ATC tried to kill me!!!!

[A Squared]

Ummm, no, not really. I've been noticing the sensationalism the media is so fond of these days and I though I'd try some myself.

Anyway, now that I've got everyone's attention, here's what happened; we were tooling along one of our more common routes. I asked center for lower, he cleared us pilot's discretion to an altitude well below the MEA for that route portion, and well below a mountain range that was about 100 miles ahead, between our position and our destination. I accepted the clearence, as it was pilot's discretion and I knew we weren't going to descend that low until we had cleared the mountains, looked at the captain and said something like "hmmm that's an interesting altitude" A little while later the controller came back and ammended our clearence to descend to the MEA. It got me to thinking about it. In retrospect, I probably should have questioned the clearence immediately, instead of playing it cool. yeah, it wasn't any danger to us, cause we knew where the terrian was and what the MEA is, but if a controller makes a mistake like that and it's not brought to his attention, he might make it again. The next pilot might be one who's not quite as familliar with the route and immediately zips on down to the cleared altitude and hits something. Anyone else ever have ATC give them a clearence that would have put them in the rocks or something similar?

 

[dogman]

The controller did cover himself by saying at "your discretion." It's not uncommon for me to receive clearances to descend below class B airspace in a turbine powered airplane. The controllers can get away with this by saying at "your discretion." It then puts the responsiblity on your shoulders.

 

[AviatorCentral]

ATC makes mistakes just like people do- but ultimately its the PICs responsibility to know that MEA and stay above it.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FAR 91.3 Responsibility and authority of the pilot in command.

(a) The pilot in command of an aircraft is directly responsible for, and is the final authority as to, the operation of that aircraft.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FAR 91.103 Preflight action.

Each pilot in command shall, before beginning a flight, become familiar with all available information concerning that flight.

 

[Northern Lights]

uh....thank you....

 

[A Squared]

The controller did cover himself by saying at "your discretion." It's not uncommon for me to receive clearances to descend below class B airspace in a turbine powered airplane. The controllers can get away with this by saying at "your discretion." It then puts the responsiblity on your shoulders.

I'm skeptical that this somehow releases the controller from his obligations. In the situation you mention, where it is legal to clear *an* airplane below the floor, but it is illegal for you to operate *your* specific airplane that low, yeah, the controller may be in the clear if he said "pilot's discretion" In my example where it isn't legal to clear *any* airplane to that altitude on that route segment, I don't think that "pilot's discretion" would be much of a defense for the controller.


>>>>"but ultimately its the PICs responsibility to know that MEA and stay above it."

Yeah, I certainly wasn't suggesting that it is solely the controller's responsiblity to know hte minimum altitude. Ignoring the legal aspects, from a practical standpoint, the pilot is the one that gets killed in a misunderstanding like this so it behooves the pilot to keep track of what's going on.

 

[huncowboy]

ATC makes mistakes just like people do- but ultimately its the PICs responsibility to know that MEA and stay above it.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FAR 91.3 Responsibility and authority of the pilot in command.

(a) The pilot in command of an aircraft is directly responsible for, and is the final authority as to, the operation of that aircraft.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FAR 91.103 Preflight action.

Each pilot in command shall, before beginning a flight, become familiar with all available information concerning that flight.

and you think he did not know with his 4900TT what you have just learned... ummm... a few months ago?... ok

 

[flyboy]

I was flying a mooney for a company last year and ATC certainly tried to kill me. It was March and spring TStorms were all along my normal route. I spent 15 minutes on the phone with a briefer and we both agreed that it would be better to just take on more fuel and go a completely different route. This new route would miss the tstorms completely. When I was around 200 miles from my destination ATC came on with an amended clearance. The new course bended toward the adverse weather I was trying to avoid. I reminded the controller that I did not have radar and was trying to avoid the weather. He adivsed that I would pass southwest of the system. I pushed direct and was on a new course.

A little later I recieved yet another amendment to my clearance that would take me even more toward the storm i was trying to avoid. Once again, I avised the new controller that I did not have radar and would rather stay away from the weather. She responded with confidence that I would still pass southwest of the storm. 10 minutes later I was in a washing machine from hell. Lightening, thunder, and occasional hail. Once in the updraft, the aircraft went from 10,000 ft to 10,900 in a matter of seconds. I requested lower and advised of the rough weather. It was at this point I encountered a good ole Texas t-storm downdraft. 7500 feet later, the aircraft was under control and under the clouds. All around me were black clouds and rain. Oh yeah, I arrived at 3500 less than a minute after entering the downdraft.

Once the aircraft was under control, I advised that I was ok and that she should check her screen for intense weather. A few minutes later, she reported level 4s and 5s in my area and other aircraft began diverting. After my heart started beating again, I continued on to OKC. The moral of the story is, don't accept a new clearance if you think it may put you in harms way. Also, don't put too much stake in the ability of the radar equipment ATC uses. There seems to be a delay in its returns. My headset was bent at the top where my head hit the roof in the negative g's. Everything that had been in the back was now under my feet (including the half-full pee jug I'd used an hour before).

P.S. Some words of wisdom: If you have never been in a T-storm before and you think the worst of it is when it turns black outside the windows, you are sorely mistaken. You know you are in the worst of it when the outside has turned the color of your swimming pool in October, a disgusting aqua green. Cheers!

 

[TonyC]

Anyone else ever have ATC give them a clearence that would have put them in the rocks or something similar?

Short answer: Yes. Twice that I can recall I queried the controller and received an amended clearance. Another time, the other crewmember was aware of a hazard that I was not aware of, HE queried the controller, and we received an amended clearance. As the proverb goes, two heads are better than one.

Now, if you'll allow, I'll weigh in with my opinion.

Granted, we all make mistakes. Pilots and controllers alike are human (as far as I know) so we'll never be able to achieve a 100% error-free environment. So, we must face the challenge of identifying and trapping the errors before they break bones or bend metal.

Back to your situation involving a route with a published MEA. Since we don't necessarily know all of the terrain in the entire area covered by every route segment, we can only rely on the published data and apply our general knowledge of its purpose and usage. One third of the way from Point A to Point B on the route, we might be well clear of the high terrain that determined the MEA for the particular route segment, and it may in fact be perfectly safe to descend well below that MEA, given an ATC clearance to do so, of course. In that case, the controller should be familiar with the associate Minimum Vectoring Altitudes, or whatever they might call them in the enroute structure. In and of itself, a clearance to an altitude below the published MEA is not illegal or improper.

If the controlling terrain for the particular MEA is still ahead of the aircraft along its intended route, however, it would be improper to issue a clearance of any kind ("at pilot's discretion" for instance) that would jeopardize the safety of the flight. It would seem to me that, given the scenario you recalled, the controller was wrong. Had an aircraft begun a descent upon receiving the PD clearance, it certainly would have been in jeopardy.

So he made a mistake - - in my opinion. Not the end of the world, but it could have been for somebody. I've made mistakes like that too. Fortunately, I'm still here to talk about 'em, and hopefully others can learn from them, too.

I would have queried the controller immediately if I was concerned about the safety of the clearance. Maybe I'm right, maybe I'm wrong. Either way, there's a very good chance that in the ensuing conversation, one or the other of us will learn something. And after all, isn't that what it's all about?

You're absolutely right, Alexander. The PIC is the final authority, and he should make every effort to know as much as he possibly can about everything. Realistically, though, I don’t know anybody that knows everything. When you're being vectored (someday when you get to be a real pilot) in a busy terminal area where there is a single Minimum Sector Altitude, simultaneous approaches on parallel runways in marginal weather along with takeoffs on two other parallel runways, it's going to be busy. The controller knows what the minimum vectoring altitudes are for every square foot of his airspace, but you won't. Even if you know what they were yesterday, you might not know what they are today. Are you going to question the controller every time he clears you to an altitude below the published MSA? Don't answer -- you don't know enough yet. The answer is NO. You have to rely on the controller to do his job competently and safely. Because you DON'T know everything - - and no pilot does - - you have to trust him to do the things HE knows well. The PIC cannot be responsible for validating every word that the controller utters. It's not possible.

When you can demonstrate to me that you have memorized every terrain feature and every manmade obstacle that is used to determine MEAs, MRAs, MORA's, MSA's, MVA's and a few other Minimum altitudes in the entire continental USA, I'll consider backing off on that opinion. Until then, quoting Part 91 won't help much.

 

[A Squared]

Re: Re: ATC tried to kill me!!!!

Back to your situation involving a route with a published MEA. Since we don't necessarily know all of the terrain in the entire area covered by every route segment, we can only rely on the published data and apply our general knowledge of its purpose and usage. One third of the way from Point A to Point B on the route, we might be well clear of the high terrain that determined the MEA for the particular route segment, and it may in fact be perfectly safe to descend well below that MEA, given an ATC clearance to do so, of course. In that case, the controller should be familiar with the associate Minimum Vectoring Altitudes, or whatever they might call them in the enroute structure. In and of itself, a clearance to an altitude below the published MEA is not illegal or improper.

Yeah, I understand that in general there may be lower legal altitudes than the published MEA, but I don't think so in this case. We're talking about a fairly remote route segment witn little low altitude radar coverage, at that altitude he wouldn't have been vectoring us. In a subsequnt conversation the controller said that we wouldn't have been in radar contact at that altitude. Also, ignoring for the moment the published MEA, that segment of the airway has a significant amount of terrain all along it within 4 miles of centerline which is within 2000 feet of our cleared altitude. (it's a designated mountaious area) so I would be very surprised if the altitude we were cleared to wasn't below the applicable MIA, or any other applicable Minimum altitude.

Anyway, no big deal, the controller made a mistake and it was caught. My point wasn't to scream about incompetent ATC, rather to get some discussion going and maybe to offer a little reminder that ATC can screw up too. What was it that Reagan said? "trust, but verify"

 

[350DRIVER]

This all reminds me of the TWA 727 that went down while trying to get on the approach to DCA or IAD ( I don't remember). I do not recall the exact specifics pertaining to the clearance that was recieved but that accident was what coined the term "cleared for the approach".. I think the only guy on the flight deck that understood what was happening was the FE. Amazing how something can like that can happen if something is not understood

3 5 0