Altitude deviation

M

Mdriver

New Member
Last week we had one of our aircraft committed an altitude deviation in which the pilots promptly filed a NASA report. They were cleared to maintain 7000 then cleared to to 5000 with a turn ,aadditionally they were given 2ndturn and the pilot
icon1.png
flying saw 3000 in the asel window and queried the F/O and he confirmed now we are cleared to 3000 .Nevertheless the PIC slowed his descent rate to 100 fpm,as he had not heard the "3000".ATC came back telling thm he was told to maintain 5000 unfortuntely he was at 4600 and in his words" I snapped back to 5000 in like 3 seconds" The airspace was quiet and ATC did not issue a Brasher not did the next freq which was the tower.We had this meeting within the department to discuus this and there was a mistake which they dont deny as they wrote in their respective NASA report .....any thoughts from the ATC world?
 
Unless a controller or base operator tells you to call an ATC facility, then there was no incident or violation. Meaning nothing gets written down. NASA and ASAP (if your operation allows ASAP) reports are always a good idea.
 
This happens all the time and 99% of the time it's no harm no foul unless for some reason the guy/gal decides to be an ahole about it. In this situation they probably didn't even notice it if the pilot corrected quickly enough. Otherwise unless you cause the controller to do paperwork most of us could care less.
 
Bear in mind that if the recording is later audited at random by the ATC facility's Quality Assurance dept, it's possible that there will be follow-up even if the controller never instigated it.

A safety report is always a good idea.
 
MarkZ said:
Unless a controller or base operator tells you to call an ATC facility, then there was no incident or violation. Meaning nothing gets written down. NASA and ASAP (if your operation allows ASAP) reports are always a good idea.
Click to expand...
Unfortunately this is not true. At my last company, a coworker of mine got a traffic alert while receiving radar vectors. He had the traffic in sight, informed the controller of that, and went on with his day. No indication of a problem was given. He received a Letter of Investigation, to his surprise, about a month later. The Feds accused him of having an improperly set DG. It sucks, but that's the world we operate in.
 
I think 99.9% of controllers don't want to issue the brasher ever....sometimes we are ordered to. I don't know how anything can be reported without the brasher being issued. I've never heard of that...
 
A80TRACON said:
You're fine, no Brasher no worries.
Click to expand...
The lack of a Brasher warning, when applicable, only affects the imposition of a sanction (i.e., suspension). It does not prevent the FAA from investigating further, starting an enforcement action, and placing a violation on your record that will be there permanently.

If a PRIA-reportable FAR violation is "no worries." that's great.
 
MidlifeFlyer said:
The lack of a Brasher warning, when applicable, only affects the imposition of a sanction (i.e., suspension). It does not prevent the FAA from investigating further, starting an enforcement action, and placing a violation on your record that will be there permanently.

If a PRIA-reportable FAR violation is "no worries." that's great.
Click to expand...

Forgive my ignorance, but how would the FAA learn of the violation absent a report being filed?
 
Jetfreq said:
Forgive my ignorance, but how would the FAA learn of the violation absent a report being filed?
Click to expand...
I didn't say that. I only said the lack of a Brasher warning doesn't automatically stop the enforcement process.

For most controllers, not giving a Brasher warning means they probably won't file a report, since the two are so tied together procedurally. But Brasher doesn't apply to every pilot deviation and, after all, controllers are people too; they make mistakes. So it happens, but not that often. After all, all the cases that refer to it involve enforcement actions in which no Brasher warning was given.
 
MidlifeFlyer said:
I didn't say that. I only said the lack of a Brasher warning doesn't automatically stop the enforcement process.

For most controllers, not giving a Brasher warning means they probably won't file a report, since the two are so tied together procedurally. But Brasher doesn't apply to every pilot deviation and, after all, controllers are people too; they make mistakes. So it happens, but not that often. After all, all the cases that refer to it involve enforcement actions in which no Brasher warning was given.
Click to expand...

That's interesting, thank you....I've been a controller 8 years so my experience is somewhat limited by comparison to seasoned vets, but I was always under the impression that Brasher was required for action to be taken. For the record, the only brasher I have ever been involved in is when we've had someone call for services and pop up in the middle of restricted airspace. If we have to call and have them shut down firing operations, we have no other recourse.

We make mistakes, too...I believe most of us would rather just call attention to the error and be done with it. There are jerks everywhere, though.

Thank you again!
 
Jetfreq said:
Forgive my ignorance, but how would the FAA learn of the violation absent a report being filed?
Click to expand...

You probably don't have TARP yet. TARP will, I forget the specific metrics, but something like less than 70% of standard separation will be automatically forwarded to and reviewed by the regional office. Its out of your hands at that point.

As a side note, when you get TARP be very careful. When applying pilot to pilot visual "Don't hit the Citation, November one Alpha Bravo" and "Maintain visual separation from the Citation One AB" are examples of a read back that will earn you a deal historically.
 
We do have tarp, actually....anything 70% separation and above is deferred, to the best of my knowledge. I always considered that to just be a gotcha' for controllers. I guess it makes sense a pilot could get gigged in a roundabout way....
 
Kind of curious - it happens somewhat frequently in weather in Florida that I will hit a cloud street of thermals that makes it impossible to hold altitude or descend. I got blown up 1000 feet in about 20 seconds last week (and back down on the other side). Not turbulent, but, well, Florida can do that.

Usually, it is when I have already asked for a steer around it, but once or twice ATC hasn't been cool with reality. What's the best way to give a heads up that altitude is not entirely something I am entirely controlling?
 
drunkenbeagle said:
Kind of curious - it happens somewhat frequently in weather in Florida that I will hit a cloud street of thermals that makes it impossible to hold altitude or descend. I got blown up 1000 feet in about 20 seconds last week (and back down on the other side). Not turbulent, but, well, Florida can do that.

Usually, it is when I have already asked for a steer around it, but once or twice ATC hasn't been cool with reality. What's the best way to give a heads up that altitude is not entirely something I am entirely controlling?
Click to expand...

I can't fathom a 3,000 FPM climb from anything short of a fighter or underweight mainline over here. Was this in a glider? Extreme convective activity? Were you IFR? I have so many questions.
 
MidlifeFlyer said:
I didn't say that. I only said the lack of a Brasher warning doesn't automatically stop the enforcement process.

For most controllers, not giving a Brasher warning means they probably won't file a report, since the two are so tied together procedurally. But Brasher doesn't apply to every pilot deviation and, after all, controllers are people too; they make mistakes. So it happens, but not that often. After all, all the cases that refer to it involve enforcement actions in which no Brasher warning was given.
Click to expand...

Heres the Brasher verbiage
3-1. Flight Crew Notification of Suspected Pilot Deviations (PD).

a. Whentheemployeeprovidingairtrafficservicesdeterminesthatpilotactionsaffectedthesafety of operations, the employee must report through the MOR process and notify the flight crew as soon as operationally practical using the following phraseology:

PHRASEOLOGY-

(Aircraft identification) POSSIBLE PILOT DEVIATION, ADVISE YOU CONTACT (facility) AT (telephone number).

b. The employee reporting the occurrence should notify the front-line manager (or controller-in- charge), operations manager, as appropriate, of the circumstances involved so that they may be communicated to the pilot upon contacting the facility.
 
genot said:
I can't fathom a 3,000 FPM climb from anything short of a fighter or underweight mainline over here. Was this in a glider? Extreme convective activity? Were you IFR? I have so many questions.
Click to expand...
IFR, light single. (Very light, was about 600 under gross). Engine idle and climbed about 1000 ft. Could not speed up and pitch down, as I don't want to be above Va in that weather. A jet would go though it fast enough that it wouldn't matter

The weather I dream about as a glider pilot.

Sea breeze converging on towering cumulus, tremendous lift. I have seen that in gliders, we can have the boards out and still climb into it. When the Cu are in a line, we call it a cloud street, because rather than going from lift to sink, you are just in lift the whole time, for tens of miles. Except we would not actually enter those clouds.
 
drunkenbeagle said:
Kind of curious - it happens somewhat frequently in weather in Florida that I will hit a cloud street of thermals that makes it impossible to hold altitude or descend. I got blown up 1000 feet in about 20 seconds last week (and back down on the other side). Not turbulent, but, well, Florida can do that.

Usually, it is when I have already asked for a steer around it, but once or twice ATC hasn't been cool with reality. What's the best way to give a heads up that altitude is not entirely something I am entirely controlling?
Click to expand...

Just like that! Controllers that aren't also pilots (I'm one) are clueless about a great many things. I would have no issues with a pilot saying he is having difficulty maintaining altitude due to.....Just lets me know to give him/her a wider berth.
 
Jetfreq said:
Just like that! Controllers that aren't also pilots (I'm one) are clueless about a great many things. I would have no issues with a pilot saying he is having difficulty maintaining altitude due to.....Just lets me know to give him/her a wider berth.
Click to expand...
And for those who aren't cool with it, it is out job as PIC to let them know we are having difficulty holding altitude due to thermal activity, whether the controller likes it or not.

Old story - single engine IFR pilot heading up the east coast is vectored over a large expanse of water. After failing to negotiate
something closer in with the controller, the pilot finally plays the E card, "N1234X is declaring an emergency.: "State the nature of the emergency" is the response and the pilot replies, "The one I am gong to have if you make me fly 30 miles from shore."
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top