Narrative:

I am a flight instrument with INS and multi engine instrument ratings, 3000 hours, and advanced INS and ground instrument ratings. I am also an accident prevention counselor and very active in promoting aviation safety in the community. I was on an INS training flight north of san. After returning from the flight, I was informed by san approach control that I had penetrated the TCA 12 mi out to sea, west of leucadia. Rptedly I turned north and was then 2 mi north of oceanside VOR when I called for clearance to return to san. A TCA violation had rptedly occurred. I do not believe this is correct. I was actually working in the area of rancho bernado some 12 mi inland. Further, I was using the julian VOR 246 degree right as a reference to remain well clear of the TCA to the south and 2 restr areas to the north. (Note: as long as the CDI is not pegged, no penetration of the TCA or restr areas will occur.) a routine VOR check of the received was made during taxi-out and the system was operating properly. I was careful to maintain my various headings and estimated times of these headings to remain well inland. A clearance to return to san was obtained and radar instructions were given to turn to a heading of 180 degrees. Upon completion of the turn to this heading, my student removed his INS training goggles and immediately idented mt woodson below and slightly to the left. I also saw this mountain. Subsequently, we were vectored eastbound, then southbound again. I recognized an area formerly used as a missile ground test site. This confirmed that we were well inland and not along the shoreline at this time, I requested my position and was told 'approximately 10 mi northeast of miramar (NAS).' this is entirely consistent with my visibility sighting. Our southbound vector took us east of gillespie field which my student and I idented visually. A routine ILS approach and landing were made at montgomery field. For the above reasons, I believe that I had remained well inland and clear of the TCA, rather than out over the ocean west of leucadia. I believe I may have been confused with another aircraft. The area near where my position was reported is known to have very poor radar coverage. In fact, my student and I heard an aircraft reported in this area was refused radar service 'due to spotty coverage.' this occurred during our return to san. Callback conversation with reporter revealed the following: mistaken identity. ATC supervisor very accusatory on phone. Asked by reporter to review tapes as he had specifically requested position an was told 10 northeast miramar where he had predetermined himself to be. Reporter contacted FSDO when no response from ATC. All action dropped, but reporter feels he was harassed and should have been notified when action dropped. Feels situation was actually controller foul-up.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: INSTRUCTOR ON IFR TRAINING FLT WITH STUDENT NOTIFIED AFTER LNDG HE HAD PENETRATED TCA.

Narrative: I AM A FLT INSTR WITH INS AND MULTI ENG INSTR RATINGS, 3000 HRS, AND ADVANCED INS AND GND INSTR RATINGS. I AM ALSO AN ACCIDENT PREVENTION COUNSELOR AND VERY ACTIVE IN PROMOTING AVIATION SAFETY IN THE COMMUNITY. I WAS ON AN INS TRNING FLT N OF SAN. AFTER RETURNING FROM THE FLT, I WAS INFORMED BY SAN APCH CTL THAT I HAD PENETRATED THE TCA 12 MI OUT TO SEA, W OF LEUCADIA. RPTEDLY I TURNED N AND WAS THEN 2 MI N OF OCEANSIDE VOR WHEN I CALLED FOR CLRNC TO RETURN TO SAN. A TCA VIOLATION HAD RPTEDLY OCCURRED. I DO NOT BELIEVE THIS IS CORRECT. I WAS ACTUALLY WORKING IN THE AREA OF RANCHO BERNADO SOME 12 MI INLAND. FURTHER, I WAS USING THE JULIAN VOR 246 DEG R AS A REF TO REMAIN WELL CLR OF THE TCA TO THE S AND 2 RESTR AREAS TO THE N. (NOTE: AS LONG AS THE CDI IS NOT PEGGED, NO PENETRATION OF THE TCA OR RESTR AREAS WILL OCCUR.) A ROUTINE VOR CHK OF THE RECEIVED WAS MADE DURING TAXI-OUT AND THE SYS WAS OPERATING PROPERLY. I WAS CAREFUL TO MAINTAIN MY VARIOUS HDGS AND ESTIMATED TIMES OF THESE HDGS TO REMAIN WELL INLAND. A CLRNC TO RETURN TO SAN WAS OBTAINED AND RADAR INSTRUCTIONS WERE GIVEN TO TURN TO A HDG OF 180 DEGS. UPON COMPLETION OF THE TURN TO THIS HDG, MY STUDENT REMOVED HIS INS TRNING GOGGLES AND IMMEDIATELY IDENTED MT WOODSON BELOW AND SLIGHTLY TO THE LEFT. I ALSO SAW THIS MOUNTAIN. SUBSEQUENTLY, WE WERE VECTORED EBND, THEN SBND AGAIN. I RECOGNIZED AN AREA FORMERLY USED AS A MISSILE GND TEST SITE. THIS CONFIRMED THAT WE WERE WELL INLAND AND NOT ALONG THE SHORELINE AT THIS TIME, I REQUESTED MY POS AND WAS TOLD 'APPROX 10 MI NE OF MIRAMAR (NAS).' THIS IS ENTIRELY CONSISTENT WITH MY VIS SIGHTING. OUR SBND VECTOR TOOK US E OF GILLESPIE FIELD WHICH MY STUDENT AND I IDENTED VISUALLY. A ROUTINE ILS APCH AND LNDG WERE MADE AT MONTGOMERY FIELD. FOR THE ABOVE REASONS, I BELIEVE THAT I HAD REMAINED WELL INLAND AND CLR OF THE TCA, RATHER THAN OUT OVER THE OCEAN W OF LEUCADIA. I BELIEVE I MAY HAVE BEEN CONFUSED WITH ANOTHER ACFT. THE AREA NEAR WHERE MY POS WAS RPTED IS KNOWN TO HAVE VERY POOR RADAR COVERAGE. IN FACT, MY STUDENT AND I HEARD AN ACFT RPTED IN THIS AREA WAS REFUSED RADAR SVC 'DUE TO SPOTTY COVERAGE.' THIS OCCURRED DURING OUR RETURN TO SAN. CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING: MISTAKEN IDENTITY. ATC SUPVR VERY ACCUSATORY ON PHONE. ASKED BY RPTR TO REVIEW TAPES AS HE HAD SPECIFICALLY REQUESTED POS AN WAS TOLD 10 NE MIRAMAR WHERE HE HAD PREDETERMINED HIMSELF TO BE. RPTR CONTACTED FSDO WHEN NO RESPONSE FROM ATC. ALL ACTION DROPPED, BUT RPTR FEELS HE WAS HARASSED AND SHOULD HAVE BEEN NOTIFIED WHEN ACTION DROPPED. FEELS SITUATION WAS ACTUALLY CTLR FOUL-UP.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of August 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.