Small aircraft in IMC given a heading change from 310 degrees to 220 degrees chose to turn right without ATC approval. An less than standard separation resulted. This was an instrument training flight. Instructor wondered about the turn but did nothing about it.

Home

Browse by month

Random

Latest

About

Contact

Attributes
ACN	358119
Time
Date	199701
Day	Thu
Local Time Of Day	1201 To 1800
Place
Locale Reference	airport : pwt
State Reference	WA
Altitude	msl bound lower : 4000 msl bound upper : 4000
Environment
Flight Conditions	IMC
Light	Daylight
Aircraft 1
Controlling Facilities	tracon : sea
Operator	general aviation : personal
Make Model Name	Any Unknown or Unlisted Aircraft Manufacturer
Operating Under FAR Part	Part 91
Flight Phase	cruise other
Route In Use	enroute : on vectors
Flight Plan	IFR
Person 1
Affiliation	Other
Function	instruction : instructor oversight : pic
Qualification	pilot : instrument pilot : commercial
Experience	flight time last 90 days : 32 flight time total : 1900 flight time type : 630
ASRS Report	358119
Person 2
Affiliation	Other
Function	instruction : trainee
Qualification	other other : other
Events
Anomaly	non adherence : clearance non adherence : required legal separation other spatial deviation
Independent Detector	other controllera
Resolutory Action	none taken : anomaly accepted none taken : detected after the fact
Consequence	faa : reviewed incident with flight crew
Supplementary
Primary Problem	Flight Crew Human Performance
Air Traffic Incident	Pilot Deviation

Narrative:

After a missed approach at tiw, ATC provided radar vectors and altitude assignment to pwt, ATC notified us of radio transmission/reception problems. Much discussion took place between the pilot and ATC concerning the quality of communications during the flight to pwt. We were on a heading of 310 degrees in IMC. Somewhere near pwt ATC assigned a heading of 220 degrees. The pilot chose to make a right turn to 220 degrees. I questioned direction of turn so the pilot asked ATC for clarification on direction of turn. Receiving no response from ATC, the pilot continued the right turn to 220 degree heading. We were subsequently cleared for the ADF approach at pwt. Upon return to our home field at pae. We were told on final approach by ATC to contact ATC by telephone on landing. From the phone call to ATC we learned that ATC had assigned a left turn to 220 degrees in the vicinity of pwt and that the right turn which was flown to 220 degree heading caused an incursion/conflict with another aircraft which was redirected for evasive action.

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: SMA IN IMC GIVEN A HDG CHANGE FROM 310 DEGS TO 220 DEGS CHOSE TO TURN R WITHOUT ATC APPROVAL. AN LTSS RESULTED. THIS WAS AN INST TRAINING FLT. INSTRUCTOR WONDERED ABOUT THE TURN BUT DID NOTHING ABOUT IT.

Narrative: AFTER A MISSED APCH AT TIW, ATC PROVIDED RADAR VECTORS AND ALT ASSIGNMENT TO PWT, ATC NOTIFIED US OF RADIO XMISSION/RECEPTION PROBS. MUCH DISCUSSION TOOK PLACE BTWN THE PLT AND ATC CONCERNING THE QUALITY OF COMS DURING THE FLT TO PWT. WE WERE ON A HDG OF 310 DEGS IN IMC. SOMEWHERE NEAR PWT ATC ASSIGNED A HDG OF 220 DEGS. THE PLT CHOSE TO MAKE A R TURN TO 220 DEGS. I QUESTIONED DIRECTION OF TURN SO THE PLT ASKED ATC FOR CLARIFICATION ON DIRECTION OF TURN. RECEIVING NO RESPONSE FROM ATC, THE PLT CONTINUED THE R TURN TO 220 DEG HDG. WE WERE SUBSEQUENTLY CLRED FOR THE ADF APCH AT PWT. UPON RETURN TO OUR HOME FIELD AT PAE. WE WERE TOLD ON FINAL APCH BY ATC TO CONTACT ATC BY TELEPHONE ON LNDG. FROM THE PHONE CALL TO ATC WE LEARNED THAT ATC HAD ASSIGNED A L TURN TO 220 DEGS IN THE VICINITY OF PWT AND THAT THE R TURN WHICH WAS FLOWN TO 220 DEG HDG CAUSED AN INCURSION/CONFLICT WITH ANOTHER ACFT WHICH WAS REDIRECTED FOR EVASIVE ACTION.

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.