violation

[AC560]

The bottom line: It is never a bad idea to submit a NASA form except if you intentionally created an unsafe situation.

Please explain why it would be a bad idea to submit the form if you intentionally created the unsafe situation. In specific how filing the form makes your situation worse then if you don't file it.

 

[JediNein]

Thanks AAFlyer! I last read AA's ASAP program briefing in early 1998 after an outstation incident, so I was going on old faded memory for that.

Two questions if you know the answers: Does the ASAP prevent, prohibit, or ignore ASRS reports for AA's program? Is there a limit to the number of ASAP reports a pilot can file before AA's 'train to proficiency' goes out the window?

 

[AV80R]

Do NOT listen to Russian I cannot believe he is asking you NOT to file!? Remember that you are always guilty until proven innocent – NASA form can only help NEVER hurt you!

Was your transponder on? If so, they’ll know if it was you or not. You think you were not guilty and you probably weren’t, HOWEVER, what if you are wrong? Maybe you were off by a mile or so? Sometimes it’s hard to tell from the cockpit but it's easy for them looking on the radar where different airspace borders are very clear.

In the WORST case scenario, IF they do find you guilty of some kind of violation a NASA form might be used in lie of the violation. Lets say they give you a 60 day suspension (which I seriously doubt in your case) if you have filed a NASA form your record will say “NASA form #... used in lie of a 60-day suspension” In other words you’ll keep your ticket. However, they don’t even have to know about the NASA form until you deem like you need it.

In my view, a NASA form can only help; it can NEVER be used to “identify you” etc. Russian gives you wrong information!

Btw, you only have 10 days after the incident to file it. Anyone telling you not to file is doing you a major disservice! I think nothing will happen in your case but you never know - please be smart and file!

“The one draw back to filing the NASA form is that it is a once in a life time get out of jail almost free card.”

Learwannabe – totally false! You can file 10 NASA forms a day, there’s NO limit to that. However, once a NASA form has been used (in other words you have been notified of a potential violation and are using the NASA form to waive any suspensions etc) you must wait 5 years before you can use a NASA form to defend your license again.

 

[midlifeflyer]

Please explain why it would be a bad idea to submit the form if you intentionally created the unsafe situation. In specific how filing the form makes your situation worse then if you don't file it.

Because he and the Russian say so.

That's all - personal opinion having nothing to do with the way the program works.

 

[AC560]

once a NASA form has been used (in other words you have been notified of a potential violation and are using the NASA form to waive any suspensions etc) you must wait 5 years before you can use a NASA form to defend your license again.

No, no, no. Use of the NASA form has nothing to do with it. Use it/don't use it. The only thing that matters is whether or not you have had a violation in the past five years.

It does not matter if you filled out a report, used a report, looked at a report, thought about a report, or did anything with the report, all that matters is:

1. the violation was inadvertent and not deliberate;
2. 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;
3. 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
4. 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.

Rather then continuing on with this I would suggest everyone go and read this. Far to many people that think they know what they are talking about as opposed to taking the time to reevaluate their thoughts to make sure they are right.

Whether you have a PPL or a ATP that piece of paper gives you the same opportunity, an opportunity to learn. Far to many people around here seem to think at some point they stop learning, these are usually the people who get a violation or worse yet kill themselves. Don't be one of those people.

 

[AAflyer]

Thanks AAFlyer! I last read AA's ASAP program briefing in early 1998 after an outstation incident, so I was going on old faded memory for that.

Two questions if you know the answers: Does the ASAP prevent, prohibit, or ignore ASRS reports for AA's program? Is there a limit to the number of ASAP reports a pilot can file before AA's 'train to proficiency' goes out the window?

Hi Jedi,

My undestanding is it prevents the ASRS report. (Will have to check). There is No limit on the number of ASAPs we can file. In fact in recurrent they stress if you are concerned at all file one. In the last year I filed 3.

One the cockpit door came open on TO, the locking soleniod failed.

I had a waypoint drop out on a flight from BDL to ORD.

Lastly a month ago flying to SFO, approach cleared American XXX to descend to FL210. !0 seconds later he asked UAL XXX what altitude he was at. He meant to send UAL down to 210 and leave us up a little longer. It was his mistake, he apologized and said not to worry about it. Well, we filed an ASAP anyway.


Regards,

AA

P.S. I would have filed the NASA form in the event that the thread is about.

P.S.S Rereading your question I am not sure about what type would end the train to proficiency. I am sure 3 ASAPS for landing early due to running out of gas would most likely negate the ASAP. It was never mentioned in the briefing. I would safely say that it is most likely based on the individual and the type of incident.

 

[avbug]

I believe that the pilot should not file the ASRS report due to the fact that he knows he was not the sought pilot. If he did not make a deviation due to safety, then he should not file. He knows, and explained to the controlling agency, that it was not him. If it truly was him, and he was sure about it. A filing of a ASRS report would be applicable due to an accidental deviation into class B.

Now, say he caused a major traffic deviation. The FAA could find criminal neglect on the pilot if the passengers on the deviating plane were injured in the manuever. And, the ASRS system will not be able to protect him. Of course, this is all hypothetical. But, it could happen.

If the FAA would like to press the issue further, he would recieve a letter of investigation with or without filing to the ASRS system. If the FAA can prove that the said pilot knew better, the FAA can seek certificate action under criminal charges.

On another note, his filing fill falsify the statistics. This would be due to a deviation filed that was not committed.

Every time you tap on that keyboard, somehow you just come out dumber and dumber. Okay, genius...

The FAA seeks certificate action under criminal charges?

You understand that FAA regulation, being part of the Code of Federal Regulations, is ADMINISTRATIVE LAW, not criminal law, right??? You had the FAA getting people fired before (which they gladly accepted rather than have their certificates suspended)...Now you've given them the authority of the judiciary, too.

Under very unusual circumstances criminal charges may be proferred (very rarely, such as in the proceedings from the loss of Valuejet against certain of Sabretechs employees)...but this has NOTHING to do with certificate action. Nothing. Nada. You undertstand and grasp this concept in some small way??

The ASRS isn't about statistics, or about deviations. It isn't. It's about safety. It can be for anything a reporting party--pilot or non-pilot--wants to report. Your assertion that the submitter is falsifying statistics is idiotic. You don't have a clue what you're talking about. Not a clue. Yet, you keep talking about it, and your rambling is starting to make you sound like one of the three dumbest posters I've seen here in years. Good grief...do a little research, get some semblence of a clue as to what you're saying before you keep posting this garbage.

If the original poster had been the subject of enforcement action and waited to file an ASRS report, then he could seek no protection under the program. He would have gone past the 10 day limit. Strike one for you, my boy.

If the original poster had been the subject of enforcement action and had filed the report, the FAA would have no way of knowing he had filed the report unless he elected to reveal it to them...as it's sanitized with all names and information removed before the FAA ever gets to see it. Strike two for you, mate.

If the original poster had been the subject of enforcement action and was given an administrative penalty, at that time he would have the option of producing the date and time-stamped title strip to the report, and claiming his privilege of waiving the penalty of the enforcement action...unless he listened to you, brightspark. Strike three.

 

[AAflyer]

Russian,

You have to be the first guy in all my GA years and airline flying years that promoted not filing an ASRS. I think you should read Avbugs response above.

I am little disappointed in that you are 121 airline captain dispensing bad information. If you are unsure it may be wise not to say anything.

Regards,

AAflyer

P.S. It appears the individual THINKS and almost 100% sure it was not him. When in doubt...Well many of us have explained that to you already. Maybe you should call the FSDO and see what they say.

 

[Almerick07]

Every time you tap on that keyboard, somehow you just come out dumber and dumber. Okay, genius...

Now that was funny

 

[JimNtexas]

Please explain why it would be a bad idea to submit the form if you intentionally created the unsafe situation. In specific how filing the form makes your situation worse then if you don't file it.

Well, I think that intentionally creating an unsafe situation is probably a crime, and you're not suppose to use the form to report crimes.

But on the other hand you won't get into trouble for anything you submit to NASA, they won't turn you in.

Let's suppose you are operating a jet plane using the callsign 'Ghost Rider'. You call JFK tower and ask to do a high speed tower fly-by.

JFK Tower replies "Negative Ghost Rider, the pattern is closed". But you go ahead and do the high speed pass anyway, intentionally creating an unsafe situation.

You decide to file a NASA report. On the description line, the line that the FAA does see, you write "Intentional disregard of ATC instruction".

You won't get in trouble for admiting to the fly by in the text of the NASA form. NASA won't burn you.

On the other hand, in this case you're probably not going to get out jail free, report or no report. But heck, give it try!

Now when the FAA calls you in demanding your butt you can slap the NASA tear off on the table and laugh at them, saying "here's my get out of jail card suckers!" and just start laughing at them. Good luck with that.

Kidding aside, one thing that I think has the Russian confused is that you do want to be careful about what you write on the tear off part of the NASA form, the part that you show to the FAA. It's better to not confess to a violation in the description at the top of the form. For example, if you are reporting an altitude bust you might consider putting "question about assigned altitude" rather than "leveled off at wrong altitude".

You'd really rather have no certificate action on your record rather than an action with punishment waived due to the NASA form. The FAA will see the tear off before they make the final decision to pursue formal certificate action. There is no point in turning in a written confession of a crime to them as part of this process.

If the FAA can convince the judge that the violation was intentional then you don't get out of jail free, and the NASA report just added gas to the fire.

ETA: Avbug is correct, it's very possible that your tower fly-by was a violation of blackletter federal law. If you break federal law then your friendly neighborhood U.S. District Attorney won't be impressed at all by your NASA form.