Narrative:

When air carrier X called for pushback clearance they were told by toluca tower that the airfield was below minimums and that WX was forecast to be better in 1 - 1 1/2 hours, call back then. The crew discussed operating procedures and ATC procedures in mexico (far mexico-2) and decided to call back to work out permission to taxi out to evaluate the actual visibility. After much discussion and problems with language barrier and phraseology, crew was given permission to start taxi at crew's own responsibility. Toluca tower would not issue an IFR flight clearance, pending adequate takeoff visibility. The crew pushed back, started, and taxied to runway 15, keeping toluca tower advised of their position at all times. Taxi visibility was not a problem. Upon reaching in position for takeoff and determining takeoff visibility was greater than 1/2 mi, crew informed tower of actual visibility and requested IFR clearance. Again, crew was told, no en route clearance because airfield was below minimums. Crew decided to pick up clearance airborne if tower would allow the takeoff. Crew requested takeoff clearance and were told they could takeoff on their own responsibility. Crew acknowledged they were executing takeoff, normal takeoff completed. Clearance en route to gdl was obtained easily after takeoff. Crew was informed by company representative (safety) the following day toluca tower had reported the crew for violation of procedures. It appears as though, because of language barrier and air crew/tower controller misunderstanding, the intentions of tower and crew were not clear. ATC procedures in mexico permit the crew to follow the procedures as executed. Supplemental information from acn 295280: X called for pushback and start but were told 'field is below minimums, call in 1 - 1 1/2 hours' for departure. We discussed this among ourselves and concluded that prevailing visibility being below takeoff minimums should not preclude our start and taxi so we called again and were told we could start and taxi under what he termed 'our own responsibility.' we accepted this and taxied to runway 15. At all times we kept tower aware of our location. Upon reaching takeoff position for runway 15, we gave the tower a PIREP as the runway visibility was at least 1/2 mi and requested takeoff clearance. Once again we were told the airport was 'below minimums' but we could takeoff 'with our own responsibility.' after a brief discussion with the crew we assured ourselves that 1) a safe takeoff could easily be accomplished, and that 2) we were responsible for performing the takeoff visually and safely. Poor radio quality, inadequate airport facilities (no RVR or realistic method of determining actual runway visibility rather than tower visibility almost a mi from the runway end) and tower operators extremely lacking in english skills plus inconsistent practices among tower personnel as to what you can and cannot do make operations at toluca difficult at best, and bordering unsafe at worst. Supplemental information from acn 295868: captain said 'let's close up and we'll taxi out to see what prevailing visibility is at runway. Captain stated this was in accordance with air carrier procedures operating out of toluca. Ground reiterated field was below minimums and we could taxi only under 'our own responsibility.' we provided update reports to tower on our position on airport txwys. At end of runway 15, first officer called tower reporting visibility via PIREP to be 1/2 mi and requested clearance and takeoff clearance. Again tower reported field below minimums but you can takeoff on your own responsibility and get further clearance from mexico center after airborne.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: ACR IMC UNAUTH TKOF BELOW WX MINIMUMS FOR DEP IN FOREIGN COUNTRY. PLTDEV. VIOLATION FAR 121 PT 651.

Narrative: WHEN ACR X CALLED FOR PUSHBACK CLRNC THEY WERE TOLD BY TOLUCA TWR THAT THE AIRFIELD WAS BELOW MINIMUMS AND THAT WX WAS FORECAST TO BE BETTER IN 1 - 1 1/2 HRS, CALL BACK THEN. THE CREW DISCUSSED OPERATING PROCS AND ATC PROCS IN MEXICO (FAR MEXICO-2) AND DECIDED TO CALL BACK TO WORK OUT PERMISSION TO TAXI OUT TO EVALUATE THE ACTUAL VISIBILITY. AFTER MUCH DISCUSSION AND PROBS WITH LANGUAGE BARRIER AND PHRASEOLOGY, CREW WAS GIVEN PERMISSION TO START TAXI AT CREW'S OWN RESPONSIBILITY. TOLUCA TWR WOULD NOT ISSUE AN IFR FLT CLRNC, PENDING ADEQUATE TKOF VISIBILITY. THE CREW PUSHED BACK, STARTED, AND TAXIED TO RWY 15, KEEPING TOLUCA TWR ADVISED OF THEIR POS AT ALL TIMES. TAXI VISIBILITY WAS NOT A PROB. UPON REACHING IN POS FOR TKOF AND DETERMINING TKOF VISIBILITY WAS GREATER THAN 1/2 MI, CREW INFORMED TWR OF ACTUAL VISIBILITY AND REQUESTED IFR CLRNC. AGAIN, CREW WAS TOLD, NO ENRTE CLRNC BECAUSE AIRFIELD WAS BELOW MINIMUMS. CREW DECIDED TO PICK UP CLRNC AIRBORNE IF TWR WOULD ALLOW THE TKOF. CREW REQUESTED TKOF CLRNC AND WERE TOLD THEY COULD TKOF ON THEIR OWN RESPONSIBILITY. CREW ACKNOWLEDGED THEY WERE EXECUTING TKOF, NORMAL TKOF COMPLETED. CLRNC ENRTE TO GDL WAS OBTAINED EASILY AFTER TKOF. CREW WAS INFORMED BY COMPANY REPRESENTATIVE (SAFETY) THE FOLLOWING DAY TOLUCA TWR HAD RPTED THE CREW FOR VIOLATION OF PROCS. IT APPEARS AS THOUGH, BECAUSE OF LANGUAGE BARRIER AND AIR CREW/TWR CTLR MISUNDERSTANDING, THE INTENTIONS OF TWR AND CREW WERE NOT CLR. ATC PROCS IN MEXICO PERMIT THE CREW TO FOLLOW THE PROCS AS EXECUTED. SUPPLEMENTAL INFO FROM ACN 295280: X CALLED FOR PUSHBACK AND START BUT WERE TOLD 'FIELD IS BELOW MINIMUMS, CALL IN 1 - 1 1/2 HRS' FOR DEP. WE DISCUSSED THIS AMONG OURSELVES AND CONCLUDED THAT PREVAILING VISIBILITY BEING BELOW TKOF MINIMUMS SHOULD NOT PRECLUDE OUR START AND TAXI SO WE CALLED AGAIN AND WERE TOLD WE COULD START AND TAXI UNDER WHAT HE TERMED 'OUR OWN RESPONSIBILITY.' WE ACCEPTED THIS AND TAXIED TO RWY 15. AT ALL TIMES WE KEPT TWR AWARE OF OUR LOCATION. UPON REACHING TKOF POS FOR RWY 15, WE GAVE THE TWR A PIREP AS THE RWY VISIBILITY WAS AT LEAST 1/2 MI AND REQUESTED TKOF CLRNC. ONCE AGAIN WE WERE TOLD THE ARPT WAS 'BELOW MINIMUMS' BUT WE COULD TKOF 'WITH OUR OWN RESPONSIBILITY.' AFTER A BRIEF DISCUSSION WITH THE CREW WE ASSURED OURSELVES THAT 1) A SAFE TKOF COULD EASILY BE ACCOMPLISHED, AND THAT 2) WE WERE RESPONSIBLE FOR PERFORMING THE TKOF VISUALLY AND SAFELY. POOR RADIO QUALITY, INADEQUATE ARPT FACILITIES (NO RVR OR REALISTIC METHOD OF DETERMINING ACTUAL RWY VISIBILITY RATHER THAN TWR VISIBILITY ALMOST A MI FROM THE RWY END) AND TWR OPERATORS EXTREMELY LACKING IN ENGLISH SKILLS PLUS INCONSISTENT PRACTICES AMONG TWR PERSONNEL AS TO WHAT YOU CAN AND CANNOT DO MAKE OPS AT TOLUCA DIFFICULT AT BEST, AND BORDERING UNSAFE AT WORST. SUPPLEMENTAL INFO FROM ACN 295868: CAPT SAID 'LET'S CLOSE UP AND WE'LL TAXI OUT TO SEE WHAT PREVAILING VISIBILITY IS AT RWY. CAPT STATED THIS WAS IN ACCORDANCE WITH ACR PROCS OPERATING OUT OF TOLUCA. GND REITERATED FIELD WAS BELOW MINIMUMS AND WE COULD TAXI ONLY UNDER 'OUR OWN RESPONSIBILITY.' WE PROVIDED UPDATE RPTS TO TWR ON OUR POS ON ARPT TXWYS. AT END OF RWY 15, FO CALLED TWR RPTING VISIBILITY VIA PIREP TO BE 1/2 MI AND REQUESTED CLRNC AND TKOF CLRNC. AGAIN TWR RPTED FIELD BELOW MINIMUMS BUT YOU CAN TKOF ON YOUR OWN RESPONSIBILITY AND GET FURTHER CLRNC FROM MEXICO CTR AFTER AIRBORNE.

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.