Narrative:

At XA22Z, we departed bed en route to pbi. I had filed an offshore route to pbi. The snowbird route was: bed hto linnd azezu R511 paepr A761 torry hobee SURFN7 pbi. We had filed for FL280, as we were not equipped for rvsm operations. I was flying this leg and my first officer was working the radio. Around XB00Z, between linnd and azezu, ZNY asked us, 'can you accept FL310?' we answered that FL310 was not a problem, but that we had to stay at or below FL280 to remain clear of rvsm airspace as we did not have the proper equipment. ATC came back, '...not considering rvsm requirements and restrs, can you accept FL310?' we said, 'yes,' but again reminded him that we were not rvsm equipped. 'Ok, climb and maintain FL310.' 'roger, leaving FL280 for FL310.' after passing azezu intersection, but before entering rvsm airspace, we called ATC and asked to descend back to FL280, '...since we are not rvsm equipped.' we were told, 'no, just remain at FL310 for now,' which we did. Shortly after ZNY asked for our company phone number '...no talk to a flight department supervisor...' we gave him the number and wondered if we should ask if we had done something 'wrong.' we didn't, though, as we knew we hadn't done anything contrary to ATC instructions. We both finally decided that he was just going to advise company operations of the deviance they had allowed for us to remain at FL310. Not too long after this, we reiterated that we were not rvsm equipped, and ZNY came back and volunteered the information to the effect that, '...our consensus is that, as long as we have you in radar contact and squawking altitude, you can fly in rvsm airspace along that route, even if you do not have the proper equipment...' again, we surmised that this was a special allowance just for the busy holiday weekend. A company flight was behind us and flying at higher altitudes. They may have heard the exchange between us and ZNY regarding us not being rvsm equipped, advising ATC of that, asking for FL280, and being told to remain at FL310. I asked the next controller if ATC would be allowing non-rvsm equipped aircraft to fly this route above FL280, as we were, as long as they were in radar contact with mode C, for the remainder of the weekend? He said, no, he didn't think so. There was no further comment, and we continued at FL310 for the remainder of our cruise segment, until descent to pbi. We were very surprised to learn, upon calling in from pbi, that ATC had told company operations that we had 'violated rvsm airspace.' it seems that the controller who assigned us FL310 needed to do so for traffic considerations and failed to tell the next controller what he had done, or why, and that we had advised him that we were not rvsm equipped. When we told the next controller that we were not rvsm equipped, he then asked for the phone number -- without telling us why. If he had, we could have explained to him why we were in rvsm airspace, he could have asked the previous controller to verify it, and that would have been the end of it. In hindsight, we should have asked why he wanted the number. Company operations has put out an email to the effect that non-rvsm equipped aircraft are not to accept altitude assignments that would put them in rvsm airspace -- even if the controller says it is 'ok.' now, it seems, the 'snowbird rtes' that the FAA has requested operators to file are on again/off again procedures for us to follow, with us not knowing when, or if, they are invoked or expected. It's all very confusing and makes it difficulty to comply. Callback conversation with reporter revealed the following information: reporter advised of company's policy change directing pilots not to accept any altitude without rvsm delegated airspace even if requested by ATC.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: ZNY OCEANIC ASKS H25B FLT CREW TO ACCEPT FL310 IN RVSM AIRSPACE. FLT CREW ADVISES THEY ARE NOT RVSM QUALIFIED. CTLR INSISTS BUT FAILS TO COORDINATE NON STANDARD ALT WITH ZJX, WHO ADVISES FLT CREW OF RVSM AIRSPACE VIOLATION.

Narrative: AT XA22Z, WE DEPARTED BED ENRTE TO PBI. I HAD FILED AN OFFSHORE RTE TO PBI. THE SNOWBIRD RTE WAS: BED HTO LINND AZEZU R511 PAEPR A761 TORRY HOBEE SURFN7 PBI. WE HAD FILED FOR FL280, AS WE WERE NOT EQUIPPED FOR RVSM OPS. I WAS FLYING THIS LEG AND MY FO WAS WORKING THE RADIO. AROUND XB00Z, BTWN LINND AND AZEZU, ZNY ASKED US, 'CAN YOU ACCEPT FL310?' WE ANSWERED THAT FL310 WAS NOT A PROB, BUT THAT WE HAD TO STAY AT OR BELOW FL280 TO REMAIN CLR OF RVSM AIRSPACE AS WE DID NOT HAVE THE PROPER EQUIP. ATC CAME BACK, '...NOT CONSIDERING RVSM REQUIREMENTS AND RESTRS, CAN YOU ACCEPT FL310?' WE SAID, 'YES,' BUT AGAIN REMINDED HIM THAT WE WERE NOT RVSM EQUIPPED. 'OK, CLB AND MAINTAIN FL310.' 'ROGER, LEAVING FL280 FOR FL310.' AFTER PASSING AZEZU INTXN, BUT BEFORE ENTERING RVSM AIRSPACE, WE CALLED ATC AND ASKED TO DSND BACK TO FL280, '...SINCE WE ARE NOT RVSM EQUIPPED.' WE WERE TOLD, 'NO, JUST REMAIN AT FL310 FOR NOW,' WHICH WE DID. SHORTLY AFTER ZNY ASKED FOR OUR COMPANY PHONE NUMBER '...NO TALK TO A FLT DEPT SUPVR...' WE GAVE HIM THE NUMBER AND WONDERED IF WE SHOULD ASK IF WE HAD DONE SOMETHING 'WRONG.' WE DIDN'T, THOUGH, AS WE KNEW WE HADN'T DONE ANYTHING CONTRARY TO ATC INSTRUCTIONS. WE BOTH FINALLY DECIDED THAT HE WAS JUST GOING TO ADVISE COMPANY OPS OF THE DEVIANCE THEY HAD ALLOWED FOR US TO REMAIN AT FL310. NOT TOO LONG AFTER THIS, WE REITERATED THAT WE WERE NOT RVSM EQUIPPED, AND ZNY CAME BACK AND VOLUNTEERED THE INFO TO THE EFFECT THAT, '...OUR CONSENSUS IS THAT, AS LONG AS WE HAVE YOU IN RADAR CONTACT AND SQUAWKING ALT, YOU CAN FLY IN RVSM AIRSPACE ALONG THAT RTE, EVEN IF YOU DO NOT HAVE THE PROPER EQUIP...' AGAIN, WE SURMISED THAT THIS WAS A SPECIAL ALLOWANCE JUST FOR THE BUSY HOLIDAY WEEKEND. A COMPANY FLT WAS BEHIND US AND FLYING AT HIGHER ALTS. THEY MAY HAVE HEARD THE EXCHANGE BTWN US AND ZNY REGARDING US NOT BEING RVSM EQUIPPED, ADVISING ATC OF THAT, ASKING FOR FL280, AND BEING TOLD TO REMAIN AT FL310. I ASKED THE NEXT CTLR IF ATC WOULD BE ALLOWING NON-RVSM EQUIPPED ACFT TO FLY THIS RTE ABOVE FL280, AS WE WERE, AS LONG AS THEY WERE IN RADAR CONTACT WITH MODE C, FOR THE REMAINDER OF THE WEEKEND? HE SAID, NO, HE DIDN'T THINK SO. THERE WAS NO FURTHER COMMENT, AND WE CONTINUED AT FL310 FOR THE REMAINDER OF OUR CRUISE SEGMENT, UNTIL DSCNT TO PBI. WE WERE VERY SURPRISED TO LEARN, UPON CALLING IN FROM PBI, THAT ATC HAD TOLD COMPANY OPS THAT WE HAD 'VIOLATED RVSM AIRSPACE.' IT SEEMS THAT THE CTLR WHO ASSIGNED US FL310 NEEDED TO DO SO FOR TFC CONSIDERATIONS AND FAILED TO TELL THE NEXT CTLR WHAT HE HAD DONE, OR WHY, AND THAT WE HAD ADVISED HIM THAT WE WERE NOT RVSM EQUIPPED. WHEN WE TOLD THE NEXT CTLR THAT WE WERE NOT RVSM EQUIPPED, HE THEN ASKED FOR THE PHONE NUMBER -- WITHOUT TELLING US WHY. IF HE HAD, WE COULD HAVE EXPLAINED TO HIM WHY WE WERE IN RVSM AIRSPACE, HE COULD HAVE ASKED THE PREVIOUS CTLR TO VERIFY IT, AND THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN THE END OF IT. IN HINDSIGHT, WE SHOULD HAVE ASKED WHY HE WANTED THE NUMBER. COMPANY OPS HAS PUT OUT AN EMAIL TO THE EFFECT THAT NON-RVSM EQUIPPED ACFT ARE NOT TO ACCEPT ALT ASSIGNMENTS THAT WOULD PUT THEM IN RVSM AIRSPACE -- EVEN IF THE CTLR SAYS IT IS 'OK.' NOW, IT SEEMS, THE 'SNOWBIRD RTES' THAT THE FAA HAS REQUESTED OPERATORS TO FILE ARE ON AGAIN/OFF AGAIN PROCS FOR US TO FOLLOW, WITH US NOT KNOWING WHEN, OR IF, THEY ARE INVOKED OR EXPECTED. IT'S ALL VERY CONFUSING AND MAKES IT DIFFICULTY TO COMPLY. CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING INFO: RPTR ADVISED OF COMPANY'S POLICY CHANGE DIRECTING PLTS NOT TO ACCEPT ANY ALT WITHOUT RVSM DELEGATED AIRSPACE EVEN IF REQUESTED BY ATC.

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.