Cessna Twin Driver - LOOK OUT there's a tosser about

[LowNSlow]

After finally getting Annie the Auster in the air again. I took her up to start breaking-in the new cylinders. I was descending to the North of Baldock on the edge of the Luton Zone to enter at 1,500' as agreed with Luton Radar. I had spotted the Cessna 310 twin that Luton had identified and he passed well clear to my port and 200' higher than me.

As I turned to face forward after checking the 310 was clear, a large Cessna twin (a 421 I think, it had round windows and tip tanks) flashed above me maybe 100' up. He/she had obviously been tracking around the edge of the Luton Zone without talking to them and then disappeared in the general direction of Cranfield. It was the scariest moment of my 11 years flying and brought home to me that operating in and around a controlled environment is not as safe as I thought it was.

The questions that I would like to ask the Cessna driver came to mind when I was on the ground, having a cuppa, were these:

Q: Why clip the zone so closely when Luton are invariably obliging in Zone transits?
A: Because I'm a tosser

Q: Why not at least listen out on Luton Radar's frequency so that you can be aware of any aircraft likely to conflict?
A: Because I'm a tosser

Q: Why be at around 1,700' on an extremely turbulent day when you could be transitting at a much smoother 2,400'?
A: Because I'm a tosser.

Before anybody starts squealing about Mode-S and TCAS I was in communication with Luton Zone and was within 0.5 miles of entering it so any aviator with half an ounce of airmanship would not have been there without at least listening out on Luton's frequency and would thus have known I was there.

Rant Over.

At least now my Cirrus has her overhauled cylinders on, the mags have been refurbished and she is running like a watch. So good to be back in the air after so long waiting for bits!

[aluminium persuader]

So no doubt you've filed an Airprox report then?

Also, though not wishing to pour cold water on your rant, how come you didn't see him earlier? Being on the same freq doesn't prevent an airprox. Good lookout does.:sad:

ap

[Fuji Abound]

Also, though not wishing to pour cold water on your rant, how come you didn't see him earlier? Being on the same freq doesn't prevent an airprox. Good lookout does.

No - it doesnt.

[aluminium persuader]

Not entirely sure what you're getting at. Care to expand?

ap

[slim_slag]

Shouldn't you really be asking why the radar service didn't alert you? Even so, if you had collided, the story as given leads me to believe it would have been both pilots fault.

[ShyTorque]

Tosser or not, unfortunately, this is just how it is in the big wide world of Class G.... One can't assume that a radar service will pass information on all other traffic. My personal concern around the edge of the airspace is powered aircraft operating inside Luton's airspace without talking or squawking, sometimes whilst towing another aircraft behind..... Radar seldom see them, or if they do, they don't tell.

In your Airprox (you have filed, haven't you?) it was possibly the case that a pilot not 100% sure of his position may have been looking from ground to map when he whizzed past your window.

[Fuji Abound]

Aluminium-P

From another post:

I think it is worth repeating some information from an American study.

It takes 13 seconds from seeing an aircraft and realising it is going to hit you before your aircraft reacts to your command to avoid the collision.

At typical fast GA speeds at 3 miles head on you have less than 20 seconds to spot the aircraft, and at slower speeds maybe up to 40 seconds.

A good 180 scan takes between 20 and 30 seconds - try it out on your watch.

Next time you are receiving a RIS listen out for the range of the aircraft - see what you can spot when you are told where to look. I do the same with RIS and TCAS - it is really interesting the distances on most days at which you see the traffic WHEN you know where to look.

In short, dont kid yourself, see and avoid really doesnt work at all well - I think it may be one of the significant myths of light avaition.

The real reason there are so few collisions is due to the big sky or electronically aided avoidance.

[aluminium persuader]

Slim - He doesn't mention what service he was receiving so don't assume it was any kind of radar service. Unless the Auster had a transponder it may well not even have painted on the radar.

Fuji - I fly singles & twins mostly outside CAS so I do appreciate the speed of the development of conflicts, but I still think that see-and-avoid works pretty well.

The thread's drifting slightly, however. Unless the original poster knows for certain what the pilot of the other a/c was doing & to whom he was talking, all that name-calling was out of order. Maybe he'd just had engine-failure & a sick passenger & was busy declaring mayday on 121.5?

It also goes to show that even though you've spotted one you should keep looking for more!

[FullyFlapped]

AP,

Also, though not wishing to pour cold water on your rant, how come you didn't see him earlier? Being on the same freq doesn't prevent an airprox. Good lookout does.

Not always.

Good lookout helps, but it does b*gger all for you if something bigger and faster comes down just past your nose from above and behind as happened to me just outside Luton zone about a year ago ... and funnily enough, that was a Cessna twin as well, although I'd have said a 340, not a 421. I reported his position to ATC, but there was no secondary trace, so TCAS would not have helped either.

FF :eek:

[aluminium persuader]

Fairy nuff. Perhaps I should have said "can".

However as Shy & I have both said, these incidents NEED to be reported; otherwise how can we all learn from them and learn how to prevent them?

I know it's a nause, filling in the form, sending it off, possible interviews etc but it really is the only way.

I'll even lend you a pen!;)

[Whirlybird]

LowNSlow,
Perhaps the only good thing about this incident is that it's got you posting on PPRuNe again...or posting in the forums I frequent anyway. Welcome back. :ok:

[Dave Gittins]

Many, many years ago when I was doing a first solo 3 point X-country from Barton in a C152, I was heading towards Barton having turned at Salmesbury when another high wing Cessna suddenly appeared in my 12 O'clock head on from nowhere and shot over me with scant feet to spare.

As I was getting an FIS from Warton I was surprised not to have got any warning but a couple of seconds later the controller said somethinhg about, "assume you noticed the traffic passing the other way" and I remarked something about it was "almost conflicting".

I heard no more - the other guy wasn't on frequency - and when I mentioned it to my instructor on landing it seemed to be taken very lightly. I was probably too elated at having been allowed out of the ATZ on my own and anyway it was only an FIS. It has made me think a few times over the years and I certainly wouldn't let it pass now without at least a call to the ATC unit in question.

I note that LowNSlow was getting a radar service from Luton (and was presumeably identified) so I would be petty pi**ed if they hadn't alerted me about something that big when I would have expected to be to some extent under their safety net.

Perhaps Vintage ATCO (Ret.d) can comment ???

[LowNSlow]

aluminium persuader I was scanning ahead of me up to the point where I spotted the Cessna 310 and checked he was clear of my track. I was also looking ahead to check that there was no traffic in or out of the microlight field which was just ahead and to my left. I turned head forward and level to resume my scan when the anonymous twin rapidly hove into view. I do not have a transponder but I had been positively identified by Luton Radar through the usual method of maintain a steady course then turn onto a course specified by ATC.

slim slag I was not receiving any kind of service, I had made contact with Luton Radar and was obeying my clearance to: "enter Luton Zone, VFR, not above 1,500' on 1020, call overhead Baldock" which is the standard clearance the residents of our airfield, which is just under the approach to Luton's runway 26, get. As I said, I was approximately 0.5m from the edge of the Zone, Baldock was disappearing beneath the nose of the aeroplane. As have a lot (most?) pilots before me, I have skirted the edge of a Zone before. I usually aim to miss it by a minimum of 2-3 miles.

Fully Flapped After Googling for a picture of the 340 and the 421 I now think it was a 340. As it went past the most obvious features (apart from two engines :hmm:) were the tip tanks and the round windows. Luton sounded baffled when I reported it to them which suggested to me that the twin hadn't shown on their radar. Then there was a flurry of radio with traffic into Luton and I just concentrated on getting back on terra firma.

Whirlybird thanks for the kind words :) I have been doing much more lurking than posting of late.

All yes I will be filing an airprox when I get home from foreign climes next week. Does anybody know if I can file online?

[hobbit1983]

LNS

Believe you can request an airprox form via email here

http://www.airproxboard.org.uk/default.aspx?catid=423&pagetype=90&pageid=5635

and then presumably submit via the same using the contact details provided.

[slim_slag]

Sorry LowNSlow, I thought you were receiving a service as you had been told by Luton radar about the Cessna 310 twin. My mistake. Class G is see and avoid for all pilots, file the airprox and give reasons why you think it happened, but I don't think you can blame the other pilot for anything. Scary when it happens though.

[LowNSlow]

hobbit1983 thanks for the link.

slim slag agreed, I just feel that the other pilot did nothing to minimise the risk of collision by operating in such a manner around a very busy major airfield. I suspect he/she didn't even see me.

[Fuji Abound]

Q: Why clip the zone so closely when Luton are invariably obliging in Zone transits?
A: Because I'm a tosser

Q: Why not at least listen out on Luton Radar's frequency so that you can be aware of any aircraft likely to conflict?
A: Because I'm a tosser

Q: Why be at around 1,700' on an extremely turbulent day when you could be transitting at a much smoother 2,400'?
A: Because I'm a tosser.

I had something very similiar and it scared the hell out of me. I dont fly without a PCAS or TCAS as a result, but of course even that will not detect all traffic.

However, as to the questions you pose I couldnt resist a comment or two.

1. I agree Luton rarely fail to give a transit, but they may not have been so obliging to this twin or they may have asked him to hold (which I have known them to do on occasions). He may have had some other good reason why going around the edge was quicker (as you know transits are usually overhead and a route via Hemel or Pirton may not have been beneficial). So for any number of reasons he may have chosen to skirt the zone. If he had been refused a transit the trouble is we are all tempted to skirt the zone even though such honeypot tactics inherently increase the risk of a collision,

2. Inexcusable in my view!

3. 210 are very stable aircraft. You may have thought it choppy, but there is a good chance he wouldnt have even noticed in a 210.

The chances of a close encounter with fast traffic is hugely increased. Just look at how much less time you have to spot the traffic. Exactly the same happened to me except I was also in a fast twin.

IMO if everyone was pottering around at 80 knots or so see and avoid would have half a chance but the traffic is moving quicker these days and there is more of it (or at least there are more bottle necks, or a bit of both).

Personally I wouldnt rely on see and avoid or on other pilots to spot you (after all most pilots in my experience have a dreadful scan any way) and nor would I rely on their displaying good airmanship. I think it is worth investing in one of these portable CASs - the cost is not very great, and at least almost all fast traffic will be transponding (unless they are completely nuts!).

[IO540]

I hate smart ar*e postings but the comprehensive answer to all this is this:

Class G Airspace is a free for all.

A lookout doesn't really work (despite all the ex RAF navigators revolving in their graves at 2575rpm as I write this) because a target on a genuine collision course will be a stationary point in the sky.

And a 421 is not going to be doing 100kt.

The only hope of a real solution is unfortunately technological, but is totally undermined by those who are against transponders.

[OpenCirrus619]

...is totally undermined by those who are against transponders

I would say it's undermined by those who think the only technical solution is transponders. A far better approach would be ADS-B which

Works even where there is no radar interrogating
Provides a benefit to pilots of small powered planes / gliders - as opposed to just those with v. expensive / expansive electronics installations or those getting a radar service
Is workable off a much smaller battery - so is more likely to be viable for aeroplanes with no generating facilities

but I suppose it's unrealistic to expect those who decided on Mode-S, way back when, to move with the times - it might look as if they made a mistake.

Just my opinion.

OC619

[IO540]

OC619

I agree ADS-B is a much better solution, but if you look around countries that are playing with ADS-B, the favourite vehicle for carrying the data is the Mode S extended squitter (a sort of data channel within the Mode S protocol).

Unfortunately, there are various reasons why installing a current model Mode S transponder isn't very likely to work with ADS-B kit if/when it does arrive in Europe.

So, I don't think ADS-B is going to give us any kind of amazingly cheap TCAS, especially as TCAS installations are gradually falling in price. Currently, an Avidyne 600 system with top and bottom antennae is of the order of £10k-£20k depending how anally retentive the installer is about certification of every rivet that's needed to carry the extra avionics tray which has to be fitted somewhere, etc. You could buy the parts from the USA for probably around $10k i.e. the cost of a basic IFR GPS.

[Twiddle]

Don't assume that a squawk= a radar service, it's easy to get lulled into this by a good controller that goes beyond the call, but if you want lars ask for it and confirm it.

[englishal]

slim slag agreed, I just feel that the other pilot did nothing to minimise the risk of collision by operating in such a manner around a very busy major airfield. I suspect he/she didn't even see me.
With respect, from the other pilot's point of view, nor did you? Maybe he pulled up at the last minute and avoided taking you out, yet you will never know as YOU did not see the other aeroplane either.

You probably were fixating on the 310, you felt confident that as you were talking to ATC that you were in someway protected, I put it to you, that YOU were at fault just as much as the other pilot and maybe more, and it has scared you into posting on Pprune ;)

Actually, no one is at fault, I just said the above to look at this incident from another perspective.....:)

[Slip up]

LowNSlow, I recommend you read englishal's post and learn.

He has actually looked at the situation from the other pilot's pespective (especially as the Cessna pilot was also probably focussed on the 310) and also shown respect to yourself.

Maybe if you had done the same before calling other pilots "tossers" your post would be more useful for other people to learn from.

Admittedly the Cessna 340's airmanship could have been better, but he was doing nothing illegal and you didn't spot him either.

With attitudes such as yours, I am gald I fly my Cessna 340 using my IR in class A airspace and for your information, the nearest I have been to Luton recently was overhead at FL200 which is just about far enough away from tossers like you.

[flyme273]

I too find the ‘see and avoid’ principle somewhat unreliable in to-days fast traffic. It doesn’t take much of a haze or low sun and despite the best of intentions - separation is at risk.

Obviously, for a light aircraft a full TCAS is not an option. Does anyone have experience with portable CAS? Are there other options? Any recommendations?

I ‘m considering an installation.

[hobbit1983]

flyme - The Zaon MRX PCAS is a (relatively) cheap device, portable, battery power, that detects other transponding aircraft through use of the same, and displays the nearest one with range and height (although not direction).

Myself and another forumite were using one in a Seneca a couple of weeks ago, it did seem to work pretty well, although with obvious limitations with regard to lack of direction info/only works with transponding aircraft etc

[Fuji Abound]

Flyme

Do a search there are several posts about these very recently with all the information you need.

[LowNSlow]

Fuji Abound I appreciate what you are saying but, as the twin headed off in the general direction of Cranfield (ie to the West) I would guess that a routing via Pirton would have suited him/her fine.Agreed about the Cessna probably feeling the turbulence far less then the Auster!

englishal Agreed, Class G is free for all users but surely maintaining a listening watch on Luton Radar frequency would be good airmanship given that he was so close to the Zone edge? I am making the assumtion that he wasn't because if he had been then we would never have got so close. In terms of lookout I was obviously as much at fault as the other pilot as I didn't see him until he was so close there was no possibliyt of avoiding action being taken. I disagree that I was fixated on the 310 as once I had identified him and seen he was going to pass well clear I resumed my scan. I was looking away for approximately 2-3 seconds.

slipup With hindsight the title is rather emotive but, as you say the airmanship displayed by the Cessna pilot (who I assume is reasonably experienced given the aircraft being flown) was somewhat lacking. Just because something is legal doesn't make it sensible. I appreciate what englishal is saying and I have certainly learnt from the experience. I'm sorry you feel that a person obeying the requirements of low level operation around the Luton Zone to the letter becomes a tosser in your eyes whereas somebody who is displaying questionable airmanship is blameless.

[Slip up]

LowNSlow

My only issue was with the tone and attitude of your original post, not your airmanship.

[Whirlybird]

Slip up,

A statement like...

the nearest I have been to Luton recently was overhead at FL200 which is just about far enough away from tossers like you.

suggests you're criticising someone's behaviour in the air, not on these forums.

[Slip up]

Whirlybird,

Is this not what LowNSlow's original post set out to do, "criticise someone's behaviour in the air" coupled with the insult of calling somebody a "tosser"

These are exactly the reasons why I responded.

I probably went over the top with my last paragraph but there is no intention to criticise anybody's behaviour in the air but rather the tone of the original post.

I am sure LowNSLow found being called a "tosser" offensive, likewise so did many other "Cessna Twin pilots"

[LowNSlow]

slipup as I said, the title was a bit emotive but I don't see where my airmanship was lacking in this particular case, not that I'm saying I've never made mistakes in the past!!!

PS I didn't call all Cessna twin pilots tossers :) I would like to be one just as soon as I win the Lottery! :D:D

[gcolyer]

Forget the rant...I want to know if you are talking about a Cirrus or Auster??


After finally getting Annie the Auster in the air again. I took her up to start breaking-in the new cylinders.



At least now my Cirrus has her overhauled cylinders on, the mags have been refurbished and she is running like a watch.



PS I didn't call all Cessna twin pilots tossers


Glad to hear it as I fly a 337 now and again.

[LowNSlow]

gcolyer sorry for the confusion. I have started to break in the new cylinders on the Cirrus Minor II engine which powers my Auster :)

I've always fancied a Cessna 337 despite the rear engine overheating risk, noise and expense. Just a little too expensive for me to justify for purely pleasure flying though.

[gcolyer]

337 are not to bad to maintain and run. There is nothing you can do for the noise though, short of doing one engine approaches. As for the over heating sacrifice some airspeed and open the cowl flaps now and again.

[englishal]

I disagree that I was fixated on the 310 as once I had identified him and seen he was going to pass well clear I resumed my scan. I was looking away for approximately 2-3 seconds.
I only said fixating because I have done it myself ;)

Point noted about listening watch to Luton and if it were me, I would have, but would it have made a difference if you were not receiving any sort of "service" as such? There are also places, say Plymouth, where you can overfly the airfield (or fly very close) but be talking to someone else (Plymouth Mil for example)...I dunno what it is like around Luton, could they have been with someone else?

Anyway, my main reason for posting was just to create some persepective....I don't think anyone was really a tosser ;)

Cheers:)

[Whirlybird]

I thought it was a damned good thread title, quite clearly not to be taken that literally, and I'm still wondering what all the aggro is about. :confused: But then, after several years of reading PPRuNe, I ought to understand.....

[Fuji Abound]

wondering what all the aggro is about

Aggro

What Aggro?

This is nothing by usual PPrune standards.

Just start a thread on:

Aerobating a R-22,

and you will read plenty of aggro. :)

Infact Whirly they should be OK for 1G manouvers shouldnt they? :) :)

[Life's a Beech]

An R-22 isn't even safe straight and level! Now I will be into trouble with Whirlybird.

I fly aircraft of very much the same performance as the C340 at that level, and have often crossed Luton zone VFR or IFR below airways. One of the most helpful ATS units around (especially in comparrison with a certain neighbour). I would not dream of being within half a mile of any zone without clearance in or at the very least being identifiable to the ATS controlling the zone. Someone was relying too much on GPS to keep him clear.

Several comments have pointed out that the pilot was doing nothing illegal, but this was bad airmanship. I learned an important lesson from a friend involved in legal cases in aviation. Your actions must not only be legal, but you must be able to stand up in court and justify them if anything goes wrong.

IO540

See and avoid is fine in my experience. Back it up with at least a FIS, but if you spend most of your time eyes-out rather than looking when flying in VMC at instruments it is perfectly good. You, like the C340 pilot in question and I, fly one of the higher performance aircraft in the open FIR (outside the military routes), so most conflicts come from ahead too.

Transponders are impractical in many aircraft. Technology is not the only solution, and is very fallible.