Narrative:

I had a commercial flight test under the terms of the practical test standards scheduled with the FAA riverside FSDO with inspector #2. During the flight, I possibly violated controled airspace by entering the ful class D airspace, the chino class D, and the ont class C airspace -- all without making radio contact with the various ATC facilities. A dispute arose during the flight concerning the flight into the controled airspaces, but the authority/authorized of FAA inspector was controling during the flight since he failed me on the check ride and indicated that he should report me. I anticipate such a report due to the verbal exchange we had in the plane flying back to riverside airport and the heated verbal exchange while on the ground in the plane and while walking into the FSDO. The WX in the southern california basin included a low level moist flow (marine layer) flowing at approximately 3000-3500 ft MSL behind a low moving out of the area. The winds at 6000 ft MSL had earlier been reported at about 270 degrees and 25 KTS. During the oral portion, I had explained that since inspector #2, another FAA inspector, had assigned the flight plan as an 'exercise' and was definite that we were not going to actually fly to lax and had stated the plan as flying possibly to paradise VOR and then doing the airwork portion of the check ride, I had not purchased a terminal area chart. The day before the chkride, inspector #1 had telephoned me to cancel because his boss had directed him to complete other more important chkrides, and inspector #2 was assigned for my chkride that same day after I had spoken to the FSDO assistant manager explaining that the following monday I had a CFI initial chkride scheduled with an examiner, did not have the additional $250 for both chkrides, and had been planning to earn some money from flight instruction. During the oral, I was asked if I had a terminal area chart so we could discuss my flight plan. My response was that I did not, explaining that when inspector #1 had assigned the flight plan he clearly told me that we were not going to fly into lax, he was planning to use the flight plan for the purpose of discussing the NAS during the oral, and that we might fly to paradise VOR and we would probably go directly into the airwork areas. During the oral, I could not have made it more clear to inspector #2 that I would not fly into the area I had been directed to flight plan without a current terminal area chart since they depict the various airspaces more clearly and actually have different locations for various ground reference points in comparison to airspace boundaries. Just before the break after the ground oral, inspector #2 had requested that I check my reference materials so I could explain more thoroughly the operation of magnetos and upon my questioning about what to do with the other materials, he told me to pack them all up and put it back into the plane except for what I needed to fly, as he pointed to my sectional chart. I was left with the impression that the plan had not changed from what inspector #1 had explained to me, expecting to take off after the break to do the airwork with a possible trip to paradise to check the time and distance calculations of my flight plan. With the mistaken impression that inspector #2 would not intentionally allow me to fly the trip if it was unsafe and/or would violate any airspace, I declined to flight plan another trip when he asked if I wanted to flight plan another trip instead. Beyond having all of my flight planning equipment in the plane and my focus on his stated 'purpose' of the short flight as a time and distance confirmation test, his open folded terminal area chart, I made the judgement error of agreeing to fly to halbut, even though I have never and would never fly so low into the los angeles basin without consulting a current terminal area chart. And, as I had explained to inspector #2, when I have flown into that area I have always flown high to overfly the class B airspace or flown around it completely. I passed the time and location portion of the flight test but failed the chkride when inspector #2 complained that I had violated the fullerton class D surface based airspace extending up to but not including 2500 ft MSL. A few mi before crossing the easterly boundaries of the class D was a low hilly area which had caused moderate to severe updrafts when over the area resulting in an increase of altitude by approximately 100 ft, and downdrafts upon crossing the hills resulting in a decrease of altitude by approximately 100 ft. After returning to 2500 ft indicated, inspector #2 asked what freeway we were crossing. I told him I thought it was the 5 freeway, but it was not idented on my sectional by name. He asked me to identify the freeway again, and I again looked at my map but did not see the freeway name. Also, about this time my crossing radial off seal beach VOR was ctring identing halbut intersection. Inspector #2 suggested I turn around to get out of the area -- as we had earlier planned on the ground. After turning the plane around, inspector #2 informed me that I had clearly entered the fullerton class D airspace illegally once I crossed the freeway, and that he should report me for a violation. I disputed his claimed violation. Inspector #2 showed me the terminal area chart he was using while explaining that it showed that upon crossing the freeway I was illegally into the class D. At the time, I was so shocked and upset by his claim that my only comments were that the sectional did not show the airspace violation and that I had earlier explained that I did not want to fly the trip and would not normally fly such a trip without a terminal area chart and that I could not believe that he would let me just fly into controled airspace after I had explained my reservations of using just a sectional after he had reviewed his own terminal area chart. After beginning the return trip to riverside airport, inspector #2 informed me that I had earlier violated the chino class D airspace as he pointed out that V8 ran directly across the airspace. (I believe this was his belated justification for the failure since he did not make the claim until we were returning and not when the alleged violation occurred.) I disputed his claim by explaining that even though the flight was planned for V8 I had diverted south around the chino airspace by flying near corona airport. Inspector #2 agreed that I had a 'right needle' but claimed that I had not diverted far enough. As we continued back, we encountered a severe updraft which pushed the plane up from 2500 ft to about 2700 ft and as I was pushing the nose down and reaching to lower manifold pressure, inspector #2 exclaimed that I had now violated the ont class C airspace and that if I wanted to fly so close below the airspace I had to control the airplane no matter what the conditions. I was so upset and angry with the underhanded tactics of inspector #2 I could not process the riverside tower direction to report left downwind and instead started to fly towards a right downwind entry. In the plane on the ground, inspector #2 stated that he had told me that I needed a terminal area chart and that he had brought one with him for a flight in such a congested airspace area and I should know better if I expected to be a commercial pilot. My primary point to him was that I did not appreciate him setting me up by changing the flight planning trip from an 'exercise' to the real thing, he had not contacted me earlier so I could purchase a terminal area chart, and that his conduct was a low class 'chicken-shit' thing to do to someone -- especially where he had obviously reviewed the trip using his terminal area chart and had allowed me to fly it even with my express reservations. He stated that he could not grant commercial operator privileges to someone who could make such a bad decision. He also denied setting me up since he had offered me a chance to flight plan a different trip.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: DURING AN FAA COMMERCIAL CERTIFICATION FLT TEST, PVT PLT OF A PIPER PA28 ARROW, FAILED TO MAINTAIN ALT DUE TO TURB AND ENTERED CLASS D AND CLASS C AIRSPACE WITHOUT CLRNC. THE RPTR COMPLAINS THAT THE FAA INSPECTOR DID NOT GIVE A FAIR TEST SINCE HE FAILED THE EXAMINATION.

Narrative: I HAD A COMMERCIAL FLT TEST UNDER THE TERMS OF THE PRACTICAL TEST STANDARDS SCHEDULED WITH THE FAA RIVERSIDE FSDO WITH INSPECTOR #2. DURING THE FLT, I POSSIBLY VIOLATED CTLED AIRSPACE BY ENTERING THE FUL CLASS D AIRSPACE, THE CHINO CLASS D, AND THE ONT CLASS C AIRSPACE -- ALL WITHOUT MAKING RADIO CONTACT WITH THE VARIOUS ATC FACILITIES. A DISPUTE AROSE DURING THE FLT CONCERNING THE FLT INTO THE CTLED AIRSPACES, BUT THE AUTH OF FAA INSPECTOR WAS CTLING DURING THE FLT SINCE HE FAILED ME ON THE CHK RIDE AND INDICATED THAT HE SHOULD RPT ME. I ANTICIPATE SUCH A RPT DUE TO THE VERBAL EXCHANGE WE HAD IN THE PLANE FLYING BACK TO RIVERSIDE ARPT AND THE HEATED VERBAL EXCHANGE WHILE ON THE GND IN THE PLANE AND WHILE WALKING INTO THE FSDO. THE WX IN THE SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA BASIN INCLUDED A LOW LEVEL MOIST FLOW (MARINE LAYER) FLOWING AT APPROX 3000-3500 FT MSL BEHIND A LOW MOVING OUT OF THE AREA. THE WINDS AT 6000 FT MSL HAD EARLIER BEEN RPTED AT ABOUT 270 DEGS AND 25 KTS. DURING THE ORAL PORTION, I HAD EXPLAINED THAT SINCE INSPECTOR #2, ANOTHER FAA INSPECTOR, HAD ASSIGNED THE FLT PLAN AS AN 'EXERCISE' AND WAS DEFINITE THAT WE WERE NOT GOING TO ACTUALLY FLY TO LAX AND HAD STATED THE PLAN AS FLYING POSSIBLY TO PARADISE VOR AND THEN DOING THE AIRWORK PORTION OF THE CHK RIDE, I HAD NOT PURCHASED A TERMINAL AREA CHART. THE DAY BEFORE THE CHKRIDE, INSPECTOR #1 HAD TELEPHONED ME TO CANCEL BECAUSE HIS BOSS HAD DIRECTED HIM TO COMPLETE OTHER MORE IMPORTANT CHKRIDES, AND INSPECTOR #2 WAS ASSIGNED FOR MY CHKRIDE THAT SAME DAY AFTER I HAD SPOKEN TO THE FSDO ASSISTANT MGR EXPLAINING THAT THE FOLLOWING MONDAY I HAD A CFI INITIAL CHKRIDE SCHEDULED WITH AN EXAMINER, DID NOT HAVE THE ADDITIONAL $250 FOR BOTH CHKRIDES, AND HAD BEEN PLANNING TO EARN SOME MONEY FROM FLT INSTRUCTION. DURING THE ORAL, I WAS ASKED IF I HAD A TERMINAL AREA CHART SO WE COULD DISCUSS MY FLT PLAN. MY RESPONSE WAS THAT I DID NOT, EXPLAINING THAT WHEN INSPECTOR #1 HAD ASSIGNED THE FLT PLAN HE CLRLY TOLD ME THAT WE WERE NOT GOING TO FLY INTO LAX, HE WAS PLANNING TO USE THE FLT PLAN FOR THE PURPOSE OF DISCUSSING THE NAS DURING THE ORAL, AND THAT WE MIGHT FLY TO PARADISE VOR AND WE WOULD PROBABLY GO DIRECTLY INTO THE AIRWORK AREAS. DURING THE ORAL, I COULD NOT HAVE MADE IT MORE CLR TO INSPECTOR #2 THAT I WOULD NOT FLY INTO THE AREA I HAD BEEN DIRECTED TO FLT PLAN WITHOUT A CURRENT TERMINAL AREA CHART SINCE THEY DEPICT THE VARIOUS AIRSPACES MORE CLRLY AND ACTUALLY HAVE DIFFERENT LOCATIONS FOR VARIOUS GND REF POINTS IN COMPARISON TO AIRSPACE BOUNDARIES. JUST BEFORE THE BREAK AFTER THE GND ORAL, INSPECTOR #2 HAD REQUESTED THAT I CHK MY REF MATERIALS SO I COULD EXPLAIN MORE THOROUGHLY THE OP OF MAGNETOS AND UPON MY QUESTIONING ABOUT WHAT TO DO WITH THE OTHER MATERIALS, HE TOLD ME TO PACK THEM ALL UP AND PUT IT BACK INTO THE PLANE EXCEPT FOR WHAT I NEEDED TO FLY, AS HE POINTED TO MY SECTIONAL CHART. I WAS LEFT WITH THE IMPRESSION THAT THE PLAN HAD NOT CHANGED FROM WHAT INSPECTOR #1 HAD EXPLAINED TO ME, EXPECTING TO TAKE OFF AFTER THE BREAK TO DO THE AIRWORK WITH A POSSIBLE TRIP TO PARADISE TO CHK THE TIME AND DISTANCE CALCULATIONS OF MY FLT PLAN. WITH THE MISTAKEN IMPRESSION THAT INSPECTOR #2 WOULD NOT INTENTIONALLY ALLOW ME TO FLY THE TRIP IF IT WAS UNSAFE AND/OR WOULD VIOLATE ANY AIRSPACE, I DECLINED TO FLT PLAN ANOTHER TRIP WHEN HE ASKED IF I WANTED TO FLT PLAN ANOTHER TRIP INSTEAD. BEYOND HAVING ALL OF MY FLT PLANNING EQUIP IN THE PLANE AND MY FOCUS ON HIS STATED 'PURPOSE' OF THE SHORT FLT AS A TIME AND DISTANCE CONFIRMATION TEST, HIS OPEN FOLDED TERMINAL AREA CHART, I MADE THE JUDGEMENT ERROR OF AGREEING TO FLY TO HALBUT, EVEN THOUGH I HAVE NEVER AND WOULD NEVER FLY SO LOW INTO THE LOS ANGELES BASIN WITHOUT CONSULTING A CURRENT TERMINAL AREA CHART. AND, AS I HAD EXPLAINED TO INSPECTOR #2, WHEN I HAVE FLOWN INTO THAT AREA I HAVE ALWAYS FLOWN HIGH TO OVERFLY THE CLASS B AIRSPACE OR FLOWN AROUND IT COMPLETELY. I PASSED THE TIME AND LOCATION PORTION OF THE FLT TEST BUT FAILED THE CHKRIDE WHEN INSPECTOR #2 COMPLAINED THAT I HAD VIOLATED THE FULLERTON CLASS D SURFACE BASED AIRSPACE EXTENDING UP TO BUT NOT INCLUDING 2500 FT MSL. A FEW MI BEFORE XING THE EASTERLY BOUNDARIES OF THE CLASS D WAS A LOW HILLY AREA WHICH HAD CAUSED MODERATE TO SEVERE UPDRAFTS WHEN OVER THE AREA RESULTING IN AN INCREASE OF ALT BY APPROX 100 FT, AND DOWNDRAFTS UPON XING THE HILLS RESULTING IN A DECREASE OF ALT BY APPROX 100 FT. AFTER RETURNING TO 2500 FT INDICATED, INSPECTOR #2 ASKED WHAT FREEWAY WE WERE XING. I TOLD HIM I THOUGHT IT WAS THE 5 FREEWAY, BUT IT WAS NOT IDENTED ON MY SECTIONAL BY NAME. HE ASKED ME TO IDENT THE FREEWAY AGAIN, AND I AGAIN LOOKED AT MY MAP BUT DID NOT SEE THE FREEWAY NAME. ALSO, ABOUT THIS TIME MY XING RADIAL OFF SEAL BEACH VOR WAS CTRING IDENTING HALBUT INTXN. INSPECTOR #2 SUGGESTED I TURN AROUND TO GET OUT OF THE AREA -- AS WE HAD EARLIER PLANNED ON THE GND. AFTER TURNING THE PLANE AROUND, INSPECTOR #2 INFORMED ME THAT I HAD CLRLY ENTERED THE FULLERTON CLASS D AIRSPACE ILLEGALLY ONCE I CROSSED THE FREEWAY, AND THAT HE SHOULD RPT ME FOR A VIOLATION. I DISPUTED HIS CLAIMED VIOLATION. INSPECTOR #2 SHOWED ME THE TERMINAL AREA CHART HE WAS USING WHILE EXPLAINING THAT IT SHOWED THAT UPON XING THE FREEWAY I WAS ILLEGALLY INTO THE CLASS D. AT THE TIME, I WAS SO SHOCKED AND UPSET BY HIS CLAIM THAT MY ONLY COMMENTS WERE THAT THE SECTIONAL DID NOT SHOW THE AIRSPACE VIOLATION AND THAT I HAD EARLIER EXPLAINED THAT I DID NOT WANT TO FLY THE TRIP AND WOULD NOT NORMALLY FLY SUCH A TRIP WITHOUT A TERMINAL AREA CHART AND THAT I COULD NOT BELIEVE THAT HE WOULD LET ME JUST FLY INTO CTLED AIRSPACE AFTER I HAD EXPLAINED MY RESERVATIONS OF USING JUST A SECTIONAL AFTER HE HAD REVIEWED HIS OWN TERMINAL AREA CHART. AFTER BEGINNING THE RETURN TRIP TO RIVERSIDE ARPT, INSPECTOR #2 INFORMED ME THAT I HAD EARLIER VIOLATED THE CHINO CLASS D AIRSPACE AS HE POINTED OUT THAT V8 RAN DIRECTLY ACROSS THE AIRSPACE. (I BELIEVE THIS WAS HIS BELATED JUSTIFICATION FOR THE FAILURE SINCE HE DID NOT MAKE THE CLAIM UNTIL WE WERE RETURNING AND NOT WHEN THE ALLEGED VIOLATION OCCURRED.) I DISPUTED HIS CLAIM BY EXPLAINING THAT EVEN THOUGH THE FLT WAS PLANNED FOR V8 I HAD DIVERTED S AROUND THE CHINO AIRSPACE BY FLYING NEAR CORONA ARPT. INSPECTOR #2 AGREED THAT I HAD A 'R NEEDLE' BUT CLAIMED THAT I HAD NOT DIVERTED FAR ENOUGH. AS WE CONTINUED BACK, WE ENCOUNTERED A SEVERE UPDRAFT WHICH PUSHED THE PLANE UP FROM 2500 FT TO ABOUT 2700 FT AND AS I WAS PUSHING THE NOSE DOWN AND REACHING TO LOWER MANIFOLD PRESSURE, INSPECTOR #2 EXCLAIMED THAT I HAD NOW VIOLATED THE ONT CLASS C AIRSPACE AND THAT IF I WANTED TO FLY SO CLOSE BELOW THE AIRSPACE I HAD TO CTL THE AIRPLANE NO MATTER WHAT THE CONDITIONS. I WAS SO UPSET AND ANGRY WITH THE UNDERHANDED TACTICS OF INSPECTOR #2 I COULD NOT PROCESS THE RIVERSIDE TWR DIRECTION TO RPT L DOWNWIND AND INSTEAD STARTED TO FLY TOWARDS A R DOWNWIND ENTRY. IN THE PLANE ON THE GND, INSPECTOR #2 STATED THAT HE HAD TOLD ME THAT I NEEDED A TERMINAL AREA CHART AND THAT HE HAD BROUGHT ONE WITH HIM FOR A FLT IN SUCH A CONGESTED AIRSPACE AREA AND I SHOULD KNOW BETTER IF I EXPECTED TO BE A COMMERCIAL PLT. MY PRIMARY POINT TO HIM WAS THAT I DID NOT APPRECIATE HIM SETTING ME UP BY CHANGING THE FLT PLANNING TRIP FROM AN 'EXERCISE' TO THE REAL THING, HE HAD NOT CONTACTED ME EARLIER SO I COULD PURCHASE A TERMINAL AREA CHART, AND THAT HIS CONDUCT WAS A LOW CLASS 'CHICKEN-SHIT' THING TO DO TO SOMEONE -- ESPECIALLY WHERE HE HAD OBVIOUSLY REVIEWED THE TRIP USING HIS TERMINAL AREA CHART AND HAD ALLOWED ME TO FLY IT EVEN WITH MY EXPRESS RESERVATIONS. HE STATED THAT HE COULD NOT GRANT COMMERCIAL OPERATOR PRIVILEGES TO SOMEONE WHO COULD MAKE SUCH A BAD DECISION. HE ALSO DENIED SETTING ME UP SINCE HE HAD OFFERED ME A CHANCE TO FLT PLAN A DIFFERENT TRIP.

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.