My first (and hopefully last) "possible pilot deviation"

[DXB]

32 minutes ago, midlifeflyer said:

That's the mantra, that's not what I see when I read the full decision.  It's not about inspection passes. It's about choosing potential optional landing sites in an inappropriate place (here, a backyard in a residential neighborhood).  Although, as is sadly typical, the NTSB goes all over the place to justify a result which could have been reached so much more simply based on 40+ year old precedent , thereby creating an opportunity for a mess.  

 

What you describe is a striking example of the "argument dilution" effect: the human brain erroneously averages the strength of weak vs. strong evidence in considering a viewpoint rather than weighting each piece of evidence based on strength and then treating them additively.  

I recently learned about this from a fascinating discussion of this phenomenon on  the NPR show Hidden Brain - a transformative insight that I now consider when trying to support any viewpoint or assertion. I suspect good trial lawyers know this stuff intuitively.

https://hiddenbrain.org/podcast/less-is-more/

[midlifeflyer]

49 minutes ago, DXB said:

What you describe is a striking example of the "argument dilution" effect: the human brain erroneously averages the strength of weak vs. strong evidence in considering a viewpoint rather than weighting each piece of evidence based on strength and then treating them additively.  

I recently learned about this from a fascinating discussion of this phenomenon on  the NPR show Hidden Brain - a transformative insight that I now consider when trying to support any viewpoint or assertion. I suspect good trial lawyers know this stuff intuitively.

https://hiddenbrain.org/podcast/less-is-more/

I'm a Hidden Brain fan too.

That's part of it but there are other things at work. Lawyers are notorious for "throwing everything against the wall and seeing what sticks" rather than telling a cogent story. The best trial lawyers know the importance of the difference with a jury but it's true with most judges too. I think good judges understand the phenomenon and are generally pretty good at disregarding argument/evidence that is not particularly relevant. to the ultimate decision. Even in crimimal law with all its protections for the defendant, there is the concept of "harmless error." That translates to, "yeah, the prosecution tossed in some junk that should not have been introduced, but we don't believe it affected the result, so forget about it."

In Palmer's case, the ALJ ultimately makes the factual finding that Palmer passed within 500' of the neighbor's residence. Yet the decision finds the need to make a decision whether a propane tank on the property is a "structure." Who cares? All it does is is leave another basis to challenge a sloppy decision.

 

[T. Peterson]

On 5/1/2023 at 6:35 PM, jaylw314 said:

Just to be clear, I ask for clearance in 15 min, void by 20 min (so 5 minutes of airspace)

This is interesting. If I understand correctly you are actually receiving an effective time followed by a void time 5 minutes later. As I ply the recesses of my mind from years ago I think I may remember getting a release time followed by the void time, but it is foggy. If ATC actually will do that I completely forgot about it till you jogged my memory.

My current experience is that if I am not right ready to depart they make me call back when I am within 5 or at the most 10 minutes from departure. Of course that may just be the procedural policy of the facility, but I am very curious as to whether I am interpreting your post correctly which would validate my fading memory, or if I am just having a senior moment!

[tgardnerh]

2 hours ago, midlifeflyer said:

That's the mantra, that's not what I see when I read the full decision.  It's not about inspection passes. It's about choosing potential optional landing sites in an inappropriate place (here, a backyard in a residential neighborhood).  Although, as is sadly typical, the NTSB goes all over the place to justify a result which could have been reached so much more simply based on 40+ year old precedent , thereby creating an opportunity for a mess.  

 

I haven't read the full decision because it's 700+ pages, but skimming, I see that they lean into the "not necessary for landing" bit rather than just relying on the general recklessness rule of 91.13.

As written, I just don't see how to distinguish this case from flying low and slow down a paved runway at a sleepy airport to look for FOD. 

Perhaps more worrisome to me, this decision seems to outlaw intentional go-around practice, which is obviously not necessary for landing, and definitely takes you over the airport fence at less that 500 feet!

 

Some key quotes from the attached decision:

 "I further find that Respondent's low pass operation at 100 feet or less above ground level and his flight path was not necessary for takeoff or landing." (P 733, line 19), and

"While a low pass is recommended for -- while a low pass was recommended in Ops Guidance, it still must comply with the regulatory requirements of Section 91.119." (P 739, line 16), and

"such operations below the minimums of Section 91.119 must still be necessary for takeoff or landing under the circumstances. Under the circumstances in this case, it was not necessary.  I, therefore, reject Respondent's argument that the Off-airport  Ops Guide excused his violation." (P 739, line 23)

 

NTSB_Palmer_033023.pdf

[GeeBee]

6 hours ago, WilliamR said:

I remember that run to the plane after getting the clearance by pay phone; passengers already loaded.

Thanks for the ground lesson. I will look for the bill in the mail.

I've never been a big fan of picking up an IFR clearance on departure, especially single pilot. Copying a full route clearance is a lot of heads down time in a VFR environ. Throw in some turbulence and hands are full, but that's me.

William

Easy way to do it. I look for my routing in Garmin pilot before I depart. Yes, it will show you the ATC routing they will give you about 20 minutes prior to proposed. If it is different than what I filed, that is what I program and every time, it is what I get. 

[Hank]

3 hours ago, T. Peterson said:

This is interesting. If I understand correctly you are actually receiving an effective time followed by a void time 5 minutes later. As I ply the recesses of my mind from years ago I think I may remember getting a release time followed by the void time, but it is foggy. If ATC actually will do that I completely forgot about it till you jogged my memory.

My current experience is that if I am not right ready to depart they make me call back when I am within 5 or at the most 10 minutes from departure. Of course that may just be the procedural policy of the facility, but I am very curious as to whether I am interpreting your post correctly which would validate my fading memory, or if I am just having a senior moment!

ATC usually gives me an anticipated clearance time and a "clearance void if not off by" time. I take off any time in between that I'm ready. It's generally a 10 minute window. So I call while taxiing out.

[McMooney]

On 5/1/2023 at 10:00 AM, redbaron1982 said:

Hey, yesterday I did my first "long" XC, from SGR to 50F. Although the day was perfect VFR, I flew IFR just to keep the practice. This was my first solo IFR flight too.

50F is a non-towered airport, with no taxiways, so you need to taxi back to take off. Looking at the info in ForeFlight there is only a phone number to call for clearance. So I called 1825Z, and got a clearance with void time 1830Z, and call no later than 1835Z. I was ready to taxi, so I accept it.

When I approach the runway to taxi back, another airplane was just entering the runway, again to taxi back and then take off. Then a bonanza was in a 4 miles final so I give way to them. At this point, I already knew I was not going to make the 1830Z and even the 1835Z. But I was already with the engine running, making a phone call would imply shutting down the engine so I could hear anything. So I decided to go ahead and taxi back and take off.

I contacted departure at 1841Z, and I got a phone number to copy. When I got back to KSGR I called them and they were super nice, but anyway, I'm not sure how I should have proceeded. If I had a clearance frequency it would be easy just to call them on the radio and let them know. But it doesn't seem to be so easy with a cell phone.

At this point, I think my main take away is not to do IFR from a non-towered airport if not in an actual IMC. Actual IMC would make the airport less busy, and whatever traffic coming in and out would be already under IFR.

But I'd like to know your experience/suggestions.

Thanks!

Def invest in a bluetooth headset / bluetooth adapter,  makes this process so much easier. 

My Zulu 3's actually make calling preferable to the radio,  dont' have to wait on a clear channel

[T. Peterson]

3 hours ago, GeeBee said:

Easy way to do it. I look for my routing in Garmin pilot before I depart. Yes, it will show you the ATC routing they will give you about 20 minutes prior to proposed. If it is different than what I filed, that is what I program and every time, it is what I get. 

ForeFlight emails me an expected clearance. I load it into my ultra modern latest technology Garmin 450 and off I go.  Occasionally I get a fix or two from ATC, but usually just a few minutes of vectors followed by “cleared destination”. Of course my destinations are not in the heart of busy corridors like you guys on the coasts. My destinations are pretty much, Kansas, Missouri, Alabama and Indiana. I did go to South Dakota one time and had to deal with that busy airspace around Aberdeen!

[jaylw314]

5 hours ago, T. Peterson said:

This is interesting. If I understand correctly you are actually receiving an effective time followed by a void time 5 minutes later. As I ply the recesses of my mind from years ago I think I may remember getting a release time followed by the void time, but it is foggy. If ATC actually will do that I completely forgot about it till you jogged my memory.

My current experience is that if I am not right ready to depart they make me call back when I am within 5 or at the most 10 minutes from departure. Of course that may just be the procedural policy of the facility, but I am very curious as to whether I am interpreting your post correctly which would validate my fading memory, or if I am just having a senior moment!

When I call them on the phone at the hangar I remind them reception is spotty at the departure end of the runway  Here, their default seems to be to just give me a time in 15 minutes, which is plenty.  If I call them up on the radio on the ramp, they'll just ask me to call when I'm #1 for departure, since it's pretty obvious its working that day.  And yes, reception is really that spotty at the departure end, I'm not just making that up for them

 

[T. Peterson]

3 minutes ago, jaylw314 said:

When I call them on the phone at the hangar I remind them reception is spotty at the departure end of the runway  Here, their default seems to be to just give me a time in 15 minutes, which is plenty.  If I call them up on the radio on the ramp, they'll just ask me to call when I'm #1 for departure, since it's pretty obvious its working that day.  And yes, reception is really that spotty at the departure end, I'm not just making that up for them

 

That’s a nifty way to do it. I will have to see if I can make that work. I have been taxing to the run-up area and when I am ready to go I call on the phone and emphasize I am ready to go now. The problem with the way I do it is that even though it only takes a couple of minutes, if someone is behind me I hold them up. So far it has only happened once and it was only a minimal delay, but I still felt bad.

If I could call from the hangar and get a release time and a void time it would mitigate that problem.

Thanks for the tip!

[N201MKTurbo]

The big problem is, I’ve waited 1/2 hour before they would give me a clearance. If it is VFR, you can depart when you feel like it.  

[ilovecornfields]

15 hours ago, WilliamR said:

I remember that run to the plane after getting the clearance by pay phone; passengers already loaded.

Thanks for the ground lesson. I will look for the bill in the mail.

I've never been a big fan of picking up an IFR clearance on departure, especially single pilot. Copying a full route clearance is a lot of heads down time in a VFR environ. Throw in some turbulence and hands are full, but that's me.

William

It’s amazing how much easier it is to pick up IFR in the air now. On my recent trip home from Sedona I made a fuel stop in Bullhead City, AZ. Destination was low IFR so I’d filed an IFR flight plan (or so I thought). Took off VFR out of Bullhead and asked to pick up my IFR flight plan with Center but they said “we don’t have one.” Then I realized I was an idiot and forgot to hit the “File” button on ForeFlight. I pressed the button and let the controller know. He came back with my new squak code and “cleared as filed, maintain 10k.” That would have been such a cluster 20 years ago and it was basically painless. I do love technology sometimes but it’s humbling to realize us humans are often the weak link.

[carusoam]

2 hours ago, ilovecornfields said:

It’s amazing how much easier it is to pick up IFR in the air now. On my recent trip home from Sedona I made a fuel stop in Bullhead City, AZ. Destination was low IFR so I’d filed an IFR flight plan (or so I thought). Took off VFR out of Bullhead and asked to pick up my IFR flight plan with Center but they said “we don’t have one.” Then I realized I was an idiot and forgot to hit the “File” button on ForeFlight. I pressed the button and let the controller know. He came back with my new squak code and “cleared as filed, maintain 10k.” That would have been such a cluster 20 years ago and it was basically painless. I do love technology sometimes but it’s humbling to realize us humans are often the weak link.

There must be an interesting name for this…

1) fill out a form

2) review it

3) know it all looks good

4) neglect to push the submit button.

 

I have seen this in non-aviation apps as well…

could be an interesting version of a distraction…

Would love to know the cause, and how to avoid it… 

Best regards,

-a-

[midlifeflyer]

16 hours ago, tgardnerh said:

I haven't read the full decision because it's 700+ pages, but skimming, I see that they lean into the "not necessary for landing" bit rather than just relying on the general recklessness rule of 91.13.

As written, I just don't see how to distinguish this case from flying low and slow down a paved runway at a sleepy airport to look for FOD. 

Perhaps more worrisome to me, this decision seems to outlaw intentional go-around practice, which is obviously not necessary for landing, and definitely takes you over the airport fence at less that 500 feet!

 

Some key quotes from the attached decision:

 "I further find that Respondent's low pass operation at 100 feet or less above ground level and his flight path was not necessary for takeoff or landing." (P 733, line 19), and

"While a low pass is recommended for -- while a low pass was recommended in Ops Guidance, it still must comply with the regulatory requirements of Section 91.119." (P 739, line 16), and

"such operations below the minimums of Section 91.119 must still be necessary for takeoff or landing under the circumstances. Under the circumstances in this case, it was not necessary.  I, therefore, reject Respondent's argument that the Off-airport  Ops Guide excused his violation." (P 739, line 23)

 

NTSB_Palmer_033023.pdf 515.67 kB · 0 downloads

It's the "not necessary for landing" part and its interpretation. It's "not necessary" to land where you don't need to and shouldn't land at all, so it's "not necessary" to do a low pass to it. Is a low pass to a schoolyard "necessary for takeoff and landing"?

That 40+ year old precedent that went to the US Court of Appeals? It was a low pass over a taxiway at an airport. The low pass wasn't necessary because a landing there would not have been appropriate with good runways available. Language from the casecus quoted in the Palmer decision:

We cannot accept respondents’ proposition that the low altitudes at which their aircraft were operated were excused by the prefatory clause of section 91.[119]. As the law judge stated, respondents’ interpretation of the above regulation would in effect excuse low flight where necessary for “any takeoff or any landing from any area anywhere at any time” ... Such an interpretation is patently fallacious in that it would excuse low flight regardless of the appropriateness of the landing site.

I think that's the real decision in the case. The FAA would have violated Palmer if he had landed. It's his side of the case that claimed necessity and the FAA argues there was none. I agree with you that the poor writing of the decision is the real problem by raising issues which don't really exist and were unnecessary.

[midlifeflyer]

17 hours ago, T. Peterson said:

This is interesting. If I understand correctly you are actually receiving an effective time followed by a void time 5 minutes later. As I ply the recesses of my mind from years ago I think I may remember getting a release time followed by the void time, but it is foggy.

The difference is mostly practical.

Release time and void time window is pretty standard. It's just that the start of the release is used less often for practical reasons in a world where you can call on your cell phone and report "No. 1 for departure." ATC can and typically do

"Released for Departure. Clearance void if not off by [Time]"

instead of

"Released for Departure at [Time1].  Clearance void if not off by [Time2]"

The practicality is most ATC. Many would rather say "call us back in 10 minutes when No 1 for departure" and release you then than give a window you may or may not meet. 

[Fly Boomer]

6 hours ago, ilovecornfields said:

It’s amazing how much easier it is to pick up IFR in the air now. On my recent trip home from Sedona I made a fuel stop in Bullhead City, AZ. Destination was low IFR so I’d filed an IFR flight plan (or so I thought). Took off VFR out of Bullhead and asked to pick up my IFR flight plan with Center but they said “we don’t have one.” Then I realized I was an idiot and forgot to hit the “File” button on ForeFlight. I pressed the button and let the controller know. He came back with my new squak code and “cleared as filed, maintain 10k.” That would have been such a cluster 20 years ago and it was basically painless. I do love technology sometimes but it’s humbling to realize us humans are often the weak link.

How do you get the Internet with ForeFlight when you are enroute?

[redbaron1982]

7 hours ago, ilovecornfields said:

It’s amazing how much easier it is to pick up IFR in the air now. On my recent trip home from Sedona I made a fuel stop in Bullhead City, AZ. Destination was low IFR so I’d filed an IFR flight plan (or so I thought). Took off VFR out of Bullhead and asked to pick up my IFR flight plan with Center but they said “we don’t have one.” Then I realized I was an idiot and forgot to hit the “File” button on ForeFlight. I pressed the button and let the controller know. He came back with my new squak code and “cleared as filed, maintain 10k.” That would have been such a cluster 20 years ago and it was basically painless. I do love technology sometimes but it’s humbling to realize us humans are often the weak link.

That's something very cool. I didn´t know that Departure/Center had access to the flight plans before release.

With this information, I think that whenever departing in VMC from a non-towered airport the best thing to do is file, depart in VFR and when contacting departure ask for IFR clearance with the filed plan.

Another takeaway, this is something that should be part of IR training. I know that it's in the "theoretical" part of the training, but in my case, during the flying portion of the training I've never departed IFR from a nontowered airport, nor picked up an IFR clearance while airborne.

 

[ilovecornfields]

1 hour ago, Fly Boomer said:

How do you get the Internet with ForeFlight when you are enroute?

It took a couple of tries but I guess I was in the right spot. Sometimes that will happen and I’ll start seeing a bunch of emails come through the lose internet a minute later.

[ilovecornfields]

56 minutes ago, redbaron1982 said:

That's something very cool. I didn´t know that Departure/Center had access to the flight plans before release.

With this information, I think that whenever departing in VMC from a non-towered airport the best thing to do is file, depart in VFR and when contacting departure ask for IFR clearance with the filed plan.

Another takeaway, this is something that should be part of IR training. I know that it's in the "theoretical" part of the training, but in my case, during the flying portion of the training I've never departed IFR from a nontowered airport, nor picked up an IFR clearance while airborne.

 

I think it speaks to the value of having an experienced CFI. The gentleman I did my commercial rating with had 500 hours and had never flown outside the state. My two main instructors for my private were both ATPs with 10k+ hours, one was ex-military.

My dad was also a CFI and the airport I learned to fly at (CRQ, Carlsbad) was notorious for getting a marine layer in the morning and evening so I had lots of experience with pop-up IFR and getting a clearance enroute. I may have accidentally done an ILS approach as a student pilot as well but I cannot confirm or deny that. I still maintain it was a practice ILS but my father claims the field was IFR.

[midlifeflyer]

1 hour ago, redbaron1982 said:

That's something very cool. I didn´t know that Departure/Center had access to the flight plans before release.

Not knowing that is a bit surprising. Think about it. They have to. How can they figure out when to release you unless they know what you are going to do? 

The facilities that will handle the departure have access. They are fed it as part of the system. There may be more than one. My favorite example was a flight south. My home base is on the cusp between RDU and FAY. So much so that while the approach to runway 21 is handled by RDU, the approach to 3 is handled by FAY. So, when picking it up in the air, if I am going south, I call FAY even though the charts and AFD say to call RDU.

"Fayetteville Approach. N1068X just off Raleigh Exec."

"N1068X. Fayetteville Approach.  Cleared to..."

The other one that made the point is in this short video...

 

[T. Peterson]

2 hours ago, redbaron1982 said:

That's something very cool. I didn´t know that Departure/Center had access to the flight plans before release.

With this information, I think that whenever departing in VMC from a non-towered airport the best thing to do is file, depart in VFR and when contacting departure ask for IFR clearance with the filed plan.

Another takeaway, this is something that should be part of IR training. I know that it's in the "theoretical" part of the training, but in my case, during the flying portion of the training I've never departed IFR from a nontowered airport, nor picked up an IFR clearance while airborne.

 

If it is VMC and I am comfortable with the airspace I will almost always pick up my clearance airborne, especially from my home airport of Ennis. Just is simpler than shoving my phone into my ear canal while waiting for takeoff!

[McMooney]

15 hours ago, T. Peterson said:

ForeFlight emails me an expected clearance. I load it into my ultra modern latest technology Garmin 450 and off I go.  Occasionally I get a fix or two from ATC, but usually just a few minutes of vectors followed by “cleared destination”. Of course my destinations are not in the heart of busy corridors like you guys on the coasts. My destinations are pretty much, Kansas, Missouri, Alabama and Indiana. I did go to South Dakota one time and had to deal with that busy airspace around Aberdeen!

How it works for me, i get an expected clearance, load it into my nifty 480, call cd/ground, get something completely different, enter that into the 480, take off and fly something different from everything before, sigh  good thing it's mostly instructions to fly direct

Edited May 4, 2023 by McMooney

[tgardnerh]

4 hours ago, midlifeflyer said:

I think that's the real decision in the case. The FAA would have violated Palmer if he had landed. It's his side of the case that claimed necessity and the FAA argues there was none. I agree with you that the poor writing of the decision is the real problem by raising issues which don't really exist and were unnecessary.

I hope you're right, and I hope the FAA gives some clear guidance about what you need to know about a potential landing site *before* doing a low pass.
A low pass only makes sense if sometimes you can reject the landing site, but it's obvious that a Learjet doing a low pass over a gravel bar isn't inspecting it for a possible landing site, so... ugh.

[Hank]

1 hour ago, T. Peterson said:

If it is VMC and I am comfortable with the airspace I will almost always pick up my clearance airborne, especially from my home airport of Ennis. Just is simpler than shoving my phone into my ear canal while waiting for takeoff!

Just be careful with this. It's what I often do, but sometimes there are issues.

Taking off from a grass strip between Jax and Wilmington, with my IFR flight plan filed, Approach would never answer my calls as I'm climbing towards the clouds at about 5000 or so [filed was 10,000 msl]. Fortunately in the way down from WV I had written all of my frequency changes down, so I just looked for the next expected one and called Seymour Johnson and they opened my flight plan for me. Approach was too busy talking to planes going into Oak Island to bother with someone who was leaving . . . . And yes, I was cleared direct to Furthest WV. 

[carusoam]

Actual IMC adds to the challenge of getting the clearance while airborne… 

We used to have something called an RCO..

Remote Control Outlet?

it was a radio frequency for the nearest Class D approach/departure group…

The cell phone was a better solution.

Best regards,

-a-