37000 Feet | Browse and search NASA's Aviation Safety Reporting System |
|
Attributes | |
ACN | 110195 |
Time | |
Date | 198904 |
Day | Sun |
Local Time Of Day | 0601 To 1200 |
Place | |
Locale Reference | atc facility : e69 airport : 369 |
State Reference | AZ |
Altitude | agl bound lower : 100 agl bound upper : 200 |
Environment | |
Flight Conditions | VMC |
Light | Daylight |
Aircraft 1 | |
Operator | general aviation : personal |
Make Model Name | Small Aircraft, Low Wing, 1 Eng, Fixed Gear |
Flight Phase | landing : go around other other |
Flight Plan | None |
Aircraft 2 | |
Operator | general aviation : personal |
Make Model Name | Small Aircraft, Low Wing, 1 Eng, Retractable Gear |
Flight Phase | landing : go around other other |
Flight Plan | None |
Person 1 | |
Affiliation | Other |
Function | flight crew : single pilot |
Qualification | pilot : private |
Experience | flight time last 90 days : 32 flight time total : 370 |
ASRS Report | 110195 |
Person 2 | |
Affiliation | Other |
Function | flight crew : single pilot |
Qualification | pilot : commercial |
Experience | flight time last 90 days : 173 flight time total : 2772 |
ASRS Report | 110197 |
Events | |
Anomaly | non adherence : far other spatial deviation |
Independent Detector | other other : unspecified |
Resolutory Action | none taken : detected after the fact |
Consequence | faa : assigned or threatened penalties |
Supplementary | |
Primary Problem | Flight Crew Human Performance |
Air Traffic Incident | Pilot Deviation |
Narrative:
On 4/sun/89 I was flying in formation with another experimental aircraft en route to payson, az. Approximately 12 mi out I contacted the payson unicom operator and asked for an airport advisory and specifically if they had parking space available for the 2 experimentals. Payson was having a fly-in on this day, sponsored by the payson pilots association (ppa). Several weeks prior to this day the ppa had invited me to bring my airplane to payson and put it on display for their fly-in event. When the payson unicom operator answered my radio call, he advised me of active runway, winds, altimeter and traffic. He then invited us to make a pass on the runway for the spectators. I acknowledged his request and upon entering the traffic pattern I made position calls for downwind, base and final, including the announcement that this would be a fly-by pass down the runway. Upon landing we were greeted by an FAA employee who stated he felt we failed to maintain 500' altitude from a congested area. This situation would not have occurred had the local airport operator not invited us to join in with their activities, as I clearly intended to land if parking was available and had not considered doing a fly-by until suddenly requested to by the airport operator. I am very conscious of the total responsibility the pilot has for every phase of a flight--and bring this matter to your attention in an effort to educate airport operators in the hope they will not lead another unsuspecting pilot astray of the far's. Callback conversation with reporter revealed the following: reporter states that in his opinion and in the opinion of the pilot of the second aircraft, the sep was not compromised. However, the reporter states that he was unaware that fly-bys conducted down a runway centerline were in possible violation of an far. Supplemental information from acn 110197: it might also be noted that a unicom operator can not authorize, and should not request you to perform, such activities. Although he shared in the incident, the sole person responsible is the pilot.
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: FLT OF 2 ARRIVING ACFT MADE LOW PASS DOWN RWY, THEN RE-ENTERED TRAFFIC PATTERN AND PROCEEDED TO LAND.
Narrative: ON 4/SUN/89 I WAS FLYING IN FORMATION WITH ANOTHER EXPERIMENTAL ACFT ENRTE TO PAYSON, AZ. APPROX 12 MI OUT I CONTACTED THE PAYSON UNICOM OPERATOR AND ASKED FOR AN ARPT ADVISORY AND SPECIFICALLY IF THEY HAD PARKING SPACE AVAILABLE FOR THE 2 EXPERIMENTALS. PAYSON WAS HAVING A FLY-IN ON THIS DAY, SPONSORED BY THE PAYSON PLTS ASSOCIATION (PPA). SEVERAL WEEKS PRIOR TO THIS DAY THE PPA HAD INVITED ME TO BRING MY AIRPLANE TO PAYSON AND PUT IT ON DISPLAY FOR THEIR FLY-IN EVENT. WHEN THE PAYSON UNICOM OPERATOR ANSWERED MY RADIO CALL, HE ADVISED ME OF ACTIVE RWY, WINDS, ALTIMETER AND TFC. HE THEN INVITED US TO MAKE A PASS ON THE RWY FOR THE SPECTATORS. I ACKNOWLEDGED HIS REQUEST AND UPON ENTERING THE TFC PATTERN I MADE POS CALLS FOR DOWNWIND, BASE AND FINAL, INCLUDING THE ANNOUNCEMENT THAT THIS WOULD BE A FLY-BY PASS DOWN THE RWY. UPON LNDG WE WERE GREETED BY AN FAA EMPLOYEE WHO STATED HE FELT WE FAILED TO MAINTAIN 500' ALT FROM A CONGESTED AREA. THIS SITUATION WOULD NOT HAVE OCCURRED HAD THE LCL ARPT OPERATOR NOT INVITED US TO JOIN IN WITH THEIR ACTIVITIES, AS I CLEARLY INTENDED TO LAND IF PARKING WAS AVAILABLE AND HAD NOT CONSIDERED DOING A FLY-BY UNTIL SUDDENLY REQUESTED TO BY THE ARPT OPERATOR. I AM VERY CONSCIOUS OF THE TOTAL RESPONSIBILITY THE PLT HAS FOR EVERY PHASE OF A FLT--AND BRING THIS MATTER TO YOUR ATTN IN AN EFFORT TO EDUCATE AIRPORT OPERATORS IN THE HOPE THEY WILL NOT LEAD ANOTHER UNSUSPECTING PLT ASTRAY OF THE FAR'S. CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING: RPTR STATES THAT IN HIS OPINION AND IN THE OPINION OF THE PLT OF THE SECOND ACFT, THE SEP WAS NOT COMPROMISED. HOWEVER, THE RPTR STATES THAT HE WAS UNAWARE THAT FLY-BYS CONDUCTED DOWN A RWY CENTERLINE WERE IN POSSIBLE VIOLATION OF AN FAR. SUPPLEMENTAL INFO FROM ACN 110197: IT MIGHT ALSO BE NOTED THAT A UNICOM OPERATOR CAN NOT AUTHORIZE, AND SHOULD NOT REQUEST YOU TO PERFORM, SUCH ACTIVITIES. ALTHOUGH HE SHARED IN THE INCIDENT, THE SOLE PERSON RESPONSIBLE IS THE PLT.
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.