Narrative:

I would like to share with you an experience I had as a passenger in a small private plane last wkend. We took off from petaluma airport en route to paso robles last sun morning around XA15 am. The cloud cover ranged from broken to overcast. Upon arriving at the airport the pilot told me his WX briefing said the clouds had tops of 5000 ft and were broken to scattered. From the ground I couldn't argue, it looked like we could circle up through the clouds without much difficulty. The preflight was uneventful. That was the end of what I would call normal operations. On climb out the VFR pilot called for flight following and was given a transponder code. The pilot set the transponder to mode a only as he said the mode C had been unreliable. I told him he couldn't enter the 30 mile arc without a mode C transponder. He turned on mode C. The controller reported radar contact with an altitude of 4600 ft, only 100 ft different than the plane's indication. The pilot commented on how nice it was to have it working. As we were climbing out I noticed the pilot was not using a sectional chart. I asked about this and was assured of the course to be followed, 'I've done this a bunch of times.' there was a strong tailwind that day and our climb rate over distance covered was not what the pilot expected. The cloud cover was also thicker than the WX briefing reported. I recommend circling back through a hole that would allow a clear climb out, but the pilot said not to worry. About 5 mins into the flight he was turning around clouds clearly in violation of VFR minimums. As I looked down through the broken clouds I noticed we were very close to the east end of the san rafael bridge, a good ground reference for the edge of the sfo TCA. A check of the altimeter let me know we were not going to make the top of the TCA. Although we had flight following we had not received a TCA clearance. I warned the pilot of this and he increased his rate of climb, and entered the clouds. He contacted bay approach and asked for a higher altitude. The controller responded that he had entered the TCA and would put in a request for a higher altitude. Shortly thereafter the controller cleared the pilot to 9500 ft. The trip proceeded to the south uneventfully. As we began our descent I repeatedly reminded the pilot of excessive speed as I watched the airspeed indicator approach and cross redline. On the descent I listened as another plane was 'handled' into the airport. We entered the 45 after this plane's flight plan was cancelled and they switched to the CTAF frequency. We were searching diligently as we entered the traffic pattern under an overcast layer of 3000 ft. We spotted this plane as it came abeam the downwind numbers straight into the downwind leg and we were about to turn from the 45 to the downwind leg. My pilot turned away in what I would call a minor evasive maneuver and then entered the pattern downwind. He flew a 'close' pattern and repeatedly broadcast our position on the CTAF, the pilot thought it was 122.8. The landing was uneventful although our trailing position came close to what I could call 'tailgating.' 10 mins after the landing a woman from the other aircraft drove to the hangar and verbally attacked the pilot for unsafe flying. Both pilots claimed to have been broadcasting on the local frequency. Unfortunately, the pilot of the plane I was a passenger in was using a chart from 1984! And the CTAF had become a unicom on 123.0. I could hardly believe it. The pilot of the other plane was going to report him, but was convinced that it was a simple isolated mistake. The flight back began around XB30 pm and was less eventful, but punctuated by an in-flight cellular phone call, turning down the radio while 'with' flight following for at least 10 mi (according to the controller when contact was reestablished), and entering the TCA with a transponder that he admitted to bay approach has not been reliable for quite some time. He was instructed to turn mode C off. I have not mentioned names in this letter because I am not in a position to 'turn in' this pilot. Many of the violations on this trip were not known to anyone outside of the cockpit and therefore couldn't be acted on. When I learned to fly I was taughtto respect the regulations and that those who didn't would be caught. I learned that a violation of a TCA was a crime punished by certificate suspension. In the few yrs of flying I have heard stories of exceptions and heard stories of 'minor' infractions going severely punished. I can't believe a pilot entered the TCA in the clouds, with a mode C transponder error of at least 400 ft, and without a clearance was not even reprimanded. I hope you will be inspired to look at the activity in this busy and potentially dangerous sector. I realize mistakes can be made and that the FAA has been criticized for being too brutal. However, there should be a way of keeping this kind of pilot from flying. I know the pilot of this plane will break regulations in the future. He has traversed the TCA in mode C violation several times in this aircraft and he bragged of many flts in his 800 hours of experience that seemed to fall outside the loosest interpretation of the FARS. I hope you will use this letter to let controllers know what could be going on beyond their radar scopes and that being the 'nice understanding person' may seem like the thing to do, but it could get people killed.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: SMA PLT ENTERS TCA WITHOUT CLRNC. FLIES VFR IN IMC.

Narrative: I WOULD LIKE TO SHARE WITH YOU AN EXPERIENCE I HAD AS A PAX IN A SMALL PRIVATE PLANE LAST WKEND. WE TOOK OFF FROM PETALUMA ARPT ENRTE TO PASO ROBLES LAST SUN MORNING AROUND XA15 AM. THE CLOUD COVER RANGED FROM BROKEN TO OVCST. UPON ARRIVING AT THE ARPT THE PLT TOLD ME HIS WX BRIEFING SAID THE CLOUDS HAD TOPS OF 5000 FT AND WERE BROKEN TO SCATTERED. FROM THE GND I COULDN'T ARGUE, IT LOOKED LIKE WE COULD CIRCLE UP THROUGH THE CLOUDS WITHOUT MUCH DIFFICULTY. THE PREFLT WAS UNEVENTFUL. THAT WAS THE END OF WHAT I WOULD CALL NORMAL OPS. ON CLBOUT THE VFR PLT CALLED FOR FLT FOLLOWING AND WAS GIVEN A XPONDER CODE. THE PLT SET THE XPONDER TO MODE A ONLY AS HE SAID THE MODE C HAD BEEN UNRELIABLE. I TOLD HIM HE COULDN'T ENTER THE 30 MILE ARC WITHOUT A MODE C XPONDER. HE TURNED ON MODE C. THE CTLR RPTED RADAR CONTACT WITH AN ALT OF 4600 FT, ONLY 100 FT DIFFERENT THAN THE PLANE'S INDICATION. THE PLT COMMENTED ON HOW NICE IT WAS TO HAVE IT WORKING. AS WE WERE CLBING OUT I NOTICED THE PLT WAS NOT USING A SECTIONAL CHART. I ASKED ABOUT THIS AND WAS ASSURED OF THE COURSE TO BE FOLLOWED, 'I'VE DONE THIS A BUNCH OF TIMES.' THERE WAS A STRONG TAILWIND THAT DAY AND OUR CLB RATE OVER DISTANCE COVERED WAS NOT WHAT THE PLT EXPECTED. THE CLOUD COVER WAS ALSO THICKER THAN THE WX BRIEFING RPTED. I RECOMMEND CIRCLING BACK THROUGH A HOLE THAT WOULD ALLOW A CLR CLBOUT, BUT THE PLT SAID NOT TO WORRY. ABOUT 5 MINS INTO THE FLT HE WAS TURNING AROUND CLOUDS CLRLY IN VIOLATION OF VFR MINIMUMS. AS I LOOKED DOWN THROUGH THE BROKEN CLOUDS I NOTICED WE WERE VERY CLOSE TO THE E END OF THE SAN RAFAEL BRIDGE, A GOOD GND REF FOR THE EDGE OF THE SFO TCA. A CHK OF THE ALTIMETER LET ME KNOW WE WERE NOT GOING TO MAKE THE TOP OF THE TCA. ALTHOUGH WE HAD FLT FOLLOWING WE HAD NOT RECEIVED A TCA CLRNC. I WARNED THE PLT OF THIS AND HE INCREASED HIS RATE OF CLB, AND ENTERED THE CLOUDS. HE CONTACTED BAY APCH AND ASKED FOR A HIGHER ALT. THE CTLR RESPONDED THAT HE HAD ENTERED THE TCA AND WOULD PUT IN A REQUEST FOR A HIGHER ALT. SHORTLY THEREAFTER THE CTLR CLRED THE PLT TO 9500 FT. THE TRIP PROCEEDED TO THE S UNEVENTFULLY. AS WE BEGAN OUR DSCNT I REPEATEDLY REMINDED THE PLT OF EXCESSIVE SPD AS I WATCHED THE AIRSPD INDICATOR APCH AND CROSS REDLINE. ON THE DSCNT I LISTENED AS ANOTHER PLANE WAS 'HANDLED' INTO THE ARPT. WE ENTERED THE 45 AFTER THIS PLANE'S FLT PLAN WAS CANCELLED AND THEY SWITCHED TO THE CTAF FREQ. WE WERE SEARCHING DILIGENTLY AS WE ENTERED THE TFC PATTERN UNDER AN OVCST LAYER OF 3000 FT. WE SPOTTED THIS PLANE AS IT CAME ABEAM THE DOWNWIND NUMBERS STRAIGHT INTO THE DOWNWIND LEG AND WE WERE ABOUT TO TURN FROM THE 45 TO THE DOWNWIND LEG. MY PLT TURNED AWAY IN WHAT I WOULD CALL A MINOR EVASIVE MANEUVER AND THEN ENTERED THE PATTERN DOWNWIND. HE FLEW A 'CLOSE' PATTERN AND REPEATEDLY BROADCAST OUR POS ON THE CTAF, THE PLT THOUGHT IT WAS 122.8. THE LNDG WAS UNEVENTFUL ALTHOUGH OUR TRAILING POS CAME CLOSE TO WHAT I COULD CALL 'TAILGATING.' 10 MINS AFTER THE LNDG A WOMAN FROM THE OTHER ACFT DROVE TO THE HANGAR AND VERBALLY ATTACKED THE PLT FOR UNSAFE FLYING. BOTH PLTS CLAIMED TO HAVE BEEN BROADCASTING ON THE LCL FREQ. UNFORTUNATELY, THE PLT OF THE PLANE I WAS A PAX IN WAS USING A CHART FROM 1984! AND THE CTAF HAD BECOME A UNICOM ON 123.0. I COULD HARDLY BELIEVE IT. THE PLT OF THE OTHER PLANE WAS GOING TO RPT HIM, BUT WAS CONVINCED THAT IT WAS A SIMPLE ISOLATED MISTAKE. THE FLT BACK BEGAN AROUND XB30 PM AND WAS LESS EVENTFUL, BUT PUNCTUATED BY AN INFLT CELLULAR PHONE CALL, TURNING DOWN THE RADIO WHILE 'WITH' FLT FOLLOWING FOR AT LEAST 10 MI (ACCORDING TO THE CTLR WHEN CONTACT WAS REESTABLISHED), AND ENTERING THE TCA WITH A XPONDER THAT HE ADMITTED TO BAY APCH HAS NOT BEEN RELIABLE FOR QUITE SOME TIME. HE WAS INSTRUCTED TO TURN MODE C OFF. I HAVE NOT MENTIONED NAMES IN THIS LETTER BECAUSE I AM NOT IN A POS TO 'TURN IN' THIS PLT. MANY OF THE VIOLATIONS ON THIS TRIP WERE NOT KNOWN TO ANYONE OUTSIDE OF THE COCKPIT AND THEREFORE COULDN'T BE ACTED ON. WHEN I LEARNED TO FLY I WAS TAUGHTTO RESPECT THE REGS AND THAT THOSE WHO DIDN'T WOULD BE CAUGHT. I LEARNED THAT A VIOLATION OF A TCA WAS A CRIME PUNISHED BY CERTIFICATE SUSPENSION. IN THE FEW YRS OF FLYING I HAVE HEARD STORIES OF EXCEPTIONS AND HEARD STORIES OF 'MINOR' INFRACTIONS GOING SEVERELY PUNISHED. I CAN'T BELIEVE A PLT ENTERED THE TCA IN THE CLOUDS, WITH A MODE C XPONDER ERROR OF AT LEAST 400 FT, AND WITHOUT A CLRNC WAS NOT EVEN REPRIMANDED. I HOPE YOU WILL BE INSPIRED TO LOOK AT THE ACTIVITY IN THIS BUSY AND POTENTIALLY DANGEROUS SECTOR. I REALIZE MISTAKES CAN BE MADE AND THAT THE FAA HAS BEEN CRITICIZED FOR BEING TOO BRUTAL. HOWEVER, THERE SHOULD BE A WAY OF KEEPING THIS KIND OF PLT FROM FLYING. I KNOW THE PLT OF THIS PLANE WILL BREAK REGS IN THE FUTURE. HE HAS TRAVERSED THE TCA IN MODE C VIOLATION SEVERAL TIMES IN THIS ACFT AND HE BRAGGED OF MANY FLTS IN HIS 800 HRS OF EXPERIENCE THAT SEEMED TO FALL OUTSIDE THE LOOSEST INTERP OF THE FARS. I HOPE YOU WILL USE THIS LETTER TO LET CTLRS KNOW WHAT COULD BE GOING ON BEYOND THEIR RADAR SCOPES AND THAT BEING THE 'NICE UNDERSTANDING PERSON' MAY SEEM LIKE THE THING TO DO, BUT IT COULD GET PEOPLE KILLED.

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.