I flew east at 8,500' (and no one said anything)

U

Unregistered

Guest
I'm very embarrassed and disappointed with myself to admit I recently flew about 100 nm on an easterly heading at 8,500. I'm also surprised no one challenged me on it.

Here's what happened. Over the holidays my student pilot son and I planned a trip to visit relatives. Originally, our destination was about 325 nm on a heading of 002. The day before, we added an intermediate destination to have lunch with my sister and her husband. Our intermediate destination was 170 nm at 340 deg, which made the second leg 180 nm at 020. Using forecast winds in Garmin Pilot, it looked like 4,500 was the best altitude on the first leg, and 7,500 on the second.

The morning of the flight, I checked to see if the preferred altitude had changed. 4,500' was still best for leg 1. Then I made my mistake. I didn't hit the little tab in GP for easterly headings. Still on the westerly headings tab, I decided 8,500' was best.

My son has done a couple of dual X-Cs with his instructor, and is prepping for his first solo X-C, so I asked him if he wanted any help, or if he wanted to do everything himself. Since our intermediate lunch stop was at a Class C airport, he asked me to demo getting in and out of the class C, and that he would do everything else.

After lunch, we got ready to go and he asked what altitude we were going to climb to, and I said 8,500. I called ground (no separate clearance freq at this class C) and said "Bugsmasher 123, VFR departure, 020 heading at 8,500." Ground replied with a squawk code and clearance to taxi. When we were ready to take off, the tower instructions were "clear for takeoff; proceed on course." In the air we were handed off from tower to local approach to center and finally to another approach facility whose airspace we were transiting.

En route I was watching the destination METAR, and when it changed from unlimited to overcast at 4,000, I told my son we'd probably have to begin our descent early because the overcast was coming toward us. In my head I thought "OK, we should probably go down to 3,500. We're at 8,500 so...OH F***!!!"

This mistake is totally mine -- I own it -- but still surprised no one I talked to (1 student pilot and at least 5 controllers) questioned me.

Summary of lessons learned:
1. Be wary of the east/west tabs in GP. From now on I will just leave it on "all," and I think that will make me stop and think about what heading I'm on.
2. Reinforce with my son that he can question anything I say because (contrary to the perception I've tried to create his whole life) I am not perfect.
3. ATC...not sure what the lesson is here...don't know if they did not notice either, or they did and it was OK because no one else was out there (sounded like our FW Center controller was working all low altitude airspace from DFW west to the border with Albuquerque center).
 
On a long XC I went from west to east, ATC asked if I wanted to change altitude, I asked if it was okay to remain at altitude, they sure, so I did.
 
Sec. 91.159 — VFR cruising altitude or flight level.

Except while holding in a holding pattern of 2 minutes or less, or while turning, each person operating an aircraft under VFR in level cruising flight more than 3,000 feet above the surface shall maintain the appropriate altitude or flight level prescribed below, unless otherwise authorized by ATC:

(a) When operating below 18,000 feet MSL and—
(1) On a magnetic course of zero degrees through 179 degrees, any odd thousand foot MSL altitude +500 feet (such as 3,500, 5,500, or 7,500); or
(2) On a magnetic course of 180 degrees through 359 degrees, any even thousand foot MSL altitude +500 feet (such as 4,500, 6,500, or 8,500).

There you go...no harm, no foul.
 
wlawr005 said:
Sec. 91.159 — VFR cruising altitude or flight level.

Except while holding in a holding pattern of 2 minutes or less, or while turning, each person operating an aircraft under VFR in level cruising flight more than 3,000 feet above the surface shall maintain the appropriate altitude or flight level prescribed below, unless otherwise authorized by ATC:

(a) When operating below 18,000 feet MSL and—
(1) On a magnetic course of zero degrees through 179 degrees, any odd thousand foot MSL altitude +500 feet (such as 3,500, 5,500, or 7,500); or
(2) On a magnetic course of 180 degrees through 359 degrees, any even thousand foot MSL altitude +500 feet (such as 4,500, 6,500, or 8,500).

There you go...no harm, no foul.
Click to expand...

That was added when TCAs were established so that ATC could assign altitudes to VFR aircraft not always consistent with the regulation. Today, ATC has responsibility for separating VFR aircraft in Class B and Class C airspace and in TRSAs. Order JO 7110.65V Air Traffic Control tells controllers:

Section 7. Terminal Radar Service Area (TRSA)− Terminal

7−7−5. ALTITUDE ASSIGNMENTS

c. When necessary to assign an altitude for separation purposes to VFR aircraft contrary to 14 CFR Section 91.159, advise the aircraft to resume altitudes appropriate for the direction of flight when the altitude assignment is no longer needed for separation or when leaving the TRSA.

PHRASEOLOGY−
RESUME APPROPRIATE VFR ALTITUDES.


Section 8. Class C Service− Terminal

7−8−5. ALTITUDE ASSIGNMENTS

b. Aircraft assigned altitudes which are contrary to 14 CFR Section 91.159 must be advised to resume altitudes appropriate for the direction of flight when the altitude is no longer needed for separation, when leaving the outer area, or when terminating Class C service.

PHRASEOLOGY−
RESUME APPROPRIATE VFR ALTITUDES.


7−9−7. ALTITUDE ASSIGNMENTS

c. Aircraft assigned altitudes which are contrary to 14 CFR Section 91.159 must be advised to resume altitudes appropriate for the direction of flight when the altitude assignment is no longer required or when leaving Class B airspace.

PHRASEOLOGY−
RESUME APPROPRIATE VFR ALTITUDES.
 
Oh boy, better file an ASRS form.
 
Must not have been much traffic,ATC is usually very good about correcting minor errors.
 
frfly172 said:
Must not have been much traffic,ATC is usually very good about correcting minor errors.
Click to expand...

That assumes the controller is aware or cares that it's an error. There's nothing in the ATC Order about correcting VFR aircraft on this issue. There is for VFR-on-Top operations, but many controllers are not very familiar with that either.
 
I often fly a route that has me very close to to a 180 course, I think 176. I try to hold that as perfectly as I can but every now and then I drift over a little to say 181 and I'm at 5500'.... I know since my planned course is 176 and it's only for a moment or so but it always makes me uncomfortable.
 
The problem with bonehead errors like this is that we are all susceptible to making them. That's why it's so important to keep you're eyeballs outside, not just the VFR guys, but if you're IFR in VMC too. Think about this...

It's obvious that what you did was stupid and very dangerous if you were flying along an airway. But what about those guys who are IFR in VMC at 9,000' and some VFR guys are coming down an airway and/or flying direct somewhere at 8,500' and 9,500'. Now we know that your altimeter is properly calibrated and set and you are always precisely on your altitude, but how about those VFR guys who aren't getting their pitot/static checks done and/or forgetting to reset their altimeter as they fly along their route and/or are hand flying their airplanes the way a lot of VFR guys do ie +/- 200' or 300' or so? GPS navigation is a very good thing, but you need to remember that nowadays practically everybody is precisely tracking the centerline of the airways within just a few meters. Five hundred feet isn't much separation to begin with and even less of there's pitot/static issues and/or sloppy hand flying involved.

In order for this safety thing to work, we've all got to do our part all of the time. Do you guys use proper scanning techniques and run use your landing lights around airports during the daytime as well as at night? Ya'll be careful out there ya hear.
 
Last edited:
cowman said:
I often fly a route that has me very close to to a 180 course, I think 176. I try to hold that as perfectly as I can but every now and then I drift over a little to say 181 and I'm at 5500'.... I know since my planned course is 176 and it's only for a moment or so but it always makes me uncomfortable.
Click to expand...

That's just being silly.
 
Dead Stick said:
The problem with bonehead errors like this is that we are all susceptible to making them. That's why it's so important to keep you're eyeballs outside, not just the VFR guys, but if you're IFR in VMC too. Think about this...

It's obvious that what you did was stupid and very dangerous if you were flying along an airway. But what about those guys who are IFR in VMC at 9,000' and some VFR guys are coming down an airway and/or flying direct somewhere at 8,500' and 9,500'. Now we know that your altimeter is properly calibrated and set and you are always precisely on your altitude, but how about those VFR guys who aren't getting their pitot/static checks done and/or forgetting to reset their altimeter as they fly along their route and/or are hand flying their airplanes the way a lot of VFR guys do ie +/- 200' or 300' or so? GPS navigation is a very good thing, but you need to remember that nowadays practically everybody is precisely tracking the centerline of the airways within just a few meters. Five hundred feet isn't much separation to begin with and even less of there's pitot/static issues and/or sloppy hand flying involved.

In order for this safety thing to work, we've all got to do our part all of the time. Do you guys use proper scanning techniques and run use your landing lights around airports during the daytime as well as at night? Ya'll be careful out there ya hear.
Click to expand...

The OP's mistake has no bearing on IFR seperation. Doesn't matter that he's on an airway either. If he chose 7,500 he'd still be at 500 ft of IFR traffic above or below him. That's why the even / odd + 500 ft rule is there. Doesn't matter if you choose even or odd, seperation will still be 500 ft.

The problem exists with other VFRs opposite direction at 8,500 ft. In the OP's case since he was talking to ATC it's not that big of a deal because they'll give traffic advisories. Obviously it wasn't an issue for them or they would've said something. Like Steven said, they either didn't catch the mistake, didn't care, or didn't know the rules. Happens.
 
Last edited:
"wafdof" wrong altitude for direction of flight. Common, doesn't get me upset.
Does any vfr pilot still use exactly the 500' altitudes anymore? I didn't think it was done so much, as it funnels all aircraft into a thin layer whereas if you fly 100'-200' high or low might reduce risk a smidge.
 
Velocity173 said:
The OP's mistake has no bearing on IFR seperation. Doesn't matter that he's on an airway either. If he chose 7,500 he'd still be within 500 ft of IFR traffic above or below him. That's why the even / odd + 500 ft rule is there. Doesn't matter if you choose even or odd, seperation will still be 500 ft.

The problem exists with other VFRs opposite direction at 8,500 ft. In the OP's case since he was talking to ATC it's not that big of a deal because they'll give traffic advisories. Obviously it wasn't an issue for them or they would've said something. Like Steven said, they either didn't catch the mistake, didn't care, or didn't know the rules. Happens.
Click to expand...

I wasn't talking about IFR separation. ATC is under no obligation to point out VFR traffic to IFR aircraft. They do it workload permitting. 500' separation is only when everyone is on altitude. If you got some guy intentionally flying "100 or 200 feet high or low", all bets are off. The fact that the OP flew along as log as he did oblivious to where he was as compared to where he should have been is troubling. He needs to fill out the NASA form.
 
Last edited:
Let'sgoflying! said:
"wafdof" wrong altitude for direction of flight. Common, doesn't get me upset.
Does any vfr pilot still use exactly the 500' altitudes anymore? I didn't think it was done so much, as it funnels all aircraft into a thin layer whereas if you fly 100'-200' high or low might reduce risk a smidge.
Click to expand...
This is a very bad idea. :no:
 
Dead Stick said:
I wasn't talking about IFR separation. ATC is under no obligation to point out VFR traffic to IFR aircraft. They do it workload permitting. 500' separation is only when everyone is on altitude. If you got some guy intentionally flying "100 or 200 feet high or low", all bets are off. The fact that the OP flew along as log as he did oblivious to where he was as compared to where he should have been is troubling. He needs to fill out the NASA form.
Click to expand...

:confused: You brought up an IFR aircraft at 9,000. My question is what bearing does that have on the OP's mistake or any other VFR pilot who incorrectly flys wrong altitude for direction of flight?
 
This is the reason I don't fly at *500. Maybe *575 or *425 or something like that but almost never on the even 500.

Being on the exact 500 is nice, but especially in even light turbulence or any day with some convection, you're not flying by hand and staying there. I've been as much as 200' above or below my intended altitude before, especially low flying over a ridge. A few months back I was in a 172 at 4000', just under the Dulles shelf (4500), going 130 kts, no power on the throttle, a significant down pitch and I was still slightly climbing. I intended to be at 3000 and got a huge updraft.
 
Last edited:
The lessons to be learned, unless your error causes a conflict, don't expect anyone else to care. What matters is that you caught your error, had your "d'oh" moment, and that will remain with you greatly reducing the likelihood of it happening again when it may cause a conflict.
 
Velocity173 said:
:confused: You brought up an IFR aircraft at 9,000. My question is what bearing does that have on the OP's mistake?
Click to expand...
I was just pointing out that regardless of whether you're VFR or IFR, selecting and maintaining proper altitude as precisely as possible is important as is using proper scanning techniques and the use of landing/recog lights to make it easier to see and be seen by that guy who is cruising along at the wrong altitude for direction of flight. Don't forget that innocent westbound VFR guy at 8500' who isn't talking to anybody and runs into this guy oblivious to the fact that he's wrong way for direction of flight. As they say in the barrio, No bueno. Then you've got the VFR guys who feel that they're somehow enhancing safety by intentionally flying 100' to 200' high or low, when in fact they're just reducing the separation with IFR traffic on the same airway. Again, No bueno.
 
Dead Stick said:
Then you've got the VFR guys who feel that they're somehow enhancing safety by intentionally flying 100' to 200' high or low, when in fact they're just reducing the separation with IFR traffic on the same airway.
Click to expand...

I am enhancing my safety by being slightly off the even 500. I have reduced my chance of a mid-air. If I'm off altitude because I suck at flying a good altitude and deviate +/- 100' then I guess I just suck at strict altitude control.

Is VFR infringing on some IFR traffic above or below me? Potentially, but 100' high or low doesn't have a large impact. If the VFR traffic is at exactly *500', you can theoretically fly directly over it and have 500' separation. If they're 100' high, you have to also avoid them by 300' horizontally. at 120 kts, that's like 2 seconds of flight time.
 
bflynn said:
I am enhancing my safety by being slightly off the even 500. I have reduced my chance of a mid-air. If I'm off altitude because I suck at flying a good altitude and deviate +/- 100' then I guess I just suck at strict altitude control.

Is VFR infringing on some IFR traffic above or below me? Potentially, but 100' high or low doesn't have a large impact. If the VFR traffic is at exactly *500', you can theoretically fly directly over it and have 500' separation. If they're 100' high, you have to also avoid them by 300' horizontally. at 120 kts, that's like 2 seconds of flight time.
Click to expand...
Very foolish
 
bflynn said:
I am enhancing my safety by being slightly off the even 500. I have reduced my chance of a mid-air. If I'm off altitude because I suck at flying a good altitude and deviate +/- 100' then I guess I just suck at strict altitude control.

Is VFR infringing on some IFR traffic above or below me? Potentially, but 100' high or low doesn't have a large impact. If the VFR traffic is at exactly *500', you can theoretically fly directly over it and have 500' separation. If they're 100' high, you have to also avoid them by 300' horizontally. at 120 kts, that's like 2 seconds of flight time.
Click to expand...

Lol, that's some interesting logic. If you fly off the even 500' and the guy below you flies above his even-thousand on IFR because he uses the same logic as you do, you are now potentially less than 300' apart vertically. Point is, there have been very rare incidences of mid-air collisions with people being at their proper altitudes regarding VFR cruising regulations. You seem to be trying to outsmart a system that has been working fine for decades.
 
Let'sgoflying! said:
"wafdof" wrong altitude for direction of flight. Common, doesn't get me upset.
Does any vfr pilot still use exactly the 500' altitudes anymore? I didn't think it was done so much, as it funnels all aircraft into a thin layer whereas if you fly 100'-200' high or low might reduce risk a smidge.
Click to expand...

Yup. I fly a low wing, and I regularly stay about 100' below VFR cruising alt. I've seen a plane as I go by at similar heading several times. So I'm not on a cardinal alt - sue me, I'll live so you can collect.
 
Dead Stick said:
The problem with bonehead errors like this is that we are all susceptible to making them. That's why it's so important to keep you're eyeballs outside, not just the VFR guys, but if you're IFR in VMC too. Think about this...
Click to expand...

aw hell, you gotta be looking outside in IMC here in SoCal too. . . .
 
docmirror said:
Yup. I fly a low wing, and I regularly stay about 100' below VFR cruising alt. I've seen a plane as I go by at similar heading several times. So I'm not on a cardinal alt - sue me, I'll live so you can collect.
Click to expand...

until the other guy just like you decides the same thing - its either your day to die or its not. Trying these high-faluting redneck guessing to everything is just a crap shoot. ...
 
comanchepilot said:
until the other guy just like you decides the same thing - its either your day to die or its not. Trying these high-faluting redneck guessing to everything is just a crap shoot. ...
Click to expand...

No, the other guy will outsmart me. He'll be thinking 'I bet most planes will be flying 100' low, so I will fly 200' low!' Or 'I bet the other guy is flying 100' low, so I will fly 100' high!'

I just fly lower because it gives me a bit better view of the defined VFR altitude. No one can guarantee anything. If I had written that I fly the VFR altitude on the dot, someone would come on here and give my shyte for that, so there's no way to win in this forum either.
 
Let'sgoflying! said:
"wafdof" wrong altitude for direction of flight. Common, doesn't get me upset.
Does any vfr pilot still use exactly the 500' altitudes anymore? I didn't think it was done so much, as it funnels all aircraft into a thin layer whereas if you fly 100'-200' high or low might reduce risk a smidge.
Click to expand...

100-200 ft seem rather excessive given that a small airplane is only about 10 ft tall.
 
Flying off the *500 sometimes has to be. A while back I was westbound and 8500 would put me too close to the clouds, but 6500 was too low (ground elevation was about 4500 and I didn't want to be only 2000 AGL). I flew at 8000 and because of the terrain, this was well below any IFR traffic. I saw a Mooney go by slightly off my course but he was at 8500 (guessing) and it looked like he was less than minimum distance from the clouds.

I felt very safe at 8000 until I could climb up to 8500 once the clouds lifted a bit.
 
I'm gonna stick with the even 500 like glue, varying only by a foot or so. Because every one else is gonna be 100+ either high or low. ;) I'll have no worries. :D
 
I still have a slight issue with the near north and south directions. As it is I fly between two airports that put me on a 350/170 course fairly regularly. On one trip i crossed paths with a Mooney at the same vfr altitude. We may have been about 20 degrees off from reciprocal headings. Neither had to turn to evade. But with over 300kts of speed difference between us it takes some pretty good looking out the window to catch on coming traffic like that.

I suppose flight following is the best cure for tHis one.
 
Dead Stick said:
I was just pointing out that regardless of whether you're VFR or IFR, selecting and maintaining proper altitude as precisely as possible
Click to expand...

IFR in controlled airspace it's not the pilot who selects the altitude. He may request one but it's the controller who selects it.
 
Turningfinal said:
Which are useless if your conflicting traffic isn't utilizing a transponder with altitude encoding.
Click to expand...

I realize I am detouring this thread a good bit but I wonder: doesn't the army and/or AF utilize vertical motion radar that can determine altitude of an object? If so, how hard/expensive would it be to allow civil ATC to use that data so that they don't have to be guessing?
 
Let'sgoflying! said:
"wafdof" wrong altitude for direction of flight. Common, doesn't get me upset.
Does any vfr pilot still use exactly the 500' altitudes anymore? I didn't think it was done so much, as it funnels all aircraft into a thin layer whereas if you fly 100'-200' high or low might reduce risk a smidge.
Click to expand...

I go for x,550' so as to miss those 100-200' high or low PLUS the ones right on altitude! :yes: :D :wink2: :rofl:
 
LDJones said:
I go for x,550' so as to miss those 100-200' high or low PLUS the ones right on altitude! :yes: :D :wink2: :rofl:
Click to expand...

I go for x,500 +/- 60 'cause that's where George settles out...and on the magenta line!
 
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