GASIL - Ivory tower?

[gasax]

It dropped throught my letterbox today. I scanned it. I have to admit in recent years I have not been one of those 'full of praise' which they claim the vast majority of comments are.

So I'm reading through the commentry on a Comanche's electrical failure where in essence they suggest that checking ( and presumably resetting) the circuit breakers would have been a really good idea.

Which struck a chord so with the help of Google I searched and sure enough in the last GASIL (my memeory is obviously not that great) there is a warning not to reset circuit breakers if they trip!

Am I alone in wondering why GASIL has become not an education resource or even a source of useful information, but simply a source of hectoring negative comment?

And as for the 'Another way to kill yourself' bits????????? If this is the best our 'efficient and effective regulator' can manage then I despair.

And I will get it 11 times a year - oh dear!

[IO540]

I agree - it is rubbish.

[DX Wombat]

I for one say "Well done" as they have come out firmly against the "Guard Police"Unauthorised radio transmissions?
Having written the previous
two articles, we became aware of
some unauthorised transmissions
recently heard, on two apparently
separate occasions, on the
emergency frequency 121.5MHz.
However, these seemingly came
from an aircraft!
On both occasions, it seems
that the Distress and Diversion
cell were providing assistance to
inexperienced pilots who had
found themselves in worse
weather than they expected.
While that assistance was being
given, it is reported that a series
of transmissions were made by
people who were apparently pilots
(possibly holding licences issued
outside the UK) suggesting that
the radio exchanges providing
that assistance were interfering
with their own operations.
It is standard procedure
(indeed a requirement) for
airliner crews to listen out on
121.5MHz in addition to their
own operating frequency while
cruising. Some of these crews
may consider that their
convenience is more important
than the necessary training calls
(Practice Pan), or as in this case
even the provision of essential
safety assistance. They are
wrong.The UK Distress and Diversion
service provides direct
assistance to pilots in a manner
unique in the world. Those who
have never experienced the
service, nor learnt about it
during their training, may feel
the frequency is being misused.
However it is not up to them to
attempt to make unauthorised
transmissions. They have the
facility to submit reports if they
are concerned about what they
believe might be a possible
misuse of the frequency.Apparently the interfering
transmissions in at least one of
the reported instances were so
frequent and so aggressive that
the inexperienced pilot found
themselves concentrating more
on the accusations than their
flying. Ladies and gentlemen,[if
you need assistance, you are not
only entitled but encouraged to
ask for it on 121.5MHz, and if
you are subjected to such
unauthorised transmissions
ignore them as much as you can,
Do take note and report them,because it is possible they may
not be received by the D & D
ground stations.
So, if you hear them making their transmissions PLEASE report them - you may just help save someone's life by helping to prevent this aggressive behaviour.
editing note:- bold and colours are mine

[flybymike]

Others have commented on the needlessly patronising tone of the publication. I agree;I do not care to be spoken to as if I were an errant child.

[javelin]

Not only GASIL, but the last time I attended a CAA Safety Evening, it was Carrot nd Stick all night long. If I had been a new PPL, I would not have dared get my aeroplane out the next day, just in case I got prosecuted for something or other :suspect:

GASIL needs a big change if it is to be respected as the useful organ that it could so well be.

[Nipper2]

It always seems to me that the people who deliver all this stuff have absolutely no idea about human factors - as it relates to information and learning.

A strange problem give that the vast majority of 'accidents' are as a result of human factors - as it relates to decision making.

[IO540]

This material, and the CAA safety presentations, have historically been produced by the proverbial "ex RAF navigator" old guard at the CAA. This is the traditional military "rank" way of going about things.

These people are retiring as we speak and a few years from now we should see a different kind of stuff coming out.

I think every European country has this problem because they have all stuffed their CAAs with ex air force and ex national flag carrier airline people. These were the logical recruitment sources.

[S-Works]

This material, and the CAA safety presentations, have historically been produced by the proverbial "ex RAF navigator" old guard at the CAA. This is the traditional military "rank" way of going about things.

These people are retiring as we speak and a few years from now we should see a different kind of stuff coming out.

I think every European country has this problem because they have all stuffed their CAAs with ex air force and ex national flag carrier airline people. These were the logical recruitment sources.

You know before you roll out your usual anti CAA, old boys brigade diatribe you might want to look at who produces these things.

You really must have had a hard time somewhere along the line to be so bitter and twisted. Sometimes I think you are a one man hate campaign against GA.

[HeliCraig]

While I agree that the tone of GASIL can sometimes be overly patronising - I think on balance I would rather have it than not. It often provides useful information, but like all publications the source must be considered when making your own evaluation of the contents.

As for the anti-CAA and CAA safety evening comments, I think that perhaps you fixed wing guys are just unlucky with who you have to deal with. I can't comment directly as I don't have to deal with them. However I can speak as I find:

The heli chaps at the CAA have always been nothing short of entirely helpful, never patronising and frequently impart the wisdom of their experience freely. They have even, of late, attended some of the informal "safety evenings" organised by a member of PPRuNe in their own time, without payment, and been very very informative and contributed to the discussion freely.

I believe that one of the individuals to whom I refer is indeed ex Military, which would tend to discount the "its the way the military do things" argument. Perhaps its just the way some individuals do things - again consider the source when evaluating the content! Don't tar all of the chaps and chappesses at the CAA with the same brush.

(and no, I don't work for and am not related to anyone who does work for The CAA).

[S-Works]

My experience of dealing with the CAA has been the same as Helicraig.

I think part of the problem with those who are bitter and twisted with them is that they have often been told things they don't want to hear.....

[bookworm]

So I'm reading through the commentry on a Comanche's electrical failure where in essence they suggest that checking ( and presumably resetting) the circuit breakers would have been a really good idea.

What seems extraordinary about the comment, entitled "Emergency Drills", is that it seems to miss the key learning. Even without electrical power, the pilot could, in this case, have lowered the gear successfully manually, had the correct extension procedure been followed. It wasn't, and so the aircraft landed with the gear partially extended.

If the PA24 c/b panel is as ergonomic as the PA30's (set out of view and out of reach in the floor!) I can understand that the pilot may have missed a popped breaker.

[stiknruda]

Over the past few months, I've had protracted dealings with 3 very different departments within the CAA - some of them staffed by former RAF directional consultants. With the caveat that it IS highly bureacratic, I have nothing but praise for the individuals involved. They have been proactive, pragmatic, flexible and keen to share their knowledge.

The GASIL publication is a wee bit weak but it always gets looked at and sections relevant to me get read.


Stik

[Captain Smithy]

Speaking as a humble student, I appreciate things like GASIL. I have read through it a few times at the clubhouse and have always come away with food for thought. I have never found GASIL to be strong-worded... rather it is just being straight to the point. That I don't mind at all. But that's just my own view.

Speaking of resetting CBs... don't want to start any bunfights/pissing contests/playground arguing here but as a few here know I work with electronics, resetting low-current CBs is OK as long as you allow it to cool first for a few minutes, however if it trips again it's best to leave it as something is obviously wrong... however with high-current CBs (e.g. for the Alternator which is usually about 60 Amps) resetting even once is a major no-no. In fact if I remember correctly there was an incident a while back when the Alternator CB popped in a Cessna and resetting it caused a fire... think the report was out some time last year?

Smithy

[Rod1]

I think what gasax was getting at is;

Last edition, you silly children, you should not reset the CB

This edition, you silly children, you should have reset the CB

The approach could do with updating from the 1950’s style, and it would be nice if things were consistent. Fortunately my VFR only aircraft has fuses.

Rod1

[BristolScout]

Mine doesn't have any electrics - apart from the mags!

[fireflybob]

Coming back to circuit breakers though I thought you were allowed one reset after a suitable cooling period (2-5 minutes)?

[HeliCraig]

Any electronics?

[Rod1]

fireflybob

That is what I was taught when I did my PPL way back. Gasil’s position seems to depend on 20/20 hindsight with no consisteancy.:ugh:

Rod1

[gasax]

Latest thinking on cbs - as given in policy documents from the FAA, Transport Canada and the Australian lot is not to do it. To misquote them 'resetting cbs should be a maintenance activity'.

They do of course include weaselly words about 'unless it is necessary for flight safety or explicitly included in the flight manual'.

I feel the GASIL people have simply got into the habit of making sneering comments and so did not notice the inconsistency with their previous comments. and as mentioned above the real learning of the incident was completely ignored.....

I'll grant that there are a lot of accidents which bluntly feature a lot of 'brain fade' or 'senior moments'. But education has supposedly moved on a bit from when I was at school and teachers called kids idiots and thickos!

[IO540]

The position on CBs is complicated, and a lot depends on whether one believes that the pilot should have an understanding of the aircraft systems.

If one assumes that it is reasonable for the pilot to fly a plane with zero understanding of what is in it (in terms of what powers what) then never resetting a CB is a reasonable advice.

[scooter boy]

I only have one or two highly relevant questions for all you silly naughty CB pulling children out there, so please stop playing with your CBs and pay attention please.

1.Which real life character is Reggie Bender based on?

2.Is the fact that he has a handlebar moustache designed to break the myth that all great airmen have one?

3.If Reggie had a sex change would he be a trans-gender-Bender?

4.If Reggie had a sex change and was involved in a minor automotive collision would this constitute a trans-gender-Bender-fender-bender?

Important questions I know...

IMHO the real rubbish is on the blue printed paper (excellent as a fire starter by the way, takes a match v well).
It is usually entitled "Bloke cut me up in the circuit and never apologised" or something similar and often reads as follows:" I was bimbling around in a rusty spamcan near a damp muddy field somewhere in the middle of bloody nowhere when some absolute cad in a better plane than me dared to land without asking my permission. I immediately set off in hot pursuit and offered him fisticuffs or a duel in the flying club bar but he declined - he was clearly a coward and most certainly in the wrong... we must do what we can to reduce the likelihood of these incidents etc...

;)...

SB

[Cusco]

I always read it from cover to cover:

Patronising it may be but the more dodgy scenarios I can read about, hopefully the better prepared I will be if one of these dodgy scenarios creeps up on me.

I do find the '101 ways to kill yourself' fill-ins a bit mystifying but presume they're some kind of in-joke of the editorial board not meant for mere mortals like me............

Cusco

[pembroke]

Back to the topic, and already picked up on other threads. I usually read GASIL and there is always some useful info, not at all patronising. However I only give the smaller leaflet a glance, ie "Safety/ occurrence listing" . I've just read the leaflet, and note 114 controlled airspace and ATZ infringements in 2.5 months!
Of note, a pilot that went through Rochester at 700' and not through the "overhead" at Headcorn, blame the GPS (think about that!) Also the Mooney wandering around UK and Irish airspace without a care in the world. Then there is a,or several Cirrus SR22 infringing various parts of the London TMA, and I thought the Cirrus was so user friendly, it would make tea on final approach.
I hope the CAA and GASCO keep these leaflets post EASA and maybe, just maybe some of the above pilots may read and learn

[niknak]

We get a copy of GASIL only because a number of my ATC colleagues are also pilots. For the most part, we've had access to the full content of most of the safety abbreviated reports which appear therein, for GASIL to publish the full reports would take up masses of pages and possibly take up space that would be otherwise be dedicated to just as relevant but different issues.

I agree that GASIL doesn't appear to be the publication it once was just as CAA Safety evenings don't seem to be what they once were and it leads me to wonder if the people who organise and present both simply don't have the extensive grounding and experience of their predecessors, along with being bogged down by a world where risk assesments and safety cases take presidence to common sense.

Equally, I wonder how many of those who have complained on these forums will bother to either do so by their GA representitives who regularly talk to the CAA, or even do so directly to the CAA.
Unless you do so, things won't change and you'll have no grounds for future criticism.

[IO540]

I wonder how many of those who have complained on these forums will bother to either do so by their GA representitives who regularly talk to the CAA, or even do so directly to the CAA.Admittedly this was a few years ago, but I did just that.

During the presentation, at question-time, I politely suggested to the (well known) presenter that he might like to suggest to people that they would enhance their safety if they obtained an instrument qualification; the IMCR or even the IR. The big man didn't think much of it, and the response from someone in the audience was "nobody needs this; you can go everywhere VFR", a view which was strongly supported all around.

At a different point I suggested that the use of GPS might help with navigation and help to reduce the CAS busts (to which a large part of the presentation was dedicated), and this drew another hostile response, from both the presenter and (with much hissing and head turning) from the audience.

After that I never went again, and I doubt anybody with any intelligence did either. Nobody needs this kind of patronising input. I think the "show" has a lot of dedicated followers who queue up at the end to have their logbooks stamped that they attended a "CAA SAFETY MEETING". Quite funny really. Steve Jobs would have felt completely at home.

The format may have changed since, and if it has that would be a very good move. There are some muppets around who have a PPL but none of them are going to be turning up to these meetings anyway.

I have seen the magazine periodically and it has not IMHO improved.

[Shunter]

Seen them advertised a few times at LBA, but never been. I'm going to make a point of visiting next time, just to ask some IO540 questions (which I think are perfectly valid). To ignore the benefits of precise navigation in adverse weather is simple stupidity.

[Crash one]

I went to one during my training. Knowing little about "busts" etc.
There is one planned next month that I shall attend with more knowledge this time.

[Johnm]

I went to one in Cambridge it was OK but I didn't learn anything I didn't already know and the speaker for some reason was carting a black museum of broken aeroplane bits.

[Contacttower]

Admittedly this was a few years ago, but I did just that.How many years ago was that IO540?

I can't imagine your suggestions being poorly received nowadays....

They just seem like common sense to me....:cool:



Does one have to sign up to get GASIL? I don't actually have any recollection of receiving it....just reading ones in the flying club and on the CAA website.

As a publication (used in the loosest sense of the word) PPRuNe is pretty good for keeping up to date with ideas about safety and operations in general. Perhaps someone could set up a PPRuNe magazine cataloging and organising the best of the forum from time to time?

[flybymike]

Contact Tower, to receive a copy of GASIL you need to be either an FI, a registered aircraft owner, or subscribe £16 a year to GASCO.

[IO540]

2003 I think.

GASIL, plus another mag (GASCO?) get sent to the contents of the G-INFO CAA database.