Altitude Bust

[satpak77]

Buddy of mine called me last night who is sweating the below scenario

He is Capt for Part 135 Lear-35 company

Climbing out of XXXX airport, ATC clears them to FL 190 but says "comply with DP"

F.O. dials in 1-9-0 into alt alerter and (everyone knows whats next) they scoot right on up

ATC tells them they busted the DP and call them on phone (unfortunately they did make the phone call)

my buddy is sweating a violation, my opinion is no loss of separation, no bent metal, etc, maybe FSDO has enough work to do and this will go away

audience comments?

he DID file NASA form immediately thereafter

 

[Snoopy58]

Vegas?

 

[wildbill]

Your Buddy made a big mistake by not making the call. For the most part the people who work for ATC are not out to get you. They are in fact human like us with a job to do. By calling and coming up with a reason or an explanation of events could have resulted in a tounge lashing over the phone. By not acknowledging with the lack of a call can spell big problems. Over the years I have been given the phone number to call and have been pleasantly surprised at how things can be worked out. NASA reports are fine,but now you are on tape.I wish you both good luck.

 

[banned username 2]

Wildbill... It says they DID make the call...

 

[wildbill]

Falcon Capt, you are right I read to quick. Thanks. I did learn though by calling that things have a way of working out. Again, good luck to them...

 

[atpcliff]

Hi!

Here's an important tip.

If there is a perceived conflict/problem with ATC, do NOT, I repeat, do NOT argue with them over the radio or on the phone afterword. This can only make things worse.

This goes the same if you are stopped by the police. DON'T argue. Listen to them and do what they say.

If you are nice to people in authority, you will usually either get a break or at least you won't get sh!t on more than you already are.

Cliff
GRB

 

[banned username 2]

Hi!

Here's an important tip.

If there is a perceived conflict/problem with ATC, do NOT, I repeat, do NOT argue with them over the radio or on the phone afterword. This can only make things worse.

This goes the same if you are stopped by the police. DON'T argue. Listen to them and do what they say.

If you are nice to people in authority, you will usually either get a break or at least you won't get sh!t on more than you already are.

Cliff
GRB

Absolutely correct advice!

If these guys want to violate you, they have to fill out all sorts of paperwork... who wants to do that? If you didn't cause any type of separation conflict or such, usually just a stern warning will be issued (verbally) and you will be on your way (with tail between your legs)

Now if you piss them off by arguing with them, it will become their mission in life to bend you over...

 

[MarineGrunt]

cover your a$$

When I was being "programmed" at a certain aviation univeristy, I was told that a pilot should never make any remarks to the ATC official that they are instructed to call. Definately call them, listen to what they have to say, and thats it. If you so much as say, "Sorry-bout that," you have just admitted your guilt and that can be used against you. So if you call, CYA and say "I wish not to comment at this time" or something to that effect...

2 cents from a low-timer...

 

[350DRIVER]

If he was cleared to 190 but was told to "comply" with the DP then the altitude on the plate (DP) would take precedence over the prior 190 clearance. It is not unusual to be cleared to a higher altitude in busy terminal areas to only have that "ammended" once you are further out on the climb/and or turn , usually if this occurs it is due to the fact the atc underestimated other traffic that "previously" did not pose a conflict that now does. Multiple other reasons/scenarios could also be responsible for getting the altitude/clearance changed on you. I have had this happen many times out of busier areas like Cyyz, Teb, Lga, Iad, etc, ...

What exactly what said with regards to the "altitude" .? Did Atc wait until the got to 190 to mention anything to them or was there a hint/conversation prior to this.?

Whatever he does he should not "argue" with atc and attempt to explain his position.. He may get away with a warning if the system did not already tag him in the computer in which if that is the case it will be out of the controllers hands and a report is likely.



3 5 0

 

[Snoopy58]

Two thoughts:

First, if this is departing out of Vegas, their new procedures there caused a LOT of problems initially, for exactly what bit your friend: as a jet is climbing fast toward the 7000' holddown altitude (which applies until passing a fix several miles after you'd reach 7000), and ATC says "climb to FL190..." (so the dutiful PNF spins in 190 into the alerter) "... comply with restrictions" (but by the time you realize that this means don't leave 7 for several more miles, the damage is done). Your buddy is one of MANY who got zinged by a procedure that probably works fine if you're flying PURE VNAV (i.e. the autopilot won't climb higher than the altitude in the window, but also won't start the climb before the point in the flightplan), but doesn't work nearly so well when only LNAV is engaged & the climbs are controlled more manually.

I have no idea what the FAA may or may not do to him, although the NASA form should protect him from the worst cases. They had enough people make the same mistake, though, that they've changed their procedures & are being much more clear & explicit in their clearances. I'd guess that the odds are good that they won't go after him.

Second thought: if they DO want to violate you, and they have you on the tapes/radar display/snitch-patch/whatever, they absolutely do NOT need you to apologize to them on the telephone to do it! While you probably don't need to volunteer your life story to them, a polite, professional, attitude will HELP your cause far more than any "no comment" line will. "I'm really sorry for the trouble this caused" is no more an admission of guilt than it is saying that it's too bad the controller had to take time out of his day to talk to you.

Do you think you're more likely to get the "okay, well, don't worry about it" response from an apology, or from the "I have no comment" line?

Good on your friend from talking to them.

 

[vossdr1]

bust?

I have heard that if the controler who told of the bust leaves the frequency, and another controler immediately comes on, the first controler has gone to start the paperwork. I have been told that the paperwork must be initated immediately and that the supervisor will cover while the bust is written up. If no switch of controlers was made, there will likely be no bust.

$0.02

Good luck to your bud.

 

[WrightAvia]

If you are nice to people in authority, you will usually either get a break or at least you won't get sh!t on more than you already are.

Yea, when dealing with ATC in this type of situation, you have to be nice. They got you by the nads. When you get caught speeding, a nice attitude may get you out off with a warning.

I just don't believe in a "blanket philosophy" of being nice to people in authority. They sometimes don't know what the f they are talking about or are negligent in their duties and must be properly put in their place.

 

[Vector4fun]

What Snoopy said is right on the button.

I have heard that if the controler who told of the bust leaves the frequency, and another controler immediately comes on, the first controler has gone to start the paperwork. I have been told that the paperwork must be initated immediately and that the supervisor will cover while the bust is written up. If no switch of controlers was made, there will likely be no bust.

Not true. While it may be true that if a separation error between two aircraft has occurred, the controller will normally be relived soon, the supes/staff will do the incident report. The controller may be asked to do a statement, but that might happen the next day. the controller's statement is a small part of the package.

" I was working the East Feeder position from 22:47Z to 23:51Z. I assigned N12345 an altitude of 12,000', and the aircraft climbed to 13,400', whereupon I noticed the error and issued N12345 an immediate descent and turn to heading 120. The end."

That will be just about the complete extent of the controller's involvement if the Supe decides or is required to do a package. I think a preliminary incident report has to be done in two hours or thereabouts, but the full package may not get done till the next day or later. Radar plots etc. take time to do, and often require staff support.

It's my *personal* observation that minor altitude busts are often not forwarded for enforcement unless there's been a loss of separation, or some other factors are in play. If there's been a history of problems with a certain operation or *operator*, then somebody higher up the food chain may have decided to take discretion out of our hands. My feelings are that if you dis' the supe, including, but not limited to, NOT calling the facility if you've been asked to, you've probably increased your chances of getting that nasty-gram from FSDO.

And, btw, all ATC does is file an incident report. FSDO always decides if an actual violation will be persued. And yes, I've seen them NOT follow up on an ATC incident report.

 

[WrightAvia]

I just don't believe in a "blanket philosophy" of being nice to people in authority. They sometimes don't know what the f they are talking about or are negligent in their duties and must be properly put in their place.

I meant to also add (incase someone gets the wrong idea), I have seen some really excellent professional courtesy extended by approach and center controllers, to people on the radio and myself. I myself, have never been asked to call such and such a number, but I do know someone from our company last year that suffered an altitude bust and he turned himself in, when the controller said "say altitude". And that's all I can say about that.