37000 Feet | Browse and search NASA's Aviation Safety Reporting System |
|
Attributes | |
ACN | 438126 |
Time | |
Date | 199905 |
Day | Tue |
Local Time Of Day | 0601 To 1200 |
Place | |
Locale Reference | navaid : ddc.vortac |
State Reference | KS |
Altitude | msl single value : 5000 |
Environment | |
Flight Conditions | Mixed |
Light | Daylight |
Aircraft 1 | |
Controlling Facilities | artcc : zkc.artcc |
Operator | common carrier : charter |
Make Model Name | Cessna 210 Centurion / Turbo Centurion 210C, 210D |
Operating Under FAR Part | Part 135 |
Flight Phase | cruise : level |
Person 1 | |
Affiliation | company : charter |
Function | flight crew : single pilot |
Qualification | pilot : instrument pilot : commercial pilot : cfi pilot : multi engine |
Experience | flight time last 90 days : 60 flight time total : 800 flight time type : 70 |
ASRS Report | 438126 |
Person 2 | |
Affiliation | government : faa |
Function | controller : radar |
Qualification | pilot : student |
Events | |
Anomaly | inflight encounter : weather non adherence : far non adherence : clearance |
Independent Detector | other flight crewa |
Resolutory Action | controller : issued new clearance flight crew : diverted to another airport flight crew : exited adverse environment |
Supplementary | |
Problem Areas | Environmental Factor Flight Crew Human Performance ATC Human Performance |
Primary Problem | Environmental Factor |
Air Traffic Incident | Pilot Deviation |
Narrative:
The flight was supposed to be a VFR only charter from ict to hqg to ict with 1 passenger. The flight was restr to VFR due to the aircraft's equipment, and the pilot's qualifications (I lacked the 1200 hours total time for IFR charter). I checked the WX forecast both by phone with an FSS specialist, and by computer via duat. Hqg does not have a taf or metar, so I checked the surrounding areas including cgk, ddc, lbl, gag, and dht. The forecast called for unrestr visibility and a ceiling of 3000 ft broken to scattered. The taf was only 3 hours old, and the metars were current, and considered right before departure including a WX depiction chart which illustrated VFR conditions across kansas. The route was VFR immediately before departure. As the flight progressed, I noticed an east/west line of precipitation and low ceilings just to the south of my course. I continued relatively confident that I would reach hqg under VFR, although I had to make several route and altitude changes in the process. Approximately 20 mins from my destination of hqg (ddc 180 degree radial at 30 NM) it became apparent that I could no longer continue the flight in VMC no matter which route or altitude I chose. The ceiling was about 500 ft with unrestr visibility. Remaining VFR under the low ceiling, in my opinion, was unsafe so I filed an IFR flight plan with the ict FSS, and received a clearance from ZKC to proceed to hqg IFR. It soon became evident that the ceiling at hqg was probably lower than the airport's approach minimums, so I elected to divert to lbl where I made an uneventful ILS approach and landing. In my opinion, the problem arose due to the unforecast WX I encountered. When it was clear that I could not complete the flight under VFR (unless I operated under a 500 ft ceiling), I elected to file an IFR flight plan, and receive the respective clearance in the interest of safety. A decision to terminate the flight, or reverse course at the first sign of the unforecast WX would have avoided the situation. Faced with the situation again, I now have another valuable tool for my decision making process.
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: C210 PLT, REQUIRED BY FARS TO FILE VFR FLT PLAN WHEN UNABLE TO CONTINUE VFR, FILES IFR AIRBORNE AND DIVERTS TO LBL.
Narrative: THE FLT WAS SUPPOSED TO BE A VFR ONLY CHARTER FROM ICT TO HQG TO ICT WITH 1 PAX. THE FLT WAS RESTR TO VFR DUE TO THE ACFT'S EQUIP, AND THE PLT'S QUALIFICATIONS (I LACKED THE 1200 HRS TOTAL TIME FOR IFR CHARTER). I CHKED THE WX FORECAST BOTH BY PHONE WITH AN FSS SPECIALIST, AND BY COMPUTER VIA DUAT. HQG DOES NOT HAVE A TAF OR METAR, SO I CHKED THE SURROUNDING AREAS INCLUDING CGK, DDC, LBL, GAG, AND DHT. THE FORECAST CALLED FOR UNRESTR VISIBILITY AND A CEILING OF 3000 FT BROKEN TO SCATTERED. THE TAF WAS ONLY 3 HRS OLD, AND THE METARS WERE CURRENT, AND CONSIDERED RIGHT BEFORE DEP INCLUDING A WX DEPICTION CHART WHICH ILLUSTRATED VFR CONDITIONS ACROSS KANSAS. THE RTE WAS VFR IMMEDIATELY BEFORE DEP. AS THE FLT PROGRESSED, I NOTICED AN E/W LINE OF PRECIP AND LOW CEILINGS JUST TO THE S OF MY COURSE. I CONTINUED RELATIVELY CONFIDENT THAT I WOULD REACH HQG UNDER VFR, ALTHOUGH I HAD TO MAKE SEVERAL RTE AND ALT CHANGES IN THE PROCESS. APPROX 20 MINS FROM MY DEST OF HQG (DDC 180 DEG RADIAL AT 30 NM) IT BECAME APPARENT THAT I COULD NO LONGER CONTINUE THE FLT IN VMC NO MATTER WHICH RTE OR ALT I CHOSE. THE CEILING WAS ABOUT 500 FT WITH UNRESTR VISIBILITY. REMAINING VFR UNDER THE LOW CEILING, IN MY OPINION, WAS UNSAFE SO I FILED AN IFR FLT PLAN WITH THE ICT FSS, AND RECEIVED A CLRNC FROM ZKC TO PROCEED TO HQG IFR. IT SOON BECAME EVIDENT THAT THE CEILING AT HQG WAS PROBABLY LOWER THAN THE ARPT'S APCH MINIMUMS, SO I ELECTED TO DIVERT TO LBL WHERE I MADE AN UNEVENTFUL ILS APCH AND LNDG. IN MY OPINION, THE PROB AROSE DUE TO THE UNFORECAST WX I ENCOUNTERED. WHEN IT WAS CLR THAT I COULD NOT COMPLETE THE FLT UNDER VFR (UNLESS I OPERATED UNDER A 500 FT CEILING), I ELECTED TO FILE AN IFR FLT PLAN, AND RECEIVE THE RESPECTIVE CLRNC IN THE INTEREST OF SAFETY. A DECISION TO TERMINATE THE FLT, OR REVERSE COURSE AT THE FIRST SIGN OF THE UNFORECAST WX WOULD HAVE AVOIDED THE SIT. FACED WITH THE SIT AGAIN, I NOW HAVE ANOTHER VALUABLE TOOL FOR MY DECISION MAKING PROCESS.
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.