Narrative:

While returning from franklin, nc, to lakeland, fl (a flight my wife and I have routinely made since the summer of 1996), I encountered a questionable IFR clearance situation. Since the prevailing WX at franklin was guesstimated to be about 2000 ft broken with 5+ mi visibility, I filed an IFR flight plan requesting a 9000 ft altitude. 1a5, the franklin/macon county airport is surrounded by mountains, with a valley running toward the south along the eastern edge of the valley. My experience has proven it is not usually possible for ATC to make radar or radio contact below 9000 ft. Since 1a5 has no ATC facility, I received my initial clearance via telephone from the raleigh FSS. The initial clearance was for direct to foothills VORTAC, flight planned route, climb to 7000 ft (although my initial request was for 9000 ft), and contact ZTL during the climb. Since the initial clearance was without benefit of either radio or radar contact with ATC, it is my understanding with minimum obstruction clearance altitude in mountainous terrain will apply. In this case, a minimum altitude of 7260 ft is necessary. Luckily, I was able to climb to 7500 ft in VMC and contacted ZTL. Upon initial contact, I stated that I was in VMC at 7500 ft and requested climb to 9000 ft. At that point, ZTL seemed concerned that I was at 7500 ft in VMC before my initial contact with them even though they seemed unable to see me on radar at this point and for several mins. As is normal for this mountainous flight, I can never get in radio contact with ZTL below 7000 ft. Now there is some question as to whether I was in a NORDO situation, prior to initial contact with ZTL. Since I was in a NORDO situation, wouldn't the minimum obstruction clearance altitude rule apply? I was safely in VMC at the proper VFR altitude. I do not understand the consternation of ZTL. The foothills VORTAC is located in a valley. This makes radio and radar xmissions north into the mountains possible only at altitudes higher than 7000 ft. It would be my recommendation that the minimal clearance altitude be higher than 7000 ft. Callback conversation with reporter revealed the following information: the pilot said that he has flown this route often and he was well aware of the radio coverage limitations in the mountainous terrain. Normally he has to climb to 9000 ft to contact the ARTCC controllers during his climb out, but he was assigned 7000 ft this time. He did not request 9000 ft again on the ground and he was unable to cancel his IFR clearance with ARTCC once he was in VMC due to the lack of radio contact. The pilot seemed to be genuinely puzzled that the controller would find fault with his decision to climb above his assigned altitude. He said that the 'snowbird' MOA was never hot and he did not see any traffic during his time above 7000 ft.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: A PLT IN A GLASAIR, GL20, CLBED ABOVE HIS ASSIGNED ALT WHEN HE WAS UNABLE TO ESTABLISH RADIO CONTACT WITH ARTCC IN MOUNTAINOUS TERRAIN. THE FAA IS INVESTIGATING.

Narrative: WHILE RETURNING FROM FRANKLIN, NC, TO LAKELAND, FL (A FLT MY WIFE AND I HAVE ROUTINELY MADE SINCE THE SUMMER OF 1996), I ENCOUNTERED A QUESTIONABLE IFR CLRNC SIT. SINCE THE PREVAILING WX AT FRANKLIN WAS GUESSTIMATED TO BE ABOUT 2000 FT BROKEN WITH 5+ MI VISIBILITY, I FILED AN IFR FLT PLAN REQUESTING A 9000 FT ALT. 1A5, THE FRANKLIN/MACON COUNTY ARPT IS SURROUNDED BY MOUNTAINS, WITH A VALLEY RUNNING TOWARD THE S ALONG THE EASTERN EDGE OF THE VALLEY. MY EXPERIENCE HAS PROVEN IT IS NOT USUALLY POSSIBLE FOR ATC TO MAKE RADAR OR RADIO CONTACT BELOW 9000 FT. SINCE 1A5 HAS NO ATC FACILITY, I RECEIVED MY INITIAL CLRNC VIA TELEPHONE FROM THE RALEIGH FSS. THE INITIAL CLRNC WAS FOR DIRECT TO FOOTHILLS VORTAC, FLT PLANNED RTE, CLB TO 7000 FT (ALTHOUGH MY INITIAL REQUEST WAS FOR 9000 FT), AND CONTACT ZTL DURING THE CLB. SINCE THE INITIAL CLRNC WAS WITHOUT BENEFIT OF EITHER RADIO OR RADAR CONTACT WITH ATC, IT IS MY UNDERSTANDING WITH MINIMUM OBSTRUCTION CLRNC ALT IN MOUNTAINOUS TERRAIN WILL APPLY. IN THIS CASE, A MINIMUM ALT OF 7260 FT IS NECESSARY. LUCKILY, I WAS ABLE TO CLB TO 7500 FT IN VMC AND CONTACTED ZTL. UPON INITIAL CONTACT, I STATED THAT I WAS IN VMC AT 7500 FT AND REQUESTED CLB TO 9000 FT. AT THAT POINT, ZTL SEEMED CONCERNED THAT I WAS AT 7500 FT IN VMC BEFORE MY INITIAL CONTACT WITH THEM EVEN THOUGH THEY SEEMED UNABLE TO SEE ME ON RADAR AT THIS POINT AND FOR SEVERAL MINS. AS IS NORMAL FOR THIS MOUNTAINOUS FLT, I CAN NEVER GET IN RADIO CONTACT WITH ZTL BELOW 7000 FT. NOW THERE IS SOME QUESTION AS TO WHETHER I WAS IN A NORDO SIT, PRIOR TO INITIAL CONTACT WITH ZTL. SINCE I WAS IN A NORDO SIT, WOULDN'T THE MINIMUM OBSTRUCTION CLRNC ALT RULE APPLY? I WAS SAFELY IN VMC AT THE PROPER VFR ALT. I DO NOT UNDERSTAND THE CONSTERNATION OF ZTL. THE FOOTHILLS VORTAC IS LOCATED IN A VALLEY. THIS MAKES RADIO AND RADAR XMISSIONS N INTO THE MOUNTAINS POSSIBLE ONLY AT ALTS HIGHER THAN 7000 FT. IT WOULD BE MY RECOMMENDATION THAT THE MINIMAL CLRNC ALT BE HIGHER THAN 7000 FT. CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING INFO: THE PLT SAID THAT HE HAS FLOWN THIS RTE OFTEN AND HE WAS WELL AWARE OF THE RADIO COVERAGE LIMITATIONS IN THE MOUNTAINOUS TERRAIN. NORMALLY HE HAS TO CLB TO 9000 FT TO CONTACT THE ARTCC CTLRS DURING HIS CLBOUT, BUT HE WAS ASSIGNED 7000 FT THIS TIME. HE DID NOT REQUEST 9000 FT AGAIN ON THE GND AND HE WAS UNABLE TO CANCEL HIS IFR CLRNC WITH ARTCC ONCE HE WAS IN VMC DUE TO THE LACK OF RADIO CONTACT. THE PLT SEEMED TO BE GENUINELY PUZZLED THAT THE CTLR WOULD FIND FAULT WITH HIS DECISION TO CLB ABOVE HIS ASSIGNED ALT. HE SAID THAT THE 'SNOWBIRD' MOA WAS NEVER HOT AND HE DID NOT SEE ANY TFC DURING HIS TIME ABOVE 7000 FT.

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.