Narrative:

While deviating east for WX ATC requested not to deviation any farther east than 77 west. We advised that would not be a problem. ATC also requested expedite to FL330. Aircraft was climbing slow out of FL310 because of a high gross weight with engine and wing anti-ice on. Climb rate was 300-500 FPM. Upon changing ATC frequency we were advised to increase speed to .80 as soon as possible due to traffic behind us doing .84. Once level at FL330 ATC advised of a traffic and we must turn right 30 degrees for traffic. We advised that 30 right would put us very close to our off shore limit. ATC said either 30 right or expedite to FL310. A descent would put us in a thunderstorm. We chose the right turn deeming it the safer course of action. Had we not had to turn 30 right we would have remained clear of our limit. With a 30 right turn we were very close to our offshore limit. Callback conversation with reporter revealed the following information: captain was called to verify accuracy of report, because as it is turned in, it is incomplete by ASRS standards. Flight crew was certain they may have violated the 162 nautical mi limit of their aircraft from the coastline, which would possibly violate the distance limit. They were very much against declaring an 'emergency' for traffic separation so decided to chance the fact they might not have violated the limit and if they should have violated it they would file an ASRS report. Reporter counseled on when to use the word 'emergency,' planning WX deviations further in advance, and informing controller earlier of what is needed.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: FLC DEVIATES AROUND WX WITH CONCERN THEY MIGHT VIOLATE THE 162 NAUTICAL MI OFFSHORE LIMIT FOR THEIR TYPE ACFT.

Narrative: WHILE DEVIATING E FOR WX ATC REQUESTED NOT TO DEV ANY FARTHER E THAN 77 W. WE ADVISED THAT WOULD NOT BE A PROB. ATC ALSO REQUESTED EXPEDITE TO FL330. ACFT WAS CLBING SLOW OUT OF FL310 BECAUSE OF A HIGH GROSS WT WITH ENG AND WING ANTI-ICE ON. CLB RATE WAS 300-500 FPM. UPON CHANGING ATC FREQ WE WERE ADVISED TO INCREASE SPD TO .80 AS SOON AS POSSIBLE DUE TO TFC BEHIND US DOING .84. ONCE LEVEL AT FL330 ATC ADVISED OF A TFC AND WE MUST TURN R 30 DEGS FOR TFC. WE ADVISED THAT 30 R WOULD PUT US VERY CLOSE TO OUR OFF SHORE LIMIT. ATC SAID EITHER 30 R OR EXPEDITE TO FL310. A DSCNT WOULD PUT US IN A TSTM. WE CHOSE THE R TURN DEEMING IT THE SAFER COURSE OF ACTION. HAD WE NOT HAD TO TURN 30 R WE WOULD HAVE REMAINED CLR OF OUR LIMIT. WITH A 30 R TURN WE WERE VERY CLOSE TO OUR OFFSHORE LIMIT. CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING INFO: CAPT WAS CALLED TO VERIFY ACCURACY OF RPT, BECAUSE AS IT IS TURNED IN, IT IS INCOMPLETE BY ASRS STANDARDS. FLC WAS CERTAIN THEY MAY HAVE VIOLATED THE 162 NAUTICAL MI LIMIT OF THEIR ACFT FROM THE COASTLINE, WHICH WOULD POSSIBLY VIOLATE THE DISTANCE LIMIT. THEY WERE VERY MUCH AGAINST DECLARING AN 'EMER' FOR TFC SEPARATION SO DECIDED TO CHANCE THE FACT THEY MIGHT NOT HAVE VIOLATED THE LIMIT AND IF THEY SHOULD HAVE VIOLATED IT THEY WOULD FILE AN ASRS RPT. RPTR COUNSELED ON WHEN TO USE THE WORD 'EMER,' PLANNING WX DEVS FURTHER IN ADVANCE, AND INFORMING CTLR EARLIER OF WHAT IS NEEDED.

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.