Narrative:

An small aircraft aircraft 2 occupants, full tanks, and camping gear/clothes for a 5 night stay, departed 8a6, 13 mi due east of charlotte douglas. The altimeter was set at field elevation (800 ft). During initial climb out, charlotte ATIS was reviewed with no adjustment made to the altimeter. A shallow cruise climb was established at 130 mph indicated, 300 FPM rate of climb. The pilot has based his aircraft in the charlotte area since 1986 and is well aware of the geographical expanse of the TCA floor and the imposed altitude restrictions, in this case, 3600 ft MSL. His self-imposed ceiling in this area is 3500 ft. Because of numerous flts together, the passenger was also well aware of the airspace limits, and was following the flight progress on the plotted sectional. Although not fully licensed, the passenger had taken ground school, soloed and had become quite proficient in flight tracking. It is the best judgement of the pilot that 3600 ft was not exceeded until the aircraft was a minimum of 25 NM nne of the charlotte airport. Upon contacting cincinnati approach control, the pilot was notified that charlotte TRACON had recorded an airspace violation, no details were available. This controller verified that the mode C reported altitude was the same as reported in the cockpit. During a telephone conversation with the charlotte FSDO, it was determined that the alleged violation was reported to have taken place at 4800 ft, 13 mi ene of charlotte at AM30. This point is approximately 6 to 10 mi nnw of the departure airport. Argument: given the indicated flight parameters (rate of climb and speed mentioned above), the subject aircraft was at or below 2800 ft as it crossed the indicated location. Given the published maximum sustained climb rate of 650 FPM, at 98 mph, it would have taken slight over 10 mi for the aircraft to reach the claimed altitude assuming optimum conditions. Stated in other words, this 31 yr old aircraft would have to meet or greatly exceed its published maximum performance figures (considered to be slightly optimistic even by the manufacturer) to be at the point in space as claimed. The differences between the altitude reported by charlotte and that shown in the cockpit at any point within 15 mi of the indicated location are so great (1300 ft) that an unsuspected mechanical aberration must be discounted. There was no indication on the aircraft altimeter above 3500 ft at any point within 20 mi of charlotte douglas. It is categorically and completely denied that any violation of this airspace occurred during this flight. Also, given the physical parameters, it is impossible, or at least improbable, for the aircraft to have been flown to the reported point. It is also illogical that a rational person would commit such a flagrant violation while activating a flight plan so that there is a traceable record of the flight. Personal review of the transcripts has been requested of the charlotte FSDO.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: SMA ALLEGEDLY PENETRATES TCA.

Narrative: AN SMA ACFT 2 OCCUPANTS, FULL TANKS, AND CAMPING GEAR/CLOTHES FOR A 5 NIGHT STAY, DEPARTED 8A6, 13 MI DUE E OF CHARLOTTE DOUGLAS. THE ALTIMETER WAS SET AT FIELD ELEVATION (800 FT). DURING INITIAL CLBOUT, CHARLOTTE ATIS WAS REVIEWED WITH NO ADJUSTMENT MADE TO THE ALTIMETER. A SHALLOW CRUISE CLB WAS ESTABLISHED AT 130 MPH INDICATED, 300 FPM RATE OF CLB. THE PLT HAS BASED HIS ACFT IN THE CHARLOTTE AREA SINCE 1986 AND IS WELL AWARE OF THE GEOGRAPHICAL EXPANSE OF THE TCA FLOOR AND THE IMPOSED ALT RESTRICTIONS, IN THIS CASE, 3600 FT MSL. HIS SELF-IMPOSED CEILING IN THIS AREA IS 3500 FT. BECAUSE OF NUMEROUS FLTS TOGETHER, THE PAX WAS ALSO WELL AWARE OF THE AIRSPACE LIMITS, AND WAS FOLLOWING THE FLT PROGRESS ON THE PLOTTED SECTIONAL. ALTHOUGH NOT FULLY LICENSED, THE PAX HAD TAKEN GND SCHOOL, SOLOED AND HAD BECOME QUITE PROFICIENT IN FLT TRACKING. IT IS THE BEST JUDGEMENT OF THE PLT THAT 3600 FT WAS NOT EXCEEDED UNTIL THE ACFT WAS A MINIMUM OF 25 NM NNE OF THE CHARLOTTE ARPT. UPON CONTACTING CINCINNATI APCH CTL, THE PLT WAS NOTIFIED THAT CHARLOTTE TRACON HAD RECORDED AN AIRSPACE VIOLATION, NO DETAILS WERE AVAILABLE. THIS CTLR VERIFIED THAT THE MODE C RPTED ALT WAS THE SAME AS RPTED IN THE COCKPIT. DURING A TELEPHONE CONVERSATION WITH THE CHARLOTTE FSDO, IT WAS DETERMINED THAT THE ALLEGED VIOLATION WAS RPTED TO HAVE TAKEN PLACE AT 4800 FT, 13 MI ENE OF CHARLOTTE AT AM30. THIS POINT IS APPROX 6 TO 10 MI NNW OF THE DEP ARPT. ARGUMENT: GIVEN THE INDICATED FLT PARAMETERS (RATE OF CLB AND SPD MENTIONED ABOVE), THE SUBJECT ACFT WAS AT OR BELOW 2800 FT AS IT CROSSED THE INDICATED LOCATION. GIVEN THE PUBLISHED MAX SUSTAINED CLB RATE OF 650 FPM, AT 98 MPH, IT WOULD HAVE TAKEN SLIGHT OVER 10 MI FOR THE ACFT TO REACH THE CLAIMED ALT ASSUMING OPTIMUM CONDITIONS. STATED IN OTHER WORDS, THIS 31 YR OLD ACFT WOULD HAVE TO MEET OR GREATLY EXCEED ITS PUBLISHED MAX PERFORMANCE FIGURES (CONSIDERED TO BE SLIGHTLY OPTIMISTIC EVEN BY THE MANUFACTURER) TO BE AT THE POINT IN SPACE AS CLAIMED. THE DIFFERENCES BTWN THE ALT RPTED BY CHARLOTTE AND THAT SHOWN IN THE COCKPIT AT ANY POINT WITHIN 15 MI OF THE INDICATED LOCATION ARE SO GREAT (1300 FT) THAT AN UNSUSPECTED MECHANICAL ABERRATION MUST BE DISCOUNTED. THERE WAS NO INDICATION ON THE ACFT ALTIMETER ABOVE 3500 FT AT ANY POINT WITHIN 20 MI OF CHARLOTTE DOUGLAS. IT IS CATEGORICALLY AND COMPLETELY DENIED THAT ANY VIOLATION OF THIS AIRSPACE OCCURRED DURING THIS FLT. ALSO, GIVEN THE PHYSICAL PARAMETERS, IT IS IMPOSSIBLE, OR AT LEAST IMPROBABLE, FOR THE ACFT TO HAVE BEEN FLOWN TO THE RPTED POINT. IT IS ALSO ILLOGICAL THAT A RATIONAL PERSON WOULD COMMIT SUCH A FLAGRANT VIOLATION WHILE ACTIVATING A FLT PLAN SO THAT THERE IS A TRACEABLE RECORD OF THE FLT. PERSONAL REVIEW OF THE TRANSCRIPTS HAS BEEN REQUESTED OF THE CHARLOTTE FSDO.

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.