Improve Light A/C Separation

[Pace]

>>Pace appears to be obsessed with the idea that a collision between a locost 737 flying out of a regional airport and a glider who in his opinion should not be there is likely.<<

I never said it was Likely so please dont misquote me I said there is an increased risk of such a collision

>>My understanding is that the holiday bound (or returning) 737s spend as little time as possible at low level (i.e. below say 12,000ft) for good economic reasons. The flight paths into and out of these airports are well known and sensibly avoided, even if it would be legal to fly IMC in a glider there. Unless planning wave flying, gliders do not normally carry supplemental oxygen, and therefore do not climb above around 12,000ft.<<

Business jets operate in exactly the same way also need to climb to reduce fuel burn and often climb faster than airlines

>>The higher risk, I suggest, is to smaller business jets positioning to smaller airfields which are capable of handling them. A poster whose contributions indicate they fly such operations has said they often do so at relatively low level in the open FIR, rather than airways, for convenience and economic reasons (even when that option is available).<<

We fly business jets airways when practical and would love to fly controlled airspace takeoff to touchdown but it is not always practical how are you going to fly airways positioning Biggin to Farnborough for example? It is not only business jets but turboprops, Military and 737s which operate out side of controlled airspace read my posts again including operations from Londonderry where there isnt even radar for Airbus A320 until they get onto a military unit near by.

>>I hope they avoid flying just below cloudbase on days where the cloud is mainly cumulus; that is where a higher density of gliders is to be expected. The lack of collisions so far, and of airprox reports indicates that this is the case, and 'big sky' is working.<<

From what you say we should avoid flying in the clouds too as nowhere is safe.

>>If positioning bizjets would like further reassurance that clouds ahead are glider free, then listening on 130.400 will give further confidence.<<

I am more intent on listening to a Radar Service than some obscure glider frequency covering gliders from the top to the bottom of the country.

>>I have only one COM set. My most likely risk is another glider on the days when cloud climbs are desirable. My responsibility to the most likely conflict dictates my mode of operation.

I fit FLARM as the only current option available to me to further reduce the risk.<<

>>I agree that a fully interoperable system would further reduce the already small risk, and believe the obsession within the CAA that Mode S is a good answer, and the only answer (neither of which are backed up by the data available, or technical considerations) is unhelpful.
Meanwhile, I hope not to meet some of you gentlemen (meant in the nicest possible way).<<

Fitter2 I really think you should become a little bit more knowledgeable about what and how airspace is used especially if you operate in it rather than taking pot shots at me because I have somehow ruffled your feathers.
Infact it would be good if we both understood each others operational modes better. I am picking up a lot from the sensible gliding fraternity here but you appear blind to wanting to understand anything

Pace