 |
37000 Feet | Browse and search NASA's Aviation Safety Reporting System |
|
BE20 pilot repositioned his company aircraft and questioned whether the flight was a part 90 or part 135 operation.
| Attributes | |
| ACN | 524897 |
| Time | |
| Date | 200109 |
| Day | Sun |
| Local Time Of Day | 0601 To 1200 |
| Place | |
| Locale Reference | airport : tul.airport |
| State Reference | OK |
| Altitude | agl single value : 0 |
| Environment | |
| Flight Conditions | VMC |
| Light | Daylight |
| Aircraft 1 | |
| Controlling Facilities | tracon : sct.tracon |
| Operator | general aviation : corporate |
| Make Model Name | Super King Air 200 HDC |
| Operating Under FAR Part | Part 91 |
| Flight Phase | ground : parked |
| Flight Plan | IFR |
| Person 1 | |
| Affiliation | company : corporate |
| Function | flight crew : first officer |
| Qualification | pilot : atp |
| Experience | flight time last 90 days : 75 flight time total : 2000 flight time type : 900 |
| ASRS Report | 524897 |
| Person 2 | |
| Affiliation | company : corporate |
| Function | flight crew : captain oversight : pic |
| Events | |
| Anomaly | other anomaly other |
| Independent Detector | other flight crewa |
| Resolutory Action | none taken : anomaly accepted |
| Supplementary | |
| Primary Problem | Ambiguous |
Narrative:
Departed ktul on a part 91 flight to klit during restricted airspace system on 9/sun/01 under company call sign XXXX. Prior to departure, we discussed the situation, with our company, tulsa tower, and the supervisor of tulsa FSS. We were told we could depart IFR into controlled airspace only if we were operating under our company call sign XXXX. The flight was uneventful, but I fear we flew an illegal flight as part 91 operations were suspended due to the national ground stop for GA. No queries were made by ATC. I thing FSS and tulsa tower assumed we were part 135, but it was a part 91 flight. The aircraft is however still on company's 135 certificate. I'm not sure if we did anything wrong, but I question the legality of the flight, therefore, I'm filing this report. I should have stopped and got more information prior to departing ktul. I believe we made an honest effort to get the proper information, but we may have not considered the complete circumstances. We should have questioned the clarity of issued NOTAMS
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: BE20 PLT REPOSITIONED HIS COMPANY ACFT AND QUESTIONED WHETHER THE FLT WAS A PART 90 OR PART 135 OP.
Narrative: DEPARTED KTUL ON A PART 91 FLT TO KLIT DURING RESTRICTED AIRSPACE SYSTEM ON 9/SUN/01 UNDER COMPANY CALL SIGN XXXX. PRIOR TO DEP, WE DISCUSSED THE SIT, WITH OUR COMPANY, TULSA TOWER, AND THE SUPVR OF TULSA FSS. WE WERE TOLD WE COULD DEPART IFR INTO CONTROLLED AIRSPACE ONLY IF WE WERE OPERATING UNDER OUR COMPANY CALL SIGN XXXX. THE FLT WAS UNEVENTFUL, BUT I FEAR WE FLEW AN ILLEGAL FLT AS PART 91 OPS WERE SUSPENDED DUE TO THE NATIONAL GND STOP FOR GA. NO QUERIES WERE MADE BY ATC. I THING FSS AND TULSA TWR ASSUMED WE WERE PART 135, BUT IT WAS A PART 91 FLT. THE ACFT IS HOWEVER STILL ON COMPANY'S 135 CERTIFICATE. I'M NOT SURE IF WE DID ANYTHING WRONG, BUT I QUESTION THE LEGALITY OF THE FLT, THEREFORE, I'M FILING THIS RPT. I SHOULD HAVE STOPPED AND GOT MORE INFO PRIOR TO DEPARTING KTUL. I BELIEVE WE MADE AN HONEST EFFORT TO GET THE PROPER INFO, BUT WE MAY HAVE NOT CONSIDERED THE COMPLETE CIRCUMSTANCES. WE SHOULD HAVE QUESTIONED THE CLARITY OF ISSUED NOTAMS
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.