An small transport pilot failed to monitor his heading gyro properly.

Attributes
ACN	279114
Time
Date	199408
Day	Fri
Local Time Of Day	0601 To 1200
Place
Locale Reference	airport : mie
State Reference	IN
Altitude	agl bound lower : 0 agl bound upper : 2500
Environment
Flight Conditions	IMC
Light	Daylight
Aircraft 1
Controlling Facilities	tower : mie tracon : ont
Make Model Name	Super King Air 200 HDC
Operating Under FAR Part	Part 91
Flight Phase	climbout : initial cruise other ground : preflight
Route In Use	enroute : on vectors
Flight Plan	IFR
Person 1
Affiliation	Other
Function	flight crew : single pilot
Qualification	pilot : commercial pilot : instrument
Experience	flight time last 90 days : 100 flight time total : 4750
ASRS Report	279114
Person 2
Affiliation	government : faa
Function	controller : departure
Qualification	controller : radar
Events
Anomaly	aircraft equipment problem : critical inflight encounter : weather non adherence : clearance other spatial deviation
Independent Detector	other controllera other flight crewa
Resolutory Action	flight crew : overcame equipment problem other
Consequence	Other
Supplementary
Primary Problem	Flight Crew Human Performance
Air Traffic Incident	Pilot Deviation

Narrative:

King air 200TG departed runway 02 at muncie on an IFR flight plan to evansville. Clearance was 'cleared as filed, climb maintain 3000 ft expect 14000 ft in 10 min. Department control frequency 120.65.' cleared for takeoff runway 02 and tower said 'climb and maintain 3000 left turn on course.' WX was 400 overcast, 4 mi with fog. Took off, started left turn to 230 degrees and tower said 'contact departure control' as I was doing so, I entered the overcast and contacted indianapolis departure control and received 'fly heading 240 maintain 3000 ft.' I turned left to 240 degree and departure said 'I said 270 degrees.' and I told him that he said 240 degrees. He then said 'fly 270 degrees.' I turned aircraft to 270 degrees. During this time the directional gyro spun and I was actually on a 90 heading. By the time I had the directional gyro under control and reset to 90 degrees so I could turn left to 270 degrees, departure control advised me of my heading and had to vector another aircraft coming into muncie. I turned left to 270 degrees as advised by ATC. Directional gyro was now working properly and I continued the flight to evansville, if there was no radar service at muncie, there could have been a midair in IMC conditions, or if it was controled by grissom approach control, which it used to be, and I have been advised by indianapolis ATC that the FAA is going to try to give it back to grissom. And if this happens and another aircraft has the same or different problem as I did, the ending result could be worse, because the radar coverage that we had before with grissom was not very good.

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: AN SMT PLT FAILED TO MONITOR HIS HDG GYRO PROPERLY.

Narrative: KING AIR 200TG DEPARTED RWY 02 AT MUNCIE ON AN IFR FLT PLAN TO EVANSVILLE. CLRNC WAS 'CLRED AS FILED, CLB MAINTAIN 3000 FT EXPECT 14000 FT IN 10 MIN. DEPT CTL FREQ 120.65.' CLRED FOR TKOF RWY 02 AND TWR SAID 'CLB AND MAINTAIN 3000 L TURN ON COURSE.' WX WAS 400 OVCST, 4 MI WITH FOG. TOOK OFF, STARTED L TURN TO 230 DEGS AND TWR SAID 'CONTACT DEP CTL' AS I WAS DOING SO, I ENTERED THE OVCST AND CONTACTED INDIANAPOLIS DEP CTL AND RECEIVED 'FLY HDG 240 MAINTAIN 3000 FT.' I TURNED L TO 240 DEG AND DEP SAID 'I SAID 270 DEGS.' AND I TOLD HIM THAT HE SAID 240 DEGS. HE THEN SAID 'FLY 270 DEGS.' I TURNED ACFT TO 270 DEGS. DURING THIS TIME THE DIRECTIONAL GYRO SPUN AND I WAS ACTUALLY ON A 90 HDG. BY THE TIME I HAD THE DIRECTIONAL GYRO UNDER CTL AND RESET TO 90 DEGS SO I COULD TURN L TO 270 DEGS, DEP CTL ADVISED ME OF MY HDG AND HAD TO VECTOR ANOTHER ACFT COMING INTO MUNCIE. I TURNED L TO 270 DEGS AS ADVISED BY ATC. DIRECTIONAL GYRO WAS NOW WORKING PROPERLY AND I CONTINUED THE FLT TO EVANSVILLE, IF THERE WAS NO RADAR SVC AT MUNCIE, THERE COULD HAVE BEEN A MIDAIR IN IMC CONDITIONS, OR IF IT WAS CTLED BY GRISSOM APCH CTL, WHICH IT USED TO BE, AND I HAVE BEEN ADVISED BY INDIANAPOLIS ATC THAT THE FAA IS GOING TO TRY TO GIVE IT BACK TO GRISSOM. AND IF THIS HAPPENS AND ANOTHER ACFT HAS THE SAME OR DIFFERENT PROB AS I DID, THE ENDING RESULT COULD BE WORSE, BECAUSE THE RADAR COVERAGE THAT WE HAD BEFORE WITH GRISSOM WAS NOT VERY GOOD.

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.