Narrative:

I was climbing through 5000 to 6500' MSL as part of filed VFR flight plan for a solo x-country training flight (fdk-lyh-fdk). My aircraft was approximately 3 mi north of the potomac river on the fdk 216 degree right. After departure from fdk and leaving the traffic pattern, I had contacted leesburg FSS to activate the filed flight plan, and then dulles approach. Though the intended route of flight did not enter the dulles arsa, I felt it would be prudent to establish radio communications with dulles approach for following, traffic advisories and sep. Dulles was using runways 19 for arriving traffic. After changing to the approach frequency, I heard a conversation between approach and an arriving foreign airliner (Y). To the best of my knowledge, there were not traffic advisories issued by approach to the air carrier Y. Air carrier Y was then handed off to the tower frequency. I then established radio contact with approach, was assigned a discrete transponder code, and advised approach of my intended route of flight. As I remember, approach then asked me to switch to a different frequency. I complied, and established radio communications with dulles approach on the new frequency. At this point, I saw the air carrier Y aircraft overtaking me from my left rear quarter, about 1-1 1/2 mi away, same altitude, on a diverging flight path. Approach then acknowledged my transmission, advised me of the nearby aircraft and rebuked me for being in the approach path at 5000'. I advised approach that I had the aircraft in sight, apologized for the potential conflict, and asked approach if there were either an altitude or route of flight which they would prefer me to use. I was advised to continue my climb, and was given vectors well clear of the arsa. To the best of my knowledge, at no time during this incident did I enter the arsa. The remainder of the flight and the return continued west/O incident. As a student pilot, I think there are a # of lessons to be learned from this potentially dangerous incident. First, on future flts to the southwest from frederick, I will either stay at a lower or higher altitude when in the area north of the potomac. I had established radio communications with dulles approach, and do not think I could have done it earlier in the flight unless I waited to open my flight plan until after south of the dulles area (the aircraft I was flying had only 1 navigation/communication radio). Secondly, I will mark my washington sectional and terminal charts to outline the general areas of the approachs to both dulles and bwi. I have taken INS ground school, so can read and interpret stars and approach plates. I have marked the fixes used for INS approachs to fdk so that I can better appreciate distance when flying VFR in the fdk pattern and pilots in INS approachs are announcing their positions. From a systemic perspective, I think there are perhaps 3 areas that FSS, NOAA and ATC could better serve the VFR pilot: 1) the VFR charts provide little information about INS approachs to airports, other than establishing control zones. VFR pilots can fly into areas where heavy aircraft are maneuvering on stars at low altitude west/O knowledge. It would be helpful to the VFR pilot if the stars could be marked or alluded to in some way on the NOAA VFR charts. The non-INS rated, and particularly a student pilot, does not have knowledge of the approach procedures used by landing heavy aircraft at busy terminals. 2) barring more additions to the already cluttered VFR charts, it might be helpful if the FSS could make the VFR pilot aware of potential traffic conflicts at the time of filing the flight plan. 3) it would have been helpful if the dulles approach controllers had told me about the potential conflict on initial contact, rather than after the incident occurred. It would also have been better if the controllers had not dealt with me in such an adversarial manner. As a student pilot, already a bit shaken by the incident, it only raised my anxiety level when admonished by the controllers. This served no constructive purpose in the situation. Obviously, if I knew I was flying in or near the flight path of a commercial airliner on an approach, I would have changed course. If it is safer for me to use a lower altitude while in the area of INS approachs, I would have been happy to change my planes while in the area of the arsa.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: STUDENT PLT ON SOLO CROSS-COUNTRY EXPERIENCES ENCOUNTER WITH ACR ACFT.

Narrative: I WAS CLBING THROUGH 5000 TO 6500' MSL AS PART OF FILED VFR FLT PLAN FOR A SOLO X-COUNTRY TRNING FLT (FDK-LYH-FDK). MY ACFT WAS APPROX 3 MI N OF THE POTOMAC RIVER ON THE FDK 216 DEG R. AFTER DEP FROM FDK AND LEAVING THE TFC PATTERN, I HAD CONTACTED LEESBURG FSS TO ACTIVATE THE FILED FLT PLAN, AND THEN DULLES APCH. THOUGH THE INTENDED RTE OF FLT DID NOT ENTER THE DULLES ARSA, I FELT IT WOULD BE PRUDENT TO ESTABLISH RADIO COMS WITH DULLES APCH FOR FOLLOWING, TFC ADVISORIES AND SEP. DULLES WAS USING RWYS 19 FOR ARRIVING TFC. AFTER CHANGING TO THE APCH FREQ, I HEARD A CONVERSATION BTWN APCH AND AN ARRIVING FOREIGN AIRLINER (Y). TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE, THERE WERE NOT TFC ADVISORIES ISSUED BY APCH TO THE ACR Y. ACR Y WAS THEN HANDED OFF TO THE TWR FREQ. I THEN ESTABLISHED RADIO CONTACT WITH APCH, WAS ASSIGNED A DISCRETE XPONDER CODE, AND ADVISED APCH OF MY INTENDED RTE OF FLT. AS I REMEMBER, APCH THEN ASKED ME TO SWITCH TO A DIFFERENT FREQ. I COMPLIED, AND ESTABLISHED RADIO COMS WITH DULLES APCH ON THE NEW FREQ. AT THIS POINT, I SAW THE ACR Y ACFT OVERTAKING ME FROM MY LEFT REAR QUARTER, ABOUT 1-1 1/2 MI AWAY, SAME ALT, ON A DIVERGING FLT PATH. APCH THEN ACKNOWLEDGED MY XMISSION, ADVISED ME OF THE NEARBY ACFT AND REBUKED ME FOR BEING IN THE APCH PATH AT 5000'. I ADVISED APCH THAT I HAD THE ACFT IN SIGHT, APOLOGIZED FOR THE POTENTIAL CONFLICT, AND ASKED APCH IF THERE WERE EITHER AN ALT OR RTE OF FLT WHICH THEY WOULD PREFER ME TO USE. I WAS ADVISED TO CONTINUE MY CLB, AND WAS GIVEN VECTORS WELL CLR OF THE ARSA. TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE, AT NO TIME DURING THIS INCIDENT DID I ENTER THE ARSA. THE REMAINDER OF THE FLT AND THE RETURN CONTINUED W/O INCIDENT. AS A STUDENT PLT, I THINK THERE ARE A # OF LESSONS TO BE LEARNED FROM THIS POTENTIALLY DANGEROUS INCIDENT. FIRST, ON FUTURE FLTS TO THE SW FROM FREDERICK, I WILL EITHER STAY AT A LOWER OR HIGHER ALT WHEN IN THE AREA N OF THE POTOMAC. I HAD ESTABLISHED RADIO COMS WITH DULLES APCH, AND DO NOT THINK I COULD HAVE DONE IT EARLIER IN THE FLT UNLESS I WAITED TO OPEN MY FLT PLAN UNTIL AFTER S OF THE DULLES AREA (THE ACFT I WAS FLYING HAD ONLY 1 NAV/COM RADIO). SECONDLY, I WILL MARK MY WASHINGTON SECTIONAL AND TERMINAL CHARTS TO OUTLINE THE GENERAL AREAS OF THE APCHS TO BOTH DULLES AND BWI. I HAVE TAKEN INS GND SCHOOL, SO CAN READ AND INTERPRET STARS AND APCH PLATES. I HAVE MARKED THE FIXES USED FOR INS APCHS TO FDK SO THAT I CAN BETTER APPRECIATE DISTANCE WHEN FLYING VFR IN THE FDK PATTERN AND PLTS IN INS APCHS ARE ANNOUNCING THEIR POSITIONS. FROM A SYSTEMIC PERSPECTIVE, I THINK THERE ARE PERHAPS 3 AREAS THAT FSS, NOAA AND ATC COULD BETTER SERVE THE VFR PLT: 1) THE VFR CHARTS PROVIDE LITTLE INFO ABOUT INS APCHS TO ARPTS, OTHER THAN ESTABLISHING CTL ZONES. VFR PLTS CAN FLY INTO AREAS WHERE HEAVY ACFT ARE MANEUVERING ON STARS AT LOW ALT W/O KNOWLEDGE. IT WOULD BE HELPFUL TO THE VFR PLT IF THE STARS COULD BE MARKED OR ALLUDED TO IN SOME WAY ON THE NOAA VFR CHARTS. THE NON-INS RATED, AND PARTICULARLY A STUDENT PLT, DOES NOT HAVE KNOWLEDGE OF THE APCH PROCS USED BY LNDG HEAVY ACFT AT BUSY TERMINALS. 2) BARRING MORE ADDITIONS TO THE ALREADY CLUTTERED VFR CHARTS, IT MIGHT BE HELPFUL IF THE FSS COULD MAKE THE VFR PLT AWARE OF POTENTIAL TFC CONFLICTS AT THE TIME OF FILING THE FLT PLAN. 3) IT WOULD HAVE BEEN HELPFUL IF THE DULLES APCH CTLRS HAD TOLD ME ABOUT THE POTENTIAL CONFLICT ON INITIAL CONTACT, RATHER THAN AFTER THE INCIDENT OCCURRED. IT WOULD ALSO HAVE BEEN BETTER IF THE CTLRS HAD NOT DEALT WITH ME IN SUCH AN ADVERSARIAL MANNER. AS A STUDENT PLT, ALREADY A BIT SHAKEN BY THE INCIDENT, IT ONLY RAISED MY ANXIETY LEVEL WHEN ADMONISHED BY THE CTLRS. THIS SERVED NO CONSTRUCTIVE PURPOSE IN THE SITUATION. OBVIOUSLY, IF I KNEW I WAS FLYING IN OR NEAR THE FLT PATH OF A COMMERCIAL AIRLINER ON AN APCH, I WOULD HAVE CHANGED COURSE. IF IT IS SAFER FOR ME TO USE A LOWER ALT WHILE IN THE AREA OF INS APCHS, I WOULD HAVE BEEN HAPPY TO CHANGE MY PLANES WHILE IN THE AREA OF THE ARSA.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of July 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.