Possible Pilot Deviation

M

MileHigh

Filing Flight Plan
Joined
Feb 22, 2016
Messages
13
Display Name
Display name:
Mile High
Hello,

I am hoping for some feedback from other users as to what I might expect from this event moving forward.

A few days ago I was departing an airfield under an IFR flight plan after the tower was closed (Thus Class G airspace). I was given a DP to fly however totally forgot to fly it (honest mistake) and was advised from ATC about a possible pilot deviation and given a # to call upon landing.

The DP called for a climbing right turn after take off, I did the same thing except instead of immediately turning right on take off I waited to gain some altitude first (about 700ft) before turning right, in which the tracon noticed, asked if I was familiar with the DP and I advised I was not (Whoops, I was supposed to be flying it).

The field was VFR and VMC conditions existed everywhere in the area and along my entire route. I was simply going IFR for the practice as I recently received my instrument rating about 3 months ago. My mistake did not cause any traffic alerts, loss of separation or terrain alerts...etc other than not doing as I was expected. It was a rather quiet night in the sky.

I spoke to the tracon after landing, controller was nice, asked me why I didn't fly the DP after I accepted & acknowledged it with clearance delivery and how I should of asked for no DP ahead of time if I was not able to comply...etc. I was polite, apologized and advised I reviewed the DP and would not make the mistake again. Tracon said they would put it in their logs but not sure if anything further would happen and kinda left it open ended.

I completed a NASA report within 24hrs and felt like I learned a lesson and won't repeat it again.

In your opinion, what is the likelihood that I am violated and get a call from the FSDO in the upcoming days? And if I am contacted, should I consult with an aviation lawyer first? Naturally my fear is a 709 ride or a suspension...etc. I've been beating myself up all day thinking about the unknowns.
 
Did you submit a ASRS report? If not do it. Hard to say what will happen but you might just get off with a phone call from an FAA Inspector, unless the ATC facility lets it slide. Usually they just wack your peepee and say no worries. But, file that report!
 
Welcome, 1st Post.

I would want to look at the DP before responding. Particularly at what altitude is the first turn expected to be made? "immediately after takeoff" might defined as a minimum altitude gain before turning. So how far above that were you?

As far as TRACON leaving it "open", it's hard telling how long it will sit before further action is taken, but I would not expect it to be too long. Others may be able to answer that.

Depending on attitudes with FSDO, it could be as simple as a chat and requesting proof of instructor remedial review. It might help if you can show that you've already reviewed the procedure and flown it with a CFII (dual recieved and endorsed in your logbook) before meeting with or talking to FSDO.

Did your error result in loss of seperation with another IFR aircraft? That could make a difference.
 
BillTIZ said:
Depending on attitudes with FSDO, it could be as simple as a chat and requesting proof of instructor remedial review. It might help if you can show that you've already reviewed the procedure and flown it with a CFII (dual recieved and endorsed in your logbook) before meeting with or talking to FSDO.
Click to expand...

Great input. Go back to that airport with a CFII, fly the DP and have the instructor endorse my logbook for that. Perfect way to demonstrate that I am serious about learning from my mistake. Thank you.

BillTIZ said:
Did your error result in loss of separation with another IFR aircraft? That could make a difference.
Click to expand...

No loss in separation, no traffic advisories or terrain alerts. I simply did not do what was acknowledged and expected of me.
 
They might want to "counsel" you. They might want you to get training from a CFII. In the worst case, they might want a ride-along (44709 ride). I think it's going to be the first, maybe second (but I doubt it). But it very well may be nothing beyond what has already happened. You're doing everything right.

The point is to get the problem fixed. You're doing that on your own, and a good investigator will see that.

It sucks when these things happen, but I suspect that error is never going to happen again.
 
Well it sounds like they've filed it so odds are it'll go to the FSDO. The facility QA guy will review it and report it. The FSDO will review it and decide a course of action from there. I suspect you'll either get a call from the FSDO or a letter of caution. Seriously doubt a 709 ride.

Good luck.
 
What runway did you take off on? You didn't go into a restricted area did you? That may be why the ATC facility was so concerned, whether you flew close to or actually went into a restricted area.
 
Last edited:
I have departed that DP before, the second time I asked for no DP. I was vectored the DP then.
 
I just finished reading an (AOPA?) article about the kinder, gentler FAA which is promised and which we have hankered for in the past. Hopefully it is true in your case, and if you show earnest desire to correct past errors they will go easy on you. I especially suspect that if no deal resulted from the deviation.
Oh, and don't be hard on yourself, goofups happen.

(2 years ago I did not have a goofup but they raked me over pretty good until they decided they had nothing. Kinder and gentler would have been welcome back then. I still have to curse under my breath when I recall the controller's words back then)
 
Let'sgoflying! said:
Which rwy and which transition pls?
Maybe the entire clearance, and perhaps you could trace your route for us?
Tks
Click to expand...

Depart Runway 30, Buelt Two DP then SBAN51 route.

This is essentially how I flew it, granted I was vectored after I acknowledged that I was not familiar with the DP

aGUAOun.png
 
Let'sgoflying! said:
Oh, and don't be hard on yourself, goofups happen.
Click to expand...

This is generally my biggest problem now. I am my own worst enemy. Been beating myself up over it ever since. Granted I'm sure most pilots would feel the same way after a possible deviation.
 
Doesn't appear you violated the restricted areas. That's huge.
 
Didn't read all the responses... So.....

700' is not too late to turn. In most places that's just where controlled airspace starts.
 
I suspect the OP didn't get the PD because of the late turn but not being able to comply with the DP. Shouldn't be turning until you hit 700 MSL (400 AGL) anyway.
 
Regs state that no turns should be made prior to 400 feet. Its hard to believe they would have busted you for starting your turn at 700 feet. My guess is you were OK until you admitted you were not familiar with the procedure. :dunno: Oh well. Live and learn.
 
david0tey said:
Regs state that no turns should be made prior to 400 feet. Its hard to believe they would have busted you for starting your turn at 700 feet. My guess is you were OK until you admitted you were not familiar with the procedure. :dunno: Oh well. Live and learn.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I'd agree with all this, too. A 300' discrepancy at that point is something that would usually go unnoticed. OP might want to see if there's a LiveATC recording of this, so he can review what was said. I suspect ATC took the response as an admittance that the pilot was unaware of what to do (i.e. maybe they thought he also had no intention/awareness of joining the transition), and then they ran with that assumption and gave a deviation.

But yeah, with the ASRS done he should be fine anyway.
 
david0tey said:
Regs state that no turns should be made prior to 400 feet. Its hard to believe they would have busted you for starting your turn at 700 feet. My guess is you were OK until you admitted you were not familiar with the procedure. :dunno: Oh well. Live and learn.
Click to expand...
And people say honesty with ATC will never get you in trouble....
 
Lindberg said:
And people say honesty with ATC will never get you in trouble....
Click to expand...

JHC, this could have been a whole helluva lot worse if he tried to hide it.

He did the right thing all the way around. Well, except maybe the preflight prep, but I doubt that's going to happen ever again. And that's going to be the resolution of this PD, too. If he hears anything at all, it's gonna be counseling.

This was at night around terrain. It could have been REAL bad, VMC or not. Lots of unlit peaks around there, some as high as 6500. Note the OROCA in that sector is 11100.
 
Last edited:
Trying to find the equipment transition.
 
MAKG1 said:
JHC, this could have been a whole helluva lot worse if he tried to hide it.

He did the right thing all the way around. Well, except maybe the preflight prep, but I doubt that's going to happen ever again. And that's going to be the resolution of this PD, too. If he hears anything at all, it's gonna be counseling.

This was at night around terrain. It could have been REAL bad, VMC or not. Lots of unlit peaks around there, some as high as 6500. Note the OROCA in that sector is 11100.
Click to expand...
I agree that this should not go any further than counseling, but I'm still not sure he did anything wrong....unless he was flying a very shallow climb to 700'. Think about it, most folks staying in the traffic pattern are turning x-wind around 700'.

Unless he was flying a really shallow initial climb, I'm not seeing why ATC would have had an issue with this.
 
I don't think the problem was that he started the turn at 700' instead of 400'. The problem was that he didn't turn to the 190 heading and intercept the radial.
 
Fearless Tower said:
I'm not seeing why ATC would have had an issue with this.
Click to expand...

He accepted the procedure in his clearance and admitted to ATC he did not fly it. ATC may have had other traffic in the area, may have! He apparently didn't fly the ground track that ATC expected (clmbing right turn to 1900') and maybe it was an issue as his ground track went straight out for awhile. Obviously he's learned a lesson that when you accept a clearance you are expected to fly it. Hopefully he won't be punished unnecessarily as he has been honest and upfront about the incident, and appears to have learned a lesson.
 
Last edited:
MileHigh said:
In your opinion, what is the likelihood that I am violated and get a call from the FSDO in the upcoming days? And if I am contacted, should I consult with an aviation lawyer first? Naturally my fear is a 709 ride or a suspension...etc. I've been beating myself up all day thinking about the unknowns.
Click to expand...
It is likely you will at least get a call. Or perhaps a letter.

A few things:

1. No one can tell you any of this for sure.

2. A call from a FSDO inspector does not mean you are being violated. A violation does not occur until after the ASI decides whether or not it can be handled administratively or needs to be kicked upstairs to Legal.

3. Under the FAA's new "compliance philosophy" guidelines, the ASI is supposed to make an initial determination whether the matter can be handled with training and corrective action - referred to as a "compliance action" that is two levels below a violation

4. None of this precludes a 709 ride since that is not treated as any type of enforcement action.

5. Yes. This is the time to consult with a lawyer. No. That's not for the purpose of having a mad dog barking impotently at the FAA. It's for the purpose of having someone evaluate the situation and guide you through the process so you don't spend unproductive time beating yourself up about it.

This ans more is in the presentation I did last month (and will be repeating in March at another airport), Pilot Deviations and FAA Enforcement Actions.
 
Of course an attorney is going to tell you to seek out an attorney, it's business.

In my time on the other side of the fence I can tell you that some of the times the "aviation attorneys" got involved they only made the situation worse. Not all attorneys are created equal, and not all "aviation attorneys" a true aviation law expert. Some of those guys hold no more than a private license and have about the same knowledge as your average pilot.

Fact is today the FAA has few resources and most pilot deviations end with a phone counseling or maybe a letter of warning. Under the new compliance philosophy the airman will usually be offered remedial training unless he shows an attitude of non compliance.

Whatever you do, don't take a stick and poke it at the rattlesnake.
 
mscard88 said:
He accepted the procedure in his clearance and admitted to ATC he did not fly it. ATC may have had other traffic in the area, may have! He apparently didn't fly the ground track that ATC expected (clmbing right turn to 1900') and maybe it was an issue as his ground track went straight out for awhile. Obviously he's learned a lesson that when you accept a clearance you are expected to fly it. Hopefully he won't be punished unnecessarily as he has been honest and upfront about the incident, and appears to have learned a lesson.
Click to expand...

I agree I think I put my foot in my mouth when I said I was not familiar with the DP after I already accepting it and was on climb out. My intentions were to gain some altitude then do a climbing right turn to intercept my course, however the DP indicates I should have turned sooner. Once I admitted I was not flying the DP I accepted, I think that sealed the deal for the PD.

RotorAndWing said:
Whatever you do, don't take a stick and poke it at the rattlesnake.
Click to expand...

I can agree with this. I did something wrong, admitted to it and my actions did not cause any conflicts, loss of separation..etc but still I accepted something and did not fly it as expected. Rest assured it will be something I wont repeat moving forward.

david0tey said:
Regs state that no turns should be made prior to 400 feet. Its hard to believe they would have busted you for starting your turn at 700 feet. My guess is you were OK until you admitted you were not familiar with the procedure. :dunno: Oh well. Live and learn.
Click to expand...

I agree, I think I put my foot in my mouth by being honest but hey I made the mistake and I'm paying the price and have been beating myself up ever since. Had I been IMC, ignored the DP and did a climbing left turn, it would have likely sent me to my grave... those kinda mistakes can't happen. I do know that had IMC conditions existed I am positive I would not have made this mistake, however that's not an excuse either.
 
MileHigh said:
I agree I think I put my foot in my mouth when I said I was not familiar with the DP after I already accepting it and was on climb out. My intentions were to gain some altitude then do a climbing right turn to intercept my course, however the DP indicates I should have turned sooner. Once I admitted I was not flying the DP I accepted, I think that sealed the deal for the PD.
Click to expand...

I haven't completed IR training (suspended it a couple of years ago). Seems turning at take off to heading 190 while trying to intercept the 130 radial while low with possible poor VOR reception might not be a good idea (especially if that restricted area was an obstruction instead).
 
The 'late turn' doesn't sound like it was late at all. The turn to a heading of something other than 190 was probably what clued them into the fact that you were either misflying the DP, or weren't flying the DP at all.

I hope it works out for the best, and I admire your honesty in relaying what happened.

From a procedural standpoint, most pilots have a plan when they take off, whether it's runway heading, an assigned heading, a DP, or direct to a fix upon entering controlled airspace. What was it you had in your mind as the first leg of the flight as you were taking off? What had you briefed?

The answers to those questions might help reveal an underlying issue in the process you're using prior to takeoff at the moment. Improving that will help fix this issue, or in a more extreme case, depending on terrain, help keep you alive.

Thanks again, this answers my question of whether the BUELT2 is actually used on an operational basis out of SMX. It sounds like it is, at least when the tower is closed.
 
coma24 said:
The 'late turn' doesn't sound like it was late at all. The turn to a heading of something other than 190 was probably what clued them into the fact that you were either misflying the DP, or weren't flying the DP at all.
Click to expand...

I think this hits it on the head. It seems to me that the OP is perhaps mislead by the graphics and maybe not remembering that climbing out on runway heading is expected. The way I learned it was climb on runway heading until 400' below pattern altitude and then begin the turn.

The other thing to remember is that the graphical depiction is not required to fly the DP. The textural description is all that is required. Don't let some artiste's picture (okay, a semi-technical drawing) deceive. Read the text.

disclaimer: I do not design DPs, just fly'em on occasion.
 
Clark1961 said:
The way I learned it was climb on runway heading until 400' below pattern altitude and then begin the turn.
Click to expand...
IFR procedures are to climb to 400', and past the end of the runway, before turning unless the departure procedure specifies otherwise.

The AIM recommendation for VFR traffic patterns is to continue the departure/upwind leg until within 300' of the traffic pattern altitude before turning crosswind.
 
RotorAndWing said:
Of course an attorney is going to tell you to seek out an attorney, it's business.
Click to expand...
I did not read Mark's post as self-serving. I'm not an attorney, and I'm certainly no expert in this area, but as someone who's very passionate about aviation and has spent a lot of time, money, and effort to become a good pilot, I would absolutely go talk to a professional who can help me mitigate the risk of losing my flying privilege.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top