worth filing an ASAP?

Subscribe
1  2  3  4 
Page 3 of 4
Go to
You may be confusing ramp control with ground control. The ramp is usually on the non-movement side of the airport. Some holding pads are too. Anything on the movement side is subject to ATC control. Not that familiar with ORD but the controller probably assumed you were familiar with how the ramp wanted you to enter so he didn't specify and got irritated when you went the other way. I'm sure by now it has been replaced with other irritations.
Reply
ASAP is also about looking at trends. If more than one guy does this and it's a trend, things get changed to prevent errors. That is my understanding of why ASAP was created in the first place.
Reply
Quote: Positive. Look in the FARs, find where it says anything about taxiing. ATC is technically more of a coordinator than a director of ground traffic.

But if you blow off ground instructions and hit something, or do a runway incursion they can violate you under FARs such as 91.13.

But obviously it's in all of our best interests to cooperate...two big airplanes head-to-head on a narrow taxiway is going to require shutdown and a tug to resolve.

Why do you think SWA is so willing to cut people off and pretend they didn't hear the "give way" instruction?
Quote:
ToastAir said:


§91.123 - Compliance with ATC clearances and instructions.

(a) When an ATC clearance has been obtained, no pilot in command may deviate from that clearance unless an amended clearance is obtained, an emergency exists, or the deviation is in response to a traffic alert and collision avoidance system resolution advisory. However, except in Class A airspace, a pilot may cancel an IFR flight plan if the operation is being conducted in VFR weather conditions. When a pilot is uncertain of an ATC clearance, that pilot shall immediately request clarification from ATC.

(b) Except in an emergency, no person may operate an aircraft contrary to an ATC instruction in an area in which air traffic control is exercised.

I beg to differ, but it sounds like there was no violation because no turn direction was specified. As far as filing, isn't the whole idea of the program to improve the system?
I'll go with my co-worker who referenced the same FAR as ToastAir above:
Quote:

The Airport Authority owns the asphalt. The Airport Authority and the ATCT will have a letter of agreement giving the ATCT jurisdiction/authority to exercise control of the movement area. The movement area will be described and depicted within the LOA as well as any non-movement, non-visibility, areas, hot spots, etc. Ground is a "control" function and the instructions that he/she issues must be followed per FAR 91.123. Failure to do so is technically a pilot deviation (violation).
Excerpts from the controllers handbook:

3
71. GROUND TRAFFIC MOVEMENT

Issue by radio or directional light signals specific
instructions which approve or disapprove the
movement of aircraft, vehicles, equipment, or
personnel on the movement area except where
permitted in an LOA.

3
72. TAXI AND GROUND MOVEMENT
OPERATIONS

Issue the route for the aircraft/vehicle to follow on the
movement area in concise and easy to understand
terms. The taxi clearance must include the specific
route to follow. When a taxi clearance to a runway is
issued to an aircraft, confirm the aircraft has the
correct runway assignment.
 

Having said all that, failure to comply with ground control instructions that don't result in the encroachment upon a runway or some horrible blockage, will at most locations result in a sigh of disgust/contempt and an under the breath adjective describing the pilots IQ and hearing impairment. You may get counselled either on the freq or with the dreaded "call this number".

Reply
Quote: I'll go with my co-worker who referenced the same FAR as ToastAir above:

My understanding was that LOA's, AIM, ATC manual, etc. cannot extend the real regulatory authority beyond what is actually spelled out in the real regulations (FARs). There is no specific regulatory basis for a violation unless something bad happened or a runway got incurred (in which case certain FARs do apply).

Perhaps one of our lawyers can chime in?

Again this is a purely academic point, I in no way advocate doing anything but fully cooperating with ATC on the ground and in the air.
Reply
Quote: My understanding was that LOA's, AIM, ATC manual, etc. cannot extend the real regulatory authority beyond what is actually spelled out in the real regulations (FARs). There is no specific regulatory basis for a violation unless something bad happened or a runway got incurred (in which case certain FARs do apply).

Perhaps one of our lawyers can chime in?

Again this is a purely academic point, I in no way advocate doing anything but fully cooperating with ATC on the ground and in the air.
Unfortunately the FAA can and will violate you for making a wrong turn while taxiing. I know someone personally that received a 30 day suspension just for making a wrong turn (no ASAP was filed). It's all spelled out in FAA order 2150.3B. Here's a link to the publication (FAA inspector's compliance and enforcement handbook). http://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/m...%20Chg%201.pdf

Specifically, reference page B-16 where it clearly states that failure to adhere to a taxi clearance or instruction carries a 30-60 day certificate suspension. If you really want to get scared, read the entire guidance table. Forget to write the flight time in the aircraft flight log? 30 day suspension. Write up the aircraft for a hard landing and didn't do an ASAP? 15-60 day suspension. Thank god for the ASAP program.
Reply
FAR 91.125 under light gun signals also defines taxi CLEARANCE not just taxi advisory
Reply
Quote: Unfortunately the FAA can and will violate you for making a wrong turn while taxiing. I know someone personally that received a 30 day suspension just for making a wrong turn (no ASAP was filed). It's all spelled out in FAA order 2150.3B. Here's a link to the publication (FAA inspector's compliance and enforcement handbook). http://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/m...%20Chg%201.pdf

Specifically, reference page B-16 where it clearly states that failure to adhere to a taxi clearance or instruction carries a 30-60 day certificate suspension. If you really want to get scared, read the entire guidance table. Forget to write the flight time in the aircraft flight log? 30 day suspension. Write up the aircraft for a hard landing and didn't do an ASAP? 15-60 day suspension. Thank god for the ASAP program.
Not exactly, that sanction table would apply if it was an egregious situation, where you turned into a 737 full of nuns and babies that had to make an emergency stop or something. Otherwise, 99% of the time, it never makes it to that sanction table and is handled administratively (rather than legally).
Reply
The important thing is an ASAP can only help you. Theory behind ASAP is there are a lot of little things that go awry every day, yet no one ever really tries to fix them. So, in order to here about all the little things, FAA will forgo punitive action (in most cases)

No brainer, filing an ASAP because you did 320 KIAS all the way to final because you wanted to get to the hotel before the restaurant closes just doesn't work. Filing an ASAP because you did 320 because you were on fire, or even a galley fire that you think is extinguished...good job.
But if you use that emergency authority, even if it's just declaring a minor problem no I don't need assistance, bureaucrats want to know why and filing an ASAP will cover that square
Reply
if you have to ask, then YES you should. There is zero recourse for filing an ASAP; it only can help you(and others).
Reply
ASAP and ASRS
I can point to legal authority and cases where the ASRS form limits punishment under certain circumstances. I am still trying to find a legal or FAA document stating an ASAP form does the same. So far I have not found it.
Reply
1  2  3  4 
Page 3 of 4
Go to