with control towers and use uncontrolled fields. It is possible that he didn't report this to higher up the FAA chain or maybe he gave it to the supervisor and it may have ended there. I wouldn't count on it however, don't know if there is a quota of pilot violations that controllers have, but some act like it.
Click to expand...

Sometimes though (and just to be complete) the controller is required to report the incident under the MOR (mandatory occurrence report) which includes "any suspected loss of runway/airport surface separation between two aircraft". I think as long as this didn't occur then it's the controllers option to report. However, all we know in this case is that there was no aircraft on "short" final, but that doesn't necessarily mean that there wasn't a "suspected loss" of separation. We don't have those details.

Hopefully in this case there was no suspected loss of separation and the controller can be satisfied with the OP's compliance and not report it.
 
You aren't even commercial yet, I would lose 0 seconds of sleep over this affecting your career. Now, if you were already flying regionals and this was your 4th one after flying 121 maybe you are done for but that's not the case here.
 
How do I think it will end?

It is already over. The tower operator will not send this to the FSDO and you won’t hear anything. When you haven’t heard anything in 60 days count it as a lesson learned.

Next time don’t taxi the nose right up to the hold line. Have it in view as reminder to clearance first.
 
Last edited:
dbahn said:
Technical question: Isn't the ASAP process applicable to just air carriers? I'm not familiar with the process.
Click to expand...

Im not sure about the whole thing as well, but my University has a deal with the FAA for incidents that occur like this so that the pilot will receive lesser or no action against if reported within 24 hours of occurrence.

Thanks so much for your feedback I will definitely take your advice!
 
dbahn said:
Hopefully in this case there was no suspected loss of separation and the controller can be satisfied with the OP's compliance and not report it.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the words! Aircraft was in the pattern, he was cleared for the option, I dont know when but i suggest midfield downwind. With that said, do you think this will still be sent?
 
Kenjit said:
Im not sure about the whole thing as well, but my University has a deal with the FAA for incidents that occur like this so that the pilot will receive lesser or no action against if reported within 24 hours of occurrence.

Thanks so much for your feedback I will definitely take your advice!
Click to expand...

The purpose of an ASAP is to enhance safety. The report information is not to be used for enforcement. Nothing in the AC provides for university student participation or reduced penalty. The program does suggest something may occur instead of enforcement for the included groups. What an inspector has probably told your program is the FSDO will consider an ASAP filing as a constructive pilot attitude.


From the AC. “b. An ASAP provides a vehicle whereby employees of participating air carriers and repair station certificate holders can identify and report safety issues to management and to the FAA for resolution, without fear that the FAA will use reports accepted under the program to take legal enforcement action against them, or that companies will use such information to take disciplinary action. These programs are designed to encourage participation from various employee groups, such as flight crewmembers, mechanics, flight attendants, and dispatchers.” A student is not an employee.

The NASA ASRS also does not stop an enforcement action. It can provide a relief from the penalty with some exceptions. It will not stop a violation from appearing in your record.
 
Last edited:
Clip4 said:
The purpose of an ASAP is to enhance safety. The report information is not to be used for enforcement. Nothing in the AC provides for university participation or reduced penalty. The program does suggest enforcement may. It will not stop a violation from appearing in your record.
Click to expand...

Thanks for clarifying that, again I haven't read into it as much but made sure to file one to help my case out a bit. However here's a clip from one of the parts I did read if your curious. https://ibb.co/GsbdBm0 I do understand it doesn't ensure me anything. Thanks!
 
EdFred said:
You aren't even commercial yet, I would lose 0 seconds of sleep over this affecting your career. Now, if you were already flying regionals and this was your 4th one after flying 121 maybe you are done for but that's not the case here.
Click to expand...

Agreed on the part 61 nonnery. As to your second posit, they did fire the Envoy FO over the ORD wrong vector incident with impunity. The CA was reinstated after firing largely because he was not on probation. That was a one-mistake punishment for the FO that the cat will never recover from. I base that on the notion he wasn't intending on making Envoy his final destination in the first place.

He had to return to the military with his tail between his legs and an overseas deployment to put food on the table. Not pretty, don't know the guy so hope his marriage is still intact. Some people think he'll be able to get re-hired at a different regional. Perhaps, but I find that at best, a plausible but Pyrrhic outcome in nature. At worst case an outright inaccurate prognosis. One mistake. Some "career".
 
dbahn said:
While it may sound silly, one thing you can do between now (before the FSDO contacts you) is initiate your own "remedial training" with an instructor, and have him focus entirely on the mistake itself. Admittedly there's not much you can do that's "remedial" other than review the regulations and even "practice" holding short a few times at unfamiliar airports, but the action helps the FSDO assess your attitude. And after all what kind of remedial training will the FSDO come up with that's going to be much different than that? I think they generally are sympathetic to errors and really want to see a compliant attitude and the effort to fix the problem.

I made an unintentional "mistake" (clipped airspace) 30 years ago and called the phone number. I fessed up, responded to all of their requests, met with the inspector along with an instructor and the three of us devised a remedial training program. The entire process was very cordial, fair, and easily accomplished. It really just amounted to a financial penalty to pay for the instructor and two hours in the aircraft and review what I already really knew but had been a little careless about. The violation was subsequently expunged from the record.

Looking back, I think I could have devised my own remedial steps, executed them, documented it and shown up with that completed and logged, and I think that action would have gone a long way to making the inspector's task easy for him. I do know of others who have done this with success.

Technical question: Isn't the ASAP process applicable to just air carriers? I'm not familiar with the process.
Click to expand...
Not silly at all.
 
Bill Greenwood said:
It's unfortunate that too many tower controllers are anxious to find any mistake, by a pilot, like a cop in a speed trap small town. That's one reason that, when I can, I try to avoid airports with control towers and use uncontrolled fields. It is possible that he didn't report this to higher up the FAA chain or maybe he gave it to the supervisor and it may have ended there. I wouldn't count on it however, don't know if there is a quota of pilot violations that controllers have, but some act like it.

Moving out on the runway without clearance is serious, but you weren't on the runway. And clearance or not, always look before pulling out.
I think the advice to listen politely and co operate with any letter you get from FAA is the right advice. Good luck.

I once was taking off at my home airport on a not busy day, only one other plane beginning to taxi down as I was at the hold line. I got clearance and took off. Immediately the air cop said, "possible pilot deviation, call this number". Now legal people tell us not to make those calls, and I cant recall if I did or not. But finally I found out the major violation in his mind was when he cleared me for takeoff,that is what I did and he claimed I didn't repeat his clearance, just took off. Im not sure I said my N number or not, the jet was talking on the frequency, Anyway, he also made a mistake , used to wrong N number referring to me. When I talked to the supervisor about it , I asked the recording be preserved, and I pointed out the "possible controller deviation", At that point they dropped it and I didn't hear any more, except not long after I aborted a takeoff and they demanded to know the reason.
The guys at Oshkosh are 99% nice as well as competent, but sadly its not that way everywhere and every controller. A long time ago it used to be friendly here.
Click to expand...
I'm sure they exist, but I have never even heard of a controller who likes making a whole bunch of extra work for himself by filing an unnecessary report and having to take time beyond his work day to fill out a bunch of forms
 
hindsight2020 said:
Agreed on the part 61 nonnery. As to your second posit, they did fire the Envoy FO over the ORD wrong vector incident with impunity. The CA was reinstated after firing largely because he was not on probation. That was a one-mistake punishment for the FO that the cat will never recover from. I base that on the notion he wasn't intending on making Envoy his final destination in the first place.

He had to return to the military with his tail between his legs and an overseas deployment to put food on the table. Not pretty, don't know the guy so hope his marriage is still intact. Some people think he'll be able to get re-hired at a different regional. Perhaps, but I find that at best, a plausible but Pyrrhic outcome in nature. At worst case an outright inaccurate prognosis. One mistake. Some "career".
Click to expand...

This thread deals with the FAA and a pilot deviation. In your story it was not the FAA that "fired" the FO, but it was the company he worked for. And I can assure you that's not the whole story.
 
hindsight2020 said:
Agreed on the part 61 nonnery. As to your second posit, they did fire the Envoy FO over the ORD wrong vector incident with impunity. The CA was reinstated after firing largely because he was not on probation. That was a one-mistake punishment for the FO that the cat will never recover from. I base that on the notion he wasn't intending on making Envoy his final destination in the first place.

He had to return to the military with his tail between his legs and an overseas deployment to put food on the table. Not pretty, don't know the guy so hope his marriage is still intact. Some people think he'll be able to get re-hired at a different regional. Perhaps, but I find that at best, a plausible but Pyrrhic outcome in nature. At worst case an outright inaccurate prognosis. One mistake. Some "career".
Click to expand...

If his wife left him for that, she wasn’t marriage material in the first place
 
Clip4 said:
How do I think it will end?

It is already over. The tower operator will not send this to the FSDO and you won’t hear anything. When you haven’t heard anything in 60 days count it as a lesson learned.

Next time don’t taxi the nose right up to the hold line. Have it in view as reminder to clearance first.
Click to expand...

^^^this^^^
 
dbahn said:
Sometimes though (and just to be complete) the controller is required to report the incident under the MOR (mandatory occurrence report) which includes "any suspected loss of runway/airport surface separation between two aircraft". I think as long as this didn't occur then it's the controllers option to report. However, all we know in this case is that there was no aircraft on "short" final, but that doesn't necessarily mean that there wasn't a "suspected loss" of separation. We don't have those details.

Hopefully in this case there was no suspected loss of separation and the controller can be satisfied with the OP's compliance and not report it.
Click to expand...
Crossing a runway hold line without clearance is a Mandatory Occurrence Reporting item.
https://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/media/Order/JO7210.632.pdf
 
Clip4 said:
Fortunately unless there is an FAA inspector in the tower there isn’t anyone around to enforce that order.
Click to expand...

Well, that’s what the tower sup is for. They’re not there to sweep PDs under the rug. No different than enforcement of the .65 order. Plus you got the QA folks that do random checks. Then of course, all it takes is another controller to dime out the sup to management for not logging it.

It’s different now than the old days. Because of the FAA compliance philosophy, controllers are encouraged more in reporting events on both sides. That’s why you have such a drastic rise in controller operational errors in the last decade. In this “just culture” FAA they want more self reporting.

There’s no way of knowing if it was logged as a PD in the MOR or not unless the OP was specifically told something on the phone. If they’ve let the cat out of the bag and issued the Brasher, I’d say there’s a good chance they filed the report.
 
Last edited:
kkoran said:
Crossing a runway hold line without clearance is a Mandatory Occurrence Reporting item.
https://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/media/Order/JO7210.632.pdf
Click to expand...
I've heard that said before but I couldn't find any documentation to support it. I can't find in the order you quote any specific reference to crossing a hold short line, nor can I find anything specific in what I looked through about ASDE or AMASS (although I suspect the details may be contained in that system). I don't know that every towered airport has ASDE or AMASS equipment, so in the OP's case that could also be relevant.

Can you point out the specific language about crossing the hold short line? I suspect it's there somewhere but I just don't see it, and I do know one airline pilot who was busted for letting just the nose cross the line, but that may have been in conjunction with an actual loss of separation. So I'm not questioning that crossing the line is "reportable" as a violation. I'm just looking for the specific language that makes it "mandatory" under the MOR program without a loss of separation.
 
Velocity173 said:
Well, that’s what the tower sup is for. They’re not there to sweep PDs under the rug. No different than enforcement of the .65 order. Plus you got the QA folks that do random checks. Then of course, all it takes is another controller to dime out the sup to management for not logging it.

It’s different now than the old days. Because of the FAA compliance philosophy, controllers are encouraged more in reporting events on both sides. That’s why you have such a drastic rise in controller operational errors in the last decade. In this “just culture” FAA they want more self reporting.

There’s no way of knowing if it was logged as a PD in the MOR or not unless the OP was specifically told something on the phone. If they’ve let the cat out of the bag and issued the Brasher, I’d say there’s a good chance they filed the report.
Click to expand...
I agree with you except that last sentence. A Brasher warning is basically a reservation of the right to bring action. While the lack of a Brasher warning is a fairly good indicator that there won't be an enforcement follow-up, the presence of one is a far less reliable indicator there will be.
 
Mark, for those of us who are a little behind on our Lodge dues, and therefore don't have the secret handshake, what is a "Brasher" report? I have never had any tower file any formal complaint against me, but in 40 years of flying I've had one major and 2 or 3 minor disputes with them, never heard the term.

Years ago, the tower guys were friendly, we knew one controller who had been there so long that he now has an intersection named after him. We, as well as school groups used to visit the tower and got to know some of the people. Sadly, that changed and they are like a foreign clique, they don't come into the FBO, I only know one of them and they just stay separate from the rest of us. It's not the best situation. I have never had a formal compliance action against me, but in one case of a big dispute they were on their way down that path when they realized the recording showed a controller error, and they dropped it.
 
Last edited:
When I used to do a lot of flying out of Fon du Lac during the week, I took a number of controllers for a flight and they seemed to enjoy it. The biggest problem was finding ones who were under the 190 lb weight limit. I think they like donuts as much as I!
 
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