Narrative:

I had a meeting with lawyer, FAA, from xx discussing my flight on nov/xx/95, between 2 small cities, cambridge, ny, and north adams, ma, about 20 NM in perfect VFR WX when suddenly I was 'ambushed' by blinding snow shower. Instead chancing to land (or crash) I called albany radar approach 'I am experiencing occasional IFR, I am still VFR but I would appreciate your assistance.' when you examine my correspondence, you will notice that I did agree for a meeting with FAA representative. This took place yesterday at abc FSDO. FAA lawyer knew absolutely nothing about flying, about meteorology, or about aviation sectionals. FAA lawyer could not possibly understand difference between terminal (ATIS) WX and area WX forecast. All FAA lawyer knew, visual and instrument. FSDO and FAA are trying to tell me that I 'knowingly entered IFR' what is totally false and FAA lawyer could not possibly understand that. Of course I understand perfectly well, that FAA cannot have educated pilot or meteorologist, for every case, but at least they can make them knowledgeable about the subject. In connection, with all above, and copies that I am enclosing I do question the wisdom, legality, and justice of actions performed by FAA. My experience, in last 15 yrs dealing with FAA, shows they do not conduct investigation in depth. They have tendency to believe only those who are on FAA payroll. FSDO as well FAA ignoring 'I am innocent until proven guilty.' arbitrarily they penalize, reexamination, suspension, again, without in depth investigation, talking to me with an uneducated person, not a lawyer who knows nothing about particular subject. FAA totally ignoring their own far, and specially section 91.3(B), instead they are trying to find 'a hole in a totally legal action and well intentioned pilot.' when requested for proof of the allegations, they do not want to disclose that which includes FSDO. They will not let you use tape recorder. Statements that you make are ignored, nobody will call you and ask you for explanation. They jump to conclusion and they tell you that you can 'appeal' and my lawyer says 'they know each other and they stick together.' do not fight city hall. It is a shame, that we claim to be civilized people, and people who make a living from our taxes, act not in very democratic way, claiming in the name of 'safety of public.' how possibly, FAA lawyers can make a decision on unproven allegations and totally ignore statements made by the PIC, specially when he is acting in the name of safety believing that section 91.3(B) is well respected by FAA, is it?? No, from my 3 timely experiences. On nov/xx/95 early pm I took off from private strip in manchester, vt, for short trip to north adams, ma, with intention to fly than back to manchester or schenectady, ny. Briefer, informed me that very late that afternoon I may expect some nasty WX. After short stay at north adams, I did notice cloud build up over the mountains. I took off immediately. I saw big cloud and snow buildup over bennington port and valley, I decided to go to schenectady. By the time I did reach cam VOR I was in heavy snow storm. I did see ground but I felt IFR. I called 125 albany radar reporting 'I am on VFR flight but experiencing IFR conditions squawking 1200' I did also say this is not emergency I can handle well, steer me to schenectady. My ADF is set straight to NDB. Young fellow gave me immediately 7700 squawk and climb to 5000 ft. Well intentioned controller tried, steer me away from snow showers, can you see grass strip at argyl, can you see saratoga airport, and I am 5000 ft with no forward visibility and glued to my instruments and ground visibility to the left and right. He tries, good man, to talk me to albany ILS, I do decline 'I am not instrument rated now' and finally I impatiently requesting 'steer me to albany' (I am set for 115.3 VOR) or schenectady. After moment he says ok albany. I can see runway 19 with bright light I am reporting left base and I am set for final when he tells me 'you will see on the runway (near) several trucks.' surprisingly I callhim, controller, and I ask him 'what for all those trucks???' his answer, 'you will learn later.' it did not take me long to learn, full emergency alarm with trucks, ambulances, and fee of $9.00 of 'handling.' I did talk to your tower supervisor and he did explain to me a few things, but my point, is why all this emergency when emergency was not declared? Of course, I appreciate controller's concern, but was that necessary?

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: 'HIGH TIME' NON INST RATED PVT PLT FLEW INTO A SNOW STORM DURING A VFR XCOUNTRY FLT AND SUBSEQUENTLY FAILED TO FOLLOW TWR INSTRUCTIONS AFTER TKOF AT ANOTHER ARPT. VFR IN IMC.

Narrative: I HAD A MEETING WITH LAWYER, FAA, FROM XX DISCUSSING MY FLT ON NOV/XX/95, BTWN 2 SMALL CITIES, CAMBRIDGE, NY, AND N ADAMS, MA, ABOUT 20 NM IN PERFECT VFR WX WHEN SUDDENLY I WAS 'AMBUSHED' BY BLINDING SNOW SHOWER. INSTEAD CHANCING TO LAND (OR CRASH) I CALLED ALBANY RADAR APCH 'I AM EXPERIENCING OCCASIONAL IFR, I AM STILL VFR BUT I WOULD APPRECIATE YOUR ASSISTANCE.' WHEN YOU EXAMINE MY CORRESPONDENCE, YOU WILL NOTICE THAT I DID AGREE FOR A MEETING WITH FAA REPRESENTATIVE. THIS TOOK PLACE YESTERDAY AT ABC FSDO. FAA LAWYER KNEW ABSOLUTELY NOTHING ABOUT FLYING, ABOUT METEOROLOGY, OR ABOUT AVIATION SECTIONALS. FAA LAWYER COULD NOT POSSIBLY UNDERSTAND DIFFERENCE BTWN TERMINAL (ATIS) WX AND AREA WX FORECAST. ALL FAA LAWYER KNEW, VISUAL AND INST. FSDO AND FAA ARE TRYING TO TELL ME THAT I 'KNOWINGLY ENTERED IFR' WHAT IS TOTALLY FALSE AND FAA LAWYER COULD NOT POSSIBLY UNDERSTAND THAT. OF COURSE I UNDERSTAND PERFECTLY WELL, THAT FAA CANNOT HAVE EDUCATED PLT OR METEOROLOGIST, FOR EVERY CASE, BUT AT LEAST THEY CAN MAKE THEM KNOWLEDGEABLE ABOUT THE SUBJECT. IN CONNECTION, WITH ALL ABOVE, AND COPIES THAT I AM ENCLOSING I DO QUESTION THE WISDOM, LEGALITY, AND JUSTICE OF ACTIONS PERFORMED BY FAA. MY EXPERIENCE, IN LAST 15 YRS DEALING WITH FAA, SHOWS THEY DO NOT CONDUCT INVESTIGATION IN DEPTH. THEY HAVE TENDENCY TO BELIEVE ONLY THOSE WHO ARE ON FAA PAYROLL. FSDO AS WELL FAA IGNORING 'I AM INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN GUILTY.' ARBITRARILY THEY PENALIZE, REEXAMINATION, SUSPENSION, AGAIN, WITHOUT IN DEPTH INVESTIGATION, TALKING TO ME WITH AN UNEDUCATED PERSON, NOT A LAWYER WHO KNOWS NOTHING ABOUT PARTICULAR SUBJECT. FAA TOTALLY IGNORING THEIR OWN FAR, AND SPECIALLY SECTION 91.3(B), INSTEAD THEY ARE TRYING TO FIND 'A HOLE IN A TOTALLY LEGAL ACTION AND WELL INTENTIONED PLT.' WHEN REQUESTED FOR PROOF OF THE ALLEGATIONS, THEY DO NOT WANT TO DISCLOSE THAT WHICH INCLUDES FSDO. THEY WILL NOT LET YOU USE TAPE RECORDER. STATEMENTS THAT YOU MAKE ARE IGNORED, NOBODY WILL CALL YOU AND ASK YOU FOR EXPLANATION. THEY JUMP TO CONCLUSION AND THEY TELL YOU THAT YOU CAN 'APPEAL' AND MY LAWYER SAYS 'THEY KNOW EACH OTHER AND THEY STICK TOGETHER.' DO NOT FIGHT CITY HALL. IT IS A SHAME, THAT WE CLAIM TO BE CIVILIZED PEOPLE, AND PEOPLE WHO MAKE A LIVING FROM OUR TAXES, ACT NOT IN VERY DEMOCRATIC WAY, CLAIMING IN THE NAME OF 'SAFETY OF PUBLIC.' HOW POSSIBLY, FAA LAWYERS CAN MAKE A DECISION ON UNPROVEN ALLEGATIONS AND TOTALLY IGNORE STATEMENTS MADE BY THE PIC, SPECIALLY WHEN HE IS ACTING IN THE NAME OF SAFETY BELIEVING THAT SECTION 91.3(B) IS WELL RESPECTED BY FAA, IS IT?? NO, FROM MY 3 TIMELY EXPERIENCES. ON NOV/XX/95 EARLY PM I TOOK OFF FROM PVT STRIP IN MANCHESTER, VT, FOR SHORT TRIP TO N ADAMS, MA, WITH INTENTION TO FLY THAN BACK TO MANCHESTER OR SCHENECTADY, NY. BRIEFER, INFORMED ME THAT VERY LATE THAT AFTERNOON I MAY EXPECT SOME NASTY WX. AFTER SHORT STAY AT N ADAMS, I DID NOTICE CLOUD BUILD UP OVER THE MOUNTAINS. I TOOK OFF IMMEDIATELY. I SAW BIG CLOUD AND SNOW BUILDUP OVER BENNINGTON PORT AND VALLEY, I DECIDED TO GO TO SCHENECTADY. BY THE TIME I DID REACH CAM VOR I WAS IN HVY SNOW STORM. I DID SEE GND BUT I FELT IFR. I CALLED 125 ALBANY RADAR RPTING 'I AM ON VFR FLT BUT EXPERIENCING IFR CONDITIONS SQUAWKING 1200' I DID ALSO SAY THIS IS NOT EMER I CAN HANDLE WELL, STEER ME TO SCHENECTADY. MY ADF IS SET STRAIGHT TO NDB. YOUNG FELLOW GAVE ME IMMEDIATELY 7700 SQUAWK AND CLB TO 5000 FT. WELL INTENTIONED CTLR TRIED, STEER ME AWAY FROM SNOW SHOWERS, CAN YOU SEE GRASS STRIP AT ARGYL, CAN YOU SEE SARATOGA ARPT, AND I AM 5000 FT WITH NO FORWARD VISIBILITY AND GLUED TO MY INSTS AND GND VISIBILITY TO THE L AND R. HE TRIES, GOOD MAN, TO TALK ME TO ALBANY ILS, I DO DECLINE 'I AM NOT INST RATED NOW' AND FINALLY I IMPATIENTLY REQUESTING 'STEER ME TO ALBANY' (I AM SET FOR 115.3 VOR) OR SCHENECTADY. AFTER MOMENT HE SAYS OK ALBANY. I CAN SEE RWY 19 WITH BRIGHT LIGHT I AM RPTING L BASE AND I AM SET FOR FINAL WHEN HE TELLS ME 'YOU WILL SEE ON THE RWY (NEAR) SEVERAL TRUCKS.' SURPRISINGLY I CALLHIM, CTLR, AND I ASK HIM 'WHAT FOR ALL THOSE TRUCKS???' HIS ANSWER, 'YOU WILL LEARN LATER.' IT DID NOT TAKE ME LONG TO LEARN, FULL EMER ALARM WITH TRUCKS, AMBULANCES, AND FEE OF $9.00 OF 'HANDLING.' I DID TALK TO YOUR TWR SUPVR AND HE DID EXPLAIN TO ME A FEW THINGS, BUT MY POINT, IS WHY ALL THIS EMER WHEN EMER WAS NOT DECLARED? OF COURSE, I APPRECIATE CTLR'S CONCERN, BUT WAS THAT NECESSARY?

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.