ACR WDB ON A DIRECT INS ROUTE TOWARD LAX REFUSED AN AMENDED CLRNC ROUTE TO REJOIN AN AIRWAY NORTH OF THE ACFT'S POSITION. REPORTER SAYS HIS WX FORECAST AND PLT REPORTS OF TURBULENCE WERE THE REASON FOR REFUSING THE ROUTE CHANGE.

Date: 1988-02 · Aircraft: Widebody; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng

Anomalies: deviation-discrepancy-procedural-clearance

Synopsis

ACR WDB ON A DIRECT INS ROUTE TOWARD LAX REFUSED AN AMENDED CLRNC ROUTE TO REJOIN AN AIRWAY NORTH OF THE ACFT'S POSITION. REPORTER SAYS HIS WX FORECAST AND PLT REPORTS OF TURBULENCE WERE THE REASON FOR REFUSING THE ROUTE CHANGE.

Narrative

DEN CENTER WANTED TO CHANGE MY ROUTING AND REROUTE ME THROUGH AN AREA THAT I WAS TRYING TO AVOID DUE TO FORECAST AND RPTED TURB. I TOLD CENTER THIS AND THAT I WOULD ACCEPT ANY ROUTING TO THE S AWAY FROM THIS AREA; INCLUDING EXITING DEN CENTER'S AIRSPACE TO THE S INTO ABQ CENTER'S AREA. THE FIRST 2 DEN SECTORS SAID CONTINUE ON COURSE; THEY WOULD WORK ON IT. ON FREQ 132.17 DEN TOLD ME TO PROCEED DIR HVE VOR (THROUGH THE AREA OF RPTED TURB). I AGAIN STATED MY REQUEST FOR A ROUTING TO THE S. DEN THEN ASKED IF IS WAS DECLARING AN EMER; AND I AGAIN TOLD HIM THAT I WAS TRYING TO AVOID THIS PARTICULAR AREA OF TURB. HE THEN ASKED MY INTENTIONS. I TOLD HIM I WAS HOLDING COURSE UNTIL WE COULD AGREE ON AN ACCEPTABLE CLRNC. I WAS THEN TURNED OVER TO ANOTHER SECTOR WHERE WE WERE SLOWED AND TURNED S. JUST BEFORE LEAVING DEN CENTER'S AREA FOR LAX CENTER I WAS TOLD TO CALL THE DEN CENTER SUPVR ON THE GND FOR A POSSIBLE FLT VIOLATION. MY INFO ON THE AREA I WAS TRYING TO AVOID LED ME TO BELIEVE THAT IT WOULD BE VERY IMPRUDENT TO FLY THROUGH IT. HOWEVER; I DID NOT CONSIDER IT TO BE AN EMER SITUATION. I NEVER RECEIVED ANY INDICATION FROM DEN CENTER THAT I WAS CREATING A HAZARD TO ANY OTHER ACFT--OR THAT ANY OTHER ACFT WOULD HAVE TO CHANGE HDG; ALT OR AIRSPD FOR ME. HAD I BEEN ADVISED OF ANY CONFLICT I WOULD HAVE IMMEDIATELY ACCEPTED THE REROUTE; THE REROUTE THAT DEN WAS REQUESTING WAS A ROUTINE REROUTE THAT WE ARE GIVEN ON ALMOST ALL WBOUND FLTS; AND I HAVE ALWAYS ACCEPTED IT PRIOR TO THIS. CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING: WHEN THE RPTR CALLED ZDV AFTER ARR THE NEW DUTY SUPVR SAID HE COULD SEE NO PROB WITH THE FLT CREW'S REQUEST AND INDICATED THE INCIDENT WOULD NOT BE PROCESSED FURTHER. LATER HIS COMPANY INFORMED HIM THAT THE FAA WAS DOING A FOLLOW UP INVESTIGATION SO THE RPTR CONTACTED AN ASSOCIATION ATTORNEY. THE ATTORNEY SAID AFTER SOME INVESTIGATING THAT THERE WERE SOME PROBS IN THE DEN CENTER AND HOPED AN INTERNAL REVIEW OF THE CENTER WOULD PUT THE MATTER TO REST.

Source: NASA Aviation Safety Reporting System (public domain). Reports are voluntary submissions and are not verified by NASA.