Focus (or the lack there of) and Airspace (long)

[jsstevens]

I've waited for a few months the post this as I was waiting for the final letter from the FAA. Now I can tell the tale and hopefully someone (besides me) will learn from it.

The short version is that this is how I violated the class B airspace around Orlando International and what came of it.

A couple of months back (October 30th) I decided to go for a practice flight out of my home field: Orlando Executive (KORL). If you are not familiar with KORL, it sits between Orlando International (KMCO) and Sanford International (KSFB ). It is under the 1600' Class B shelf of KMCO just north of the 900' shelf. The runways at KMCO are oriented north-south so the class B shelves step up to the east and west. I tell this because it is important to what happened.

I wanted to work on MCA and landings. I looked at the sky and there were clouds in the east so I figured on going out to the practice area north west of KORL. Out that direction the class B shelf rises to 4000' before you get to the edge of the practice area. I looked over the chart and verified the landmarks and altitudes. Once I got to the airport I checked the online system for NOTAMS & TFRs as well as weather. I went out and started my preflight. I checked the fuel level first. This is something my primary flight instructor taught me-check the fuel first because if you need fuel you can call and have the truck moving while you finish the rest of your preflight. It saves time.

In this case, I did need fuel (we top off the tanks each time so each pilot can pay for their own fuel). I called the FBO and asked for fuel, then continued my preflight. I finished up, walked over and looked at the new (to our club) plane, walked back. Still no truck. It had been close to 1/2 hour. I called again and was informed that he's on his way but they're setting up for a political rally in one hanger and dealing with several executive jets that arrived unannounced for this same political rally. At any rate, it's over an hour later than I anticipated getting off the ground and now the clouds have dissipated to the east. Since I like the east practice area better, I decided to go east.

Take off is quite nice - cool dry air makes a happy airplane. I head out to the east. I get to the edge of the 1600' shelf and begin climbing as well as heading to the south east. Since I wanted to work on MCA and I knew there was a small chance I might stall I wanted to climb up to 3500' MSL (~3400 AGL). I climbed up, trimmed out for cruise and then started to throttle back. I got slowed down, and something was bugging me. I couldn't put my finger on it, but I was uneasy, so I pulled the plug and started back down and in. I headed back to KORL and shot a few landings. All went well. After my last landing, Ground called me and said "Report when ready to copy a phone number." Uh-oh. I looked over at the chart open on the passenger seat and I immediately knew what I had done: the practice area in the east has a 3000' ceiling - not 4000' as in the west. I had climbed out and climbed right into the airspace.

I copied the phone number from ground, secured the airplane and spent the next hour trying to call. Come to find out, my cell provider will not connect to their recorded line. I finally got the number for KORL tower who gave me a different number for Orlando Approach. I called this and spoke at some length to a controller. He took my ceritificate number and pertinent information on the flight including verifying that I was PIC. He recommended that I 1) write down the details of the flight because it might be a long time before the FSDO called and 2) cooperate with the FSDO when they called.

A couple of weeks later a gentleman from the local FSDO called and wanted to schedule a time when I could answer a 20 minute survey on the incident. We had a couple of misfires, but finally connected. I went through what had happened and answered a number of questions about experience, fatigue weather and training. After this he said “If this goes the way I want, you need to take two courses on the AOPA site (“Know Before You Go” and “Aerial Decision Making”) send me the certification. I will forward all this to Oklahoma City and they will send you a letter saying that no further enforcement is necessary.”

I completed the courses within the week. 4 weeks later I got a letter from the FAA saying “No further enforcement required” and “Don’t do this again”. Apparently this will be in my file for two years.

My take aways: I will always have a plan before I go up. My main mistake was to change directions and not relook at the chart. I misremembered that the practice area in the east had the same ceiling as the one in the west.

John

 

[steingar]

Glad you can put it all behind you. You will have to stay squeaky clean for a couple years, though. A good handheld GPS might help you stay clear of that airspace. You probably don't need it, but it might assist with situational awareness. Our 496 saved us from an airspace incursion when the pilot with whom I was flying failed to get a proper briefing.

 

[TMetzinger]

Nice writeup, and a good job by the FAA in handling that. I like the "penance" they gave you.

 

[jsstevens]

Glad you can put it all behind you. You will have to stay squeaky clean for a couple years, though. A good handheld GPS might help you stay clear of that airspace. You probably don't need it, but it might assist with situational awareness. Our 496 saved us from an airspace incursion when the pilot with whom I was flying failed to get a proper briefing.

Yes they can. There is a GPS in the panel (a GNS-96 IIRC) and it had the msg indicator on. I checked it as I was heading back and it told me I was in restricted airspace (that's not the exact verbiage) but I was so sure I discounted the warning. Was it Mark Twain who said "It's not what we don't know-it's what we know that just ain't so!"?

Anyway another lesson learned on my part:check before you're so _sure_.

John

 

[Everskyward]

Good story with a good ending. In my experience it's always been better to fess up if you really have done something wrong. I know people have other opinions about this but it has worked for me.

 

[Gary F]

Did you file a NASA ASRS form? Would this have offered any protection if the FAA had decided to hit you with a punitive enforcement action?

 

[Clark1961]

Thanks for sharing the story. I'm based under a Bravo and have to think about it on every flight. It's tougher than it might look to outsiders, that's for sure.

 

[jsstevens]

Did you file a NASA ASRS form? Would this have offered any protection if the FAA had decided to hit you with a punitive enforcement action?

I have not. I thought about it at the time but since they had already called me, etc. I don't think it would offer any protection. My understanding (and I'm sure someone will correct me if I'm wrong-and maybe if I'm right:wink2 is that nothing you put in the form can be harvested to use against you in an enforcement action. In my case all the info was already on record.

John

 

[jsstevens]

Good story with a good ending. In my experience it's always been better to fess up if you really have done something wrong. I know people have other opinions about this but it has worked for me.

My impression through the whole process both in talking to ATC and the FSDO is that these folks wanted to help, wanted everyone to stay safe and didn't want to keep me from flying. I was cooperative and so were they.

It's also possible that I earned some extra brownie points because I was tenacious about getting through to ATC after the fact I spent nearly an hour tracking down phone numbers until I got one I could call. Why my cell carrier would not connect to the initial phone number I was given (which records the conversation) I don't know. I do know it's hard to find out how to call ATC.

John

 

[weilke]

Hey, sanity and reason prevailed at the FAA . Two hail marys, one lords prayer and go forth and sin no more.

Good you showed 'compliant attitude' and managed to get through this with minimal damage.

 

[Gary F]

The FAA was very reasonable in this case but I am not sure that everybody who busts Class B airspace gets off as easy. I would have filed a NASA form. Has anybody in this forum used one to avoid a penalty?
http://www.jumplawgroup.com/nasaform.htm

http://asrs.arc.nasa.gov/overview/immunity.html


Enforcement Policy

• The Administrator of the FAA will perform his/her responsibility under Title 49, United States Code, Subtitle VII, and enforce the statute and the FAR in a manner that will reduce or eliminate the possibility of, or recurrence of, aircraft accidents. The FAA enforcement procedures are set forth in Part 13 of the FAR (14 CFR Part 13) and FAA enforcement handbooks.
• In determining the type and extent of the enforcement action to be taken in a particular case, the following factors are considered:
  • nature of the violation;
  • whether the violation was inadvertent or deliberate;
  • the certificate holder's level of experience and responsibility;
  • attitude of the violator;
  • the hazard to safety of others which should have been foreseen;
  • action taken by employer or other government authority;
  • length of time which has elapsed since violation;(8) the certificate holder's use of the certificate;
  • the need for special deterrent action in a particular regulatory area, or segment of the aviation community; and
  • presence of any factors involving national interest, such as the use of aircraft for criminal purposes.
• The filing of a report with NASA concerning an incident or occurrence involving a violation of 49 U.S.C. Subtitle VII, or the FAR is considered by FAA to be indicative of a constructive attitude. Such an attitude will tend to prevent future violations. Accordingly, although a finding of violation may be made, neither a civil penalty nor certificate suspension will be imposed if:
  • the violation was inadvertent and not deliberate;
  • the violation did not involve a criminal offense, or accident. or action under 49 U.S.C. Section 44709 which discloses a lack of qualification or competency, which is wholly excluded from this policy;
  • the person has not been found in any prior FAA enforcement action to have committed a violation of 49 U.S.C. Subtitle VII, or any regulation promulgated there for a period of 5 years prior to the date of occurrence; and
  • the person proves that, within 10 days after the violation, he or she completed and delivered or mailed a written report of the incident or occurrence to NASA under ASRS. See paragraphs 5c and 7b.

 

[steingar]

I have. The NASA reporting system is a good thing, though it would not have changed the outcome one bit. The letter in the OP's file will prevent him from using this mechanism for two years, which is why I said he'd have to be squeaky clean, which shouldn't be too hard from what I'm hearing.

Living in the shadow of a Bravo does sound a bit extra difficult. Flying is hard enough as it is.

 

[JeffDG]

I have not. I thoguht about it at the time but since they had already called me, etc. I don't think it would offer any protection. My understanding (and I'm sure someone will correct me if I'm wrong-and maybe if I'm right:wink2 is that nothing you put in the form can be harvested to use against you in an enforcement action. In my case all the info was already on record.

John

Protection from sanction is a secondary purpose of the ASRS form...

Still file it today...your story is something that can feed into the whole aviation safety body of knowledge, which is the primary purpose of ASRS.

 

[dmccormack]

I have not. I thoguht about it at the time but since they had already called me, etc. I don't think it would offer any protection. My understanding (and I'm sure someone will correct me if I'm wrong-and maybe if I'm right:wink2 is that nothing you put in the form can be harvested to use against you in an enforcement action. In my case all the info was already on record.

John

Yeahbut...

5. Prohibition Against the Use of Reports for Enforcement Purposes

• Section 91.25 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (FAR) (14 CFR 91.25) prohibits the use of any reports submitted to NASA under the ASRS (or information derived therefrom) in any disciplinary action, except information concerning criminal offenses or accidents which are covered under paragraphs 7a(1) and 7a(2).
• When violation of the FAR comes to the attention of the FAA from a source other than a report filed with NASA under the ASRS, appropriate action will be taken. See paragraph 9.

More here: http://asrs.arc.nasa.gov/overview/

 

[Gary F]

I still think that the NASA form can function as a get out of jail free card under certain circumstances. This can be helpful if the FAA is not as reasonable as in this case.

Again, from the NASA site:
Accordingly, although a finding of violation may be made, neither a civil penalty nor certificate suspension will be imposed if:

• the violation was inadvertent and not deliberate;
• the violation did not involve a criminal offense, or accident. or action under 49 U.S.C. Section 44709 which discloses a lack of qualification or competency, which is wholly excluded from this policy;
• the person has not been found in any prior FAA enforcement action to have committed a violation of 49 U.S.C. Subtitle VII, or any regulation promulgated there for a period of 5 years prior to the date of occurrence; and
• the person proves that, within 10 days after the violation, he or she completed and delivered or mailed a written report of the incident or occurrence to NASA under ASRS. See paragraphs 5c and 7b

http://asrs.arc.nasa.gov/overview/immunity.html

 

[TMetzinger]

As I understand it, if you screw up in an airplane and file an ASRS report, the following things happen:

Your data gets anonymized and you get a receipt. Unless you do something criminal or have an accident covered by the regs - all the FAA gets is the anonymized data.
The FAA may never learn of the error

If the FAA (through other sources) does learn of the error - they will still investigate, and you are still required to cooperate with the investigation. You should let them know of the ASRS filing. They may still find you in violation, but if you've been "good" otherwise, they will waive the penalties because of the ASRS filing. Then a 2-year clock starts before an ASRS form will be honored for avoidance of penalties again.

As we saw in this case - there are often times where a violation will be found and the FAA will not take a certificate action or propose a civil penalty, even without an ASRS form on file. It's still a very good idea to file a form anytime you make an error or have a safety-related situation (it could be someone ELSE's error). The purpose of ASRS is to identify common error threads so that training and outreach can address them and keep everyone safer. And if you can show that you're an active participant in making the system safer that does you a lot of good if you're ever involved in an enforcement action.

SFRA/FRZ and some other TFR violations aren't covered by ASRS because they've been criminalized - the NOTAM language will address that.

 

[Gary F]

I have read and heard from several sources that the FAA is interested in a pilot's attitude when they determine the consequences of a violation. I think they want to know if the pilot is a conscientious person who made a mistake or a slob pilot who does not care and will likely cause more problems in the future. A pilot that admits a mistake (call back immediately, file a NASA form), participates in Wings or various safety programs regularly will probably be treated more favorably than an arrogant jerk. I believe that is why the OP was treated reasonably.

 

[Gary F]

How not to do it. This guy did not get off so easy for violating FARs. I wonder why.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SH7gEzgPUOo&feature=related

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/metropolitan/7077096.html

At first, Kirbow told her to deny having been on the plane at all but later encouraged her to back up his story that it was having engine problems at the time.

Will that work? Hey, it's gotta work better than the truth.

 

[steingar]

SFRA/FRZ and some other TFR violations aren't covered by ASRS because they've been criminalized - the NOTAM language will address that.

Wow. Getting lost or having an equipment malfunction is criminal. Your government at work.

 

[dmccormack]

Just wondering....

What if the OP had *not* repeatedly tried to call the number?

I suppose *if* they really want to follow up someone at the local FSDO looks up the N Number of the offending a/c and sends a letter to the owner.

What if the owner fails to reply?
What if the owner says, "Wasn't me"?

 

[Everskyward]

Just wondering....

What if the OP had *not* repeatedly tried to call the number?

I suppose *if* they really want to follow up someone at the local FSDO looks up the N Number of the offending a/c and sends a letter to the owner.

What if the owner fails to reply?
What if the owner says, "Wasn't me"?

This is what I have been told by controllers and the FAA. For certain situations ATC is required to file a deviation report and the FAA needs to do at least a little bit of investigation. If you don't call them they will be in contact with the owner or operator through the N-number. Sometimes they won't even have the opportunity to give you a phone number because you have changed frequencies or left ATC control so you won't know about it until they contact you or the owner/operator lets you know that they have been contacted. If you agree to talk the inspector will get a statement from you and the controller if one was involved. The end result can be nothing, a letter like the OP got, some training, or various other sanctions. In some cases the ASRS report will get you out of the penalty but not the violation if you get one. I've spoken to the FAA about various incidents over the years but have never even gotten to the letter phase so I guess that's why I have this strong bias towards being honest and humble.

 

[dmccormack]

I've spoken to the FAA about various incidents over the years but have never even gotten to the letter phase so I guess that's why I have this strong bias towards being honest and humble.

I think this is the best approach, but I *might* know of a pilot that takes the "It wasn't me and you can't prove it" approach and I still see the hangar empty and the airplane overhead.

 

[JeffDG]

I've spoken to the FAA about various incidents over the years but have never even gotten to the letter phase so I guess that's why I have this strong bias towards being honest and humble.

I think the point is that the FAA inspectors are not out there trolling for pilots to violate and yank certificates.. Their job is to make flying safer, and they do that by investigating and trying to find the most appropriate remedial action. In this case, some simple training was the perfect remedial action, and everyone's happy.

When some people dig in their heels when they get the "I have a number for you." and refuse to cooperate, get a lawyer in the middle...then the Inspector steps aside and lets the local Counsel handle it on a lawyer-lawyer basis...lawyers are, by training, adversarial. Rather than working to a mutually beneficial resolution, each side now plays to "win". And the table is most certainly not level, and tilts very noticeably towards the FAA lawyer.

 

[pmanton]

About 10 years ago I busted Seattle Class B big time. I was returning to Tacoma KTIW and I made a long letdown right across SeaTac approach. It was one of those perfect days and I just had my head up and locked. I got the "call this number" from the KTIW tower.

The approach controller asked me what was on my mind. I explained that I was the stupidest, most inept pilot in history and that I would never make such a monumental mistake again period. He chewed on me for about 10 minutes. Each time I answered him I groveled a bit more.

That was all there was to it. I assure you I have never even come close to busting airspace again.

Paul
N1431A
2AZ1

 

[gprellwitz]

About 10 years ago I busted Seattle Class B big time. I was returning to Tacoma KTIW and I made a long letdown right across SeaTac approach. It was one of those perfect days and I just had my head up and locked. I got the "call this number" from the KTIW tower.

The approach controller asked me what was on my mind. I explained that I was the stupidest, most inept pilot in history and that I would never make such a monumental mistake again period. He chewed on me for about 10 minutes. Each time I answered him I groveled a bit more.

That was all there was to it. I assure you I have never even come close to busting airspace again.

Paul
N1431A
2AZ1

And everyone wins, just as in the OP's story.

 

[Gary F]

About 10 years ago I busted Seattle Class B big time. I was returning to Tacoma KTIW and I made a long letdown right across SeaTac approach. It was one of those perfect days and I just had my head up and locked. I got the "call this number" from the KTIW tower.

The approach controller asked me what was on my mind. I explained that I was the stupidest, most inept pilot in history and that I would never make such a monumental mistake again period. He chewed on me for about 10 minutes. Each time I answered him I groveled a bit more.

That was all there was to it. I assure you I have never even come close to busting airspace again.

Paul
N1431A
2AZ1

I would have done the same thing except that I would have filed a NASA ASRS form afterward for good measure.

 

[Steve Foley]

I copied the phone number from ground, secured the airplane and spent the next hour trying to call. Come to find out, my cell provider will not connect to their recorded line. I finally got the number for KORL tower who gave me a different number for Orlando Approach. I called this and spoke at some length to a controller. He took my ceritificate number and pertinent information on the flight including verifying that I was PIC. He recommended that I 1) write down the details of the flight because it might be a long time before the FSDO called and 2) cooperate with the FSDO when they called.

I'm glad that everything worked out. I just wanted to point out that there is no legal obligation to call the tower, or assist the FAA in any way in an investigation against you. Similarly to dealing with the police, you have no obligation to answer their questions, including "Did you just land that plane". Doing so identifies you as PIC. If you don't answer, they probably don't have enough evidence for an enforcement action.

On the other hand, showing a cooperative attitude goes a long way in minimizing the damage, which you clearly did by jumping through hoops to contact them.

Refusing to answer any questions will probably put your name on some list somewhere.

 

[flyingcheesehead]

I think this is the best approach, but I *might* know of a pilot that takes the "It wasn't me and you can't prove it" approach and I still see the hangar empty and the airplane overhead.

Well, with that kind of person, I wouldn't be surprised if his ticket got suspended and he decided to fly anyway.

 

[Ted]

I'm glad that everything worked out. I just wanted to point out that there is no legal obligation to call the tower, or assist the FAA in any way in an investigation against you. Similarly to dealing with the police, you have no obligation to answer their questions, including "Did you just land that plane". Doing so identifies you as PIC. If you don't answer, they probably don't have enough evidence for an enforcement action.

On the other hand, showing a cooperative attitude goes a long way in minimizing the damage, which you clearly did by jumping through hoops to contact them.

Refusing to answer any questions will probably put your name on some list somewhere.

As one inspector once put it to me "I took a job with the government because I don't want to work. If I call you, I just want to have a chat. If you refuse to cooperate and make me work, then I'm going to get annoyed and want to slam you."

I can see both sides of the argument, but would tend to agree with Mari. Although this is one of the advantages of making a habit of filing IFR or getting flight following wherever you go. Unfortunately, both are more difficult around Bravos, where you probably need them most.

Glad to hear everything turned out well. Most of the people I've talked to from the FAA are actually quite nice. I can only think of one who I really don't like.

 

[SCCutler]

I had something a little similar when I was baby pilot; cold day, wind from the north so ADS was departing Rwy 33 (usually 15); I took off and went on-course to my destination (north). Climbed right into the bottom of the Bravo.

Fortunately, I was still on Tower freq, and the controller called me and asked my altitude; as soon as she asked, I knew I had busted it, and I replied as I chopped power and shoved the nose over. You could almost hear her laughing at me. No call, just a little azz-chewing right then, on freq.

Lots of things out of the ordinary, all of which combined to make me screw up... but it was me that screwed up, and I learned a lot about distractions that day. I filed my ASRS the same day.