Help - I busted into the Class B SEATAC airspace last night, does anyone have any advice ?

On 2003-10-24 07:27:54 -0700, (null) said:

..... most
pilots have violated one airspace or another but they don't talk about it

Is there a statute of limitations on such violations?

The number that comes to mind is 180 days. If any action is to be taken, the ball must start rolling before 180 days have passed.

"Maule Driver" wrote:
It goes without saying I have a few stories....that I don't want to
share. Anybody else want to share?

No way! Too embarrassing!
--
Dan
C172RG at BFM

Hello everyone, my name is Kobra and I am an Airspace Violator.

[Group] "Hello Kobra!"

It has now been two months since my last violation. Let me share my one and
hopefully only story:

Here is my NASA report: (you may notice that the one thing in common with
Steve's report is that we both read our moving map GPS incorrectly. I too
was zoomed in too tightly and miss read the screen. Take note that when
using a GPS for this purpose, for God's Sake, zoom the damn thing ALL the
way out to see the WHOLE class B.)

I departed Linden Airport (LDJ) VFR enroute to KGFL with one passenger on
August 23rd, 2003 at approximately 11:00 AM. I climbed to 1000' to fly the
Hudson Corridor northbound and did not contact ATC as I figured I would do
so after I was clear of the class B airspace. I was using GPS for my
primary navigation and my passenger (non-pilot) was reading the NY Terminal
Area Chart as a cross-reference. The flight conditions were clear, but very
turbulent at that altitude. My passenger became nauseous while we were
approximately at the North Hudson Park. Shortly I saw her throw the Map in
the back of the plane and become sick. I then became distracted in helping
her find a relief bag. I looked down at my GPS and saw what I thought was
our position entering the outer most ring of the NY class bravo. I saw that
I could climb to 3000' and proceeded to do so. Unfortunately I did not
realize I was not entering the outer most ring, I was entering the
second-to-last ring which only entitled me to climb to 1500'. As I was
approaching 3000' I looked at the GPS again and saw what I thought was us
leaving the class B airspace and proceeded to climb to our cruise altitude
of 5500'. During that climb I contacted approach control to receive flight
advisories. After about a minute or so the approach controller informed me
of my transgression into NY's class B airspace and gave me a phone number to
call to speak with them. Shortly after I landed I phoned the number I was
given and gave ATC my tail number. She explained the problem, listened to
my situation and then gave me several frequencies to use if I ever am in
that situation again. [report end]

Kobra

TK up is for mouth breathing invertebrates who never really learned to
formulate a map in their head which they compare to the sectional and
any other nav instruments they may be using.

I see people like this all the time, they have to rotate their sectional
chart whenever they change heading or they will get confused. These are
the same people that get lost when flying south because now left on the
map does not mean left in the world.

I have found that pilots navigating with GPS most often loose
situational awareness when using TK up than using North up. The folks
using TK up know only that they are heading toward whatever they punched
in for "Direct To". These are the people that cannot adequately tell
ATC their location in reference to a nearby town or airport because they
can't relate their left and right to north and south.

As you mentioned in the first sentence of your post, "TK up is better
when you know where you are." You folks flying around with TK up
because it appears to be easier, you are just asking for a navigation
related airspace bust.

Most pilots using GPS as their primary means of navigation don't know
exactly where they are, so by your statement they should probably be
using North Up. If they knew where they were they wouldn't be using the
GPS.



Todd Pattist wrote in
:

sdfsdf wrote:


TK up is better when you know where you are. North up is
probably better if you don't and are trying to compare GPS
to the sectional.
Todd Pattist
(Remove DONTSPAMME from address to email reply.)
___
Make a commitment to learn something from every flight.
Share what you learn.

"wtfcfi" wrote in message
news:nWimb.20178$e01.38578@attbi_s02...

TK up is for mouth breathing invertebrates who never really learned to
formulate a map in their head which they compare to the sectional and
any other nav instruments they may be using. [remainder of drivel
snipped]

lol...

This being the Usenet, you haven't come close to posting the most idiotic
message of the year. But that doesn't mean it approached being sensible.

Different people navigate different ways. Your claims regarding someone
"just asking for a navigation related airspace bust" is completely
unfounded, and I guarantee you have no data to support it. Beyond that,
your willingness to dimiss someone as incompetent just because they use a
technique to navigate that you don't like or appreciate is the mark of a
fool.

Pete

"wtfcfi" wrote in message
news:nWimb.20178$e01.38578@attbi_s02...

TK up is for mouth breathing invertebrates who never really learned to
formulate a map in their head which they compare to the sectional and
any other nav instruments they may be using.

I see people like this all the time, they have to rotate their sectional
chart whenever they change heading or they will get confused. These are
the same people that get lost when flying south because now left on the
map does not mean left in the world.

I have found that pilots navigating with GPS most often loose
situational awareness when using TK up than using North up.

Bla, Bla, Bla,_________________________


Halleluiah!!!

You need to get to FlightSafety immediately and notify them of this!!!

My training with them every 6 months for the past 24 years in various
aircraft, Falcon, Lear, Beech stress TRACK up on the main MFD. No wonder us
corporate pilots are always lost*************

They need your help!!


Karl

Did you see the question mark after my comment, Its interesting how you could
come to the conclusion that I made a conclusion.
Real simple, I asked if he called or not.

Craig Prouse wrote:

Jeff wrote:

You did not call them as soon as you were on the ground?

That's an interesting reading of the post. How were you able to reach any
conclusion as to whether the author did or did not call?

[some snippage]
I would have called them upon landing to see what they had to say.

Yeah, when they tell you to call, it's a good idea to call.

He probably did call, and got to talk to the tower supervisor. That person
probably can't say at that exact moment whether or not they plan to pursue
an enforcement action, or whether the FSDO will follow up on it, or whether
it would be beneficial to hire a lawyer, or otherwise answer any number of
questions.

Hey when you know the outcome of this, can you post it and let us know. I am
kinda interested to see how they handle things like this there.

steve mew wrote:

I did call and they were very understanding. As soon as I landed last night
Twr (118.3) gave me a phone number to call which I did. I 'fessed up and was
very appologetic as I was the idiot, no question. They said not to worry too
much about it as it does happen with low time pilots all the time.
Unfortunately due to the traffic load and new rules since 9/11 they have
filed paperwork but they did say that if the Investigation Board wants to
pursue it they will tell them that I was very cooperative and that I made a
genuine mistake and am very sorry. I did found out from the FAA this morning
that I set off TCAS on 2 big jets on finals - Ouch.!!! The Twr supervisor
has called me a couple of times today and has been really great, very
understanding and supportive. He is going to call again later to let me know
what the radar trace looks like.

Bottom line is I think I may get away with a warning letter and some
remedial work . However, if they do suspend my license, I will eat it up and
ask for an extra slice of humble pie for dessert. I have absolutely no
excuse, I knew better and I went against my own judgment. I knew it wasn't a
good idea to go and I went anyway, the biggest mistake a pilot can make. I
had a bad feeling on the ground and I chose to ignore it. It was gusting on
the field at 18kts for Petes sake !! What was I thinking ??. Winds aloft
were 33 kts @ 3000

It's been a wake up call. I have to say that I am very lucky to be on the
ground today as there were moments I wasn't sure we were going to make it
back to BFI.
I've got a 115 hours, half way through I.R. Part 141 and have become a bit
over confident and complacent. I have forgotten how really inexperienced low
time like this is. I am still learning and when I've got 5000 hrs I will
still be learning. The best pilots are the old pilots who've made it that
far. Not because they were Chuck Yeager's but becuse they knew their limits
and knew how to be safe. It's all about being safe.

Fly Safe Everyone (Please !!!)

steve mew

PS Thanks for all the responses and support !

"Craig Prouse" wrote in message
...
Jeff wrote:

You did not call them as soon as you were on the ground?

That's an interesting reading of the post. How were you able to reach any
conclusion as to whether the author did or did not call?


[some snippage]
I would have called them upon landing to see what they had to say.

Yeah, when they tell you to call, it's a good idea to call.

He probably did call, and got to talk to the tower supervisor. That
person
probably can't say at that exact moment whether or not they plan to pursue
an enforcement action, or whether the FSDO will follow up on it, or
whether
it would be beneficial to hire a lawyer, or otherwise answer any number of
questions.

Do you really mean that


karl gruber wrote:
No wonder us

corporate pilots are always lost*************

They need your help!!

Karl

your willingness to dimiss someone as incompetent just because they use a
technique to navigate that you don't like or appreciate is the mark of a
fool.

Well said! But, you forgot, "or can afford".