Possible penetration of restriction airspace.

Attributes
ACN	110067
Time
Date	198904
Day	Sat
Local Time Of Day	1201 To 1800
Place
Locale Reference	atc facility : pmd
State Reference	CA
Altitude	msl bound lower : 10500 msl bound upper : 10500
Environment
Flight Conditions	VMC
Light	Daylight
Aircraft 1
Controlling Facilities	tracon : edw
Operator	general aviation : personal
Make Model Name	Small Aircraft, High Wing, 1 Eng, Fixed Gear
Flight Phase	cruise other
Flight Plan	VFR
Person 1
Affiliation	Other
Function	flight crew : single pilot
Qualification	pilot : instrument pilot : commercial
ASRS Report	110067
Person 2
Affiliation	Other
Function	observation : passenger
Events
Anomaly	non adherence : far other anomaly other
Independent Detector	other flight crewa
Resolutory Action	flight crew : exited penetrated airspace none taken : detected after the fact
Consequence	Other
Supplementary
Primary Problem	Flight Crew Human Performance
Air Traffic Incident	Pilot Deviation

Narrative:

The problem arose because I made a poor error in judgement. My copilot was navigating. We were with edw approach, flight following, 10500' MSL. I looked at the chart, but did not see the restr area, only the MOA. I was not exactly sure of my position, but did not think I was in violation of airspace. It was only in retrospect that it occurred to me it was possible we violated R2515. But, I was on flight following, with a squawk code, and the controller never made any mention of a possible conflict with the airspace. While we were making an effort to avoid the MOA/R2515, it is possible that we nicked it. However, the controller never made any mention of this. Consequently, it is possible I'll get violated down the line. If this is the case, redundancy should be built into the system. First, the pilot should avoid the airspace. Second, the controller should also issue advisories. Third, the controller should always notify the pilot of an incursion, if indeed it occurred. This redundancy would be wiser and safer. Personal opinion: I'm filling out this form, at the risk of personal friendship, to cover myself for a potential violation that I don't think occurred, but cannot prove. The current 'book 'em, danno,' philosophy of the FAA will contribute to danger by providing a motivation not to work with them.

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: POSSIBLE PENETRATION OF RESTRICTION AIRSPACE.

Narrative: THE PROB AROSE BECAUSE I MADE A POOR ERROR IN JUDGEMENT. MY COPLT WAS NAVIGATING. WE WERE WITH EDW APCH, FLT FOLLOWING, 10500' MSL. I LOOKED AT THE CHART, BUT DID NOT SEE THE RESTR AREA, ONLY THE MOA. I WAS NOT EXACTLY SURE OF MY POS, BUT DID NOT THINK I WAS IN VIOLATION OF AIRSPACE. IT WAS ONLY IN RETROSPECT THAT IT OCCURRED TO ME IT WAS POSSIBLE WE VIOLATED R2515. BUT, I WAS ON FLT FOLLOWING, WITH A SQUAWK CODE, AND THE CTLR NEVER MADE ANY MENTION OF A POSSIBLE CONFLICT WITH THE AIRSPACE. WHILE WE WERE MAKING AN EFFORT TO AVOID THE MOA/R2515, IT IS POSSIBLE THAT WE NICKED IT. HOWEVER, THE CTLR NEVER MADE ANY MENTION OF THIS. CONSEQUENTLY, IT IS POSSIBLE I'LL GET VIOLATED DOWN THE LINE. IF THIS IS THE CASE, REDUNDANCY SHOULD BE BUILT INTO THE SYS. FIRST, THE PLT SHOULD AVOID THE AIRSPACE. SECOND, THE CTLR SHOULD ALSO ISSUE ADVISORIES. THIRD, THE CTLR SHOULD ALWAYS NOTIFY THE PLT OF AN INCURSION, IF INDEED IT OCCURRED. THIS REDUNDANCY WOULD BE WISER AND SAFER. PERSONAL OPINION: I'M FILLING OUT THIS FORM, AT THE RISK OF PERSONAL FRIENDSHIP, TO COVER MYSELF FOR A POTENTIAL VIOLATION THAT I DON'T THINK OCCURRED, BUT CANNOT PROVE. THE CURRENT 'BOOK 'EM, DANNO,' PHILOSOPHY OF THE FAA WILL CONTRIBUTE TO DANGER BY PROVIDING A MOTIVATION NOT TO WORK WITH THEM.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of August 2007 and automatically converted to unabbreviated mixed upper/lowercase text. This report is for informational purposes with no guarantee of accuracy. See NASA's ASRS site for official report.