Practice Pan

[snapper41]

I've never done a 'practice pan' call, but understand it's ok to do it. Anyone done one? What's the procedure?

[Mark 1]

This (http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/33/srg_gad_D&D_poster.pdf) should tell you what you need to know.

[snapper41]

Brilliant - thanks Mark 1

[chevvron]

I know it does say 'Listen Out'; what it means is listen for long enough to be sure there is no ACTUAL emergency in progress, and don't call if there is!!

[Whopity]

I've never done a 'practice pan' call, but understand it's ok to do it.
You should have done this as part of your licence training!

[niknak]

Equally, at most other ATC units, we will welcome you practising the procedure.

Most importantly, listen out on the frequency for at least 3 - 5 mins to ensure that the ATCO isn't too busy or about to commit themself to a time consuming procedure such as an SRA or similar.
Make it absolutely clear that it is a practice, try and make the scenario realistic (there's no need to scream:) ) and take part to the fullest extent possible.

At some units its just not going to be practical most of the time, but when it is, it's very good practice for us, just as it is for you.

[omcaree]

You should have done this as part of your licence training!

I don't think I ever did one either, have done 1 since. During my training I did some basic VDF fixing (talking to local ATSU, not D&D), but don't remember ever doing a Pan.
Obviously covered both Pan and Mayday for the RT practical test, but I wouldn't count that.

[jxc]

Hi

Having just very recently got my ppl i never did a practice pan either :{
Will go with an instructor to do one

JXC

[whowhenwhy]

Guys, can you please name and shame these training establishments? This should be a core part of the PPL course - especially for the navigation elements - and any organisation that is not covering it deserves to lose all of its custom. :mad:

[jamestkirk]

I have to agree with whowhenwhy and the others.

Any instructor who has not taken their student through the process of 121.5 (by the end of the course) needs a serious talking to. Its an excellent exercise for them and 121.5 seem to appreciate it as well.

Believe it or not, at FL170 on a scheduled normal day, we were asked to change to 121.5 to do a practise pan.

[LH2]

Guys, can you please name and shame these training establishments?

Nope, of course not.

This should be a core part of the PPL course

Well, guess what, it isn't. Therefore it's up to the instructor, student, and local ATS if they choose to do it or not.

especially for the navigation elements

You'll do better not getting lost in the first place :}

Any instructor who has not taken their student through the process of 121.5 (by the end of the course) needs a serious talking to

Why? The rest of the world does not usually do practise pans and we all seem to manage just fine.

I'm not against practise pans, far from it, but the self-righteousness shown above is... well, a bit provincial.

Thankfully other posters have already replied with all the relevant info.

[jamestkirk]

Practise pans cover a multitude of sins.

It is a great eye opener for a student to talk to 121.5 and discover how helpful and resourceful they are. Everyone I seen did it really enjoyed it and said that if in trouble, they would contact them ASAP. Some people I have talked to thought they would get into some kind of trouble if they did. Its all just an educational issue.

I wonder how many pilots would have not got into trouble if they did use 121.5 or used it a bit earlier. Thats from personal experience, as I used them when I had about 70 hours and got lost. Ended up over USAF base upper heyford. it was active back then!!!

There is a part of the PPL called 'lost procedure'. When pilots stop getting lost/infringing controlled airspace and worse then we probably will not need to teach it.

No-one is being self righteous. I and am sure others know how worrying it can be for someone to find themselves in trouble. And when dealing with that trouble you can make mistakes as the workload increases. That can be the terrible first link in a chain that can lead to a more serious situation.

At the teaching stage a student should experience everything possible at their disposal to help in an unforseen situation.

Thats not being righteous, its just caring about their welfare.

I advise you to read the CAA's on track document. Also the CAA Occurance/incident data reports and the odd gasil and aaib report.

I am surprised you don't teach it. It takes a couple of minutes and gives a great insight fot the student.

[LH2]

Practise pans cover a multitude of sins

I know and I did say I have nothing against them. I agree that if they're there might as well use them.

At the teaching stage a student should experience everything possible at their disposal to help in an unforseen situation.
Thats not being righteous

No. It's the "they didn't teach you that? Burn them at the stake!!!" attitude that is entirely out of place. If some schools/instructors won't cover this with some or all of their students, my first thought is they must have a reason rather than just can't be arsed.

In any event, it's not rocket science and any student who has been brought up to a solid standard of airmanship and polished R/T work in the first place should not have any trouble requesting assistance.

I advise you to read the CAA's on track document. Also the CAA Occurance/incident data reports and the odd gasil and aaib report

I do happen to keep up with them all(*), as well as the corresponding publications from the French and Spanish aviation authorities. Is there a specific reason you should mention this?

(*) The CAA's material mainly for amusement value, what with their patronising tone. The AAIB reports are an entirely different story, of course.

I am surprised you don't teach it

??? - I'm not an instructor.

[jamestkirk]

My point on practise pans is just for lost procedures and asking for help as soon as someone can. That means not veering off towards bad, weather, high ground and/or controlled airspace. The UK has some of the busiest airspace in the world and remote area's where 121.5 would be the only comprehensive help in times of trouble.

If you have read the publications like on track you would have got a concise overview of airspace infringments and what can be done to minimise them.

Gasil's and occurance data reports are real incidents, so I cannot see how you can call them amusing.

There is no valid reason why an instructor cannot teach this element of a lost procedure.
Butif a fellow FI reads this and disagrees's, then please share your thoughts.

New PPL'ers 'sometimes' do not have polished airmanship and RT skills. They have the basics to learn more. New pilots can find the apprehension of being lost very worrying indeed and the help you can get from 121.5 is exceptional. Although, not everyone is taught what they can offer and how good their manner is when you talk to them.

To give an example. I would get a student unsure of his/her position. Get them to call 121.5 and say they only have 30 minutes of fuel left and need a tarmac runway with more than 1200m. Obviuosly I know where they will take us, but the student does'nt. Then get headings for the destination until we arrive overhead. It is invaluable that the student can just call, get that service and feel confident in talking to them. We learn from experience, so this is a good start.

If your not an instructor, you probably have not had the resposibility of sending students on a solo cross country. We just ty to give them the best chance of completing that flight safely and if they do get lost, know how to handle it.

[LH2]

James,

I understand your point of view, but I think we're going to have to disagree.

There is no valid reason why an instructor cannot teach this element of a lost procedure.

Even though I'm not an instructor, I wouldn't make such a bold claim. Perhaps some instructors decide to prioritise other things, perhaps some students never get the chance to do this particular exercise for whatever reason (D&D being busy, whatever), perhaps their instructor feels that their student is perfectly capable of using that particular service without having to demonstrate first... even though I understand it takes only a few minutes, and it's probably a good idea to give it a go at some point during the instruction, surely if it was that critical it would have been made a compulsory part of the syllabus?

The UK has some of the busiest airspace in the world and remote area's

A common assertion, but again one has to disagree, especially from the point of view of GA, which in the UK hardly ever mixes with CAT. GA flying in the UK is basically getting from A to B low and slow while avoiding controlled airspace, which is the equivalent of taking a car on the back roads and trying not to drive the wrong way. Seriously basic stuff--if people can't get that right, surely we have a big problem which I'm not sure D&D can help much with.

And a remote area is where you have to carry survival gear, along with your own tools and spares, because if you go down nobody is going to come to pick you up. There are no such areas in the UK.

Gasil's and occurance data reports are real incidents, so I cannot see how you can call them amusing

Because a lot of the CAA stuff is written like they're addressing an eight year-old. It's also, in the cases where there is anything of substance, often a rehash of AAIB reports/recommendations without further analysis or commentary.

New PPL'ers 'sometimes' do not have polished airmanship and RT skills

Yes, I know. It's a well-known fact that given enough money any monkey can get a licence, but that's another discussion.

If your not an instructor, you probably have not had the resposibility of sending students on a solo cross country

That's correct and I can see how you wouldn't want the students to keep getting lost all over the country, I fully agree with that, but I do not recognise a practise PAN as being such a critical element of instruction. After all, there are many other things which are just as important and yet it appears they're not being taught properly--filling out flight plans, researching AIPs, proper online briefing, map and approach plate reading, correct use of GPS... those are all little things which help people stay out of trouble just as much, yet I do not hear too many rants from people calling their instructors incompetent for not having taught them that. What is your opinion on this point, being yourself an instructor?

[VFE]

Emergency situations involving London Control on 121.50 are covered in depth during groundschool studies and examined during Air Law and Communications written exams so unless I feel a particular student is more likely to get lost than is the norm I merely remind them about it's uses and demonstrate how effective they are by making a quick practice pan call to obtain a position fix and bearing for our home aerodrome at the end of a navigation lesson. However, if during a dual navigation exercise a student has become lost and following lost procedure remains lost I will invite them to contact London Control on 121.50 to make a practice pan call so that they might get first hand experience of their excellent service and hopefully learn a lesson (usually 'PPPPPP'!).

VFE.

[jamestkirk]

Bold statement yes. And taken from personal experience.

Busy airspace. Yes you do not want GA and CAT mixing 'inadvertantly' with each other. It happens all the time. The latest occurance data reports ahs loads of examples. A quick call to D&D early on may prevent this. I assume you have a half million southern UK VFR map and see the amount of controlled airspace there is mixed with alot of GA airfields. Then ask a new student to navigate their way through the TMA's, CTA's and CTZ's. NOT BASIC STUFF AT ALL.

My god where do you get the idea that a GA pilot would be carrying spares and survival equipment for a flight over the Yorkshire Moors or Cairngorms is a little naive. If you go down over some ranges of hills in the UK you may not get picked up immediately but alot of people take that chance.

New PPL'ers who are not 'polished' are NOT MONKEYS. They are people who have passed a certain level of competancy but still need to learn, gain experience and look for guidance from Instructors etc. That was a terrible and ill-informed statement to make.

We do teach everything and the D&D use is a useful tool for all the reasons I explained earlier. I don't think that GPS use is part of the PPL. You said you have read 'on-track'.

I have never found the CAA publications in the negative way you do.

Giving a call to D&D may not be compulsory but it is common sense. For the PPL skills tests you only need to demonstrate a 180 turn in simulated IMC conditions. However, i bet most instructors give their students a broader level of that exercise when being trained.

Can I ask do you fly in the UK and what experience do you have.

[Final 3 Greens]

Can I just put in a little plug for the training fix procedure.

Don't wait until you are lost, use it to confirm position

"G-ABCD training fix training fix training fix"

"G-ABCD is 7 miles East of ......"

I have used it once, when low houred and it helped me avoid busting CAS on a very hazy day.

Its quick, too.

[whowhenwhy]

I should like to point out that it's not the act of not doing a practise PAN that I'm against (although as pointed out it's always useful to try something before you have to use it in anger) it's the notion that the 2 posters in question seem to suggest that they've never had it even explained to them. I should also point out as an ex D&D controller who has spoken on the phone (post-incident)both to students who'd done practises with us before using us for real and to students who'd only be talked through it on the ground, the evidence seems to suggest that to practise first with an instructor is best practise. A number of the people who call do so as a last resort, some have been in tears and have got to the stage where they even need to be talked through how to fly the ac. There are a number of tales that would require a mighty large sandbag to be pulled up, but suffice to say that practise makes perfect. :ok:

And LH2 sorry, but D&D was originally given DF on VHF by the CAA as a means of reducing CAS infringements - the idea being that GA would have someone to turn to to help them out. This is also the reason why Farnborough have introduced London LARS - to ensure that a LARS is available around the TMA to try to reduce CAS infringements. You'd be surprised the number of times that GA and CAT mix:E

[snapper41]

whowhenwhy - congratulations! You win today's prize for the greatest number of acronyms in a post; that last paragraph was a joy to behold!:D:D

[Lister Noble]

Yes, I know. It's a well-known fact that given enough money any monkey can get a licence, but that's another discussion

Well,I've checked myself out.
Not much body hair,in fact not much hair at all,and despite looking ,feeling behind and asking friends,I can't find a tail.

I'm a low hours (150) ppl and I'm worried that I may not qualify to fly?

Lister:confused::confused:

[Il Duce]

SNAPPER41.
Acronyms or abbreviations?

[whowhenwhy]

TLA = Three Letter Abbreviation. Sorry everyone, it was a long day....:ugh:

[Wazzmastermax]

I have never done a practice pan on 121.5 as part of any of my flying training, those who think it is wrong of FTOs not to teach it (practically) have obviously never learnt to fly (real flying, resulting in a license!)

Firstly, A lot of training is theoretical as you can't practice everything in the air.

Secondly, we are taught to A.N.C. As long as we can fly the aircraft in any emergency - which IS taught practically - telling someone about it comes last.

I had an actual pan as a student on a solo navex - nothing serious, but my instructor had taught me well enough to remain calm, fly the aircraft to a suitable airfield and call a pan on my current frequency (Liverpool App).

What would I do in a mayday situation?

"My engine's failed!!!! How do I tell D&D????"

or

"My engine's failed!!!! How do I land safely????"

Aviate - Navigate - Communicate.