Publication deficiency cited by reporter that makes his pilot flight crew planning in-flight less pr...

Attributes
ACN	274279
Time
Date	199406
Day	Tue
Local Time Of Day	0601 To 1200
Place
Locale Reference	atc facility : zzz
State Reference	US
Altitude	msl bound lower : 18000 msl bound upper : 25000
Aircraft 1
Controlling Facilities	artcc : zzz
Operator	general aviation : corporate
Make Model Name	Commercial Fixed Wing
Operating Under FAR Part	Part 91
Navigation In Use	Other
Flight Phase	cruise other
Route In Use	enroute : direct enroute other
Flight Plan	IFR
Person 1
Affiliation	Other
Function	flight crew : captain oversight : pic
Qualification	pilot : atp
Experience	flight time last 90 days : 60 flight time total : 4200
ASRS Report	274279
Person 2
Affiliation	Other
Function	flight crew : first officer
Qualification	pilot : instrument pilot : commercial
Events
Anomaly	other anomaly other
Independent Detector	other flight crewa
Resolutory Action	none taken : anomaly accepted
Consequence	Other
Supplementary
Primary Problem	Chart Or Publication
Air Traffic Incident	other
Situations
ATC Facility	procedure or policy : unspecified

Narrative:

This is a general description of a problem with pubs. No particular incident occurred -- although there is a possibility that one could occur. The highest altitude depicted for any MOA on the published charts (hi, lo, RNAV) is FL180. As a former navy pilot and user of MOA's I know that higher altitudes are routinely used (FL240). I routinely file RNAV direct and always check the maximum altitude of any MOA's I cross. All say FL180 or lower, yet on frequent occasions I have been vectored around these MOA's at FL250 and higher. Chart manufacturer says they just report what the FAA publishes. Recommendation: if the user of the MOA routinely uses altitudes higher than FL180 then the official description of the MOA should reflect that higher altitude. While it is true that the area above FL180 is class a airspace and all aircraft will be under IFR, it would prevent surprises and unexpected vectors to have the actual maximum altitude published on the charts.

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: PUB DEFICIENCY CITED BY RPTR THAT MAKES HIS PLT FLC PLANNING INFLT LESS PREDICTABLE.

Narrative: THIS IS A GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF A PROB WITH PUBS. NO PARTICULAR INCIDENT OCCURRED -- ALTHOUGH THERE IS A POSSIBILITY THAT ONE COULD OCCUR. THE HIGHEST ALT DEPICTED FOR ANY MOA ON THE PUBLISHED CHARTS (HI, LO, RNAV) IS FL180. AS A FORMER NAVY PLT AND USER OF MOA'S I KNOW THAT HIGHER ALTS ARE ROUTINELY USED (FL240). I ROUTINELY FILE RNAV DIRECT AND ALWAYS CHK THE MAX ALT OF ANY MOA'S I CROSS. ALL SAY FL180 OR LOWER, YET ON FREQUENT OCCASIONS I HAVE BEEN VECTORED AROUND THESE MOA'S AT FL250 AND HIGHER. CHART MANUFACTURER SAYS THEY JUST RPT WHAT THE FAA PUBLISHES. RECOMMENDATION: IF THE USER OF THE MOA ROUTINELY USES ALTS HIGHER THAN FL180 THEN THE OFFICIAL DESCRIPTION OF THE MOA SHOULD REFLECT THAT HIGHER ALT. WHILE IT IS TRUE THAT THE AREA ABOVE FL180 IS CLASS A AIRSPACE AND ALL ACFT WILL BE UNDER IFR, IT WOULD PREVENT SURPRISES AND UNEXPECTED VECTORS TO HAVE THE ACTUAL MAX ALT PUBLISHED ON THE CHARTS.

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.

Publication deficiency cited by reporter that makes his pilot flight crew planning in-flight less predictable.