Narrative:

I was taxiing out after getting an ATIS briefing and clearance when I recieved a ground taxi clearance to runway 32. But on preparing to cross 32, I saw a light plane on about a mi final. I continued across, at the opp end of the runway and was advised, after crossing, I did not have clearance to cross 32. Following takeoff, I was clearing the area and advised buffalo I would be operating mostly at 1700'. But prior to departure, ATC was advised this was the 'traffic show for communication radio' operating 2000' or below on climbing 200' above 1700', I was called by the controller and chided for leaving 1700'. The aircraft is called under a letter of agreement and it's request is exactly the same twice a day. Crossing runway 32 did not create a traffic hazard, in my opinion, but breaking the clearance limit is a serious business if in fact that as the case. There was a great deal of cockpit confusion because if was testing out a new avionics and broadcast system. A radio technician was talking constantly. I was concerned with a late start. I was also fearful of system malfunction during the nfl report for traffic. The human factors lads could spend a week on this one. Regarding the altitude change, why did data given ATC get lost in the shuffle? Do I need to notify more than clearance of my intentions?

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: GA SMA UNAUTH RWY CROSSING AND ALT DEVIATION EXCURSION FROM CLRNC ALT.

Narrative: I WAS TAXIING OUT AFTER GETTING AN ATIS BRIEFING AND CLRNC WHEN I RECIEVED A GND TAXI CLRNC TO RWY 32. BUT ON PREPARING TO CROSS 32, I SAW A LIGHT PLANE ON ABOUT A MI FINAL. I CONTINUED ACROSS, AT THE OPP END OF THE RWY AND WAS ADVISED, AFTER XING, I DID NOT HAVE CLRNC TO CROSS 32. FOLLOWING TKOF, I WAS CLRING THE AREA AND ADVISED BUFFALO I WOULD BE OPERATING MOSTLY AT 1700'. BUT PRIOR TO DEP, ATC WAS ADVISED THIS WAS THE 'TFC SHOW FOR COM RADIO' OPERATING 2000' OR BELOW ON CLBING 200' ABOVE 1700', I WAS CALLED BY THE CTLR AND CHIDED FOR LEAVING 1700'. THE ACFT IS CALLED UNDER A LETTER OF AGREEMENT AND IT'S REQUEST IS EXACTLY THE SAME TWICE A DAY. XING RWY 32 DID NOT CREATE A TFC HAZARD, IN MY OPINION, BUT BREAKING THE CLRNC LIMIT IS A SERIOUS BUSINESS IF IN FACT THAT AS THE CASE. THERE WAS A GREAT DEAL OF COCKPIT CONFUSION BECAUSE IF WAS TESTING OUT A NEW AVIONICS AND BROADCAST SYSTEM. A RADIO TECHNICIAN WAS TALKING CONSTANTLY. I WAS CONCERNED WITH A LATE START. I WAS ALSO FEARFUL OF SYS MALFUNCTION DURING THE NFL RPT FOR TFC. THE HUMAN FACTORS LADS COULD SPEND A WK ON THIS ONE. REGARDING THE ALT CHANGE, WHY DID DATA GIVEN ATC GET LOST IN THE SHUFFLE? DO I NEED TO NOTIFY MORE THAN CLRNC OF MY INTENTIONS?

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.