Glou idiot ! [Archive] - PPRuNe Forums

Alvin Steele

19th Jun 2006, 15:20

It got to the 'Heart and Spear' section (2 aircraft draw the heart and the 3rd spears it) when the intruder was first spotted, the three jets cleared out with the intention of having another go........but abandoned that, next the 'corkscrew' went out the window too......so, maybe about 50% of a display......it was after the third sighting when Red1 called it a day.
The downside for the Reds is that anyone out of earshot of the commentary would have thought it a f$%k up on the part of the team because infringers aren't always visible to the viewing public (unlike the Eastbourne fiasco) and so yesterdays probs wouldnt be readily apparent.

Aussie Andy

19th Jun 2006, 15:22

Cheers -- I suppose another danger is that the Reds themselves might become less interested in displaying at such events, God forbid, should they deem the risk unacceptable... lets hope not.

Roffa

19th Jun 2006, 17:52

Will 0500 354 802 deliver a route briefing, along a route where you specify a number of waypoints, including IFR waypoints?

No as it's not a substitue for some proper planning but it does give geographical locations which, for someone out on a VFR flight, should at the very least give a heads up to a possible issue en-route. I assume people do actually look at maps these days before they jump in the aeroplane and fire up the GPS?

And it's a freephone number so what excuse is there not to use it?

spernkey

19th Jun 2006, 18:04

Is it just me or are all pprune poster's sanctimonious to**ers!

But hang on that would be jumping to conclusions before one had the facts - wouldn,t it??????

As it happens i routed round Kemble on my way back from Devon just before the Reds got going and the vis was challenging for visual nav. We were 8000 hours experience between the 2 of us - i imagine a lower time ppl(on his/her own?) could easily have planned to miss the TRA and still come unstuck.But of course i don't know the facts either so i'll leave it at that.

Thank god for all the other saintly pilots or where would we be?

This is my last post here as i have finally had enuff of this DRIVEL.

Roffa

19th Jun 2006, 18:35

Is it just me or are all pprune poster's sanctimonious to**ers!

Probably :rolleyes:

If this event was a one off fair enough, but in the day job I see traffic infringing CAS and TRA to a greater or lesser degree (and with a few pretty close calls with scheduled traffic) on pretty much a daily basis so it becomes increasingly difficult to remain 100% sympathetic.

And I'm not being sanctimonious when I ask if people look at maps these days because the reports after the fact have shown than in a number of infringements of the airspace I work in maps weren't being looked at, just out of date GPSs.

Whatever, the facts will come out in the wash, but in the meantime there is no harm in publicising any means available for trying to make sure that one is aware of everything that may be happening in the air around you.

Cheerio.

Saab Dastard

19th Jun 2006, 18:38

Is it just me or are all pprune poster's sanctimonious to**ers!

It's just you. :ok:

This is my last post here as i have finally had enuff of this DRIVEL.

:D

englishal

19th Jun 2006, 19:42

We should ask why these infringements happen. There seem to be a lot of them, and I reckon it is a problem with the way Notams are disseminated. Even I have trouble wading through 50 pages of A4 textual rubbish and staying awake.

Now is the time for the AIS to release a GRAPHICAL officially endorsed Notam plotter which shows these TRAs etc...without all the other rubbish and allow one to just include today's pertinent Notams. If the author of NotamPlot can do it, I'm sure some boffin in AIS can knock up one in half a day.

Anyway, I'm sure whoever did infringe the display didn't do it deliberately, and will probably suffer a lot more than those who missed half of the red arrows display. (wasn't me, honest, I'm in Norway;) )

DFC

19th Jun 2006, 19:44

There's no good reason for not calling 0500 354 802 at the very least.

I have never called that number and have no intention of doing so.

To take up IO540's point, it is a legal requirement to properly prepare for a flight including checking NOTAMs, AICs and the AIP etc.

A briefing from AIS will include any TRAs for the red arrows etc as well as all the other information one is legally required to check. The telephone message merely repeats what one has already received in the legally required briefing.

Thus there is no need to ring any freephone numbers if one has obtained a full and proper pre-flight briefing.

Perhaps some pilots think that if they ring the frephone number that they do not to get a full AIS briefing before flight? - Wrong!

---------

IO540,

Agree that many instructors and examiners do not ensure that students/candidates check notams and aip etc pre-flight. Many people obtain PPLs without having ever consulted the AIP. How can that be done?

Of course those former students become instructors and very soon, hardly anyone knows how to brief properly for a flight!

Regards,

DFC

Roffa

19th Jun 2006, 20:24

I have never called that number and have no intention of doing so.

To take up IO540's point, it is a legal requirement to properly prepare for a flight including checking NOTAMs, AICs and the AIP etc.

Good for you DFC, I wouldn't have expected anything less.

The point remains however that it is a facility that is there, free of charge, to be made use of.

In the imperfect real world it appears there are still some people flying (talking simple day VFR here) who, for whatever reason, fail to brief themselves properly (if at all) before so doing.

If, at the very least, they just picked up the phone before climbing into the cockpit they would probably be warned about the most likely airspace gotchas that might otherwise embarass them.

It may not fulfil the legal requirements to the letter but it would be a lot better than what seems to be happening too often at the moment.

IO540

19th Jun 2006, 20:30

I think it's very easy for all those who spend their days and nights ;) on pilot forums to make sweeping judgements about other pilots.

Yes, everybody reading pprune, or any of the countless other pilot forums that load up the internet with varying degrees of success, ought to know about www.ais.org.uk.

But let me tell you that in my 600+ hrs of flying over 5 years I have almost never heard of internet weather and have never heard of getting notams via the internet or through any other means. In training, the instructor would pin a fax with some local notams to the noticeboard and that was it. It was only through reading some pilot forums back in 2001/2002 that I discovered these great resources.

About 3000 PPLs get dished out every year. The CAA (probably very sensibly) doesn't release the total # of nonexpired PPLs but it's thought to be of the order of 20000. It's also known that 80-90% of PPLs don't make it past the first renewal.

So, we have a lot of PPLs which expire more or less right away, and I don't suppose those pilots feature very much in infringements.

Based on the known average PPL award age of about 40, and the likely age before a holder fails his CAA Class 2 medical, we have a much larger population of pilots who have been flying for say 10-30 years. These people may be hanging around at flying schools or clubs but a lot of them (I can't guess how many but it must be the majority**) are flying entirely outside any training environment.

This last group will see an instructor every two years (and this itself is quite a recent thing). Often it will be an old pub mate of theirs who will sign them off without much formality. But this instructor, being most likely a member of the old school, won't know about internet notams or internet weather or internet anything, or indeed anything that's happened since WW2.

There is another group which flies entirely outside the training system: the private IR pilots. Many of these did their stuff in the USA, and they cringe at the thought of hanging around a flying school where some sanctimonious airport bar pilot will tell them to not use a GPS. However, these people are pretty modern, have all the gadgets and use them, and they will very rarely find themselves somewhere unexpected. Hard to do anyway when being vectored by London Control :) The few of these who are on G-reg and thus receive GASIL or GASCO toss those old rags straight in the bin.

It's the people that got their PPL years ago and are outside the system but who fly at a low activity level who are most likely to get into this kind of trouble, and it's no use pontificating that they are dickheads, etc. They are just victims of the substandard PPL training system - just like I was when I dropped out of it 5 years ago.

Finally we have which I might call the pure sport flying group. I don't want to suggest I have anything against microlights but the general level of aviation professionalism there seems to be even lower than in the PPL(A). A lot of these people can't navigate if you paid them for it, and I doubt they were ever trained to get notams any more than PPL(A)s.

(** most schools don't like PPL holders to hang around; they prefer students to spend all their precious money on lessons, not subsidising some PPL's cost sharing scheme ;) )

Alvin Steele

19th Jun 2006, 20:37

We should ask why these infringements happen. There seem to be a lot of them, and I reckon it is a problem with the way Notams are disseminated. Even I have trouble wading through 50 pages of A4 textual rubbish and staying awake.
Now is the time for the AIS to release a GRAPHICAL officially endorsed Notam plotter which shows these TRAs etc...without all the other rubbish and allow one to just include today's pertinent Notams. If the author of NotamPlot can do it, I'm sure some boffin in AIS can knock up one in half a day.
Anyway, I'm sure whoever did infringe the display didn't do it deliberately, and will probably suffer a lot more than those who missed half of the red arrows display. (wasn't me, honest, I'm in Norway;) )

Completely agree:ok:

rustle

19th Jun 2006, 22:10

We should ask why these infringements happen. There seem to be a lot of them, and I reckon it is a problem with the way Notams are disseminated. Even I have trouble wading through 50 pages of A4 textual rubbish and staying awake.

If you're getting 50 pages when everyone else is getting 1 or 2, the "problem" must be between the chair and the keyboard.

windriver

19th Jun 2006, 22:57

".....AIS to release a GRAPHICAL officially endorsed Notam plotter"

Just as an exercise once I wrote a little PC programme that took selected Items of Notam info of the Web and displayed it in Microsofts MapPoint as diferent coloured pushpins... I could see at a glance where things were happening on any given day... so presumably it could be done quite easily for any data with a geographical (eg Lat Long) reference.

GK430

20th Jun 2006, 07:50

:uhoh: Interesting title to the thread.
How do you know the intruder was over Gloucestershire and not err Wiltshire?

By the time I departed Kemble, it was not known what / who the infringer was.

A glider, a microlight or a PPL in a light aircraft.

Let someone else be the judge when the facts are known.

I have to agree with Englishal. When NATS had really good on airport AIS', the charts were plotted for all to see.
I think Guernsey FBU must be about the only one left that I visit where this is still done:D

Fuji Abound

20th Jun 2006, 07:55

So what is wrong with Notam Plot.

It is free,

It is real time,

It shows all the data in a graphical interface.

http://www.notamplot.flyer.co.uk/

Enjoy.

excrab

20th Jun 2006, 07:59

Interesting that IO540 states

"The few of those who are on G reg and thus receive GASIL or GASCO toss those old rags straight in the Bin"

Perhaps if the offending pilot at Kemble had read the latest GASCo bulletin before disposing of it he or she might have sen the article on page 6 entitled "The red arrows and how to avoid them" in which case this thread wouldn't even exist.

However I won't go anyfurther with comments about the rest of the tirade against almost every part of GA except his or herself as it has to be a wind-up.

Fuji Abound

20th Jun 2006, 08:16

Excrab

I think the point being made (tongue in cheek) is that if you brief properly and navigate properly and take your flying "seriously" there is not a great deal for you in GASIL - for everyone else it is worth a read!! :)

In my opinion the real lesson is to establish why this type of issue arises all to frequently. I share the view of those who have said the training industry is very poor at informing pilots where to get this information and what is required to ensure they have breifed themselves properly.

In this country it reamins the case that it is difficult to see how this essential information could be supplied in a more disjointed and un-userfriendly way.

If the authorities are really interested in preventing the next re-occurence then they should at least ensure the training industry is doing its job properly AND the relevant information is made available in the most effective way possible.

IO540

20th Jun 2006, 08:30

The CAA seems to be reluctant to act against any interests of the flight training business.

It would be difficult, for example, to include GPS in the PPL syllabus (simply because most schools would raise hell over the necessary mandatory fitting of the equipment in planes used for training) but it would be easy to make schools teach internet based notam briefings.

I suppose that some schools are still bound to vigorously complain, on the grounds that the £25/month they will be forced to pay for an ADSL connection is going to drive them out of business :ugh:

Does anyone know what fees, if any, does the CAA get from the flight training industry? They don't (normally) get the very lucrative AOC fees.

However, as I said already, I suspect (do any surveys support this?) that most c0ckups like this one are done by "old pilots" who don't hang around within the school/club system, and infrequently, for many years. Perhaps it happens on the rare occassions they venture outside their usual bimbling area. If the data does not support this, then the blame is squarely on the flight training business.

In any event, the blame is on the instructors/examiners who do skills tests and bi-annual checks. But if the CAA doesn't require this to be tested....??

The notam delivery system will never change. It's international, it has countless d1ckheads all over the world feeding rubbish into it, and you have to learn to live with it. GA doesn't count in Europe. The Narrow Route Briefing works perfectly well. The problem is if you want to bimble over a large area; then you just have to read through a lot of stuff but again most of it is obviously rubbish and doesn't take a long time to scan through (minutes). Far less time that a preflight check.

The AIS website has frequent problems but one can phone them with a list of waypoints and a fax number and the man will instantly fax you the data. Not satisfactory I know (not many pilots have a fax) but better than nothing. I suppose they could read it to you if you press them?

Fuji Abound

20th Jun 2006, 08:39

I0540

Perhaps I should have said training and "examining" industry. Your point about the old "f%$"Ts" is I am sure valid but these should be getting caught during their two yearly renewal.

Who amoung us was asked at their last two yearly how they brief before their flight?

IO540

20th Jun 2006, 09:48

I don't think there is a requirement to check this stuff at the license renewal. That's what's fundamentally wrong with the system.

I know some instructors do check general navigation (and notam gathering) ability at this point but most don't. Of course those that don't won't be reading this stuff, either. I can't recall how many instructors I have shown how to do this. Most think internet weather is plain amazing...

By "old" I didn't mean to imply above a certain age, just those who got their PPL some years ago.

I'd bet that the bulk of the farm strip flying scene is not conversant with this new fangled stuff :)

Fuji Abound

20th Jun 2006, 10:00

"I don't think there is a requirement to check this stuff at the license renewal. That's what's fundamentally wrong with the system."

No, nor do I.

My point was that if there are to be twice yearly renewals make their content as pro-active as possible. If you accept there are pilots "outside the system" then use this opportunity to ensure examiners bring them up to date on the issues of the day.

The analogy is with professional training. One of the reason why the professions have compulsory CPE is that it provides a good opportunity to ensure the "carrot crunchers" are at least getting exposure to the issues and concerns of the day.

In short, rather than whineing about these infringements or just prosecuting the pilot do something pro-active. At least be certain this sort of information is reaching the unwashed and unworthy. Then by all means prosecute if you will.

GuinnessQueen

20th Jun 2006, 10:03

It's easy to blame instructors and examiners, but remember we have each passed a skills test, and hence demonstrated that we can plan and execute a nav flight. What we then do once let loose on our own might be very different!

When conducting the bi-annual flight as an instructor, there are certain basics I expect a student to know and do....ie demonstrate AIRMANSHIP, and surely this includes pre-flight planning?

There is a lot to cover in the bi-annual flight, and mostly I try to concentrate on the skills that get rusty (i.e manouvres that PPL's perhaps don't practice on every flight). If the bi-annual check was to cover everything in the PPL syllabus then it would take a lot longer and instructors, examiners and of course the CAA would be accused of costing the average PPL even more dosh.

PPL's need to accept THEY are PIC, hence blaming the instructing and examining community only reaches so far.

GQ

Fuji Abound

20th Jun 2006, 10:21

"When conducting the bi-annual flight as an instructor, there are certain basics I expect a student to know and do....ie demonstrate AIRMANSHIP, and surely this includes pre-flight planning?"

Exactly.

On the taxi out.

So I assume you have the NOTAMs for the day. Oh, good where do you get them from? How have you ensured they cover the area in which we will be operating today. You do realise there has been an increase in flying display infringements and the CAA will prosecute.

.. .. .. and I assume you have the weather? What is it and where did you get the information from.

So let me see - that takes all of 5 minutes.

No - if you are doing bi-annuals focus on the areas that are really causing pilots a problem if you possibly can, and if you are the regulator encourage examiners to do so. It can be fitted in to the one hour made available but it is a matter of ensuring the emphasis is in the right place.

robin

20th Jun 2006, 11:03

I would agree with the view that the biennial flight is the perfect place to catch up with changes in legislation and procedures. But given that the flight has to be a minimum one hour this can add a bit to the rush to get things done.

I would suggest that the flight should not be specified as a specific time. After all the flight test can be of any length. That way non-flying issues can be dealt with in a more reasonable way

Aussie Andy

20th Jun 2006, 11:15

My two-penneth worth on the question of where/how people get their NOTAMs:

I wonder whether a lot of training organisations, such as BAFC at Wycombe where I learned, have a system where the NOTAMs for the local / training area are pinned on the briefing board, along with hard-copy of the weather etc? I think this is great for students in one respect, i.e. they can get in the habit of checking the print-outs pre-flight, but on the other hand this does not breed self-sufficiency.

Maybe we'd be better off telling students from the time they start their cross-country flights that they have to get the NOTAM and WX themselves, at home via their PC (yes, I think you do need a PC - or an Ops dept - to fly these days!) before coming in for the lesson, rather than have it served up on a plate in a club environment. Because at some stage after they get their license, they'll begin flying from places other than the "safe" club environment they trained in and we need to be our own self-sufficient Ops Dept to fly in our busy skies!

Andy :ok:

Fuji Abound

20th Jun 2006, 12:00

"I wonder whether a lot of training organisations, such as BAFC at Wycombe where I learned, have a system where the NOTAMs for the local / training area are pinned on the briefing board, along with hard-copy of the weather etc?"

Exactly so. I think this is almost the universal way things are done.

.. .. .. and of course once you have your PPL, they are not really interested in you any more. (with some very good exceptions of course).

The other factor I suspect is some pilots simply get lazy. You know the thing. I think I will go fo a little potter round the local patch. I know it well enough. There arent usually any NOTAMS to worry about and I cant be bothered to check.

Ooops what was that red streak!

Aussie Andy

20th Jun 2006, 12:53

and of course once you have your PPL, they are not really interested in you any more.Well yes that may be the case, but even if it is not you will find yourself flying further afield than the area covered by the briefing board as soon as you have your license, so people will anyway need to take responsibility for their own NOTAM and Wx planning and simply haven't been taught to do so I think...

Andy :ok:

Humaround

20th Jun 2006, 13:19

"So what is wrong with Notam Plot.

It is free,

It is real time,

It shows all the data in a graphical interface."...

.... it's yet ANOTHER flightware product that is Windows only....

rustle

20th Jun 2006, 13:22

For a group of individuals (pilots) who hate "the nanny state" and demand the freedoms that flight gives, there seems to be an amazing desire to blame "someone else" whenever there's a problem.

It's the instructor's fault
It's AIS's fault
It's the CAA's fault

Whatever happened to personal responsibility? Everyone is taught from the same syllabus, everyone knows what they need to be briefed on (WX and NOTAMs to name 2), so WTF is it "someone else's" fault when they fail to do it? :confused:

Aussie Andy

20th Jun 2006, 13:25

Whatever happened to personal responsibility? Well we could ask the numpty who busted the Reds' display to see what his answer would be, but of course the rest of us are exercising our personal responsibility!! That doesn't change the need for trainign thoughm does it? Don't you acccept that training can sometimes be used to improve safety?

Andy :ok:

rustle

20th Jun 2006, 13:29

No it doesn't remove the need for training.

But it does leave the responsibility for obtaining that training where it belongs: With me.

If I don't learn how to use the AIS website or the GPS device(s) I use then I shouldn't (and wouldn't) blame someone else for that shortcoming.

Aussie Andy

20th Jun 2006, 13:31

But it does leave the responsibility for obtaining that training where it belongs: With me.Absolutely mate -- that's the law :)

mm_flynn

20th Jun 2006, 14:03

"So what is wrong with Notam Plot.
It is free,
It is real time,
It shows all the data in a graphical interface."...
.... it's yet ANOTHER flightware product that is Windows only....

Actually its a Java application which runs fine on my PowerMac and without a doubt is a good tool. It would be great, if between Ais and Avbrief you could get the narrow route data and plot it with NotamPlot

Fuji Abound

20th Jun 2006, 14:25

"Whatever happened to personal responsibility? Everyone is taught from the same syllabus, everyone knows what they need to be briefed on (WX and NOTAMs to name 2), so WTF is it "someone else's" fault when they fail to do it?"

If you havent been trained properly, not surprisingly you might want to blame the trainer.

Seems odd that if a number of people are saying they werent trained where to find this information, and how to disseminate the information in a user freindly way, instructors wouldnt want to sit up and take note.

It also seems odd when you would hope the bi-annual is there to keep pilots "within the system" that examiners would also not want to sit up and take note.

Turn your post around. The training industry can go on ignoring the problems and complaining it should all be down to personal responsibility when someone forgot to mention at the last bi-annual you should watch your speed a bit more closely on late final because you are risky "stalling in".

dublinpilot

20th Jun 2006, 15:04

My training experience was similar to IO540's.

I had heard mention of notams during my training in TT manuals, but I naively assumed that they were either something from a bygone era, or just for airline pilots.

None were ever hung up on our club notice board, and no instructor ever showed my where to get them, or how to read them. In fact the first time I ever saw them, was on the day of my Skills Test when I had handed a badly printed fax page from an instructor and told to read them, in case the examiner asked me anything about them. I could barley make any sense out of the codes. I passed my Skills Test that day, not knowing where to get, or how to read Notams.

If fact it was through PPrune, and the help and support of other here, that I managed to educate myself in the use of notams. I now wouldn't dream of taking off without checking them first.

I had an interesting conversation with an instructor doing a checkout for me when I was joining a different club. He asked me if I had checked the notams. I quickly produced my narrow route brief, having circled the ones I thought relevant. He quickly produced his own printout, was rather surprised that my list contained some relevant notams that his didn't, and that my list was about 4 pages, while his was 1 & 1/2.

It turns out that he gets his notams from an unofficial source on the net, where he simply puts in his field of departure and destination. What he gets returned is the notams for the two airfields, but nothing enroute :=

If you are just bimbling in the local area, you'll probably get away with this. But if you want to go any distance, you need to be able to do a proper briefing.

I blame the instructors. I was churned out of the PPL training system, not knowing where or how to get Notams, and not knowing how to read them if I did find them. But worst of all, I was churned out not knowing their importance.

rustle

20th Jun 2006, 15:24

Fuji, I know from other threads that arguing is futile and/or you completely miss the point, so we'll have to agree to differ.

I'll take responsibilty for my knowing how to use the AIS website, the Met Office website, my GPS, my engine(s) and everything else a pilot might be expected to take responsibility for.

I'll also take responsibility for ensuring I complete my annual and bi-ennial (ftr, bi-annual means twice every 12 months) check flights and take any lessons learned away from those.

What I won't do is blame everyone else if/when there's a knowledge gap. This comes back to my point about taking personal responsibility.

BTW, you guys must go to some pretty ropey training establishments if everything you suggest they don't teach is not taught. If I were you I'd not go back but find somewhere decent. Vote with your wallet.

Fuji Abound

20th Jun 2006, 16:08

Rustle

"Fuji, I know from other threads that arguing is futile and/or you completely miss the point, so we'll have to agree to differ."

OK :)

It is a shame when others relate a similiar experience on this thread that notice is not taken.

There will always be a few arrogant pilots who intentionally ignore the rules. I take the view that is true of very few. If pilots are getting things wrong then I would far rather see if the "problem" can be rectified at the root. This has nothing to do with "blaming" anyone, but a lot to do with reviewing existing policy to see how this might be improved. If you reckon the training is perfect then indeed I have missed the point.

If you are happy to see more pilots prosecuted then I would also agree with your post.

IO540

20th Jun 2006, 16:15

rustle

I'll take responsibilty for my knowing how to use the AIS website, the Met Office website, my GPS, my engine(s)

Unfortunately:

A PPL student is not normally trained to use the AIS website.

A PPL student is not normally trained to get notams through any other route.

A PPL student is not normally trained to use the MO website.

A PPL student is not normally trained to use any internet weather source.

A PPL student is not normally trained to use a GPS :)

A PPL student is not normally trained anything about engine management; most training is done with mixture fully rich.

Very few PPLs read pprune.org.

Very few PPLs read flyer.co.uk.

Very few PPLs read any other pilot website.

So it's no good moaning that everybody should know this stuff. The pilot community on here (and other places where I guess you hang out) is almost completely un-representative of the private pilot population flying around.

Otherwise, I agree with you 100% ;)

To be practical about it, if the CAA was looking for a way to improve things, I would suggest that some action on the instructor front would be by far the most productive.

GuinnessQueen

20th Jun 2006, 18:11

But surely you have read either the Trevor Thom manuals or the AFE / similar manuals, and then sat the PPL exams? Hopefully that would teach you the theory behind met, using the mixture, preflight nav planning etc. (Unless of course you just used the 'confuser' with the intention of only passing the exams.....not learning the useful/important stuff).

There is an awful lot to cover in the PPL sylabus as it is and when you consider the range of students who train for their PPL it is difficult to apply one method for all. What I did (and now teach) is to read through the theory books for both the exams and the flight breifings and then use these as the basis for any questions for the instructor. From an instructors point of view, judging 'depth of knowledge' is very difficult (anyone who has read Propellerhead will know what I mean...the bit about the Pitot tube)!

The written exams and the skills tests are then just methods for checking the 'basics' are there. We all then get our licences and the learning really begins! If the PPL were to teach absolutely everything there is to know about flying.....then the experience is going to take thousands of hours!

Going back to the earlier point...I think I shall be putting a stern letter in the post to my former driving instructor as I got caught speeding 4 weeks ago....couldn't possibly be my fault?

Aussie Andy

20th Jun 2006, 18:28

Trevor Thom wrote his book when there was no internet (practically!) so certainly offers no advice on how to get NOTAMs that way...

Flap40

20th Jun 2006, 18:47

But surely you have read either the Trevor Thom manuals or the AFE / similar manuals, and then sat the PPL exams?
Err..No
When I learnt to fly in the mid 80's (and bear in mind I'm only 43) the "manuals" were Birch and Bransom Vol 1 and Cap 85. The latest and greatest computer on the block was the Sinclair spectrum and the Internet was a decade or so in the future. I also bought one of the first Gps units in 1991.
For Notams I used to visit the Clearance office of my local airport and in the office next door was the Met office where I could always get a personal briefing from a forcaster.
If you were trained in this era and only flew from a farm strip, unless you are technically savy it would be very easy to just sit there bemoaning the passing of met offices etc without realising that there are other alternatives.
What has the CAA done to alert the non computer owning, non magazine reading 1980's (or 50's/60's/70's) PPL to the change in ways of obtaining info?
It is possible that some might have assumed that the info had been abolished in government cuts.
Just playing devils advocate you understand ;)

Fuji Abound

20th Jun 2006, 20:12

"But surely you have read either the Trevor Thom manuals or the AFE / similar manuals, and then sat the PPL exams? Hopefully that would teach you the theory behind met, using the mixture, preflight nav planning etc."

So you would want your Doctor to treat you on the basis of the theory learnt from Gray's anatomy?

No one ever told me how to lean the mixture during my PPL. I have just looked back through my first log book - I had six different instructors. I thought you just left the mixture rich and whatever TT said, I wouldnt have been brave enough to tamper with it, even if I had grasp what TT had to say on the matter.

I admit weather came from the club notice board as did the NOTAMS.

Strange how many people have had and still have the same experience.

Anyone had their instructor chat to them about where, when and how they obtain weather and NOTAMS at their last biennial. (Thanks Rustle you are quite correct, but there is no hyphen :) :confused: ).

modelman

20th Jun 2006, 21:42

10540 wrote:
A PPL student is not normally trained to use the AIS website.

A PPL student is not normally trained to get notams through any other route.

A PPL student is not normally trained to use the MO website.

A PPL student is not normally trained to use any internet weather source.

A PPL student is not normally trained to use a GPS :)

A PPL student is not normally trained anything about engine management; most training is done with mixture fully rich.

Very few PPLs read pprune.org.

Very few PPLs read flyer.co.uk.

Very few PPLs read any other pilot website.

As a low hours PPL student I am not very well qualified to comment on the above,but I do feel personal responsiblity has to play a part.
I have registered with the AIS website
I have not been trained yet on obtaining NOTAMS but thought this might be useful so worked it out myself with AIS and Notamplot.
I have also bought NavBox
I signed up with the Metoffice to get all my weather reports.
I am training myself in the use of GPS ( and will seek some official training)
I have asked about leaning techniques
I read as much stuff as I can about GA.
I wring out my instructor as much as he does me-at these prices I am not going to sit there like some nodding dog.
Modelman

Fuji Abound

20th Jun 2006, 22:05

"I wring out my instructor as much as he does me-at these prices I am not going to sit there like some nodding dog."

You are correct to do so, but why should you have to.

That is not personal responsibility - its not getting what you paid for.

A good instructor can tell you everything you need to know about obtaining NOTAMS and weather as the system currently stands in a one hour lecture.

So what happened to ground school?

So what happened to the personal responsibility of professional instructors who are willing to go on allowing PPLs to qualify without satisfactory ground school?

Gertrude the Wombat

20th Jun 2006, 22:23

Anyone had their instructor chat to them about where, when and how they obtain weather and NOTAMS at their last biennial.

Yes. I suspect that had I not given a satisfactory answer I might not have made it as far as the aircraft.

pulse1

20th Jun 2006, 23:06

When I re-qualified for my PPL in 1998, I was given no instruction on the use of a transponder. Only one of the school aircraft had one and the first time I flew this particular aircraft was on my solo qualifying Xcountry for which I had to fly through two AIAA's. I had previously only done one of the three legs with an instructor and this was not through either AIAA which, for that flight on a weekend, were not active anyway. My solo flight was in the week when they were active.

Fortunately, I had flown to Newcastle with a friend a few weeks before and had learned how to use the transponder by watching him and this helped me to get a superb RIS through both areas. But no thanks to my instructor.

On my last bi annual check which was with a CAA examiner, I was not asked about Notams and cannot remember them coming up in any of my previous ones.

My neighbour is currently learning to fly and I do not get the impression that Notams figure very strongly in his flight preparation either. In my view they should be treated as important as fuel before every flight, even if you are just planning to do circuits - it can be a bit embarrassing to suddenly find you cannot use the taxiway you are used to.

Mike Cross

21st Jun 2006, 05:03

Anyone have any views on the effect of the regulatory regime on training?

A friend is training at the moment and it is rare to have the same instructor twice running. With such fragmentation it's no surprise that unexamined skillls get missed.

Part of the blame lies IMHO at the feet of the CAA for their decision years ago that FI's needed to hold a CPL or higher in order to be paid.

A PPL/FI is every bit as qualified to instruct as a CPL/FI yet he is unable to recover the costs of obtaining and maintaining his rating. If he wants to do so he must get a CPL and hold a Class 1. Net result? Instruction is effectively limited to those primarily interested in commercial aviation who are merely filling in while looking for a "proper" job, costs are higher than they need to be and instructors ditch their students at the sniff of a job or interview.

It does the "self improver" no favours either. If he were able to be paid for instructing as a PPL/FI he could defer his entry into CPL/ATPL training to a time when he had more experience, could gain more from the training, and have better prospects of getting a job on completion. He'd also avoid the expense of keeping his unused commercial ratings current while building his hours.

PPL training takes place in a benign environment (students don't fly in unsuitable conditions). It's not the same as Public Transport and shouldn't be subject to the same restrictions.

Mike

IO540

21st Jun 2006, 06:29

This time, exceptionally, I am not going to blame all the world's problems on the ATPL hour builders ;)

These are mostly relatively bright young men who do know how to use the internet - much more so than the older instructors who know as much about the internet as the average person of similar age (not a lot, usually). It would be trivial to get them to teach the material.

They have also (usually) sat the ATPL ground school which deals with weather pretty exhaustively. OK, it does it in a rather theoretical manner and again without teaching how to get the raw data via the internet (GFS in particular) but this is only a short step.

The problem is with the syllabus which is deliberately really really basic.

It is so backward that the mind boggles how much effort must go into keeping it so backward, and who bothers to keep up this pretence that "the olde ways are the best".

Fortunately for the CAA, when they want to prosecute somebody, they can use a GPS to find their way to the courtroom, they can use computers to type up their evidence, etc ;) Nothing backward in that.

Anybody with some sort of technical education, who enters PPL training, wonders where all this cr*p is coming from and how long they will have to put up with it.

The lack of GPS is the most obvious thing but that's because everybody knows about it, and most reasonably smart people use it elsewhere. But nobody outside aviation will know about internet notam and weather sources - unless they happen to read stuff like this.

The circular slide rule is the second one.

DFC

21st Jun 2006, 10:56

The problem is with the syllabus which is deliberately really really basic.

And quite right too.

One could include everything in the PPL and make it 200 hours.

The PPL does not inlcude aerobatics training. A pilot who gets their PPL and straight away purchases a zlin and promptly kills themselves can not blame the training industry for not providing aerobatic training in the basic PPL.

Smilarly, the pilot who trains in a C150 and purchases an M201 on PPL completion can not balme the trainig industry for being 50 miles behind the aircraft.

The PPL is designed to get a person to the standard that permits them to fly simple light aircraft while carrying passengers without endangering them. A big part of the course is Airmanship and a big part of Airmanship is not doing anything or using anything one is not happy with - Ask and instructor!

I agree that instructors are not teaching MET and NOTAM briefings correctly. There is much work required in that area. Part of the problem being that they were not shown it in the first place and thus have no idea themselves.

Clubs should NOT publish met or NOTAMS. Every pilot should get their own.

GPS is covered in a very basic way on the PPL. Why only this? Because there are such a variety of GPS uits available that it is futile. The CAA, the training organisations, the representative organisations (AOPA etc) and the GPS manufacturers all recomend that prior to using aviation units (hand held or otherwise) that training is obtained from a qualified instructor. If pilots ignore that information and get into trouble then it is clearly their own fault.

--------

If you were trained in this era and only flew from a farm strip, unless you are technically savy it would be very easy to just sit there bemoaning the passing of met offices etc without realising that there are other alternatives.

I have no doubt that you were familiar with AICs and ther AIP when you were training and you know how important they are a part of flight preparation and planning. Everyone else should also and since all changes to AIS and met services are published in advance in AICs not to mention also in the AIP, there is absolutely no excuse regardles of what the pilot's age or experience.

-------

These days, many students eat the confuser rather than read the books. There lies part of te problem - learning answers is not good enough.

Regards,

DFC

Fuji Abound

21st Jun 2006, 11:41

DFC

I agree with much of what you say.

Of course the PPL should not get you to the stage you can fly aeros or complex or fast aircraft. IMO it should also not get you to the stage where you can set of for the South of France with complete confidence.

What it should do is get you to the stage where you can take on reasonably lengthy flights in the UK being safely able to handle an aircraft of the type on which you trained having properly briefed yourself on the weather and NOTAMS and in the full expectation you will not become one of the all too frequent infringers of CAS.

In the main I think the PPL achieves these objectives.

I think this thread has however "exposed" some serious deficiencies in the way in which pilots are taught to brief themselves prior to a flight. I also believe that it is down to the training industry to rectify these deficiences and not those being trained.

Say again s l o w l y

21st Jun 2006, 12:03

Not only does the training system need to be better (though I've only ever seen FI's showing the planning side properly), the information providers need to sharpen up their act.

NOTAM's are better than they used to be, though they are in no way perfect, Wx briefings aren't standardised and general route information is often sketchy unless you pay for it from a commercial provider.

All of these things should be combined for an easy to use system that gives clear information. A bit like the packs that are handed to commercial crews.

When this is done, then we will see less problems like idiots blundering into TRA's.

IO540

21st Jun 2006, 12:37

IMO it should also not get you to the stage where you can set of for the South of France with complete confidence.

Why not?

Flying in France is like flying in a graveyard, compared to much of the UK. It's also completely within the most basic PPL privileges.

If a PPL is not taught how to dig out a chart for area XXX, look at it, read it, work out a suitable (OCAS) route, and fly it, then he's been well ripped off.

Droopystop

21st Jun 2006, 14:02

This thread highlights the huge range in the quality of instruction in this country. That then means the panel examiners and the chief pilots should be doing more to ensure that instructors are telling PPL students where and how to get all the information needed to properly plan a flight. But I do think pilots are as much to blame as anyone. In my time as an instructor I saw all too many SF hirers who simply wanted to turn up and fire up and go. Persuading them to do proper pre flight planning was a constant battle. There are many places in the country where NOTAMs are rare and when combined with the frequency with which the average PPL flies, they maybe check the first few times but then give up because they never see anything that affects them.

A good example is the west coast of Scotland at the moment. Normally extremely quiet, but at the moment..... there's a war on. And the NOTAMs contains nuggets such as :

LIVE FIRING WILL TAKE PLACE WI AND ABOVE THE CONFINES OF EGD803 OUTSIDE PUBLISHED HOURS OF OPERATION. THIS AIRSPACE DOES NOT COMMAND DANGER AREA STATUS.

Quite how live firing doesn't command Danger Area Status is beyond me.

Fuji Abound

21st Jun 2006, 14:23

"Why not?

Flying in France is like flying in a graveyard, compared to much of the UK. It's also completely within the most basic PPL privileges."

Now come I0 do you really mean that?

1. You have got to get across the stream between us. Most clubs require a channel check out and many are uncomfortable when they first encounter the spacial effects you sometimes find over the channel,

2. As this thread has discussed many PPLs dont know where to find the UK NOTAMs - how on earth do they get on with the French ones,

3. Then there are the differences in airspace. Straight forward in theory - yes, enough to confuse a new PPL - I suspect so,

4. And then whilst we relish having no one to talk to, when they have always had some to talk to it is a bit disconcerting,

5. Of course they have to find the weather, and I said the south of france because we are talking about a days flying for many with a stop or two, and some high terrain,

I could go on at some length.

Remember they will not be flying airways.

In short, I am not saying that in theory they are not capable of making the journey, but I am saying there is enough there to make them think twice, and maybe even thrice.

PPRuNe Radar

21st Jun 2006, 14:36

A good example is the west coast of Scotland at the moment. Normally extremely quiet, but at the moment..... there's a war on. And the NOTAMs contains nuggets such as :

LIVE FIRING WILL TAKE PLACE WI AND ABOVE THE CONFINES OF EGD803 OUTSIDE PUBLISHED HOURS OF OPERATION. THIS AIRSPACE DOES NOT COMMAND DANGER AREA STATUS.

Quite how live firing doesn't command Danger Area Status is beyond me.

As the hours and activity height are limited by the UK AIP, I can see why NOTAM'ed activity outwith those limits can't be encompassed as being within EGD803 (as it doesn't exist for the extra times or the extra airspace). Presumably the CAA have a constitutional reason why they can't grant it Temporary Segregated Airspace status (effectively a Danger Area). Perhaps they are awaiting the European airspace model of Single Skies ?? Or maybe because it's in Class G below FL245.

Hopefully the 'extra' activity takes place under appropriate safety measures such as 'Radar Clear Range' procedures :ok:

Fuji Abound

21st Jun 2006, 15:44

The recent changes to the Luton CZ will not appear on the CAA chart for ages.

I wonder what everyones views are to this contributing to airspace busts or whether the existing mechanism for promulgating these changes without up dating the charts is adequate?

Aussie Andy

21st Jun 2006, 15:49

The recent changes to the Luton CZ will not appear on the CAA chart for ages.Personally not too stressed about this as I am based nearby (live 2 miles from BNN) and well aware of it through the various announcements and have amended my charts by hand, plus it fills in a corner tucked underneath some other airspace so unlikely people will take a short-cut through this.

But, I guess it could also be seen as an accident waiting to happen if someone hasn't got the message about the new airspace and sees it as a handy gap on the chart in which to do some high-level work / aeros? The subsequent enquiry would be interesting but would probably put the blame on the pilot I guess...

Andy :ok:

IO540

21st Jun 2006, 15:56

Fuji

Flying in France is like flying in a graveyard, compared to much of the UK. It's also completely within the most basic PPL privileges."

Now come I0 do you really mean that?

I do actually mean that. I've flown there VFR a number of times, right across France. For notams you can use ais.org.uk - it's only the domestic (non international airport) airfield notams that don't come up on there, and one wouldn't be flying to any of those from the UK.

For weather, it's all the same sources (like the notams, on the internet, and that's probably the problem).

rustle

21st Jun 2006, 17:01

Fuji Abound

21st Jun 2006, 17:15

I0540

Ok, sorry if I didnt take your comments seriously enough.

In my experience the questions you get from new PPLs about going to L2K for the first time never mind the south of France makes me feel on the whole they would not be comfortable with this sort of trip. I certainly would have hesitated when at that stage and indeed did so, although I managed to avoid the need to have anyone accompany me the first time :) :) !

Perhaps other new PPLs would take it on - I dont have enough experience of what others have done to reach a proper conclusion.

To stay on thread, obviously my point was that the lack of training about where to source weather and NOTAM information could in a similiar way result in airspace infringements - including danger areas etc and an uncomfortable interview ith DGAC.

BRL

21st Jun 2006, 19:38

Note for the moderator:

As elsewhere (;)) this thread started because someone busted a TRA.

The discussion about AIS provision/presentation is not really relevant to that thread, as the TRA was in the NOTAMs.

Worthy as it is, all this discussion about AIS etc. is diluting the fact that someone was obviously not briefed appropriately and shouldn't have been where he/she was at that time.

Can the AIS/NOTAM bits of this thread be hived-off into a thread of their own, so that the discussion about infringing a TRA isn't lost in the noise?

TIA :)

If I get more than five min's to myself tonight I will do it. Just spent a good 40-odd mins' just reading the new posts from the last few hours and I am already late to go out!!!

If I am not too drunk later when I return I will give it a go then.

IO540

21st Jun 2006, 19:50

Fuji

I agree with you. I think it is semantics.

If you asked whether a PPL graduating from the present system should be confident about flying to say Biarritz the answer is a definite NO.

If you asked whether a PPL graduating from a modern training system which I'd like to see should be confident about flying to say Biarritz the answer is a definite YES.

BRL

I don't see the point in splitting up the thread because (as many here will agree) the busts are closely related to the wider picture of pilot training. Pilots are simply not (on the whole) being trained to check notams.

If one takes the view that ignorance is no excuse (which is valid, too) then there is never anything to discuss and nothing will never improve! The CAA may as well publish notams in a thick printed book, once a week, for £100. Perfectly reasonable - ignorance of the law is no excuse.

Fuji Abound

21st Jun 2006, 20:20

BRL

I second IO540 - I see no point in splitting this thread for the same reasons.

Save yourself a great deal of work :) :)

IO540

We agree!

rustle

22nd Jun 2006, 07:27

FA/IO I knew you two would come to that conclusion - are you married to each other?

The reason I suggested a split in the thread is that now this thread's focus is AIS and briefing, whereas it should have remained focussed on the transgression of a TRA by a pilot.

I know you two like to think that it is AIS's fault that the pilot transgressed, but in reality the two things (briefing/transgression) are not that closely linked.

1. The TRA was in the NOTAMs.

2. Pilot either didn't check at all, changed routes without rechecking NOTAMs, or just missed the fecking great big TRA while planning.

Fuji Abound

22nd Jun 2006, 07:46

Rustle

I am sorry we cant agree with you all the time. Lifes like that.

The interest on this forum is debating opinions.

I dont think either of us or a number of other posts think it is the AISs fault.

We have suggested it may be attributable to the training pilots receive regarding the sourcing of NOTAMs.

The poster explained he was "annoyed" by an aircraft interfering with an Arrows display. This in itself dloesnt leave a great deal to be debated - ah yes, we are all annoyed!

Of far greater interest is why these incidents are becoming more common. That is what has been debated. I can see absolutely no reason what so ever for splitting the thread which would lose the entire susbstance of the debate and the way it has evolved.

Sorry.

DFC

22nd Jun 2006, 22:06

Of far greater interest is why these incidents are becoming more common. That is what has been debated. I can see absolutely no reason what so ever for splitting the thread which would lose the entire susbstance of the debate and the way it has evolved.
Sorry.

Agree.

Rustle,

I do not think that we would want to have a thred that simply slagged of a pilot for making an error. The whole ethos in aviation is that we are not afraid to talk about our errors, misunderstandings or whatever because the whole idea is to find the reason why that error or misunderstanding happened and to come up with ways that such an error or misunderstanding does not happen again.

To have 50 people slag off a pilot who made a mistake acheives nothing.

To debate the issues that cause so many pilots to infringe airspace or get lost (combine infringements with D+D lost reports) could lead us to the idea that something basic is not being done be it at the training stage or later.

Regards,

DFC

Tim_CPL

23rd Jun 2006, 14:48

I am reading this thread with great interest. Although originally from the UK, and having done some flying there, the vast majority (99%) of my flying has been in the US, and I now understand how spoiled we are here. My (perhaps incorrect) impression of the current state of UK private flying is that you are being regulated out of existence, the costs are skyrocketing, the CAA/Euro control seem intent on marginalising you and any possibilities of safe flying (like an instrument rating) are fast becoming unattainable. In addition you seem to have very poor access to information, and what little there is has to be paid for via premium rate numbers. This is not a dig at any one person, but at the seemingly poor state of affairs.

My experience here has been just the opposite, the system is setup to help the private pilot just as much as the heavy metal fliers, and information is available freely to encourage safe flying.

Just to rub it in, 'over here' we have a freephone number (1-800-wxbrief) to speak to a specialist briefer who can give you NOTAMS (local, distant, FDC), TFR's, weather, fight planning & filing and a hundred other useful bits of information. In addition there is the excellent NOAA WX site with real time Nexrad WX, AOPA real time flight planner, free access to DUATs at most FBO's and a whole bunch of other things that make it easy to find the information you need. I truly do not believe I could face flying in the UK again.

Not sure how the system could be fixed in the UK, it seems like control has been delegated to a bunch of faceless bureaucrats who are not accountable or elected by the people who pay their wages.

I just wish it was different, but I guess this is the reality of flying the the brave new Eurocontrol zone.

tangovictor

23rd Jun 2006, 16:09

well Tim, not much to do with my original thread, however since you mentioned the US, I may as well rant a bit, maybe aviation is better in the land of the free, lol.
However being British we are not allowed to live for longer than 6 months in the land of the free, even though, our forces are fighting alongside each other in the Middle East, We are not allowed to enter the worldwide " Green Card Lottery " to enter the land of the free, although, your welcomed with out streched arms to buy a holiday home / car / air craft. and all the associated services required to run them all, just don't stay 1 day over the 6 months, else you find out, it sure isn't the land of the free, after all.
End of Rant

englishal

23rd Jun 2006, 16:41

Actually, Americans can't stay in the UK more than 6 months either :) It is not that difficult to get a working visa for the USA should you want to....And if you are Irish, you are automatically American....aren't you ;)

tangovictor

23rd Jun 2006, 16:55

No I'm not Irish, Im English, and have no intention of working in the US
I wouldn't mind retiring there, buy a new house / car / airplane and spend all my cash in the US, however, the US gov, doesn't allow that

Fuji Abound

25th Jun 2006, 10:27

Tim CPL

You make an extremely good and compelling case for the way things could be done if there was a will.

America has many things wrong with it as do we. Recognise those parts that work and work very well and adopt those parts.

Next time the CAA bring a prosecution for CZ infringement I hope the circumstances of why the pilot infringed are fully explored. So lets see:

1. You were never trained how or where to obtain NOTAM information,

2. You have to rely on third party software to present the information in a half intelligible way, and in order to do so require access to the internet and a computer,

3. CZs are changed without the officially published charts being amended for months,

4. Little or no moving map GPS training was given to you, and you find yourself relying on antiquated navigation techniques that worked very well before the countryside was littered with CSs and aircraft rarely exceeded 100 knots,

5. I find when I want it controllers are often far too over worked to provide a radar service.

Not a compelling case for the prosecution me thinks :D .

IO540

25th Jun 2006, 10:30

I think, Fuji, this "expose the crap training industry practices" has been tried before, and it worked :) Take that well publicised fuel exhaustion case.

Any half competent aviation lawyer will use this, and rightly so IMHO.

FJJP

26th Jun 2006, 15:33

Pity Red Lead didn't get one of the team to intercept the intruder and collect the type and reg.

That would have squared away the individual and stopped the current speculation. Also, whatever happened to radar tracing these days? In times passed, an infringer would have been tracked to destination where the details would have been taken.

Mind you, the Reds displaying paint pretty pictures in smoke writ large against the sky - didn't the twit notice? Or is he registered blind?

Stinky Pete

26th Jun 2006, 17:39

Brize apparently tracked the offender until just the other side of the R105 restricted area and then lost radar contact, reckoning that it went below their radar coverage. Both Bristol and Lyneham were unable to help and the suggestion is that the a/c landed in the triangle between Bristol, Bath & Tetbury. Pretty wide area I know but there cannot be that many strips in that area? Badminton were contacted but could not help. Any other ideas?????

Johnm

26th Jun 2006, 18:59

Garston Farm? Charmy Down? Winsley? Clutton Hill? I assume Colerne has been ruled out:\

Fuji Abound

26th Jun 2006, 21:57

Was the pilot trained in low level radar avoidance techniques := .

robin

27th Jun 2006, 10:40

Was the pilot trained in low level radar avoidance techniques := .

Would have been good practice for the RAF to have pursued, intercepted and escorted the miscreant. After all, aren't we supposed to be on the alert for another Bin-Laden atrocity - the C172 filled with explosives aiming for Highgrove?

IO540

27th Jun 2006, 12:34

I don't think a Hawk can fly as slow as a typical club C172 loaded 10% over MTOW :O

And if it could, the AOA would be so high, and the fuel flow likewise, a C172 would easily outrun it on fuel endurance alone. It could get the reg OK though.

robin

27th Jun 2006, 13:38

.. so the C172 bomber will always get through!!

IO540

27th Jun 2006, 14:12

Robin

Are you serious about a "bomber"?? This is straight out of the Daily Mail...

AFAIK spamcans are normally intercepted by police helicopters; a twin turbine can easily outrun a C172. A jet could shoot one down too; what it probably cannot easily do is escort it to some airfield as was suggested higher up here.

I know the international interception procedures are supposed to provide for slow aircraft interception by jets, but I am sure 99% of PPLs have never heard of them.

Fuji Abound

28th Jun 2006, 08:18

"I know the international interception procedures are supposed to provide for slow aircraft interception by jets, but I am sure 99% of PPLs have never heard of them."

.. .. .. but I thought it was in the PPL syllabus?

.. .. .. arent you also required to carry the card!!!

IO540

28th Jun 2006, 08:43

Yes and Yes, Fuji, but if pilots don't (as is claimed) know about CAS then they are far less likely to know about this. To be honest I haven't got a clue what the procedures are, but the card is in my checklist (on the last page).

In fact I would bet that so few private pilots would know what to do, the police (when using their heli) must have some other procedure to communicate with the pilot.

Fuji Abound

28th Jun 2006, 12:07

IO540

It was of course a bit tongue in cheek! As you say should it ever happen the card is there!

I am still at a loss on this.

There appears to be agreement that changes to the PPL syllabus would be a very good thing and should prevent new pilots making this type of mistake.

Of course that in itself does little about the eixsting problem becasue of the time it will take to filter through.

The biennial seems to be the other check point.

The common theme seems to be pleas from the instructors that they are only given an hour and there is a lot to cram in.

I just dont buy that.

Isnt an hour sufficent to take in a bit of CAS or if you happen to be in a part of the country where any CAS is too far away at least the instructor could for the sake of the flight redesignate an ATZ as CAS.

So in the south it might go something like:

"Plan a flight to MAY, ask for a clearance direct X (which takes in a bit of CAS), and then back home by whatever route you wish."

There is plenty of time to throw in a bit of upper air work en route (show me a stall, a bit of slow flight whatever you like) and back home a couple of circuits with a PFL.

Surely as an instructor you come away from that knowing whether the pilot is safe (or not) and whether he is likely to be the next airspace infringer.

It seems too simple :confused: :) .

skippyscage

3rd Jul 2006, 19:24

When NATS had really good on airport AIS', the charts were plotted for all to see.
I think Guernsey FBU must be about the only one left that I visit where this is still done:D

blimey - that brings back memories of plotting out all the airspace restrictions late at night on that big map before going home! :ugh:

useful of course, but pretty pointless plotting out all the in-flight refuelling zones in the north sea :eek:

at least it was nice to know that people actually looked at the thing

Pudnucker

4th Jul 2006, 13:40

I flew up to Manchester that day from the South... Saw the Notam - If I remember correctly, the TRA was a circle around Kemble and not defined with Lat & Longs.... Not exactly hard to avoid.. I also made sure I was speaking to a radar service the whole way past it (Bristol) for just in case I ran off track.

The more infringements there are, the more justification the CAA will have for over-regulating us..... As for the AIS site, try reading the instructions, I have and it seems to work easily every time!

IO540

4th Jul 2006, 13:59

As for the AIS site, try reading the instructions, I have and it seems to work easily every time

:ugh: :ugh: :ugh: :ugh:

Most PPLs are not taught to use the AIS website.

And anybody who did their PPL before c. 2003 wouldn't have known about it because it didn't exist.

And, it appears, most instructors either don't know about it or don't tell anybody about it when they do their bi-annual check flights with "old" PPLs.

rustle

4th Jul 2006, 14:51

And anybody who did their PPL before c. 2003 wouldn't have known about it because it didn't exist.

:=

Not true.

Old style A1/A8 bulletins were on the internet yonks* ago (on the NATS website IIRC).

The new style AIS briefing system was introduced 22 August 2002 ;)

* Prior to 1998 at least

High Wing Drifter

4th Jul 2006, 14:54

Pudnucker,
I also made sure I was speaking to a radar service the whole way past it (Bristol) for just in case I ran off track
Beware, LARS won't protect you from flying into CAS, hills, TRA, etc and neither will they be aware that you are moving off your intended track. Radar maps don't have some features, even including some ATZs, never mind transient TRAs. The onus is squarely on you to know where you are and negotiate clearances enroute.

IO540

4th Jul 2006, 15:05

The new style AIS briefing system was introduced 22 August 2002

Here we go again.

Almost nobody (outside those who spend their lives on these internet forums) had heard of it back then.

It didn't work properly even by summer 2003. I busted a Frog nuclear power station TRA then, and narrowly escaped having the CAA prosecute me on behalf of the DGAC. I was able to show that a) the info didn't appear in the narrow route briefing and b) I was receiving a Frog radar service at the time and they obviously chose to not tell me (but they did so kindly remember to ask me my full details including my inside leg measurement, so they could fill in the forms). The Frogs were arrogant enough to supply a radar track printout showing the squawk they allocated to me :)

It works well today, but it's much too late for many pilots, and it will always be too late for the big majority of active PPLs, who fly outside the training system, often flying simple aircraft from nameless farm strips, have better things to do than read the drivel on pprune, drivel on flyer.co.uk, drivel in other pilot forums, and who will probably not discover this for another 10 years.

Got to remember that nearly all those who get a PPL today drop out nearly right away, so even if ab initio training was "fixed" overnight, only a small trickle of people knowing this terrible Masonic secret will find their way into the active PPL community.

rustle

4th Jul 2006, 15:11

Almost nobody (outside those who spend their lives on these internet forums) had heard of it back then.

I know Shoreham is a bit backward, what with its quaint buildings and stuff, but surely they had a computer in the clubhouse? ;)

Everyone I spoke to knew about it -- and none of them post(ed <= 2002) here or on FLYER.

Are you sure you're not generalising just a smidgen? :suspect:

Pudnucker

4th Jul 2006, 15:40

Agree....

No-one taught me how to use the AIS site..... Seriously, probably best to let a teenage son work it out then show you how to use it :)

IO540

4th Jul 2006, 17:09

I know Shoreham is a bit backward, what with its quaint buildings and stuff, but surely they had a computer in the clubhouse

Did I mention Shoreham, Rustle? My recollection of my training (the location is irrelevant) is that notams were not taught at all, internet was not available (except in one school which folded shortly afterwards and where any aircraft owner was banned from using the facilities), and the tower briefing terminal was a PC hacked to work only for MET and flight plan filing.

Talking of Shoreham, my (vague) recollection of the pilot briefing room there is that internet is not available and this is true for most UK GA airfields. That's why I nowadays never bother with what they call "pilot briefing facilities" at any airport - a laptop with GPRS is a far better way to do it.

Yes of course I am generalising. I am using plenty of words like "almost", "nearly", etc. You are just taking it literally/personally. But this is the problem: the general situation is that a lot of pilots out there don't know they should collect their preflight briefings in this way, but the "establishment" assumes that everybody knows about it. As indeed do all the righteous people on here (and flyer.co.uk, and elsewhere) who immediately have a go at somebody, automatically assuming he is an idiot.

My experience from training, and from meeting other pilots, is that while some are right clowns (and will probably end up in the side of a hill) most are completely normal and far from stupid. Their "fault" is that they were trained in another age, and their contact with these new fangled developments is very minimal.

As regards who has or has not posted on flyer.co.uk, this means nothing because most people use nicknames, and far more people read those forums than ever write anything.