What happened
The FAA’s narrative, in sentence case. The FAA writes it in capitals and removes private details.
(-23) Pilot filed what he stated was an IFR flight plan with duats, (it was received as an VFR flight plan.) He did coordinate for the 'slot program'-a requirement for IFR. He called ipt fss for weather information a few hours prior to flight and asked if they could check on his IFR flight plan. They informed him that the duats flight plan system does not allow them to check on flight plans and recommended that he check with cxy ground about an hour before takeoff. Pilot asked cxy tower for IFR clearance 'as filed', cxy had no information on IFR clearance. Pilot went back to ipt fss and attempted to coordinate again for IFR clearance. Pilot states that he thought that he had an IFR clearance all along, in fact he did not. After a reasonable waiting period, elected to takeoff VFR and thought that the IFR clearance would be able to be picked up after takeoff (not an airfile, but an unusual administrative delay). After his VFR takeoff, the ATC system became overloaded to the point that ATC was not accepting any more ifr's into zny center sector. Unfortunately, that information was shared between cxy and MDT just after N58GP'S takeoff. All along the pilot of N58GP was certain that he filed an IFR flight plan "properly" and that all he needed was to have it activated. After numerous requests to activate this flight plan with har app without success, the pilot persisted to activate with zny without success (zny was not aware of any IFR flight plan). The zny controller informed the pilot that he could not provide VFR services and to exit the frequency. The duats system and the delay in providing the flight plan resulted in a coordination problem that was exasperated when all parties did not effectively communicate. This situation could have been avoided if the pilot did not utilize the duats system (VFR vs. IFR as he stated he intended to file), and he used the 'conventional' telephone fss filing. Most importantly, the pilot should not have taken off VFR because he could not guarantee that the IFR would be available. The issue of waiting until the IFR clearance was provided was detailed extensively during counseling with the pilot. ATC (cxy and har app) could have better explained to the pilot the saturation in the University Park area and perhaps facilitated the transition to IFR and zny's airspace, as the pilot did not make the necessary coordin ation with ipt fss, however did not allow sufficient time for all coordination to take effect. Counseling was completed with the pilot of N58GP on 11/17/99.
As the FAA filed it
(-23) PILOT FILED WHAT HE STATED WAS AN IFR FLIGHT PLAN WITH DUATS, (IT WAS RECEIVED AS AN VFR FLIGHT PLAN.) HE DID COORDINATE FOR THE 'SLOT PROGRAM'-A REQUIREMENT FOR IFR. HE CALLED IPT FSS FOR WEATHER INFORMATION A FEW HOURS PRIOR TO FLIGHT AND ASKED IF THEY COULD CHECK ON HIS IFR FLIGHT PLAN. THEY INFORMED HIM THAT THE DUATS FLIGHT PLAN SYSTEM DOES NOT ALLOW THEM TO CHECK ON FLIGHT PLANS AND RECOMMENDED THAT HE CHECK WITH CXY GROUND ABOUT AN HOUR BEFORE TAKEOFF. PILOT ASKED CXY TOWER FOR IFR CLEARANCE 'AS FILED', CXY HAD NO INFORMATION ON IFR CLEARANCE. PILOT WENT BACK TO IPT FSS AND ATTEMPTED TO COORDINATE AGAIN FOR IFR CLEARANCE. PILOT STATES THAT HE THOUGHT THAT HE HAD AN IFR CLEARANCE ALL ALONG, IN FACT HE DID NOT. AFTER A REASONABLE WAITING PERIOD, ELECTED TO TAKEOFF VFR AND THOUGHT THAT THE IFR CLEARANCE WOULD BE ABLE TO BE PICKED UP AFTER TAKEOFF (NOT AN AIRFILE, BUT AN UNUSUAL ADMINISTRATIVE DELAY). AFTER HIS VFR TAKEOFF, THE ATC SYSTEM BECAME OVERLOADED TO THE POINT THAT ATC WAS NOT ACCEPTING ANY MORE IFR'S INTO ZNY CENTER SECTOR. UNFORTUNATELY, THAT INFORMATION WAS SHARED BETWEEN CXY AND MDT JUST AFTER N58GP'S TAKEOFF. ALL ALONG THE PILOT OF N58GP WAS CERTAIN THAT HE FILED AN IFR FLIGHT PLAN "PROPERLY" AND THAT ALL HE NEEDED WAS TO HAVE IT ACTIVATED. AFTER NUMEROUS REQUESTS TO ACTIVATE THIS FLIGHT PLAN WITH HAR APP WITHOUT SUCCESS, THE PILOT PERSISTED TO ACTIVATE WITH ZNY WITHOUT SUCCESS (ZNY WAS NOT AWARE OF ANY IFR FLIGHT PLAN). THE ZNY CONTROLLER INFORMED THE PILOT THAT HE COULD NOT PROVIDE VFR SERVICES AND TO EXIT THE FREQUENCY. THE DUATS SYSTEM AND THE DELAY IN PROVIDING THE FLIGHT PLAN RESULTED IN A COORDINATION PROBLEM THAT WAS EXASPERATED WHEN ALL PARTIES DID NOT EFFECTIVELY COMMUNICATE. THIS SITUATION COULD HAVE BEEN AVOIDED IF THE PILOT DID NOT UTILIZE THE DUATS SYSTEM (VFR VS. IFR AS HE STATED HE INTENDED TO FILE), AND HE USED THE 'CONVENTIONAL' TELEPHONE FSS FILING. MOST IMPORTANTLY, THE PILOT SHOULD NOT HAVE TAKEN OFF VFR BECAUSE HE COULD NOT GUARANTEE THAT THE IFR WOULD BE AVAILABLE. THE ISSUE OF WAITING UNTIL THE IFR CLEARANCE WAS PROVIDED WAS DETAILED EXTENSIVELY DURING COUNSELING WITH THE PILOT. ATC (CXY AND HAR APP) COULD HAVE BETTER EXPLAINED TO THE PILOT THE SATURATION IN THE UNIVERSITY PARK AREA AND PERHAPS FACILITATED THE TRANSITION TO IFR AND ZNY'S AIRSPACE, AS THE PILOT DID NOT MAKE THE NECESSARY COORDIN ATION WITH IPT FSS, HOWEVER DID NOT ALLOW SUFFICIENT TIME FOR ALL COORDINATION TO TAKE EFFECT. COUNSELING WAS COMPLETED WITH THE PILOT OF N58GP ON 11/17/99.
Other reports on N58GP · 1
Matched to the same aircraft by N-number and date.