Is booking out a legal requirement?

[Oldpilot55]

Anyone know? It is a source of constant discussion at my club.
If it is legal what is the definition?

[Jetblu]

This subject has come up often over the years. As far as I am aware there is no 'legal' requirement for booking out. However, you may find that booking in/out is in the t & c's of the club 'if' you are a member.

From my personal experience, the few times that I have forgotten to book out the issue is usually raised by known jobsworths.

[Heston]

No legal requirement. It may be stipulated by the airfield operator - and they are likely to have good reasons for this such as conditions in their planning consent or the like.

[piperboy84]

Back in the early 90's there was a certain vertically challenged and freshly minded FI at Perth who used march around with a clipboard who appeared to take great delight in demanding and challenging owners upon their return from flying as to correct entries in the sign-out sheet, inspite of the fact it was not his job or business. One day he hassled me and I asked him why he had such a bug up his ass about the sheet. He informed me that it was necessary as if there was anyone smuggling drugs he would have a log of the flights and he could relay this info to the cops, I pointed out that if indeed there was any smuggling going on the traffickers were hardly going to sign his shytee wee book.He never took much to do with me after that, I always felt the guys talents were being squandered teaching folks how to fly, he was far more suited for the guard tower at Bergen Belsen.

[PA28181]

Who would an acrft owner at his own strip book out with?

[Gertrude the Wombat]

Who would an acrft owner at his own strip book out with?
Anyone who might care if s/he didn't come back when expected? Wife/husband/etc?

[PA28181]

Yes, that goes without saying, but, still doesn't satisfy any perceived legal requirement.

This whole ridiculous invasion of privacy (Why should I have tell anyone where I am going unless crossing an FIR? This should be my choice.

It was all brought about I believe by Michael Bentines son going missing for a long time. Typical kneejerk reaction we have over here, just look at the shambles following Dunblane. the only people left in the country with a handgun now are the scores of criminals, after thousands had their legitimate and highly regulated hobby destroyed.

[gasax]

The Bentine thing was incorporated into the rules of the air clause 20(depending upon your interpretation).

Under SERA there does not seem to be an exact read across - which given the arrangements in Germany is surprising - but that I suppose is covered by the Aerodrome permissions part of things (unless Germany has posted a list of exemptions as we have!).

[chevvron]

There actually is a legal requirement (brought about by the above mentioned 'Bentine' story) for you to leave basic details of your intended flight with a 'responsible person'. Additionally, some airport operators require you to 'book out' for each flight, in some cases by telephone in advance, but most accept an RTF call.
Don't forget that military 'booking out' differs from the civil version in that your details will be passed to your destination and they will be told when you are airborne.

[Jan Olieslagers]

What is "booking out"? I have never come across anything by that name. Then again again, I've never flown in the UK, so it might well be just another...

I do am used, though, to closing the flight plan (if any), and writing down the landing in the aerodrome logbook (if any). Plus completing the entries in my pilot's log and in the plane's log.

[gasax]

You're right Jan, it is a very British thing directly due to political influence from a bereaved father.

But the question is - does SERA and its British embodiment still have that requirement - I've had a look and I cannot see it!

Is this a gold plate removal - even if accidental?

[Jan Olieslagers]

Thank you, Gasax, but after reading more thoroughly I am not so sure. What DOES it mean, after all? Leaving some notification of where you intend to fly before take-off? Filing a flight plan includes that info, and a good deal more. Even when not filing a flight plan, I am supposed to mention my destination in the aerodrome log before take-off.

France has no such aerodrome logs, but I think Germany does have them. Holland must have them too, they have just about everything to discourage one from private flying.

[9 lives]

In Canada, we don't have "booking out" It's none of anyone's business when and where you fly, unless you are requesting access to controlled airspace. If you are required to file a flight plan, or flight notification, you are responsible for closing it too. But this rarely has anything to do with an airport, or operator, unless you chose them as your "responsible person".

The nearest I know of is "Booking it", which can either mean "but the ticket [for a commercial flight]" or, run or drive very quickly [to escape], seemingly a teenager term, 'cause I guess they need to escape every now and then...

[Maoraigh1]

Leaving some notification of where you intend to fly before take-off?
Based at a full ATC airfield, I have to book-out by telephoning ATC before my radio call for taxi permission." Land-away" and I give my destination. "Local" otherwise. I give endurance, duration, and number on board. I'm then free to go wherever I want in Class G airspace. Local can be 2 hours + at 100kts, with no requirement to talk to anyone once away from the airfield.
Our Group have a log sheet which we use to record T/O, Land, time and airfield, - but when operating from a strip I've carried the sheet in the aircraft - which would not be helpful if I disappeared.

[fireflybob]

Is booking out a legal requirement?

It certainly used to be, this from an old "Guide to Visual Flight Rules (VFR) in the UK"

Rule 17 of the Rules of the Air Regulations 1996 requires a pilot intending to make a flight to inform the Air Traffic Service Unit (ATSU) at the aerodrome of departure, an action known as ‘Booking Out’. Filing a FPL constitutes compliance with this Rule. The action of ‘Booking Out’, however, does not involve flight details being transmitted to any other ATSU.

Whether it's been included in the Standardised European Rules Of The Air (SERA) Regulation I am not quite sure but I guess you'd find it there if it is.

This from another:-

• Transition to the SERA rules covering VFR night flying
• Some modifications to flight planning requirements. For example, the UK expects to keep the existing process of ‘booking out’ at an airfield before a flight but will consider whether to introduce some form of ‘booking in’ at the end of a flight
• A change from the use of quadrantal cruising levels to semicircular cruising levels to align the UK with the rest of the world.

Legislation aside I think it is common sense to "Book Out".

[Mach Jump]

There used to be a requirement to 'Book in/out' but I suspect that when we adopted the Single European Rules of the Air it got lost in the transition.

...but when operating from a strip I've carried the sheet in the aircraft - which would not be helpful if I disappeared.

Best thing to do here is just call a friend (responsible person) tell them that you intend to fly, text them the details, with the Tel. No. for D&D, (we all know what that is, don't we?) and ask them to raise the alarm if you don't call them back by an agreed time.

Or there's always the 'note under a stone' at the departure method. At least anyone investigating your disappearance might then have a chance of finding out who you were, and your intentions.


MJ:ok:

[PA28181]

So if I "book" out at airfield "A" to fly to airfield "B" who at "B" would know I am en-route as no PPR required, and who at "A" would know or care I haven't arrived at "B"

As I don't fly in straight lines but take scenic routes via coaslines etc who would know where to start looking anyway?

Pointless & nanny state mentality.

[On Track]

I never cease to be amazed by the eccentricities of British aviation.

When I first saw the title of the thread I thought it must have something to do with an insurance company's requirement that an instructor sign out an aircraft to a flying club member or to a student pilot training solo. That's fairly standard procedure in this part of the world.

[Private jet]

I never cease to be amazed by the eccentricities of British aviation.


& you should see some of the eccentrics they let do it :}

PA28181 summed it up very nicely but that's probably anathema to people that still use terms such as round-out and overshoot...

[fireflybob]

I never cease to be amazed by the eccentricities of British aviation.


I feel the same way about some of the idiosyncrasies associated with flying in Australia.

Some of us will recall the case of Michael Bentine's son who went missing in 1971.

while his elder son, Gus, was killed when a Piper PA-18 (Super Cub, registration G-AYPN) crashed into a hillside at Ditcham Park Woods near Petersfield, Hampshire, on 28 August 1971. His body, together with that of the pilot and the aircraft, was found on 31 October 1971. Bentine's subsequent investigation into regulations governing private airfields resulted in his writing a report for Special Branch into the use of personal aircraft in smuggling operations.

They had not "booked out" and Bentine who was a well known comedian was very vocal about this aspect.

I can't understand why anyone would not want to book out (or whatever you want to call it). When I say this I'm not talking about unmanned landing strips but places where this a presence in the form of A/G, AFISO or even ATC.

Surely it's common sense to let someone know what you intend to do and how many are on board etc?

[Pirke]

@Jan: yes, Holland requires the aerodromes to log about everything... including intended destination. But then again, intentions could change mid flight, so it's a total waste of effort. All of the aerodromes that I know of log pilot names as well, although I'm not sure if that is actually required or they do it because more logging is better right? Some aerodromes even want to know the passenger names...

[gasax]

Well I had a second look at SERA and still cannot find the requirement, so it probably did die in the translation.

As for it being 'common sense'? Who do you 'tell' Fine if it is a full service aerodrome (and SERA does require the equivalent of booking out there) but the average strip?

Remember this requirement came in at a time when if you had a well equipped aircraft it had a 360ch radio and probably no transponder. Gadgets like EPIRBs or PLBs were science fiction - as indeed were mobile phones!

Those technologies make the old requirement look pretty daft.

[fireflybob]

Who do you 'tell' Fine if it is a full service aerodrome (and SERA does require the equivalent of booking out there) but the average strip?


gasax, I did post:-

When I say this I'm not talking about unmanned landing strips but places where this a presence in the form of A/G, AFISO or even ATC.


Well I had a second look at SERA and still cannot find the requirement, so it probably did die in the translation.


It looks like it has done.

Remember this requirement came in at a time when if you had a well equipped aircraft it had a 360ch radio and probably no transponder. Gadgets like EPIRBs or PLBs were science fiction - as indeed were mobile phones!

Those technologies make the old requirement look pretty daft.

True but even modern technology can fail and radar coverage is limited at lower level especially in the valleys of places like Scotland. Also not all a/c are equipped with radio, not every pilot carries PLBs and batteries can deplete on mobile phones.

[PA28181]

Surely it's common sense to let someone know what you intend to do and how many are on board etc?

No problem if you want to file a flight plan every time you fly, however, in the absence of a FP are you religiously going to inform every airfield you are flying to, of your route, POB and ETA, nah.....

[fireflybob]

No problem if you want to file a flight plan every time you fly, however, in the absence of a FP are you religiously going to inform every airfield you are flying to, of your route, POB and ETA, nah.....
PA28181 is online now Report Post

But that isn't "booking out" which is merely informing the aerodrome operator how long you intend to be airborne in the event of a local flight or where you intend to land if landing away.

There are some airports which will not accept booking out on the radio and they do indeed require details such as endurance and POB.

I don't understand why anyone would find booking out (or whatever you want to call it) so difficult which can only be in the interests of all on board the aircraft.

[PA28181]

Well I believe that filing a FP does indeed constitute "booking out", the only benefit to "booking out" as you have identified is if you are on a local, with no intention to land away. Then yes maybe some kind of "overdue" action could be taken but not if it's A/G?, as I said unless the destination is fully aware of your POB, route & ETA then forget any O/D action being taken as the departure airfield will not be ringing up to ensure you have landed safely.

An archaic requirement that needs removing under "Red Tape".

[fireflybob]

Well I believe that filing a FP does indeed constitute "booking out", the only benefit to "booking out" as you have identified is if you are on a local, with no intention to land away. Then yes maybe some kind of "overdue" action could be taken but not if it's A/G?, as I said unless the destination is fully aware of your POB, route & ETA then forget any O/D action being taken as the departure airfield will not be ringing up to ensure you have landed safely.


Filing a FP does constitute booking out.

With respect I don't think it is quite as simple as that. I agree that no formal overdue action can/would be taken.

However let's say a pilot does not return home to his nearest and dearest at the expected time because they've had an engine failure and forced landed enroute and been injured etc. Next of kin would call the airfield to enquire whereabouts. If the pilot had booked out then further enquiries could be made at the destination airfield and if necessary the authorities informed. OK I agree it's not the same as filing a FP but rather than being an archaic requirement or red tape I still think it is common sense. What specifically is the objection to doing it?

[PA28181]

What specifically is the objection to doing it?

Very simple, there is a tendency about that implies if your against something like this your are obviously against "safety" and should be treated as a pariah.

As has been said this "requirement" only came about because someone with influence in political circles bent a few ears. No one is required to know when I get in my car, sail a boat, drive a power boat, launch myself of a cliff in a hang glider, go walking or multitudes of other activities.

I do not accept that some one who just sits in a room with a radio has the right to know my personal details of where I am going, lets hear from those who are at the other end of the radio tell us what they do with this information of where we are flying too, and once the words "changing to xxxxx" are spoken, then are they at the least bit concerned about my welfare I doubt it.

[ShyTorque]

PA28181,

So if you happened to go missing, and you were lying injured on a cold frosty hillside, would you expect the emergency services to go looking for you?

[PA28181]

So if you happened to go missing, and you were lying injured on a cold frosty hillside, would you expect the emergency services to go looking for you? Where do they start, at the departure airfield and look 5 miles either side of a track that could be 200m long that they have no idea of direction I am taking. I would expect to receive all the services required if it happens and some good soul spots the accident and has a mobile same as whichever ground station I am working/listening to and I yell over the radio will let the world know I need help, just as I would if I fell off a push bike. If booking out gives some, a cosy warm feeling that all of the air traffic services are waiting to hit the crash alarm as soon as they are in trouble so be it, I live in the real world of known risk, and act accordingly.

[Gertrude the Wombat]

Where do they start, at the departure airfield and look 5 miles either side of a track that could be 200m long that they have no idea of direction I am taking.
Um, yes? Wouldn't talking to radar units along that route be helpful? - it usually seems to work for post-crash analysis.

[PA28181]

Um, yes? Wouldn't talking to radar units along that route be helpful? - it usually seems to work for post-crash analysis.

And all that happens in the "Golden Hour" of first aid.

Cosy warm feeling I'm getting.:)

[9 lives]

It seems that the theme of the discussion has shifted to "would you like someone to watch over you while you fly?".

For myself, I see that as a personal preference, either choice deserving respect. The minute you take "innocent" passengers, you owe it to them to take all precautions in their favour. If you're by yourself in Canada, within 25 miles of where you took off, there is no requirement to tell anyone you went anywhere. Farther than that, flight notification requirements apply.

Personally, for my solo flying, it's none of anyone's business where I come and go. My wife knows where I am, and whom to call, if I'm not where I should be. When I lived alone, with the plane in my back yard, I certainly did not look for anyone to tell I was going flying, I just went. If I crashed, well, that's what I keep an ELT in service for! Now, with cell phone, two different portable radios, a SPOT, still the ELT, and a wife who likes to have a rough idea where I am, I feel pretty secure. As for lying in a crashed plane in the freezing cold, I dress for it before I fly. I don't worry about going for a walk, drive, or ATV ride alone, why would I worry any more about flying alone? My personal best for being alone in the plane, was camping last summer in Labrador, where I believe that I was 93 miles form the nearest other person. But, with a sat phone, and two independent ways to be found, I did not worry! A flight plan really does not work well up there, 'cause unless the sat phone works, you cannot open and close it anyway... I like sat phones, but I would never depend upon one!

When I take my 11 year old daughter camping in the plane, my wife knows, daughter has the cell phone, knows how to activate the SPOT, and has instructions as to how to use the portable radio to ask for help. Similarly, any other passenger gets a briefing, and someone (I choose) knows where we're going.

If an aerodrome wanted to know every time I took off, I would politely say that they are welcomed to look out the window and watch, but writing it down or telling anyone, is an intrusion upon my privacy! Sort of like the rules of listening to public radio transmissions, listen all you want, but do not record or divulge!

So personally, I would rise against what I now understand as a requirement to "book out" when flying my plane. But, that is just my personal preference, and not intended to sway anyone elses preference....

[Jan Olieslagers]

"would you like someone to watch over you while you fly?"or the reverse "nobody should know what or where or how I intend to fly and anybody curious about that is infringing upon my privacy"

That feeling is quite alive among a part of the Belgian microlight fliers. I once heard a story of a long planned group flight abroad, so that in a strictly legal sense filing a flight plan was required. Yet when one participant actually did so, another promptly quit the party, saying that he wouldn't fly in the company of people who didn't respect the proper microlight spirit.

I'm sure that same feeling exists elsewhere too; though it seems to me it is on the recline.

[Chuck Ellsworth]

To be really safe you should never even think of not wearing your hi-vis vest when engaging in any activity on an airport, the hi-vis vest is number one priority in my opinion.

[Silvaire1]

To be really safe you should never even think of not wearing your hi-vis vest when engaging in any activity on an airport, the hi-vis vest is number one priority in my opinion.

Yes, of course. In addition to confusing rules, petty but determined and invasive do-gooders, discussions about the exact way in which one should obey rules (if it can be determined what they are), and on-site comments that other participants are "not short a quid or two" all aviation activity must surely include appropriate fancy dress. ;) Preferably brightly colored and festive uniforms, of which the reflective vest is a perfect example.

[Gertrude the Wombat]

To be really safe you should never even think of not wearing your hi-vis vest when engaging in any activity on an airport, the hi-vis vest is number one priority in my opinion.
You've missed one, however.

As well as

- not booking out
- not wearing hi-ris
- turning off the transponder

if you really don't want people to know what you're up to you mustn't forget to

- paint a fake reg on your aircraft (just covering up the real one doesn't hack it, that'll look suspicious)

and of course you need to turn off all your phones/iToys ect ect.

And when you've done all that ... you'll be all set up for your drug- or people-smuggling run!

[ShyTorque]

Speaking as an ex SAR pilot, I can assure you that narrowing the search area even slightly increases the chances of success. The point you are perhaps failing to see is that by widening the area of uncertainty, the resources tied up searching are greatly increased. All at tax payers expense of course, not that of the individual in question.

[gasax]

First of all - there can only be one set of 'rules of the air'. The 2007 rules have been replaced by SERA. There is a listing on the CAA website of what are referred to as 'retained rules' left overs of the 2007 rules of the air that the CAA has decided to retain. Booking out is not one of them!


As for most of the other comments, there is a massive lack of logic - I have a 760 channel radio, a mode c transponder, a PLB and a mobile phone.

If I need anyone to know where I am I have 4 methods which pinpoint me. I fly in the highlands and believe me there are many, many more people in the hills than you would think. One accident I am aware of the pictures were posted on the internet before the guys even got back to the airfield.....

Booking out is a classic 'small persons' response to a near non-existant problem.

[Pilot DAR]

Hey posters, this is a worthwhile discussion, which I'm happy to see continue. But, bits are being lost, as I'm editing out some seemingly personal attacks.

Please play the ball, not the player...

[fireflybob]

Am not so sure the Rule does not apply anymore.

I posted a query on the Flying Instructors forum and this is an answer I received:-

The requirement is contained in Rule 17 of the Rules of the Air Regulations and is unaffected by the introduction of Part-SERA. The ANO and Rules of the Air Regulations remain law in the UK unless they conflict with EU regulations.

[PA28181]

The assumption is that "booking out" must include destination. Only yes if a FP is required.

[gasax]

This has piqued my interest and I suspect that the instructors reply was based upon a general understanding - not having read the specifics.

Firstly The Standardised European Rules of the Air (commonly referred to as SERA) took effect across Europe on 4 December 2014 and in the UK superseded most (but not all) of the UK Rules of the Air Regulations 2007.

The old Rule 17(2) states - 2) The commander of an aircraft arriving at or departing from an aerodrome in the United Kingdom shall take all reasonable steps to ensure, upon landing or prior to departure, as the case may be, that the person in charge of the aerodrome or the air traffic control unit or flight information service unit at the aerodrome is given notice of the landing or departure. which is what most people claim sets the requirement for 'booking out'.

The equivalent SERA clause - which does fully replace the old rules of the air states - SERA.4015 Changes to a Flight Plan
(a) Subject to the provisions of SERA.8020 (b) all changes to a flight plan submitted for an IFR flight, or a VFR flight operated as a controlled flight, shall be reported as soon as practicable to the appropriate air traffic services unit. For other VFR flights, significant changes to a flight plan shall be reported as soon as practicable to the appropriate air traffic services unit.
(b) Information submitted prior to departure regarding fuel endurance or total number of persons carried on board, if incorrect at time of departure, constitutes a significant change to the flight plan and as such shall be reported.

So the emphasis in very much on flight plans or controlled flights - not booking out where borders are not crossed which has been the application by many in the UK.

[PA28181]

A certain airfield manager has stated categorically that filing a flight plan does not constitute booking out at his airfield.

The fact that he has a piece of paper with all the flight details on it, is not the same as a call on the radio saying "off for a local bimble"

[gasax]

His train set - his intellect. Unfortunately symptomatic of why flying can be such a pain in the UK.

[ShyTorque]

The 2007 rules have been replaced by SERA. There is a listing on the CAA website of what are referred to as 'retained rules' left overs of the 2007 rules of the air that the CAA has decided to retain. Booking out is not one of them!

The CAA website outlining changes post SERA does still refer to the term "booking out".

[gasax]

But the critical point is that the rules do not.

the difference between what people think or want the rules to say, is often quite different when you read the actual rules.

[Oldpilot55]

The consensus would appear to be that it is NOT a legal requirement. I'm not interested in the pros and cons of whether it is a good idea or not. If it was a legal requirement I'd like to see where it is written down but it appears that I can stop looking.

[172510]

I can't understand why anyone would not want to book out (or whatever you want to call it). When I say this I'm not talking about unmanned landing strips but places where this a presence in the form of A/G, AFISO or even ATC.

Surely it's common sense to let someone know what you intend to do and how many are on board etc?
It's the very original purpose of a flight plan: making SAR easier. Booking out is an additional and useless requirement to that purpose. Why having 2 different procedures for the same purpose?

[On Track]

Why is it any business of the airport operator where you are flying to?

Obviously it's another one of those only-in-Britain things.

[Prop swinger]

Yes it is. It's called good manners & is for the benefit of S&R should someone want to look for your body.

[phiggsbroadband]

Hi All... I cannot think of any airfield that does not have 'Booking IN'.
Even the most remote runway and unlocked cabin set-up has that, if only to record the paying of the landing fee .
Sometimes there are additional columns in their log for time of departure and destination.

[Silvaire1]

Hi All... I cannot think of any airfield that does not have 'Booking IN'.
Even the most remote runway and unlocked cabin set-up has that, if only to record the paying of the landing fee. Sometimes there are additional columns in their log for time of departure and destination.

I've never flown as PIC to an airport that had any of what you describe.

[dont overfil]

Again it is a British thing. Usually a condition of the airfields planning permission or for proof of continuous use.

D.O.

[phiggsbroadband]

Which reminds me of a time I flew into a deserted Pembray...
Signed into their book, and put my landing fee into the adjacent 'Honesty Box'... Had the usual Tea and Cake at their canteen....

Went to Start Up and Taxi, when someone came running out, saying I had not paid the landing fee... I said 'It's in the Box'... He explained that was the Air-Ambulance charity box, and I still owed them the cash...!
.

[9 lives]

a condition of the airfields planning permission or for proof of continuous use.

And that's a good reason to "sign the book", I always do that to support airports. I see that as being very different to telling "the airport" where I'm flying.

[fireflybob]

When in Rome do as the Romans

[Jetblu]

It is better to live for one day like a Lion than a hundred years as a Sheep.

[gasax]

I joined this discussion out of a pet hate of 'silly' rules. Its positive is that it made me carefully read SERA and the comparison with the old Rules of the air.

One thing it has hopefully made quite clear is that rules which need interpretation or read across from legal principles might be fine for the legal profession but they are no use for pilots, hence the 'phone a friend' 'old wives tales' responses to aspects of this discussion.

Perhaps it makes very clear that the GASVIG or GASVFR or whatever the acronym group's approach to producing an equivalent to the Highway Code would be well worthwhile?

[chevvron]

Many years ago when I was a Watch Manager at Farnborough, we were told of a helicopter crash north of Reading and asked if we had worked the aircraft, which was stated to be an R22 and 2 bodies had been found in the wreckage.
I checked through our flight progress strips and found we had worked it northbound to Wycombe, but its type was given as an S300. Knowing that an R22 is a 2-seater but an S300 is a 3-seater, I checked with Wycombe ATC to see if they knew how many were on board.
The lovely Coral told me they had booked out with 3 on board, not 2, so I duly informed police and AAIB they should be looking for a third person.
They eventually found the third body some distance from the wreckage.
Had the airfield not required the pilot to book out, the search for the third person might not have been initiated; had that third person survived the crash (AAIB deduced they must have jumped out before impact) they might not have been found and could have died of their injuries.
Is that not a good reason to book out?

[Oldpilot55]

I am not questioning the requirement for booking out. My question is "is it a LEGAL requirement". That's all.

[gasax]

No I do not think that is. Should all boats book out? Should we book out when we get in the car to drive around the corner? Where does it all stop?

Light aircraft are subject to a very significant amount of regulatory oversight. Many of the people who work within 'the system' have no sense of proportionality and simply invent further 'rules' to serve their self importance. We can all think of exceptional circumstances where sometime made things better or indeed much worst.

Is there a legal requirement now? It seems not. Was there a legal requirement? Well dependent upon interpretation probably yes.

This forum and the others are full of these sort of threads where the regulations are subject to much argument, simply because they are not written in a simple and straight forward way. How can that possibly be acceptable?

[Pilot DAR]

So, to be fair to everyone, have we determined that this is no longer a legal requirement in the UK, though some people like the idea, and continue to do it/promote it out of non required personal preference or experience?

[Oldpilot55]

I'd like to think most of us on here are intelligent, we have proven ability to read and understand text books and pass exams. So we are not stupid, we are capable of making a rational decision based on weather, aircraft serviceability and the state of our health before going flying. Most of us will happily accept that there is logic to supplying information to others about our flight either through a formal or informal process. I see both arguments, I don't book out to go to Tescos but I do want someone to come and look for me if I end up broken somewhere. That is the risk we accept when we go flying.
Maybe 20 years ago an aircraft was not booked out from a local club and it crashed killing the occupants. No formal booking out process was complied with, at that time the club was run informally and did not insist on booking out, although you could argue that merely by booking the aircraft for an hour's slot they had booked out. The occupants would not have been helped had they done so but clearly in the helicopter accident described a couple of posts back it did help.
So we have a risk of an accident, the consequences could be very serious (I happily accept that lying seriously injured in a field is not a good thing) but into the equation is how frequently does an accident like this happen?
I would argue so infrequently that it is almost irrelevant.

Having said all that I have no objection to booking out but as others have said there seems to be no longer a legal requirement to do so.

[ShyTorque]

Was there a legal requirement? Well dependent upon interpretation probably yes.


I'm sure it used to be so. I admit to not having got fully to grips with the wording of the requirement under SERA just yet. However, about ten years ago I was reported to the CAA for allegedly not booking in or out at a minor UK airfield. It was an unjustified allegation, because I had been booked in by our company ops dept. and the airfield owner had failed to read his own written log, where I had booked out in person before departure, so no action was taken against me.

[A and C]

May be I have this wrong but my understanding was that an airfield movements record was a requirement of the customs authorities and nothing to do with SAR or ATC.

[chevvron]

All of the above aside, there is still the requirement at an airfield with an 'Ordinary' Licence for an aircraft operator to obtain permission from the airfield authority to use the airfield (ie take off or land) and this is usually reflected in the planning conditions for the airfield.

[Oldpilot55]

Chevron, I am not disputing that. If I use an airfield I accept I have to follow the rules, conditions or whatever. I know booking out is a club rule because I can see it in black and white. So far no one has referred to a CAA document stating that it is a legal requirement.

[9 lives]

there is still the requirement at an airfield with an 'Ordinary' Licence for an aircraft operator to obtain permission from the airfield authority to use the airfield (ie take off or land)

Obviously, it would be courtesy to request permission to use private property that you do not own, but is that "requirement" a regulatory burden upon the pilot? What is the regulation with which the pilot must comply?

I see the "requirement" to obtain permission to use a private aerodrome (which perhaps is granted one time for all, to a based aircraft), as quite different to a [regulation?] to quasi flight plan every flight from an aerodrome.

Of course, examples can be found where doing so has had a great benefit for search and rescue efforts. However, is burying a system in reports of coming and going proportionate to that? Certainly, for the capacity of Flight Services to receive and process flight plans or flight itineraries, relative to the number of flights from private aerodromes in Canada is just not there. If we were to document each flight, the system would be swamped. I would estimate that more than half of the aerodromes in Canada are not regularly attended, so there would be no means to present a "booking" in or out.

In my opinion, a pilot's obligation to them self, their passengers, and SAR is to appropriately notify someone responsible of their flight. No "local" requirement would so obligate a pilot, if a national air regulation did not. That's certainly the way it is in Canada.

[vector4fun]

Things are much more simple here in the U.S. The only entity requiring me to "book out/in" is my wife. One master at a time. :hmm:

[On Track]

This thread confirms what I realised some time ago.

EVERYTHING in British aviation is different.

[Helen49]

There are always those who wish to kick against the system and reading this thread it becomes evident that for a variety of reasons some pilots just don’t wish to be helpful and cooperative. They see all rules as a nuisance and for the benefit of someone else.

Booking out [with which filing a flight plan complies] is a simple procedure and takes a couple of minutes or so. As a consequence of making the effort, the following benefits are derived…….no not all by the pilot, but there are other people in this world!

The ATS unit [be it ATC, AFIS or A/G] will know who you are, what your likely requirements will be and which route you will be using to leave their airspace [particularly useful in regulated airspace].

If this is done by telephone [a requirement at some airfields] then the ‘tower’ will have a pre-prepared flight progress strip [or whatever they use]. This is particularly helpful at busy airfields where passing details on the RTF is both time consuming and an unnecessary distraction for the radio operator/ATCO etc. It also clogs up the frequency.

ATS will know whether or not to expect your return and approximately at what time.

Licensed/Certificated Airfields are required to maintain an aircraft movements log. Completion of the log requires information about the flight destination.

In the event of an aircraft going missing, search co-ordinators will have a clue where to start looking. If, perchance, the pilot and passengers are injured on a remote hillside, they will have a greater possibility of survival. Surely in the best interests of relatives/friends etc.

If the pilot/operator is engaged in criminal activities, the police, HMRC etc will have a better chance of discovering their activities and taking the appropriate action. That interests the law abiding citizens!

This may all appear ‘nanny state’ and maybe it isn’t done in some parts of the world. However the UK has applied a good SMS principle and learned from its mistakes. As a consequence of many accidents over the years, we have learned that the more readily available the information about a flight the better the chances of survival. It also makes for the more efficient use of search resources…….paid for by the rest of us!

On a personal note, as a former ATCO I have, over the years, spent countless hours on telephones trying to track down missing aircraft which the simple expedient of a telephone call would have prevented!

It’s no big deal, it’s not big brother, it’s common sense!

H49

[fireflybob]

EVERYTHING in British aviation is different.

You could say the same thing about Australia

[gasax]

There is not a single instance where a life has been saved through this bureaucracy.

If people within the system want to make work for themselves fine. Making up reasons for it on the basis of 'assisting the police' and other entirely spurious reasons is symptomatic of why GA in the UK is becoming unsustainable as a transport option.

Leaning on rules which in themselves have no real value is why we need a serious simplification and evidence basis for them - not simply 'I think this might be a good idea and if the postman/police/customs/whoever needs an address I could give it to him'.

This whole thing is similar to and even less useful than the now no longer required fire cover for training during ppls,,which again was proven to have never saved a life - but cost us all a significant amount of money (oh and kept people 'within the system' in work!).

[Helen49]

Booking out may not have saved a single life, I bow to your superior knowledge. However it has saved valuable time in the ATS world and avoided much heartache on the part of ATS personnel! I doubt it keeps a single person anywhere in a job but it does make life simpler and safer for those who are involved in these matters.

I know the OP was asking about the legality of booking out. The thread has drifted! In the days when finding a telephone and getting through to ATS was more difficult I can almost understand the failure to book out. In these days of mobile telephones, it is a two minute job whilst walking out to the aircraft. Get real folks, stop being so selfish. Think about helping others for a change!

My days in ATC are way back and things may have changed but I do know that back then the pilots and operators who were polite, helpful and worked within the rules [like them or not] generally got the best service and were a pleasure to work with! The awkward uncooperative non-compliant personnel would often get the same service in return and it is very easy for ATC to give as they receive!!

H49

[9 lives]

In the days when finding a telephone and getting through to ATS was more difficult I can almost understand the failure to book out. In these days of mobile telephones, it is a two minute job whilst walking out to the aircraft.

But when I do phone flight service, It'll often be a 15 to 20 minute wait to get through on the phone, so that two minute call can take 22 minutes, which is often longer than I fly for! If Nav Canada were to employ enough people to answer the phones in under two minutes, I would not want to be paying for that service, I feel that our society does not need that degree of regulated voluntary oversight.

Speaking as a volunteer firefighter of 25 years, we have spent ever bit as much time looking for difficult to find car accidents, lost persons, boats, and snowmobiliers, as crashed aircraft, and our society does not expect the surface borne to report their intended trip nor destination, why should pilots be more burdened? Because they fly farther into remote territory? Then yes, they can file a flight plan or flight notification, and I'm sure that they do.

By the way, while walking out to the aircraft, don't be on the phone, think about where you're walking! Ramps can be busy places!

[Gertrude the Wombat]

our society does not expect the surface borne to report their intended trip nor destination
My wife's uncle was a retired mountain rescue person in BC. He expected us to tell him exactly where we were going and when we were due back when we went off walking in the mountains.


(But then admitted lying to his kids and telling them that he was due back a day later than he was actually planning.)

[9 lives]

He [uncle] expected us to tell him exactly where we were going and when we were due back

Indeed, I entirely agree. But, uncle is not "society". It's great that friends and family are there to keep tabs on each other. My wife likes me to tell here where I'm going when I fly, and I appreciate that. If I cannot, I'll have the SPOT on, and she knows to look for it. My pilot buddies have a pretty good idea where to look for me. If I have no one to tell, I can file a flight plan.

The option is always there to notify people of your trip, and to be "followed" so to speak. How nice that aviation has this system in place, and there are regulations as to it's use. For some flights, it is required.

However, in my opinion, for bimbling around, I feel no greater obligation to society on the whole, to notify them of a flight more than I would if I were to walk, ride, drive or sail to that same place. If society has put a rule in place in that respect, I accept that, and will follow it. But the expectation that every person venturing out will notify "society" is asking too much of society to track all of that.

Society cannot afford the cost to track every person who chooses to venture out - what makes people flying more an object of such oversight?

I recall years ago, taking a non aviation passenger for a hundred mile flight over remote winter territory. Of course, I filed a flight plan, airport to airport. The destination airport was a few miles beyond the lakeside town at which we were to meet the others. While flying over the others at the lake shore, I could see them, and they needed our help. I landed on the ice, and we provided the required help - and I got distracted, and forgot to close the flight plan - totally my fault.

So I had not arrived at the airport, and the calls start going out. My team of flying buddies got the call, as one of them was the "notify" person (before wife). He first called the police in the town I was visiting, and told them to look for a yellow plane on the ice at the waterfront. Sure enough, there I was, problem (that I had caused) solved.

I had a totally mea culpa talk with flight services afterword. During that talk, I learned that nothing in their way of doing things would have triggered anyone to ask if the plane had landed on the town's ice instead of the airport. They were about to spend a lot of money launching SAR aircraft, who would have found me safely on the ice. Sometimes the family/friends traking is actually better than society's system - ('cause they were getting ready to fly too!).

[PA28181]

The awkward uncooperative non-compliant personnel would often get the same service in return and it is very easy for ATC to give as they receive!!

I would be interested to know as I'm sure others will, how does that manifest itself to a pilot using your service.?


Notification of arrival and departure
17.—(1) If the commander of an aircraft has caused notice of the intended arrival of the aircraft at an aerodrome to be given to the air traffic
control unit or other authority at that aerodrome, he shall ensure that the unit or authority is informed as quickly as possible of—

The operative word is "IF" there is also a reference to "Booking out" which advises "Flight details will not be passed to another ATSU" unfortunately I think the CAA server must be down due to the Holborn fire? so cant give relevant CAP

The argument about the use of boats with no requirements like this are valid. Unless going to a foreign port no-one knows..

[dont overfil]

A flight plan does not constitute booking out.

In the UK VFR flight plans generally are ignored as they do not require to be closed and do not usually contain the required info for SAR. eg POB endurance and contact phone Nos. Often the arrival or departure airfield will not have an AVPEX terminal. (and probably fewer will have in the future)

The only time a VFR flight plan is required is when intending to cross an international boundary.

The booking out procedure at my local licenced field is written in to the airfield ops manual and SMS manual. This has been in place for many years due principally to the extremely inhospitible terrain nearby.

As Helen49 says in her very sensible posts licenced airfields are required to log all movements and arrival and departure information. Several agencies may have an interest in this information.

D.O.

[PA28181]

A flight plan does not constitute booking out.

From CAP 694.


5 Booking Out, Rule 17 of the Rules of the Air Regulations 2007 requires a pilot intending to make a flight to inform the Air Traffic Service Unit (ATSU) at the aerodrome of departure, an action known as "Booking Out". Filing an FPL constitutes compliance with this Rule. The action of "Booking Out", however, does not involve flight details being transmitted
to any other ATSU.

[dont overfil]

If the airfield does not have an ATSU?

I don't have time to look at the document at the moment but I think that it may be referring to booking in or out of an aerodrome within a control zone.

A flight plan in that instance can usually be an informal one of basic details by phone or over the radio. You will be asked your desination, endurance and POB and sometimes if you are IFR or VFR.

D.O.

[Pronto]

I'm fairly sure that A and C (whose comment is on the preceding page) is correct and that it is, or was, a customs requirement to sign in and out. The Customs and Excise Management Act 1979 gave Customs the power to make various regulations and I'm fairly sure that a requirement to sign in and out was one of those. Whether that part of the Act survived the transfer of responsibility for customs controls at the border from HM Revenue and Customs (the successor to HMCE) to the UK Border Agency is something I don't know.

[gasax]

It would be much more helpful if instead of quoting old wife's tales if posters could actually find the regulatory requirement which they think makes booking out a legal requirement.

To answer don't overfill. look back at the SERA extract. A FPL fulfils the requirement to book out - which only applies at an airfield with an ATSU.

[Pronto]

Not an old wives' tale at all - see CEMA 1979, s33(3):

"(3) The person in control of an aerodrome licensed under any enactment relating to air navigation and, if so required by the Commissioners, the person in control of any other aerodrome shall—

"(a) keep a record in such form and manner as the Commissioners may approve of all aircraft arriving at or departing from the aerodrome;

"(b) keep that record available and produce it on demand to any officer, together with all other documents kept on the aerodrome which relate to the movement of aircraft; and

"(c) permit any officer to make copies of and take extracts from any such record or document."

There's nothing on the Legislation website to suggest it's not still in force and now administered by UKBA.

P

[9 lives]

licenced airfields are required to log all movements and arrival and departure information.

And the foregoing post seem to oblige the aerodrome operator, not the pilot of an aircraft to report movements at the aerodrome.

I don't know about the UK, but in Canada a privilege may be associated with regulation. The privilege to fly in domestic airspace will be regulated by national regulation. International airspace, additional regulation. Privilege to cross borders will invoke customs regulations, but I don't know about customs controlling entirely domestic flying?

[On Track]

Step Turn, I enjoy your posts. It seems that Canada, Australia and NZ all approach the business of SAR in a similar way.

If I do want or need to file a flight plan in Australia or NZ (which I might do simply for the purpose of having a SARtime in the system) then all I have to do is go online. In fact that's the way that ATS in both countries prefer it to be done.

I certainly don't have to tell the airport operator what I'm doing. Indeed there are hundreds of Class G airports where there's nobody to talk to anyway.

[riverrock83]

Current law is a bit of a mess.
Essentially, the Rules of the Air regulations 2007 has been superceeded by Part-SERA (December 2014) but Part-SERA didn't cover everything so some parts have been retained, and there have been some derogations in some areas.
See http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/2884/20141204ROTA2007Retentions.pdf
and you can read about further details here: http://www.caa.co.uk/default.aspx?catid=2884&pagetype=90
This should all be cleaned up with new legislation this year.
However the booking out regulation hasn't been retained. It is no longer law for pilots. It is now only the Part-SERA regs which requires submission of some sort of flightplan (which could be an abbreviated flight plan, which the CAA helpfully refers to as "booking out") to be in controlled airspace (so likely including an ATZ).
Hope that clears the legals up!

Of course, might still be required by each organisation according to their own rules / safety management system.

[BillieBob]

This should all be cleaned up with new legislation this year.On the 30th April, in fact, when the Rules of the Air Regulations 2015 (http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2015/840/pdfs/uksi_20150840_en.pdf) come into force.