CAA Prosecution - A lesson to be learnt

[MagpiePedro]

Dear all

This is my first thread and thought I should tell you all a tale of how I myself became another statistic of CAA prosecutions.

I qualified as a flying instructor back in October 2008 having previously completed an Integrated ATPL at a well known establishment. A lack of recruitment in the airline industry prompted me to continue flying the only way I could afford to, as an instructor.

The following incident took place in my first week as a newly qualified instructor:
I had been scheduled to do a check ride with a PPL holder of some 30 years experience that had fallen out of club currency rules, who shall be known as Mr A for explanations sake. Nothing unusual about that, happens on a weekly basis. The gentleman in question was very confident and seemed like your average club member. He told me that he'd like to go to White Waltham aerodrome that morning for his check ride and return about 30 minutes after. So without knowing any better about the situation I agreed. We checked the aircraft, signed out of the booking sheet, myself as Captain, and proceeded to depart.

This is where the trip became a disaster:
Approaching White Waltham, an airfield Mr A had assured me he was very familiar with, I myself not so, it became apparant that Mr A was unsure of our position. White Waltham, for those of you that dont know, sits over the Western boundary of Heathrow Class A. The aircraft we were flying in had a cruise speed of about 120kts at the time.
As I begun trying to get a position fix using NDB's ( which it later turns out did not work) and VOR's, the inevitable had already happened. After only 3 or 4 minutes of trying to work out where we were, a sight that will forever live with me appeared out the front window, Heathrow Control tower. At this point I immediately took control, yanked the plane into a 90 degree turn away form it and proceeded with haste away from the airport. Mr A however was convinced that what we had just flown towards was infact Farnborough, some 20 odd miles further south of Heathrow. We eventually landed at White Waltham after what had turned out to be about 10 minutes worth of delayed departures and landings at Heathrow and a telephone call awaiting us from Heathrow.
Naturally I was devastated by what had happened and was effectively 'grounded' for a week. On consultation with my CFI we arranged to do 2 trips, at my own expense, around the Heathrow Class A and into White Waltham aerodrome so I could prove, mainly to myself, that I was not a liability and that I could fly professionally and safely.

A couple of months later, 2 days before Christmas infact, I was interviewed under caution by the CAA, and during the interview confessed all and took full responsibility as the Captain of the aircraft. A further two months passed before I was summoned to a crown court and fined £500. This was a minor blessing as the maximum penalty was £2500. Mr A received no further contact from the CAA and continues to fly, at a different flying club, with no repercussions to deal with.

What happened to me that day will haunt me till the day I die and my advice to you all is simple. If you sign an aircraft out as the Captain, then for :mad: sake be a Captain, no matter what your flying, who your flying with or where your flying to. A momentary lapse in concentration can have disastrous consequences.

Safe aviating all.

[chrisN]

MP, no criticism, just questions. Did a 1:500,000 chart, or any other, play any part in you and/or your P2's preparation and in-flight navigation, and if so, what part?

If not, then what, apart from your references to VOR/NDB?

Have you changed your view in any respect on this?

Chris N

[MagpiePedro]

We both had 1:500,000 charts but as I said Mr A was very confident in his ability to find W.W which in hind sight probably caused me to switch off a little. Being a junior instructor flying with an experienced pilot I assumed nothing could go wrong. It was a difficult position to be in and one I have learnt much from.

[S-Works]

I am guessing no sight of a GPS either?

[BackPacker]

If it was a club check, not a proficiency check or a lesson, and Mr A was otherwise currrent (including the 90-day rule), why was Mr A not PIC? Or did you agree that you would be PIC beforehand?

[S-Works]

If it was a club check, not a proficiency check or a lesson, and Mr A was otherwise currrent (including the 90-day rule), why was Mr A not PIC? Or did you agree that you would be PIC beforehand?

Hours building Instructor. Sometimes their is a price to pay for those hours......

[flybymike]

Gps, Gps, Gps.

[MagpiePedro]

Mr A was effectively a student, according to club rules, and as an instructor I was Captain. The thing that frustrates me the most is that Mr A has been at least advised to do any further check flights by the CAA, effectively leaving the door open for him to make the same mistake in the future, or worse. Then what happens? I truely believe the CAA have shown great neglect in dealing with this situation. Not sour grapes, I openly admitted my mistake and took my punishment like any man should.

[MagpiePedro]

Hours building Instructor. Sometimes their is a price to pay for those hours......

Thanks for that senseless comment.

And no there was no GPS available.

[PompeyPaul]

...I learnt more about flying from my mistakes than I did my flawless flights. I know it was an expensive mistake but at least you have learnt one hell of a lesson from it. I guess that's how you get experience from all of those hours.

Certainly a great posting and acts as a strong reminder of what P1 actually is.

[S-Works]

It might have seemed like a senseless comment to you but was valid.

As Instructors if we are teaching then we are PIC and take on the responsibility for the safe conduct of the flight regardless of the perceived level of the student. As such we carry the can when it goes wrong. You did not adequately prepare before the flight, you were complacent during the flight and as a result you were punished after the flight. Those hours you get to log don't come for free, they have to be worked for. You did not work for them and made a rod for your back.

You have learnt a harsh lesson and you do have my sympathy, being a new Instructor and probably low hour pilot yourself by the sound of it, it was easy to be lulled into a false sense of security and make the mistake.

However you can now move on and learn from the mistake. Do proper pre-flight planning, including weather and NOTAM for yourself and cross check it against the student. Get a moving map GPS and learn to use it properly. I take a 496 with me every time I fly out of the local area with a student. Expand your own experience and visit more places and become familiar with them.

[MagpiePedro]

know it probably doesn't help much but...
...I learnt more about flying from my mistakes than I did my flawless flights. I know it was an expensive mistake but at least you have learnt one hell of a lesson from it. I guess that's how you get experience from all of those hours.

Certainly a great posting and acts as a strong reminder of what P1 actually is.


Thanks Pompey. As the other poster has since written I did learn a very valuable lesson and as he can probably imagine my CFI has been very supportive of my situation. But my comment about the other pilot involved being left free to do a the same again should no, in my opinion, have let off without a safety check flight.

[S-Works]

But my comment about the other pilot involved being left free to do a the same again should no, in my opinion, have let off without a safety check flight.

I think we are going to have to disagree on this one as I just see you trying to transfer some of the blame.

In my view he was having a safety check with you! It was you who failed him by not taking your responsibility as an Instructor and commander of the flight seriously. I would suspect that he has probably learnt something from your mistake anyway!

[RatherBeFlying]

Every instructor ends up getting led astray by a student.

I know lots of folks hang their hat on the GPS these days, but when you don't have one, maps do the job just fine.

It sounds to me that you were new to the local area and unfamiliar with the airspace boundaries. That's the time when you need the map out and need to know where the airplane is on it.

'nuff said as you likely have absorbed the lessons, but a cautionary tale for the newer folks.

[BEagle]

Out of interest, what was your intended route?

My advice is "Always work out how you would fly the trip yourself!". Particularly with 'experienced' PPL holders! There is a fine divide between 'experienced' and 'complacent'.....

Even sticking religiously to the WW arrival procedure can often be difficult, thanks to the antics of some of the locals! And be especially careful of altimeter settings in that part of the world! I once asked Benson for the London QNH whilst transiting the Benson MATZ with a student practising UK airspace familiarisation and was haughtily told "Remain on the Benson QFE!". To which I replied "As I fully intend. Request FIS - now, what is the London QNH?"

Sorry that the CAA took you to court, but I guess 10 min of LHR delays is a bit different to sticking a wing into the Stansted zone or similar - so they probably had to make a point?

[MagpiePedro]

My last major concern is that in a year or two when the airline indusrty will hopefully be picking up, will this prosecution effectively halt my chances of getting a job with an airline?

[BEagle]

I doubt that it will - in fact it might give them something to chat with you about at interview and will give you a golden opportunity to discuss captaincy and cross-cockpit authority grade pitfalls with them.

Assuming, that is, that you're interviewed by someone intelligent and not just by some human factors trick-cyclist.

[MagpiePedro]

Thanks. And thanks to all for contributing on my first PPRUNE thread. A lot of good points that Ive taken on board.

[Rod1]

Thanks for sharing that with us, it was very brave! Will the prosecution be the end of any chance you had of an airline job or will it make no difference?

Rod1

[jonkil]

But my comment about the other pilot involved being left free to do a the same again should no, in my opinion, have let off without a safety check flight.

I think the type of pilot you depict is one of the most dangerous type there is.
Keeping a licence current with bare minimum hours.
Remember coming back to a local field and been looked down upon for flying a rag and tube microlight and being told I was crazy by a guy that thinks his regular well beaten 50NM flight is something else...... dried his eyes when he realised we had flown back from the Isle of Wight to North west Ireland.

Keep your chin up, it was a lesson that you have learned from, and to boot you had the balls to post here and let us know, that fact itself leaves me in no doubt that you will continue to be an excellent instructor and career pilot.

Jon

[englishal]

My view is that it is a waste of time fining someone for something like this.

What would probably happen in FAA land is that you'd be mandated to retake the FI or CPL flight test, or a portion of it, with a FAA insepector. I reckon they should do this in the UK too. Let you keep the £500 but then ensure you "lose" your ticket until to take the remedial test to a satisfactory standard.

[dragqueen120]

I had a similar thing (not looking at Heathrow tower I Might add) when a guy came for a check ride to Join the club. It was on a PA28 archer and he showed me pictures of his own PA28 arrow that he owns at his home town. Obviously I assumed (and there is the key word) he would be ok. Instantly I could see his checks were poor and his spatial awareness and knowledge of rules was ****e. I let him carry on whilst monitoring the situation and he was apauling. I took it off him on three of the four landings and suggested he do some time with the CFI. But because he oozed with confidence and owned an aircraft of same type (more complex actually) I initially took a relaxed view to the whole thing. The truth is Assume makes an ass out of you and me! those who say they are great are usually crap those who keep quiet usually fly a red arrow :-)
I once told a horse riding instructor I was an expert rider and it took off with me and bucked me off so I too have been the big mouth all be it with a sore arse! (her arse was nice by the way hence the attempt to sound like a pro):cool:
Magpie- could you see the whites of their eyes?

[MagpiePedro]

Not quite the whites of there eyes! We were a couple of miles away but Heathrow Tower is one of those things you see and insantly recognise. Thats when you suddenly rise an extra inch or two in your seat!

[goatface]

Chin up MP!

As an examiner and instructor in my part of aviation, the first thing that I look for within the community is the honesty to own up and the balls to admit to making a mistake.
It takes courage to not only admit to your errors, but bigger mutts nutts to come out and be as honest as you were.

You ****** up in a truely royal fashion and paid a steep price, but it's not so important that we found out because of your error but more so that others can learn from it.

It's a shame that there aren't more folk like you within the professional side of flying training who are willing to admit errors they've got away with.

[BEagle]

dq120, I had a similar experience with a pilot who had a FAA licence and used to own a high performance light single. He wanted to fly our aircraft, so I took him on what I thought would probably be a straightforward familiarisation ride.

When he whacked the control yoke from one extreme to the other, banging against the limits, during the 'full and free' control check pre-start, the alarm bells started ringing. From then it got worse and worse - he didn't fly the aeroplane, it flew him. I had to take control during several of his landing attempts..... On another occasion we went for a short navex to learn some of the UK airspace and FIS/RIS quirks - he was hopeless. A simple circuit at an unfamiliar FISO aerodrome maxxed him out.

He went back to the US without having been cleared to fly our little PA28s.

[cjhants]

Pedro, sorry you have had your collar felt, but as said above you have learned a valuable lesson. having flown a lot in this area, given the proximity to the london class A, i am surprised your school didnt send you out with another instructor to point out the local landmarks, before you went up with a student.

if you can recognise wycombe, marlow and maidenhead, and you stay to the west, you will avoid trouble. the "november" joining point for WW at henley is, i am sure, there to keep joining traffic away from the class A. i suspect your club member thought he could fly a direct line between booker and WW, ignore the joining instructions, and get away with it.

[Crosswind Limits]

MP,

Sorry to hear of your woes! You have my sympathy. Given certain circumstances, this could have happened to many of us.

I used to instruct, firstly part time then as a full time instructor, strangely out of White Waltham. Lovely airfield and locality BUT you have to be so careful operating in and out and VIGILANT at all times!

As an instructor you are a professional pilot (whatever anyone says) and you must know both your privileges and responsibilities. Take control, be assertive and therefore be a captain! Safety and legality are the most important aspects of flying, the rest can and does follow in my book.

I learned so much as an instructor and I am now a better pilot for it. Made loads of mistakes and frightened myself to death half a dozen times! I know at my old club that I would have been tipped off by more experienced colleagues when flying with these so-called "experienced PPLs". To my mind they (but not all) are the most dangerous and the ones most likely to get you in trouble or worse! Perhaps junior/new instructors, especially the young ones should be mentored a little more.

Good luck now!:ok:

[Final 3 Greens]

MP

Sorry you had to learn it the hard way, but there is a big difference being being responsible for a flight and accountable for the conduct of the flight.

The former can be delegated and the latter cannot, as you found out to your cost.

I suffered from a similar assumption, except it was in reverse.

The instructor on my first night circuit for a year did not watch closely enough, because 'you seemed well in control and made a beautiful approach', however, I screwed the landing and was lucky not to damage the aeroplane as the instructor was too late intervening.

At the time, I had over 200 hours, was confident, knew the drills backwards and good on the r/t -BUT I was out of currency at night, even though very recent during daylight.

Moral of the story, if you are there as an instructor, monitor like a hawk and be ready to intervene at any stage.

If the person you are instructing doesn't like it, they have an attitude problem.

[MagpiePedro]

When you say you used to instruct, does that mean your now retired or flying somthing a little bigger?

[dragqueen120]

:ugh:the classic one I had which was by far the most alarming went as follows:
I was sat in tower at an airfield (AG radio) and I got a call from a major airport controller asking me to tell all AC in the circuit to bugger off and any on the ground to stay put as he was talking a lost pilot in to our field. I did so and the bloke landed and taxied up to the apron. He got out and left all the lights flashing and brakes off. I thought he must be pissed up. In a brummy accent (which made a great tale greater) he told me that whilst on a solo x country of 15 mins he got lost and after an hour he had a near miss with an aircraft that came really close and waggled his wings. "i just waggled em back like" "there is some bloody idiots up there". I rang his flight school who were relieved he was down and not dead. They told me he busted Coventry, EMA, Birmingham (in the overhead) and Langar dropzoone. they asked if I would fly him back. Got to the plane with him and I asked why he was tiptoeing on the peddles. He said he did not know how to move his seatforward. It also turned out the reason he had to get ema to talk him down was coz he couldnt work out how to get even numbers on the radio! I took it to the fuel pump and it had f all fuel left and i mean FFF all. I let him fly it back to his base which he couldnt find. It turned out he had 75hrs and had only just gone solo, he owned an auster but crashed this in letouquet when he couldnt get the nose down coz his wife had a suitcase on her kneee in the back (i.e. the fuel went low so no weight in front), three in an Auster J1N to france??? not me thanks. I went a bit mad at his instructor for letting him go but after seeing the colour of his face (a whiter shade of white) I just went home.

Ahhh the joys. Never knew what happened...if any one recognises the story let me know the outcome.

[Crosswind Limits]

I stopped instructing 2 years ago and in February this year my ticket expired! Now flying in corporate aviation which is full of ex and current instructors! :p

[woodcoc2000]

Three points:
- first of all we all balls things up. i know i have. the only difference is that some are lucky enough to do it in a fashion where it is subtle and doesnt get noticed where as some unlucky sods do something not so subtle and get it printed in the press. No one can possibly tell you something (ie what were you thinking? you have learned a valuable lesson etc etc) that you havnt already told yourself. i know this from experience.

-2nd as an ex instructor the renewals/revalidations/club check types especially the cocky ones are ALWAYS the ones to really watch out for. like someone else said on here, the good ones dont need to talk about how good they are.

-3rd. although i am not in a position to say this for sure; i should think this should not be a career blocker for you. People who have been around in aviation long enough have all made mistakes and know it could have been them. so long as you werent downright negligent and being a real cowboy then they can put themselves in your shoes and identify with you. nothing better in an interview than an interviewer that knows precisely where you are coming from even if he doesnt want to admit it. http://static.pprune.org/images/smilies/wink2.gif

[stickandrudderman]

Nothing for me to contribute here other than to say "excellent post!"

[HEATHROW DIRECTOR]

May I add some input as a retired Heathrow controller with over 30 years experience of watching this sort of thing happen a good many times? Infringements of the London Control Zone, even by experienced pilots, are not rare and are invariably down to poor airmanship and poor navigation.

When you first realised you were close to Heathrow and suddenly yanked the aircraft round to get away from the airport... did you not think of immediately contacting Heathrow SVFR to let them know what was happening? You were lost so it would have been very good airmanship to make contact with the controlling authority of the zone you were infringing: It would have given Heathrow ATC at least half a chance to avoid major delays at the airport because they could have vectored you straight to WW and they would have known your altitude, probably the most important piece of information you could have given them.

In Class A airspace, when it is believed that an aircraft is lost, has experienced radio failure or is making an unauthorised penetration of the airspace ATC is bound to keep other traffic clear of it. It's always difficult to guess the intentions of the lost pilot but a sudden and dramatic change of direction, with no information on altitude, would not have made life easy for those trying to keep commercial traffic safe.

Please remember that controllers will not "book" you unless it is really necessary. Report writing and subsequent interviews take up time which could be better spent. Many of them hold flying licences up to ATPL; some fly as commanders on passenger aircraft, others are flying instructors so they are sympathetic towards those who have made a genuine error..

If you wander into a busy control zone and do not talk to anyone, ATC will endeavour to trace you. If they are successful you may be asked to telephone them and explain what happened. DON'T argue - radar does not lie! If you have made a mistake, admit it. If the infringement was minor you'll probably just be reminded to improve your navigation in future.

If your infringement causes havoc, ATC has no choice but to file a report, which may lead to prosecution.

Lastly, do pilots make use of Google Earth during flight planning? White Waltham shows up quite well and it is possible to view an approach to the 'field from various directions, angles and altitudes. As I write, I have GE showing me the view looking northeast to WW at about 1500 ft altitude. The airfield is plain to see, as are surrounding roads and other landmarks. Give it a whirl... You could even print the picture and take it with you.

I hope this helps....

[SergeD]

"Hours building Instructor. Sometimes their is a price to pay for those hours......"

Mr bose-x areyou a real CAA instructor and by that I mean a FI who has a JAA CPL, not just a LAA coach or a CRI?

I think this man learnt a hard lessonand did not deserve this comment.

[Cusco]

Chilling reading magpie. My sympathies as one who as a low hours PPL also bust the London TMA over Detling. I was lucky as I only got my knuclkes rapped: still lives with me though.

Had you considered posting on the instructors forum where you might get more valuable feedback than the usual PPRuNe crap you got on here?

Cusco

[chrisbl]

Beware the "experienced" pilot.



Anyway MP a good post, very brave and I am sure you will do well.

[smarthawke]

"Had you considered posting on the instructors forum where you might get more valuable feedback than the usual PPRuNe crap you got on here?"

At least MP probably wouldn't have got the unfair and harsh abuse from a CRI on the Instructors Forum....

[Cows getting bigger]

I've never had that particular scenario (still time to put a notch on the headboard!) but my closest was when doing slow speed/stalls. As ever, the one bit of useful blue was bordering the TMA and I spent much of my time chasing 4000ft of clear sky. Combine that with an average student who was struggling with stalls (practically and psycologically) I let my situational awareness dip. At the last moment I noticed a twon that appeared tio be a little cloe and a quick look at the GPS indicated we were about a mile the wrong side of the line. Lights on, transponder checked, a quick 180 and toggling the radio to the freq of the unit concerned (when known/available, I tend to have this selected in one of the boxes). ATC were very good, told me they were generating a bit of a gathering to watch the carnage and that was that.

I learnt about instructing from that. :eek:

[S-Works]

At least MP probably wouldn't have got the unfair and harsh abuse from a CRI on the Instructors Forum....

What abuse? That's what I love about PPRune, when people hear things they don't like the immediately slip into personal attacks.

I am sure you think that he should get a pat on the back for disrupting the traffic at one of the busiest airports in the world due to negligence. An Instructor whatever flavour they may be has a responsibility to ensure they do the job properly. MP clearly did not do the job properly and as a result was punished. Blowing smoke up his bum about how it can happen to anyone and how great a chap he is for telling us all about his sorrowful story still does not detract from the fact that he did not fulfil his duty as an Instructor properly and as a result caused a major incident. An incident that was investigated and he was find culpable and punished. Pretty simple to me.

Hopefully he has learnt from this mistake and it will make him a better Instructor and a more professional aviator. There has been plenty of good advice on here for him to heed. We all make mistakes and we all learn from them. But there is a line between a mistake and negligence and it seems in this case the line was crossed.

I am sorry if some people don't like the facts but my refusal to sugar coat them should not be grounds for personal attacks.

[BEagle]

Good grief, bose-x, have you been at the E numbers again?

[HeliCraig]

MP: Thank you for relaying your tale of woe, it takes a brave man who admits his faults so publicly. Seems to me the tone of your original post wasn't at all "sorrowful" as Bose-X describes, but honest and forthright.

As for the fine and court costs, I agree with EnglishAl, I think it would have been far more productive for them to have mandated further training and possibly revoked your FI rating or reduced privileges until this had been done.

Other than short term financial hardship, I don't think the fine serves any purpose. Given that you admitted fault/guilt unconditionally to the CAA at first interview they could have avoided the costs of preparing and prosecuting the case; and arguably improved safety as well.

Safe flying.

[wsmempson]

I reckon that since getting a PPL at High Wycombe (and thus my 'licence to learn') I have, in one form or another experienced most of the elephant traps that there are out there for private pilots. We're all human and, after all "to err is human".

However, I was just a PPL, as opposed to a CPL FI employed by a flying school, and therein lies the rub; However much of a numpty the chap being checked out was, I think that it is reasonable to expect that a qualified flying instructor, based at a flying school on the edge of the London TMA, shouldn't allow him or herself to end up at Heathrow. Sad to say, but I think the contention by MP that it's all a bit unfair that the book got thrown at him, rather than the pupil (or bloke he was checking out), indicates that a state of denial still exists here, as to whose fault this bust actually was.

If you are P1, you are in charge - end of story. If you are an instructor and P1, there really is no discussion to be had. It's not that I'm unsympathetic, because I'm not, but events like these need to go through a 'truth and reconcilliation' process.

I think that there are also other peripheral elements to this tale which merit further discussion (such as why a training establishment would send out a new instructor with a paying customer, when he was not sufficiently familiar with the local area, to prevent him from ending up over Heathrow?) and maybe someone from Wycombe Air Centre or Cabair would like to comment?

[oversteer]

To agree with heathrow director - you can obtain UK airspace KMZ files for Google Earth and it's a great way of relating permanent ground features to airspace (including ATZ,MATZ,etc)

While no replacement for a current map and NOTAMs, I found it very useful in the preparation of my navigation exercise. Be warned, the "true picture" from the air can vary greatly!

[Crosswind Limits]

4 years ago on my first morning as an instructor at White Waltham the CFI (a top bloke :D ) took me for a familiarisation flight in the local area. It was very useful, as whilst I had flown through the area I had never operated out of it. All the local reporting points and landmarks were identified which gave me confidence for my first local lesson that afternoon. Granted I was not a new FI, as I'd been doing it part time for almost 2 years in deepest Essex and Kent, but it was very useful nonetheless.

New instructors need mentoring and guidance which a good school should provide, especially one located near the Heathrow zone or LTMA.

Having said all this, an instructor is a commercial pilot and must know his/her job, privileges and responsibilities. This unfortunate incident was probably caused by weak training of the instructor and/or a lack of assertiveness on his part.

You are the aircraft commander, take control!

[S-Works]

Seems to me the tone of your original post wasn't at all "sorrowful" as Bose-X describes, but honest and forthright.

At the risk of pedantry perhaps you might want to refresh your grasp of the English language.

telling us all about his sorrowful story

Does not mean that the tone of the post was sorrowful, just the story itself.

If you want to quote people, don't do it out of context unless your intent was just malicious?

[18greens]

A salutory tale. I've flown with that guy, or one of his many cousins. Bummer the CAA was so tough on you.

When I got my first job the CFI warned the one that gets you isn't the keen but inaccurate student but the high hour PPL who seems to know what they are doing but then at some point later doesn't. He hads proven himself right again and again.

On the other side of the coin the level of training imposed in this country does mean that of the hundreds of people I have flown with theres only two I recall that I would not get in a plane with and I managed to spot them before I got in. One got a darwin award shortly afterwards. Now compare that to how many people you would prefer not get in a car with and you could conclude someone is doing a pretty job somewhere.

[soay]

At the risk of pedantry perhaps you might want to refresh your grasp of the English language.

A risky tack that, for someone who doesn't know when to use "there" or "their"! :}

Hours building Instructor. Sometimes their is a price to pay for those hours......

[Fuji Abound]

It is interesting those who dismiss the responsibilities of a PPL and laud the responsibilities of a CPL. If you are in command you are responsible, I don’t see the category of your licence has anything to do with it.

Following through that theme there are inexperienced PPLs and CPLs. It is more than possible a CPL will not have the breath of experience to consistently avoid making bad calls.

The law allows little discretion of interpretation. As much as there might seem merit in chastising the other pilot, the ANO does not recognise the other pilot as having any authority or responsibility in this scenario. The CAA would therefore be over stepping the mark were they to meat out any penalty on the other pilot. Perhaps there is more of a responsibility on the school to recommend that he avail himself of further training. I wonder if they did so.

In handing down penalties I think there is an argument for weighing up the causes of the incident. In my book a pilot with no instrument training who has read the TAFs and sets off in conditions where instrument flying is likely is negligent and should be dealt with severely. He has knowingly endangered himself and more importantly others. In the alternative, a pilot who properly briefs himself for a flight but becomes lost and is quick to take appropriate action has, in my view, committed a less heinous offence, because he has made a mistake that was not deliberate or caused by avoidable negligence.

It may be the case in this instance that the pre-flight brief fell below acceptable standards. If this were so inevitably you only have yourself to blame. On the other hand, if the pre-flight brief had been adequate and every effort had been made to maintain situational awareness but due to inexperience and inadequate training awareness was lost during the flight the offence in itself would seem less heinous along the lines erst while referred by others that to err is to be human.

The corollary is RTA. If you drive into the back of another car while on your mobile or drunk the penalty will be severe because you knowingly compromised your ability to safely drive the car. If, on the other hand, you were neither drunk or on the ‘phone and for no other reason than an inexplicable lapse in concentration allowed yourself to run into the other car the incident will be treated as an unfortunate accident.

Bose, I think for the reasons I have tried to set out your assessment may be too sweeping. Yes, we should expect a higher standard of flying from the average CPL if only because he has had to pass a more stringent flight test and endured further training. However, if the mistake arose because of a lack of experience and or training perhaps the instructor is less negligent that if he knowingly set off without an adequate pre-flight brief and without making every effort to maintain situational awareness throughout the flight.

Into which camp he fell I am not making any judgement, but I felt it was worth distinguishing between the two camps because whether we be ATPLs, CPLs or mere PPLs each is more than capable of screwing it up, it is just more difficult to excuse screwing it up in consequence of your failing to conduct the flight in a manner than could reasonably be expected of a qualified pilot.

[S-Works]

Bose, I think for the reasons I have tried to set out your assessment may be too sweeping. Yes, we should expect a higher standard of flying from the average CPL if only because he has had to pass a more stringent flight test and endured further training. However, if the mistake arose because of a lack of experience and or training perhaps the instructor is less negligent that if he knowingly set off without an adequate pre-flight brief and without making every effort to maintain situational awareness throughout the flight.

Fuji, by his own admission he let the 'experienced' PPL get on with it. By this very admission he did not take his duty as commander seriously. I made no differentiation between PPL,CPL or ATPL that was other posters. What I did say is that as an Instructor, logging the hours as commander he had a responsibility for the safe conduct of the flight. His standard was below that required of an Instructor and a commander and as such he got into trouble.

I have sympathy with his lack of experience but do not feel that he was treated unjustly. I would however question the chain of command that allowed a naive and inexperienced instructor to get into such a situation.

Regardless of the level of licence that an Instructor rating is attached to that Instructor has to operate to the highest professional standard and understand that being in command is not just about getting hours in the log book it is about ensuring the flight is conducted safely and legally. The Instructor has an obligation to ensure that THEY are competent, qualified and experienced enough to undertake any flight they take on as commander. It is an Instructors duty to set the highest examples of professionalism and airmanship at all times. If they are not experienced enough then they must make this clear to the command chain and gain more experience before they attempt to put themselves into such a situation.

[Final 3 Greens]

Bose

I support your comments 100%.

You get straight to the heart of the matter, but that is fair in the circumstances.

Like you, I was concerned at a tone of injustice in the OPs post, command is absolute and so is the accountability that goes with it.

[BEagle]

What he said.

Although perhaps with a little sugar on top.

[Fuji Abound]

Bose

I was of course very careful to point out that I was not making a judgement into which camp this gentleman fell. On the basis of your assessment then clearly his preparation as commander fell well short of the mark. Given the various views expressed on this thread it is a matter for the poster to reflect on the cause of the infrigement, whether the punishment was just and whether any action might have been taken against the PPL.

Examples such as this illustrate some of the potential pitfalls I pointed out of mentoring. One can easily imagine a very similiar situation where an apparently experienced PPL asks his mentor to accompany him to a field in an ATZ with which he is not familiar. Under the mentoring scheme the PPL is Commander but, and this is the rub, legally or otherwise the probability is the PPL will derogate to the experienced mentor because in his mind that is why the mentor is in the right seat. Indeed the mentor may well have said - worry not, I am pretty familiar with that area leave the navigation to me!

Of course the CAA will prosecute the PPL in the left seat and the mentor will shrug his shoulders, but who is at fault?

[englishal]

Not a very good mentor then ;)

[S-Works]

Fuji. This is not the appropriate place to discuss the mentoring scheme especially as you know so very little about it.

We are still setting up the scheme and both the MWG and IC are working together to make sure that Mentors know the limitations of the scheme and how to make sure no such confusion arises.

[Fuji Abound]

Bose - you can ignore AOPA's scheme as you wish as this is still work in progress but the point is generally valid whether the mentor is an AOPA appointee or just another PPL who reckons he knows what he is doing.

The point is whenever you place yourself in a position of being an instructor or a mentor in its most general context whether or not you are strictly in command there is a good chance the pilot in the left seat has already derogated some responsibility to you - you may not like it, or even be aware of it, but it doesnt make any difference.

I recall being in the middle of Germany with a mate who had done very little touring. When he got lost he was very quick to give me the stick and with a grin - its over to you now. I am sure you have been there.

If there is even a modicum of a chance that the pilot in command is relying on your skills it is well worth doing the job of the commander even if strictly it is not your responsibility.

[S-Works]

Agreed Fuji. But this discussion is not about mentors.

[jonkil]

Must be great to be perfect boys :}
Takes more balls to admit you have made a mistake than to moan at the person concerned :=
The OP referred to a mistake HE made, took it on the knuckles and learned, was BRAVE enough to tell us about it.......... we reward him with our excellent advice, what he SHOULD have done WHERE he should have done it, the reason WHY it should not have happened .... facts
it did, he got reprimanded, learned from the episode, informed us the great unwashed.....
what does he get?
A pile of ****e from folk with time on their hands to live on pPrune and offer great fireside advice.
He doesn't need it, the fact he has spoken about it reinforces that, maybe glass houses and stones should be reflected upon.......
"but for the grace of God go I"

[vee-tail-1]

jonkil :ok:

[S-Works]

He doesn't need it, the fact he has spoken about it reinforces that, maybe glass houses and stones should be reflected upon.......

Ah right, now I understand, PPRuNe is just a confessional. It allows those who have done wrong to clear their souls and not have to expect any comment in return. Just a few hail mary's and job done!

Thanks for clearing that up Jonkil!!

[BEagle]

bose-x, if the original post has served to help MagpiePedro explain his situation such that it will be a warning to others, then so much the better.

Not the first time you've waded in to rip the ears off someone who has had the honesty to report his less-than-ideal experiences to a wider audience......:(

Truly professional pilots encourage such candour and honesty.

[S-Works]

Not arguing with that at all Beagle. Merely responding to the view that PPRuNe is some sort of confessional where you post your sins and do not expect a comment from others......................... If you only want a response that makes you feel better than perhaps the local church would be a better 'forum' for a confession.

[Crash one]

I'd go with Jonkil on this one, Pedro was not asking foregiveness, nor a pat on the back.
I don't think he deserves quite so much of a kicking as he has had from the Utterly Infallible Sky God Supermen on here.
He got a kicking from CAA. He accepted it like a man. He had the balls to tell us about it in some form of warning, not that Utterly Infallible Sky God Superman needed a warning of course. It must be bloody wonderful knowing that your life has been & is going to be, so perfect, that you will never ever cock anything up, never make any mistake however small for the duration of your life.
If I have made any spelling or grammatical errors, please keep it to yourself because I couldn't give a flying :mad:.

[hightower1986]

Well i think there would be a lot more of this kind of thing if people had the balls to confess to something they had done and forget there pride, im only just about to do my ppl skills test and im sure I will be making mistakes over the next few years/many years. We are not robots!
You never make the same mistake twice!

[hoodie]

Merely responding to the view that PPRuNe is some sort of confessional where you post your sins and do not expect a comment from others.........................

And the person who articulated that view was... YOU!


Ah right, now I understand, PPRuNe is just a confessional. It allows those who have done wrong to clear their souls and not have to expect any comment in return. Just a few hail mary's and job done!



Excellent debating skills, bose - take a Cabinet post.


MagpiePedro, thank you - publicly this time - on your honesty and self-awareness. Thanks also for posting this in PF rather than the Instructors forum, as this way you get the widest relevant audience.

I also think that your acceptance of blame is far more mature than some posters credit you for, and that your consideration of what your student did (or didn't) take away from the experience is not only valid, but shows a commendable long term view of how such experiences may give best benefit to everyone concerned rather than just the prime suspect. (Which in this case was quite rightly you, as you say.)

If, Magpie, you had ever attempted in this thread to duck your own responsibility as PIC, or minimise it, I'd have some sympathy with the criticisms, but you self-evidently didn't - as can be seen by those who read your posts properly.

Why is this important?

Because honesty like Magpie's must be encouraged, which will not happen if SkyGods leap in to hammer someone who has ALREADY confessed openly to their errors by telling them they were an idiot. They KNOW that already - they confess to others to minimise errors being repeated, as they always will be. Why else would they?

Those who don't confess (because, as a relevant example, they believe that bose will publicly ridicule them) will prevent others learning from their mistakes, and so those others may end up making those mistakes themselves before they can learn. With the obvious real world risks.

[Final 3 Greens]

I'm still with Bose.

Yep, the OP did post here, but if you look at posts 8 and 12, there is tendency to gripe about the treatment handed to the PPL.

Reality is that this new instructor wasn't prepared and got caught out.

He was unlucky in the sense that his faux pas was pretty much as high profile as it gets and I really sympathise with that, for many of us have got away with things that were lower profile.

However, griping at the treatment of the PPL did sound like a little like transference to me as well and I thought Bose's original comments were fair, if direct.

If this is payback time for Bose, then he does stick his head over the parapet and he's big enough to fight his own corner, but in this instance he has made astute observations.

[hoodie]

Reality is that this new instructor wasn't prepared and got caught out.


Magpie knows that without a doubt - as is scourgingly obvious from his original post.

His later point is that HE has had the lesson branded into him - but has his student? A perfectly relevant question to ask, I'd have thought we should all agree.

[Fuji Abound]

It takes ba**s for many people to admit their mistakes. It may be a bit easier when the post is anonymous, be it on here or CHIRP.

So he made a mistake. In my earlier post I was expressing my opinion on how we as a society assess the seriousness of mistakes. I gave the example of the guy running into the back of a car due to inattention, contrasted with the same accident caused by the driver being on his mobile or even drunk. Most of us would happily slate the second driver in the way some are suggesting Bose is doing, but would be far more forgiving in the first instance.

The poster has had the courage to admit his mistake. The general lesson that if there is any chance the other pilot has derogated responsibility to us we had better measure up to that responsibility is a good lesson and one terribly easy to overlook in many circumstances.

I think in this case Bose is suggesting that an instructor has less excuse than most for making this mistake. I think Bose is suggesting that an instructor who is being paid for his services should reasonably be expected to ensure the flight does not infringe CAS. A mistake it is, but if Bose’s assessment is correct, however harsh, I think he is simply making the point that it was a reasonably serious mistake and one which was difficult to excuse – a view which doubtless the Court also took.

This thread, like any other, is a debate about the issues. I don’t think it is a matter of slating this pilot, nor I would hope is it about any of us being holier than thou, but there would seem to be some merit in discussing how you can end up being totally responsible for the flight when you thought it was down to the other guy and when this happens whether the precursor were mistakes that were serious enough to be on a scale with the driver on his mobile, or were due to momentary inattention, or somewhere in between.

In short lets not polarise the debate into another thread in which we slate each other but have a more interesting discussion about how the command process works in a single pilot aircraft where there are two pilots in the front and if you wish an assessment of whether the mistakes made by this instructor were more or less excusable.

[wsmempson]

I'm not sure that I would have posted the initial thread as, if my understanding is correct, whilst the courts have rendered a fine, the CAA have not finished with magpiepedro yet.:bored:

[Pull what]

MP, you should have told the CAA that you were not P1 and quoted the PPrune posts last year were quite a lot of the self appointed experts on here were adamant that if you were engaged on a check ride as an instructor with a qualified pilot you could not be P1, funny how none of them have picked up on this!

Also not mentioned is that you could have brought down a public transport flight with disasterous consequences, I wonder how the 'experts' would have viewed your incursion then?

Your conviction will shew on a CRC check, so I would be very suprised if any major airline would employ you and I speak as a retired ex management pilot. If you were involved in an incident with an airline and your prosecution came to light it would not look very good for that company would it?

The commader is decided before flight but the role of commander needs to be understood at a much earlier stage as this incident proves.

[Duchess_Driver]

This doesn't sit with me well - but Bose has it here.

Yep - MP screwed up and yes, he knows it. But he also has commented on the fact that he feels the CAA should come down his 'student'. Nope....sorry, but that is MP's responsibility.

As has been pointed out many times this was, I believe, single crew - there is no P2 function and even if there was it would be entirely at the behest of the aircraft commander (MP) or 'company' (the school) to insist on whatever corrective action (punishment) they felt necessary.

As commander, MP is responsible for the safe and propper conduct of the flight and from a commercial point of view he has a responsibility to his customer (the other pilot) to ensure that learning points are, well, exactly that. Sad fact, but the customer has paid to be 'watched' to ensure he could conduct a flight safely. MP failed in this respect.

PPP,PPP

Sad, yes.
Ballsy to admit the original error, yes.
Naive to expect anyone to share the blame? very much so!

[BackPacker]

MP, you should have told the CAA that you were not P1 and quoted the PPRuNe posts last year were quite a lot of the self appointed experts on here were adamant that if you were engaged on a check ride as an instructor with a qualified pilot you could not be P1, funny how none of them have picked up on this!

Need to read the thread a bit more careful next time. I picked upon this in post #5 and the OP responded that he was P1 as per club rules (post #8), and had signed the aircraft out as such (post #1).

In general, on a club mandated club check with a pilot who is otherwise legally current (including the 90-day rule), both the "student" and the "instructor" could legally claim P1, but not simultaneously. So you've got to decide before the flight who is (and gets to log) PIC/P1. At least, that's what I remember from the discussion here a while ago.

In this particular case, the decision seems to have been preempted by club rules. Fair enough. Case closed.

[scooter boy]

"If my understanding is correct, whilst the courts have rendered a fine, the CAA have not finished with magpiepedro yet.http://static.pprune.org/images/smilies/wbored.gif"

How so?

SB

[aseanaero]

a sight that will forever live with me appeared out the front window, Heathrow Control tower.

Definitely a 'beam me up, scotty' moment.

[Flyin'Dutch']

On the path of life we all have lessons to learn.

If we are lucky we get away with a close shave.

In this case you bought the ticket. Worse things happen; bag the experience and move on, ignore the detractors.

[aseanaero]

MagpiePedro , everyone has a 'brain in neutral' moment when flying , some get killed , some get a scare , some get fined and some get away scott free and keep it to themselves.

There will always be 'Sky Gods' who have never done wrong (never admit to it) who will put the boot in.

Keep critcising yourself and sharing , that's how we all learn.

I'll bet you will never be a sit back and relax PIC again , good lesson learned.

[mad_jock]

Not wanting to bring the thread into a wannbies type bitch fest.

I noticed that the poster said they were integrated trained.

How much experience did you have prior to this event in planning and executing your own flights outside the training environment of your course?.

Its not intended as a derogatory remark I know that you guys are trained from the outset with RHS something sexy in mind. I presume every flight you do is in the course syllabus with no latitude for spur of the moment. I also presume as well every flight will have been checked by an instructor and signed off as you don't get a license until you have finished the whole lot.

Would it be fair to say that this is one of the few flights you have been PIC on that nobody has doubled checked what you have planned, exam flights excluded.

[IO540]

Maggie did well to post that. What an experience!

Obviously one lesson to be learnt is that the impression one might get of a pilot's experience (from conversation) might be bullsh*t, and in this GA business which is full of Walter Mitty characters, a lot of what one hears is indeed just that. Quite a bit of it not a million miles away from these forums, either. I used to rent out my TB20 and was astonished at some of the types I came across then, and more since, and oddly enough the worst happened to be certain instructors.

The other lesson is that one has to avoid the "experienced pilot" syndrome. In GA, single pilot, there will always be some ambiguity as regards who is really PIC - even if legally the situation may be clear. I've got vastly more touring experience that almost any PPL instructor I have ever met and I am sure I could go up for some check or renewal flight with any local instructor and sail straight into CAS while the instructor would be pretty relaxed, and if this was in a G-reg then he would be PIC by default and would get busted for it.

I am N-reg and under FAA rules the "student" is PIC (in US airspace on the privileges of the FAA Student Pilot Certificate) and in general terms this remains the case in UK airspace too, so the scenario is more ambiguous there because in most N-reg flying instruction done outside the USA the "student" is actually legally capable of being PIC.

Reading many accident reports, sometimes between the lines (the AAIB has to be careful what they write) it is obvious that a lot of bad decisions are made in this way. I have never had a scary flight myself but my only spectacularly bad weather decision to date (which resulted in having to fly an ILS into Biggin through the bottom part of a very dark CB) was made when I was flying as a PU/T with a supposedly highly experienced instructor. One well publicised recent 2x fatal in the USA had both pilots with tens of thousands of hours between them and they still did a CFIT - equipment failure excepted, it is likely that each assumed the other knew what they were doing.

Finally, I am suprised the CAA prosecuted in this case. Maybe they wanted to make an example of it? Who knows. They are a bunch of ex policemen and thus sometimes work in mysterious ways. Normally, if you have the "correct attitude" (grovel like hell at the interview) you get away with a CAS bust. They tend to prosecute high-media-profile TRA busts, and most of all they love prosecuting alleged illegal public transport (usually reported to them by a nearby AOC holder ;) ).

Next time, fly with a GPS ;) The student doesn't need to see it, of course. I would never fly anywhere without a GPS - I prefer to sleep at night and life is too short.

[kalleh]

I'm with bose. Writing about the experience here is great, trying to transfer some blame to the student - plain wrong. Read the first page posts again if you doesn't see this.

[cockney steve]

Firstly, I'll state I'm NOT a pilot, Sim-er (well, crashing RC heli's doesn't count? :} ) nor am I a walt.

Were I in a position to be under instruction....even for a "check-ride"....I would like to think that my "instructor" started from the absolute basics.

As Duchess Driver referenced, PPP PPP.

I'd like to think my planning, preparation (including a PROPER walk-round) and ensuing performance were ALL included in the appraisal for which I was paying.

Some years back, I was Hon Boatswain at a local sailing-club. I maintained inboard and outboard fast and slow rescue-boats which all members did a duty-rota maintaining.

ALL persons "driving" had recurring assessments, from launching the rowing-dinghy, to padlocking the Rescue-Boat back on it's moorings.

I always picked up some pearl of wisdom from these training exercises and would have felt cheated, if the instructor/examiner had taken a passive role and just signed my log.

Re, the" inexplicable" motor-accident scenario......you would be prosecuted for DRIVING WITHOUT DUE CARE AND ATTENTION. in all probability.

Hitting another vehicle is always due to a mistake. if the grim reaper doesn't punish you, the Law or insurance company will.

Magpie- hope you are now more assertive!

[MagpiePedro]

Thanks for all the posts my thread received. To summarise;

1. I admitted the incident was my fault from the outset and did not once try to shift the blame. I cocked up.
2. I paid the price, literally, and will forever have to live with my mistake.
3. Every flight I have conducted since this incident has been to the highest standard I am capable of.
4. I have not spoken to Mr A since the incident.
5. I fear for Mr A as I dont think he has learnt anything from this experience. That does not mean I am annoyed he was not punished as I was.

Those are the facts. Those who have posted comments thinking I have somhow tried to shirk my responsibility are just wrong. Those who have seen through this have hopefully learnt from my mistake.

Thanks to all

MP

[IO540]

I fear for Mr A as I dont think he has learnt anything from this experience

I wouldn't worry about that. The 2-yearly check flight achieves very little for many pilots, evidently. You can't fix the whole world.

[mary meagher]

Does anyone out there remember a flight a few years ago that ended in the drink off of Blackpool? Where an "experienced pilot" was given too much responsibility by a flying school, to deliver an aircraft to a location in the southwest, and returning near darkness in weather that got worse and worse as they approached Blackpool, attempted a couple of approaches, being too low on fuel to go to an alternate with better weather.......

Would that case be relevant to this one in any way?

[soay]

A significant difference in that case is that the PIC was not very experienced.

[wsmempson]

....and the experienced pilot was not a current instructor, but retired and flying on an NPPL

[scooter boy]

MP,
Good on you for talking about the situation you found yourself in and the punishment the CAA gave you. I think it demonstrates laudable self criticism and am not sure many posters in this forum would do the same given the circumstances.

There are many "perfect pilots" on this forum whose egos exist in a rareified reality. Firstly they would never ever get into the situation you got into and that would enable them to be highly critical of your judgement :rolleyes: etc... . Furthermore they would go on to accuse you of using the thread as a confessional - :confused:.
Dear dear...

Certain expressions come to mind but the politest one contains the words "pride" and "fall"...

So, MP; all the best with progressing your professional flying career, I'm pretty certain you won't let a navigational ballsup of this scale happen to you again, and that when you are captain of the heavy that has to go around because of an infringer you will view the situation more forgivingly.

None of us are perfect, (not even me!)

SB

[busidriver]

MP wrote:

My last major concern is that in a year or two when the airline indusrty will hopefully be picking up, will this prosecution effectively halt my chances of getting a job with an airline?


Truthfully, I suspect it will.

And truthfully, given the circumstances:

I assumed nothing could go wrong

I suspect it should, too. The professional flying job market is very much in the favour of the employer at the moment; we can afford to be very choosy.

My best advice is, for the moment, to keep as quiet as possible about it and hope no-one asks (your posting here is probably an even bigger error as many people, myself included, now know far more about your misdemeanour than would otherwise have been the case)... If the question arises, you will need to be truthful.

If you get part of the way through a recruitment process, and it hasn't come up, then you should be ready to pick your time to mention it. Otherwise you will live in permanent fear of being 'found out' and binned.

I am puzzled by one thing, though. You said

It was a difficult position to be in

...and I fail to see what 'difficulty' there was with you following your progress on a chart and intervening when things started to go wrong...

[Wide-Body]

MP

I doubt it will affect your chances for an Airline job. Firstly in a couple of major airline application forms it has a question about accidents. It has nothing about prosecutions. You can therefore fill the form honestly. If it does come up then be as honest in the interview as you have been on here. Most interviewers (trust me I know) will use what you say to give a big picture of yourself, and if your good enough you will pass.

The biggest question this raises is that should the 2 yearly flight be a little bit more formalised?


Good luck and come back to Waltham for a beer.

regards

Wide

[Offchocks]

MagpiePedro

Well my two bobs worth is don't let this get you down. Look at what took place, yes there was a misstake on your behalf but nobody was hurt, the best thing you can do is to learn from what happened and move on.
After 40 years of flying that is what I do, I still beat myself around the head a little occasionaly but you must learn and move on!

[flybymike]

The two yearly flight review should be removed, not more formalised.

The CAA review of flight safety following introduction of the JAA BFR in 1990 together with all the other stuff ( 90 day rules, annual MEP tests etc) showed absolutely no safety benefit whatsoever. This is before all the new crap which EASA are going to chuck at us.

This stuff is all just jobs and money for the boys and bureaucrats who invent it . Those who need a "review" are free to have one whenever they wish. We all survived just fine for decades before these requirements were introduced with absolutely no more fatalities or accidents.

OK ...Aim...fire....

[englishal]

Is it a "criminal offence" to bust airspace? If so then it will go on your record...If not, then don't tell anyone ;)

The best bit about this post is that it shows how serious flying can be. There are many people with the nonchalant attitude "you shouldn't throw stones, it may happen to you". Well it shouldn't happen to you.....That is what being a licensed pilot is all about.

I am still of the view that if this does happen to "you" then "you" should have your licence removed until the authorities are satisfied it is NOT going to happen to you again, unless there are mitigating factors in your favour (system problems, bad vis, illness, that sort of thing), and your actions on realising you are in airspace (did you call Heathrow, did you turn OFF the mode C to "hide" etc....)...

Some things you can't do anything about - like an engine failure, other things, like busting airspace are completely within the pilots control most of the time.

I think there should be a FORMAL BFR - like the FAA one, whereby after 2 years you cannot fly until you have done a BFR with an instructor. However if you go over the 2 years, no problem, you just can't fly until you have done the BFR. That would mean no time contraints and no panic to meet a certain date.

Typical BFR should be a minimum of 1 hr ground school and 1 hr flight, focusing on whatever the "student" has problems with, and once done the instructor signs the bit of paper in the licence. It should not be like a mini test, but a training session, and can include Nav but not only traditional DR nav, but allow use of any nav systems in the aeroplane.

[IO540]

Yes, flying is a serious business. It's very easy to mess up something and get into trouble.

I think most pilots realise this and I also think that is a big reason why so many give up. There is the constant worry of ending up in deep s**t, which you just don't have in other walks of life e.g. driving (except, in driving, speed cameras but one can install warning devices for those).

[Molesworth 1]

We all survived just fine for decades before these requirements were introduced with absolutely no more fatalities or accidents.

Flybymike

I agree with you up to a point. A responsible pilot will ensure that he flies safely and thoroughly briefs him or herself before flying, especially if there has been a lapse of some months. One doesn't loose handling skills that quickly. It's more a case of remembering all the drills.

On the other hand, flying with an instructor from time to time is not a bad idea (even if they also get lost sometimes - sorry maggie :E).

[betterfromabove]

Magpie Pedro - was at WW that morning of your bust & was listening in to the phone/radio calls. If I remember rightly, you were one of two aircraft that LHR thought had infringed simultaneously ....

Interesting to hear the follow-up.

Can only comment as another PPL, but as someone who's done some mentoring, even when sitting right-seat & most definitely not PIC, I do my own pre-flight planning. Even for a local bimble.

I have a huge respect for instructors, since you have to be ready for the unexpected from the moment you approach the aircraft to the minute you sign in the paperwork. As a professional, it's the realising of the mistakes that defines what you do. Those who don't see it as a mistake are those that don't deserve the title. Some of the lessons can be hard.

Heathrow Director - who is no doubt the most pertinent person to speak on here - has already suggested this, but I would reiterate that Google Earth is a fantastic resource for pre-flight planning & I use it for every trip. When operating around a control zone like LHR's, it's a life-saver. A GPS is great, but there's nothing like having a mental image in your own head of what you should see when....especially in ratty conditions when you want to keep "head-up". I even print out 3D images of the view at the height I should be at given waypoints.

I'm currently looking at running a training course on GE for pilots with another PPL - if anyone's interested, let me know. Situational awareness is a very different thing to knowing how to operate the aircraft.

Hope the flying bug is still with you & the experience has let you grow rather than make you hang up the headset.

Flying is a privilege.

BFA

[Warped Factor]

Magpie Pedro - was at WW that morning of your bust & was listening in to the phone/radio calls. If I remember rightly, you were one of two aircraft that LHR thought had infringed simultaneously ....

No, there was only one on this occasion.

[eyeinthesky]

Full marks to MP for the honesty on the circumstances of this infringement. Must just ask: was it in a certain club aircraft(C172S G-O..G)? That has a panel-mounted GPS, albeit with a very small map.

Also a bit surprised that your 'instructor checkout' at your flying club did not apparently give you enough familiarity with the local area to recognise important features before the heathrow tower got your attention!

I hear that White Waltham traffic may well figure on the 'evidence' paperwork at the next 'infringement prosecution' brought by the CAA following someone else's antics in the Heathrow Zone yesterday:oh:

[betterfromabove]

W-F

Stand corrected. Know at the time they were calls coming in about two aircraft, one that was well inside the zone & one that had just clipped it. Both ended up sat on the grass outside the WW clubhouse. Both from the same operator.

Eyeinthe sky

Yes - that aircraft you mentioned was one of the two.

WLAC instructors themselves can have a fairly laid-back approach to things at times, but they are super-scrupulous about the arrival procedures & circuit discipline at WW, which appears well justified.

Extend downwind on certain runways at WW & you are in the Heathrow zone.

BFA

[IO540]

Is the google earth airspace data current?

Last I heard, it was derived from the U.S. military aviation database (the name escapes me right now) which was removed from public access in the summer of 2006.

[Warped Factor]

bfa,

Stand corrected. Know at the time they were calls coming in about two aircraft, one that was well inside the zone & one that had just clipped it. Both ended up sat on the grass outside the WW clubhouse. Both from the same operator.

From an ATC perspective I was rather intimately involved with MP's infringement from start to finish, I certainly don't recall a second one taking place at the same time. If one did it mustn't have been of any great significance or I'm sure I'd remember.

[betterfromabove]

The airspace kmz's I've seen have only been for the US & very limited. Not sure if anyone's created any for elsewhere in the world...

They would have to be regularly & scrupulously updated to be of any practical use of course. You could use 'SketchUp' to produce the 3D polygons quite easily I would imagine though.

My suggestion however is actually to place the route ('Path' in Google-speak) on & fly it at the appropriate levels you intend to fly at & then save it as a 'Tour'....with no other information. Terrain exaggeration you set to something suitable for the area. This simulates more closely what you're going to experience from the cockpit....there are no airspace boundaries marked in the sky after all...

It is the reading of the terrain & highlighting of prominent features from the view you're going to have where I find it really useful. Not everyone has a feel for topography & I'm not sure it is adequately emphasised in the PPL syllabus. We spend so much time learning all the various nav techniques & flying time is so expensive, we seem to forget this fundamental element of navigating somewhere along the line...

Unfortunately instructors probably don't always have the time to run through an entire journey like this on GE with their students, but it's amazing how useful it can be to ask "so, what do see that sings out to you at this point in the journey" for instance.

There is always something, even on the dullest routes, whether it be subtle topography changes or a far mast, minor water feature, confluence of linear features. It may not confirm a locationas such, but it can add to your confidence or otherwise of your general position.

In poor viz, that 3D "mental image" of what the route should look like can be invaluable. It's the next step beyond reading "ground-to-map" if you like (the ground never lies, but the map can...). If you think about it, it's what you do in your local area....you may well be navigating between some pretty minor features...roundabouts, ponds, individual churches. These aren't marked on the map, even on the airfield plates, but they are marked on your brain.

The GPS & the map itself become a back-up to keeping Mk1 eyeball outside & looking for stuff :-) The GPS is a wonderful get-home, but some have delays of several seconds in updating position & you should know where you are to start with, right?!?

I really wonder how many PPL's follow the military rule of thumb of roughly 3 hours prep for 1 hour's flying & how many of these incidents start on the ground?? The attitude of certain clubs to PPL mentoring (even instructor mentoring if judging by this story...) has got to be questioned. Don't the people running some of these organisations remember what if felt like to plan your very first solo navs after your PPL? Bloody frightening & lonely experience for many people that's for sure.

Also find it surprising how much emphasis put on the 1:500K map in the UK. Unless you're flying a 250kt hot-ship, the 1:250K is perfectly usable for most GA speeds. Ok, you might need two for a very long nav, but the extra information (runway layouts, topo, small masts, feature details...including exact airspace boundary info) has got to be worth the extra paper. Any comments?

In areas with few features, eg. South Africa, it's the only map they use. Wonder if using the 1:250K around London would avoid some of these kinds of incidents??

BFA

[Gertrude the Wombat]

I really wonder how many PPL's follow the military rule of thumb of roughly 3 hours prep for 1 hour's flying
Sounds about right for trips outside the area I'm familiar with. For the local area it's just a few minutes of reading the weather and the NOTAMs.
Any comments?
Last time I looked at a quarter mil map it stopped at around tree-top height. I get higher than that if the clould allows.

[Molesworth 1]

Is the google earth airspace data current?

The imagery date is shown in the bottom left hand corner. It doesn't show the new Cromer airfield, for example.

[Fuji Abound]

I really wonder how many PPL's follow the military rule of thumb of roughly 3 hours prep for 1 hour's flying & how many of these incidents start on the ground??


You must be joking!

I reckon an hours planing would cover anything in the UK with the benefit of a reasonable moving map and some experience.

The GPS & the map itself become a back-up to keeping Mk1 eyeball outside & looking for stuff :-) The GPS is a wonderful get-home, but some have delays of several seconds in updating position & you should know where you are to start with, right?!?


No idea what you are talking about.

[englishal]

It does beg the question "why does Heathrow need so much Class A?". We have already established on one of these threads that LAX (for example) is busier than LHR, yet you can go right up to the airport boundary at 90 deg to the runways at sub 2000' before you enter their Class B (in fact Hawthorn airport could be considered "LAX executive terminal")....Of course the IAPs and SIDs are protected to 10,000'. If you have a helicopter you can land on the roof of the international terminal, and if you want to fly in in your fixed wing, then you can (VFR or IFR).

[Duchess_Driver]

The problem I find with most pilots and in particular students is that the 1/4 mil map gives them too much information. Their head then gets overloaded with "is it that road or the other road" and the head then becomes 'in-cockpit' rather than looking for the turning point or, more important, the traffic outside.

Overloading the cockpit with printouts of Google this and Google that, IMHO, doesn't do anybody any favours.

1/2 mil is absolutely fine - provided it is studied properly and planned for.

Plan to fly - fly to plan.

[betterfromabove]

DD - You're right, the last thing we need is any extra pieces of paper. Printing out GE images for really difficult waypoints can be useful though.

Main point was trying to get across is that when operating around busy airspace or planning a long unfamiliar nav, we should all the tools available to us.

OK, 3-1 time spent on prep might be a bit much, we're not the military planning a bombing run, but an extra 15mins to visualise a route doesn't seem too onerous to me.

Happy flying

BFA

[Fright Level]

why does Heathrow need so much Class A? ... LAX for example

Chalk and cheese. Many of Heathrow's SIDs have large turns inside the CTR (eg DVR/BPK off 27's and CPT off 09). It also contains the initial parts of the go around tracks from all runways. The space is all used (or at least "reserved" in the event of an engine failure on something climbing out of LHR) so it would be difficult to shrink the boundary by much.

On the other hand, I have never been refused a SVFR transit via BUR/Ascot whether LHR have been on easterlies or westerlies in 20 years of flying around this area. For an SEP, there isn't really an option to fly across the eastern end of the zone.

The only possible room for improvement (imho) would be to pull the zone surface boundaries in around the western ends so that Denham, WW & Fairoaks ATZs were completely outside the zone and perhaps lift the base from SFC to 1500' around the western area at Ascot/Bracknell/Burnham.

[mm_flynn]

In the US large Turbojet aircraft are not allowed to operate below the Class B floor (or outside its lateral extent) when operating to the airport for which the Class B was established - so they must contain all of the missed approach tracks, SIDs and STARs (which on a casual glance appear to be equally complex to those of LHR). Conversely, LHR would seem to need more holding capacity. I suspect this is primarily due to exceptionally high runway utilisation, aggravated by a European ATC infrastructure that is not particularly joined up, and, I suspect, an inability to coordinate speeds of inbound long haul aircraft (the later two making flow control less effective than it seems to be in the US).

Most US Class Bs would have a 1500 ft shelf allowing the BUR-ASCOT transition without bothering LHR-SVFR (but of course with mandatory Mode-C). I have been less successful on this particular transition, probably only getting it 50% of the time. I am told this is just luck of the draw in that it can only be used one direction at a time. In addition, many of the places like WW, Denham, Fairoaks would, in the US, have some breathing space around them due to the smaller footprint of the inner ring (that goes down to SFC) of the Class B.

[scooter boy]

"I really wonder how many PPL's follow the military rule of thumb of roughly 3 hours prep for 1 hour's flying":rolleyes:

Oh come on! What an incredible waste of time 2.5 of those 3 hours would be.
On that basis how do you explain a low level military Jetstream very nearly T-boning me at 500ft while in the circuit at Bodmin and well within Bodmin's ATZ back in 2002? Maybe the Jetstream crew on that day needed more than 3 hours prep? Or maybe they're just human like the rest of us and balls it up occasionally too despite all the planning. Answers on a postcard please...

Weather prep is far more significant to light plank operators with or without the IR.

Nav prep is a moveable feast and can be done preflight far more rapidly nowadays with navigational software and (relevant) NOTAM downloads - how many times have you been able to maintain the chinagraphed line on the chart for a 100 miles leg at 2000ft? Didn't think so, me neither (the only time I have managed to go in a straight line or on a pre-ordained course for a heck of a long way is in an airway above the weather and in class A airspace). Some element of re-planning in the cockpit is an essential in-flight activity on almost every VFR low level flight I do. This is usually due to weather if there are cells of CB around.

SB

[englishal]

I have done so.
Something I'm going to do one day ;)

Mate of mine flies bizjets and was coming back to Long Beach from Phoenix. They were running late and my mate was flying back to the UK that night for a holiday. It was rush hour and the traffic at rush hour is a night mare (as you probably know), and they didn't have very long to get to LAX...So once they landed, the Citation owner wheeled out his jet ranger from the hangar, and flew my mate to LAX....!

Wonder if you could get a SVFR from S to N across the Heathrow CTZ "via the overhead" :)

[HeliCraig]

Haven't got my charts on me - but H9 crosses Heathrow -at 800'.

I have done it North - South several times.

[scooter boy]

Helicraig, I've also crossed Heathrow in helicopters at low level in the helilanes a few times in the past. You are expected to hold and then time your crossing to coincide with a gap in the heavies on final. It is a fantastic experience. When Battersea wasn't quite so extortionately overpriced I had reason to venture into the helilanes. I think that as long as Von Essen/Premiair own Battersea the prices will remain prohibitive for those of us who are non-oligarchs and have to pay for our own flying hours.

Englishal, the best way to get to/from your fixed-wing aircraft is by taking a helicopter to the airport from your back garden. Using a helicopter and fixed wing aircraft synergistically adds massively to the satisfaction of ownership. I always think that comparing the plank and the whisk is like comparing apples and oranges. Both have strengths and weaknesses and suit different missions.

I suppose the best option would be to have a 1000m paved runway in your back garden (like John Travolta), then you could jet everywhere and not have to worry about a chopper.

I understand Sir Bernard Ashley used to do the heli/Fixed wing thing with an A109/King Air combo.
My steeds of choice (on a somewhat lower budget) are R44II/M20R.
Jet Ranger/Citation sounds like a nice pairing though!

Decadent - Yes!
Flash - Yes!
Fun - Yes!

Beats the hell out of sitting in the car though (except when the Wx is bad).

SB

[mad_jock]

As I asked a few posts ago.

I suspect this instructor will have far less time true PIC time than most PPl's of 100hours. They are trained as a multi crew pilot end of story.

Why intergrated are due a reduced entry course requirment for the FIC is pure bollocks.

I suspect that the poor lad unsupervised PIC time is in single digits how the hell can anyone expect them to have any command descision potential or PIC airmanship. They haven't had to do any all through there course they have always been supervised.

Single pilot SEP is something the person is untrained for and not equiped to train. They shouldn't have been rated to be in the place to **** up in the first place.

[Flintstone]

Doesn't Jocklish utilise any form of punctuation? It should, that last post was practically gibberish.

[flybymike]

Jocklish is a unique form of Inglescot which is apparently gibberish on the surface but usually highly amusing and with great insight....

[Flintstone]

Insight, or total tosh depending upon your point of view.

Low time instructor comes here, tells his story with the best of intentions only to be served ill written, smug comments.

Totally unnecessary even when written from a position of perfection.

[flybymike]

I am sure Jock can speak for himself, but personally I read his post as a criticism of the system not the instructor.

[Flintstone]

That may well be but it was ill written (in more ways than one) and merely served to rub the guy's nose in it. No blame culture anyone?

[mad_jock]

It's not a smug comment and to be honest such a trip as 950 hour instructor and a 4000 hour total pilot; I would be quite nervous about it to be honest for the first time. Airways IFR cleared I wouldn't have a problem with it, but VFR with no prior experence, no thanks. I could see myself doing exactly the same thing.

I have reservations about not only the system that put the poor lad in that postion in the first place, but also the supervision in regards of the FI who authorised sending a restricted instructor on such a trip if they hadn't done the trip before. I wouldn't have authorised him. I would ask if the supervising FI has been talked to never mind the punter.

If you see it as tosh thats your opinion, I still reackon the system and the school gave him an unreasonable amount of rope to hang himself by.

And you are another pilot that has no clue about no blame culture. It is not a get out of Jail free card for incompetence. I would argue that he was put in a postion under supervision which he should have never have been in. The supervising FI should have been in court as well.

[Flintstone]

And you are another pilot that has no clue about no blame culture.

Damn. All those years on the safety panel seems to have taught me nothing.

You know what they say about untested assumptions Jock.................. :rolleyes:

[mad_jock]

In a none argumentative way can you please explain no blame culture and this situation.

I must admit the definition of no blame has changed virtually every time its been mentioned to me. And fessing up and doing the right thing hasn't stopped many a pilot from being sacked. Personally if I had done something similar my resignation would have been on the bosses desk at the same time as the report on the incident.

And to be honest the incompetence wasn't directed towards the FI who was under supervision.

[betterfromabove]

Scooter - I'm not one for slanging matches, so maybe I'll just try & explain where I'm coming from.

Sure, 3 for 1 for the average VFR navex is OTT, but how long should the entire pre-flight process be? This might start days before with the first checks on the weather for someone not flying everyday. Call it the "thinking time" about a flight if you like. I'd reckon it still should amount to a couple of hours.

Sure, check the essentials (notam, wx, airframe) & blast off in the blue yonder. I've done it - what does it take, 20 mins?

There are places where PPR is not even a concept & landing fees never play a part in decision-making, but......we're talking about SE England.

Take WW-Denham, say for the average PPL, low on hours or flying once a month. Doesn't need 3 hours of head-down swotting, but if you're gonna be operating within 2 or 3 miles of the LHR CTA I don't care who you are, unless you fly it everyday, I personally think 15 mins on GE is a good investment. And yes, I'd have a 1:250K on me too....

DD - Sure, 1:500's have their place...especially, if covering ground fast & in straight lines, but they are missing a hell of a lot of useful information.
If you ask me, students get confused by 1:250K's because they're not taught to use them properly. What you're describing is reading "map to ground", an unfortunate habit picked up from wandering around on the surface for too long. In the air, the opposite what's going to get them out of trouble. If they've been taught that properly, then the 1:250K becomes a wealth of information rather than a mass of incomprehensible squiggles.

Fuji - Yes, GPS's can show delay. I've seen it on the ground & a few weeks ago, for the first time, in the air.

Don't ask me for the reason behind it, but imagine it's to do with poor satellite capture or a problem with the unit itself. I'm not an electrical engineer.

Cheers
BFA