Airmanship - a consideration

[Max Alpha Limited]

Good afternoon aviators!

I wonder if I might use your forum to highlight what seems to be an ongoing issue with airmanship?

This afternoon, while working an Airshow at Elvington in Yorkshire, and having issued the following NOTAM:

Q) EGTT/QWALW/IV/M/W/000/050/5355N00058W003
B) FROM: 10/07/31 11:30C) TO: 10/08/01 14:00

E) AIR DISPLAY/AEROBATICS ACTIVITY WI 3NM 5355N 00058W
(ELVINGTON AD, YORKSHIRE)
10-07-0747/AS 2

LOWER: SFC
UPPER: 5000FT AMSL
SCHEDULE: 1130-1400

We still had a joker appear in the overhead during the Harvard display and proceed to fly up and down the display line, at a height well below 5000ft and conduct his own aerobatics! Now I know this is class G airspace, but whatever happened to airmanship?!

Do others find that, especially in areas of high traffic density such as the area around York, it is exasperating the amount of GA aviators that either don't read NOTAMs, or blatantly arrive over an event to add their own "act"?

Being a GA pilot myself, as well as holding a DA and being involved in displays on the ground, I am staggered that such attitude to airmanship still exists and that no-one at clubs, or those conducting bi-annual checks are picking up pilots for such blatant poor airmanship. When I learnt to fly, airmanship was an assessed part of the syllabus I seem to remember! I know the Red Arrows have also been blighted with this over the years, and yet pilots still barrel into their RA(T)s!

As a parting shot, if anyone is flying in the Elvington, Breighton, Church Fenton area tomorrow please give us a call on York Radio 119.625 and we can pass traffic information to you. We have a discrete display frequency for the display a/c, so you won't be bothering anyone by calling but we would ask that you respect the 3nm and 5000ft mentioned in the NOTAM and remain clear by at least that. Display a/c may also be holding overhead Acaster Malbis and VFR to the south of Elvington.

Happy and safe flying!

Max

PS The observant amongst you may note that a similar thread has been posted on another forum outside PPRuNe, however I feel this deserves discussion with as wide an audience as possible as the problem doesn't seem to be getting any better!

[IO540]

Many or most UK PPLs don't read notams. Many don't use the internet. Look at the pilot age demographic data (back pages of FTN) - it is obvious.

There is a huge pilot community out there which has never 'got weather' and never 'got notams'. I know a fair few of them myself. They fly out of strips, mostly. No transponders, of course.

And your show was in Class G. Class G is Class G...

Of course pilots should read the notams... the real Q is: do you want to run adult education classes on how to use a PC, and how to get an internet connection when away from home?

What's basically happened is that over the past decade, flying has caught up with the pilot community, and it will take many years to sort out.

[Lister Noble]

Well,how arrogant can you get,well knowing you ,probably a lot more.:rolleyes:

I am 67,have been using the internet for around 14 yrs,using PC's before that.
Many of my pals exceed even my age,and maybe unbelievably for you,can use the internet.
Notams are available and used by many,especially now there are user friendly sites.
You will always get the odd pratt,usually young,cocky and inexperienced in procedures.
But some of the cocky ones are a lot older;)
Lister-OAP and proud of it.:}

[IO540]

Lister, calm down. I am 53 and getting older :) Almost old enough to get a bus pass.

Do you actually dispute my comment on pilots not using the internet, etc? If so, please back it up.

[Fuji Abound]

Lister

I am afraid I think you are wrong.

I posted a comment on the darker side about an occasion recently I went to Gloucester. Farnborough had a temp class A which I picked up before going and had at least been published the previous evening. You should have heard the number of pilots who didnt know - it was quite dreadful. I reckon in the 15 minutes I must have heard at least a dozen pilots being told they had infringed. It is not by any means the first time.

Next time there is a temp class A go fly around the area or listen up on the ground and you will be horrified. Of course there are plenty who read the NOTAMs and plenty who dont.

Sorry on reflection I dont mean you are wrong because I think your comment was more directed at oldies being computer illiterate - some clearly are, some cant be bothered and some arent.

[Jan Olieslagers]

IO540, there certainly are lots of pilots just doing their thing, without never consulting neither weather nor notam's nor the holy virgin neither whatever. But I have never observed such behaviour to have any relation to age or internet capacities, to these eyes it seems more related to temperament and education. Not to mention budget.

And both excess of temperament and lack of education are more common among youngsters. Large budgets do seem to come with age, though.

The clown of the opening message seems to have suffered from an excess of temperament. No excuse, certainly, I heartily agree with O/P. But there is NO illustrated relation neither with age nor with internet currency. At the contrary, without internet information said clown might never have known about the event and gone blow his whistle elsewhere.

[IO540]

From pilots I know personally (face to face) there is a very strong correlation between those who do not use the internet, and their age.

They don't need to be much older than me, either. I happen to have been in electronics design since day 1 so I was always "in" this game, but a chap of say 60 who has been insulated from it by doing a job which does not involve email etc communication will not necessarily be up to speed.

This lack of IT literacy is seen in every walk of life and is a real issue for employers, because so many jobs today require the use of email, at least. It is really quite sad sometimes; I had one temp-agency woman of about 60 trying to feed a credit card into a fax machine, to authorise the card. It is unfortunate that working practices (specifically, the use of IT methods) have changed so much faster than many people have been able to cope with.

This incidentally is IMHO who there is so much apparent adult illiteracy around. There has probably not been an actual increase, but a lot of employees who used to do purely manual jobs have been pushed into jobs where they have to do email, etc, and they end up looking ridiculous because they can't write.

And of course about 100% of those who don't use the internet won't be getting notams, because one cannot get notams (practically) otherwise.

Obviously anybody on pprune.org will be on the internet, and some are likely to be offended by this discussion.

[Jan Olieslagers]

IO540, of course I am only a youngster myself, but could you please illustrate how anyone managed to consult notam's before the days of internet? Are those methods still available today?

[IO540]

but could you please illustrate how anyone managed to consult notam's before the days of internet? Are those methods still available today? I think the short answer is they didn't.

In my PPL days (2000/01) the instructor got a local briefing by fax and pinned it on the wall. Of course nobody present flew past the nearest crease on the chart... so this was OK. Those who might have been going places were not around because most schools don't like experienced PPLs hanging around, upsetting the instructors ;)

In 2000/01 a pilot going places probably just got away with it... There used to be phone numbers which you could call for a briefing, but I have never met anybody who used to call them. And realistically there are only about 50-100 TRAs around the UK each year, mostly airshows, and the chance of a random pilot busting one is quite small, and this is probably how it "worked" all those years. Everything which is not an RA is fair game for a bust and nothing will be done about it because no law was broken.

Then a number of things changed.

(1) After 9/11, The French set up the prohibited areas around their power stations. I busted one of those in 2003, but narrowly escaped major hassle a) because I did not land in France and b) because the ais.org.uk database was crap, and c) because the French IGN charts did not show them.

(2) UK ATC set up the ais.org.uk notam database and this became everybody's source for going places. You could do a Narrow Route Briefing which remains to this day, and works fine. This became usable c. 2003.

(3) Because of the notam database, everybody and their dog who was authorised to generate notams (which was, and remains, everybody and their dog, illiterate or otherwise, but always awfully self important, especially if in the military) started generating masses of notams, mostly irrelevant and mostly just a pollution of the database... but you have to read through this garbage when you get the briefing. I bet the notam volume has gone up 10x to100x between 2000 and 2010, while the number of actually meaningful notams has remained the same.

[Flyingmac]

Note to the pilot who thought it would be a good idea to practice aeros at Elvington this afternoon, right in the middle of the Wings and Wheels air display.

Tomorrow, Sunday. August 1st, is day two of the event.
(You were crap, by the way).

[Ryan5252]

Valid points regarding the age demographics of pilot's and actually bothering to do any kind of pre-flight, including checking NOTAMs. What strikes my as shocking about the post is the fact that said 'tool' seemed to be aware of what was going on - and proceeded to act the tit anyway. The issue of checking NOTAMs and their (un)accessibility has been well documented recently but this is a case of non-existent airmanship, a complete lack of respect for the safety of affected aircraft/crew and a lack of consideration to those trying to watch the show (which I assume are families with kids over a summer weekend?) No excuse, this guy needs to have his licence revoked for such idiotic behavior IMHO.

Cheers
Ryan - 26 and getting younger!! :}

[Jan Olieslagers]

@IO540: with all respect, I keep to my point of view: a responsible pilot will do a proper pre-flight and that's all. Point à la ligne.

If tomorrow meteo info is only available through smoke signals, any responsible pilot will learn to read those. I just hope these words will not bring bad inspiration...

I am willing to believe there was less sense of responsability in earlier days, when traffic was much less dense, and those who grew up in that mentality are unlikely to change it overnight. But that has nothing to do with internet litteracy.

BTW every a/d I have visited round here has a PC with internet access available to pilots, and there's generally someone around to help if required. Lack of internet ability is really not a proper excuse!

And I do insist dangerous or inconsiderate airmanship is more often seen from not-so-old people with big budgets and great planes than from humble gaffers. The one time I observed it - an antique biplane showing his acrobatics right through a cloud of descending parajumpers - the pilot was younger than myself, and a manager of a bizjet operation. Not an internet illitterate, I should think, neither unversed in air law, or so one should hope.

But I am really surprised at your point 3: as I read your words, any nitwit of a n___y could post a notam declaring a TRA around his place for next Sunday's family bbq - surely such postings must be validated by any kind of authority before being published? Really the UK must be a very different place!

[FREDAcheck]

But I am really surprised at your point 3: as I read your words, any nitwit of a n___y could post a notam declaring a TRA around his place for next Sunday's family bbq - surely such postings must be validated by any kind of authority before being published? Really the UK must be a very different place!
Somebody that knows will probably answer this, but what is annoying is people that post long NOTAMs (running for many months) warning of very occasional events. For example, launches of meteorlogical balloons, where they're launched once or twice a month, but there's a near-permanent NOTAM just acting as noise in a long list of NOTAMs. People really shouldn't be allowed to do that. If it's not significant enough to create a Danger Area, then the NOTAM should give individual dates and times of activity.

[fisbangwollop]

On numerous occasions last week I was called at Scottish Information by various aircraft saying they could not establish comms with Carlisle ATC on 123.6........on every occasion I suggested to these folk that if they read their notams all would have been revealed.........Carlisle ATC last week were short staffed and had been operating revised hours!!!!:cool::cool:

[Lister Noble]

A ray of common sense,there is so much jumble that very few could be expected to unravel official Notams.
Much better to see one of the " unofficial sites".
But no one of my age would know how to do it.

Lister
Old and not so wise;)

Gosh,how am I doing this internet stuff:}?

[Gertrude the Wombat]

how anyone managed to consult notam's before the days of internet?
They arrived at the airport by some magic or other and were put up on the notice board each morning, for you to read before take-off.

So, not easy to consult in advance, you might turn up at the airport to find that you couldn't make the planned flight.

[Fuji Abound]

I agree that a lot of NOTAMS should never be accepted. I agree that the official promulgation of NOTAMS leaves much to be desired.

However the reality is everyone has the right to our airspace. This sometimes means that a minority will use our airspace for their special purpose - for example aerobatic competitions. In addition it also means there are occasions (security, hazards etc) when the airspace should be restricted. I think we all recognise those needs.

For me it is wholly irresponsible for us not to pre-flight NOTAMS. Moreover I dont buy that it is difficult. There are numerous sources of graphical NOTAMS that really do provide all you need and numerous ways of accessing these.

It takes me literally a few minutes to self brief before a flight. I am not going to claim I do so before absolutely every flight but I do for the very vast majority.

Quite simply I think those that dont, whatever their age are negligent.

When I started flying, some what before some of the posters so far, things were different, but that is irrelevant. Times gone bye and we could do T and Gs at Gatwick. Sadly, perhaps, the world has moved on.

[IO540]

If tomorrow meteo info is only available through smoke signals, any responsible pilot will learn to read those. I just hope these words will not bring bad inspiration...I think many won't, if it is too hard.

But often it doesn't matter. If you fly for 30nm then you can get a good enough picture by looking out of the window.

This is how I think it used to work. Speaking to some friends of mine confirms this. One 2000hr+ pilot says he cannot read tafs or metars. He flies at low levels mostly. He is a great bloke and I can see how he gets away with it, along with many others. For most short-ish flights you don't need a weather briefing; it is "VFR" after all ;)

The problem is Notams... there is no way to avoid those, and one day it will bite you.

I am willing to believe there was less sense of responsability in earlier days, when traffic was much less dense, and those who grew up in that mentality are unlikely to change it overnight. But that has nothing to do with internet litteracy. I don't think there was less traffic. (If you go back some decades, there was less controlled airspace, but CAS busts are another issue).

I think that the only notam that is really going to get you into trouble is an RA or temporary Class A (usually the Royal Family going somewhere) but if you go back say 20 years, not many had transponders so were much harder to track afterwards ;)

BTW every a/d I have visited round here has a PC with internet access available to pilots, and there's generally someone around to help if required. Lack of internet ability is really not a proper excuse!Not so in the UK. Some airfields have a public PC but most don't - unless you walk into a school and ask them nicely. My own base (a full ATC airfield) has no internet facilities. It has a PC which is hacked to file flight plans etc but you cannot get internet on it. There is not even free/open WIFI so the only way is your own laptop with GPRS/3G.

They arrived at the airport by some magic or other and were put up on the notice board each morning, for you to read before take-off.

But those were local area notams. Notams for a reasonable route, say a 100nm flight somewhere, could never be thus presented. People just flew without them, usually, or phoned up for a briefing. In my PPL, I was never taught to get notams myself.

[DX Wombat]

The clown of the opening message seems to have suffered from an excess of temperament. And you, Jan, are being excessively rude and offensive. There is nothing clever about the actions of the perpetrator and having someone whizz past you as you pull up vertically is no fun.
Max, you have my sympathy. The BAeA competition held at Elvington has also been dogged by similar idiots, one of whom, a twit in a Robin from Sherburn in Elmet did exactly the same thing, Unfortunately for him he was tracked by Church Fenton Radar who just happened to be working that Saturday and as we had also got his registration there was no way he could deny it. I'm not sure what happened on his return to Sherburn but I'm pretty sure it was probably along the lines of tea and biccies with the CFI - without the tea and definitely without the biccies. I posted something similar earlier this year - probably around the beginning of May when we had had several intruders in the competition box. What amazes me is the number of people who attempt to defend the perpetrators by complaining that NOTAMs are too difficult to obtain and/or read.
Please note - I am NOT a member of the BAeA, I am simply someone who enjoys going to help out at some of their competitions.

[Jan Olieslagers]

Well, sorry, please put it down to my being shocked at the irresponsible behaviour of one pilot. I certainly did not want to offend anyone. But I do be aware that in this country it has become virtually impossible - except for the military - to organise any aviation event including aerobatics, following an incident where another pilot killed himself AND several spectators through disrespecting given rules.

On re-perusal, this discussion seems to have slipped into flight preparation, the difficulties of properly consulting published notams, and - for myself - the surprising differences between one country and one other.

The original message was about a pilot who most likely knew very well what was happening then and there - but decided to do his own thing nevertheless. Certainly my instructor would have termed that much worse than "seeming to suffer from an excess of temperament" but I'll not cite his vocabulary - it wouldn't bear translation, anyway.

[Crash one]

IO540Sometimes you talk sense, but I do take issue with your regular inference that all aged, untransponderised grass strippers are somhow inferior members of the aviatic community. Please be reassured that some of us do know of the existence of Notams, Weather, the internet, airspace restrictions & some of us can actually read & write. I have even been known to carry an aviation chart in the aircraft on the odd occasion!!

[DX Wombat]

Jan, please accept my apologies, I mistakenly thought you were referring to Max.

[Jan Olieslagers]

No problem, DX, I'm glad to see it sorted out. It is easy enough to misunderstand one-another face to face, much easier on these impersonal web pages. Note to self: next time be more precise, i.e. mention "the joker mentioned originally" or words to that effect.

To continue on the original discussion: how hard would it have been for the organisers to have a Temporary Restricted Zone set up? That would not have changed anything for any pilot not consulting notams of course, but it would have made it possible to dissuade him (her?) from repeating the, err, performance.

Setting up such a TRZ seems rather common in France, at least.

[vee-tail-1]

As a 71 year old pilot I regularly do self checks to see if it is still safe for me to fly with me. :bored:
I even read NOTAMS, but find myself irritated by their format:
Why reverse the date information?
Why have vast amounts of gobbledegook codes?
There is no longer any reason not to use plain language, and if NOTAMS were more easily readable then it follows that more pilots will read them.

[Jan Olieslagers]

There is no longer any reason not to use plain language Quite correct, and the same applies to METAR and TAF.

[Chuck Ellsworth]

Why have vast amounts of gobbledegook codes?

Because the cretins who are in these government positions want it that way.

[Pilot DAR]

Yes, the cinical side of me says that in the information age, when incredible amounts of pointless information can be made avaible anywhere, for no good reason whatever..... if the purveyors of NOTAMS, and aviation weather really wanted that information to be quickly and properly accessed, and used, they would provide it in plain, whole word, text, and forget all of the codes.

I used to type Telexes, where every character counted. Those days are long gone!

Where do I sign my whole name to a petition for this?

[IO540]

Eurocontrol is working on some new notam presentation, but it will still require the internet, so it will not be accessible to a large part of the GA community.

Sometimes you talk sense, but I do take issue with your regular inference that all aged, untransponderised grass strippers are somhow inferior members of the aviatic community.I didn't say that. I merely said that there is a correlation between being a member of that community and

- not getting weather
- not getting notams
- not having a transponder

I would have thought that the said members would be proud of being able to fly thus unhindered, while some of us spend an average of 3.7 hours before every flight checking everything including the oxygen :)

Speak to almost any ATCO (they don't want to talk about this openly because it would make them look prejudiced against one section of GA) and they will tell you where the "biggest" CAS busts come from. I was once talking to Lyneham, outside their airspace, and they were pretty nervous about me being close. I phoned them up afterwards and the man said they had just had a bust by about 30 microlights, one by one, and every one, all going to/from some convention. While there are plenty of pra*s in any section of GA, I don't think you would get a 100% score like this out of most of them.

Flying "simply" is fine and it works if you stick to the regular short trips. The airshow locations are well known and if your regular jaunt avoids those, avoids Farnborough etc (Royal flights), then you will probably never do anything illegal by never getting notams. And if you don't carry a transponder, if you did bust somewhere they probably won't be able to track you back home.

It is when you try to do a longer distance version that you expose yourself to potential trouble.

Seriously I do think there is a business opportunity for a "mobile internet for pilots" ground course. One would cover AFPEx and notams and weather, and setting up a little £200 laptop from Ebay to get the internet, all in one go. Throw in a bit on Navbox and Skydemon, too. All the good stuff which should be in the PPL ground school, but never will be. Where is Irv Lee??

[malcolmf]

Would it be unreasonable as part of the service provided by airfields in return for the landing fee to expect a free wifi connection? (irony)

[FlyingStone]

Would it be unreasonable as part of the service provided by airfields in return for the landing fee to expect a free wifi connection? (irony)

Couple of remote airports I've flown into don't have even enough GSM signal strength to pay fuel (since transmission to bank is done with terminal that uses GSM) :ugh: But at less remote fields, yes, great idea - I wish anyone from management would read this :ok:

In my opinion, not getting weather isn't so critical as you only screw up your day if you have to divert away from your destination/origin and stay there for couple of days or get into inadvertent IMC. But not having a transponder is simply ignorant to the flight safety as whole, especially when today's transponders fit into ANY kind of flying device, even for UAV you can get a transponder that weighs 500g or less - and even S-mode nowadays. People really think that in 2010 the air traffic density is the same as it was 40 or 50 years ago - time changes, people change, technology changes and so should the mandatory requirements which would have to include at least mode C (if not S) transponder.

[IO540]

Would it be unreasonable as part of the service provided by airfields in return for the landing fee to expect a free wifi connection?Quite reasonable, since they all have a phone line and you can get ADSL on the back of that for next to nothing these days. And the person collecting the money will probably be on pprune anyway :)

One needs to do more. One needs to provide a public PC. The cost of that is absolute peanuts these days.

In the wider context, travelling abroad, all this is wishful thinking and having mobile internet is absolutely the only way to go.

There are bound to be strips out there without a GSM service, and without a phone line, and their residents just need to make other arrangements. But this will be rare. I live and work in the countryside so I see poor signal levels all the time, but one can usually get connectivity, even if most of the countryside will not have 3G. You don't need 3G for any aviation preflight purposes.

[malcolmf]

Just spotted this on the Flyer forum FLYER Forums • View topic - Airfields with wi-fi access (http://forums.flyer.co.uk/viewtopic.php?f=33&t=55522&start=15&view=previous)
Surely any airfield worth it's salt would at least have a phone line, and surely they have a broadband connection. All they need to do is allow those pesky pilots access to the signal.
As the technology ramps up and gets cleverer (NATS satnav) then you will surely be looking at much heavier penalties for airspace infringements, and probably rightly. If GA embraces the technology, then it may even be possible to limit the growth of controlled airspace (Norwich?).
I have just started using Skydemon and am running it on an Archos 9 tablet with a bluetooth GPS. Fantastic! Do your preflight planning on it as a regular PC and then one click starts the GPS and it transforms into a moving chart.

[Gertrude the Wombat]

Why reverse the date information?
Year-month-day is international standard and is unambiguous.

What does 6/7/2010 mean? 6th of July or 7th of June?

You can tell because of the country you're reading the date in? Yeah, right. How exactly are you guaranteeing that no piece of US written software anywhere in the chain from originator to your eyes, even if it's all remained in the UK, has thoughtfully chosen to display the date in US format?

Whereas 2010/6/7 and 2010/7/6 cannot be confused with each other. I much prefer to see people using proper international format, it greatly reduces the chances of me turning up to a meeting a month early, or delivering something a month after the deadline.

[FREDAcheck]

Surely any airfield worth it's salt would at least have a phone line, and surely they have a broadband connection. All they need to do is allow those pesky pilots access to the signal.
The strip I used to fly from didn't have electricity, let alone a phone line, running water, main drainage...

[vee-tail-1]

<<Year-month-day is international standard and is unambiguous.>>
Well you may be right, and perhaps it has changed since I retired in 1993. But during 25 years of airline flying, day/month/year was the way we read the date.
Sounds like the Americans would'nt change so everyone else did. :rolleyes:

[fabs]

Agree that the pilot yesterday showed v poor airmanship. But organising the VFR hold 2-2.5 miles on the centreline of the main runway to Church Fenton isn't exactly that sensible either, especially considering the experience levels of some of the student pilots there.
The airmanship problem may be getting worse, but so is the level of consultation with adjacent aerodromes prior to the events; a telephone call to the tower at Fenton 3 days prior doesn't really count as 'consultation' either.

[TheGorrilla]

Could argue that posting this thread on the internet itself is quite pointless. The folk who don't go online will never read this.

[mad_jock]

Well playing devils advocate. :}

As obviously that bit of class G is very busy what about the airmanship of planning an event in that area.

Why don't go somewhere where there is next to no traffic. Norwich airport would proberly do. ;)

[Max Alpha Limited]

Well ladies and gents,

A mixed response and I agree that the original intent of this thread was not to generate a debate on how available, or otherwise, NOTAMs are. As I am sure that you are all aware, private/non commercial air transport pilots are required to comply with the following from the ANO currently in force:

Article 86
Pre-flight action by commander of aircraft other than EU-OPS aeroplanes

(1) This article applies to the commander of any aircraft except for the commander of an EU-OPS aeroplane intending to commence a commercial air transport flight.

(2) A commander must, before taking off on a private flight, an aerial work flight or a public transport flight, take all reasonable steps so as to be satisfied of the matters specified in paragraph (3).

(3) The matters referred to in paragraph (2) are that:
(a) the flight can safely be made, taking into account the latest information available as to the route and aerodrome to be used, the weather reports and forecasts available and any alternative course of action which can be adopted in case the flight cannot be completed as planned;

In days gone by before t'internet, AIS would provide a briefing to anyone requiring one, or alternatively one could be provided by telephone or fax from a Flight Briefing Unit at a major airport or Parent ACC. One only had to ask...

The issue I raised was one of airmanship or lack thereof. Class G airspace or not, it may be reasonable to surmise that the fellow in question in the Elvington area yesterday may have been in contravention of Articles 86, 137 and 138 by his behaviour above an active air display site - quite obviously an air display site. Indeed it might reasonably thought by some that the actions shown were intentional with the multiple flypasts of the site, before and after the aerobatics conducted.

Flyingmac
(You were crap, by the way).

Funnily enough, you were not the only one to note this!

fabs

Either you assume rather a lot or you are not as familiar with Fenton ops as you make out. I can assure you that the process involved in obtaining an Air Display permission under Article 162 of the ANO, and the requirement to co-ordinate such airspace use with the Airspace Utilisation Section of the CAA (jointly with MOD) means that it is not just left to a "phone call to the tower 3 days before".

The briefed hold based on Acaster Malbis disused airfield is, in fact, 4nm from Church Fenton, outside their ATZ and 1nm displaced to the north of their final approach track to Rwy 24. The co-ordination with Church Fenton's controlling authority ensured that the hold at Acaster Malbis was agreed as CF were not flying yesterday and that only 1 aircraft may require the hold today. In the event, CF operations were fully discussed at the aircrew display brief this morning and a final decision as to where aircraft may hold was made on an airmanship basis with the current facts to hand, timings against those notified to us by CF and the requirements of the display aircraft. I do not intend to discuss the reasons behind the choice of Acaster as a hold, as I don't believe that is required on a public forum. Suffice to say, the decision was taken on many airmanship points and in close discussion with relevant authorities.

mad_jock

Sadly, the Buccaneer, Victor and Nimrod are now limited to the paved surface of Elvington for their ground taxy displays, meaning that the "Mountain must come to Mohammed" to allow the event to take place in all it's glory!

Lastly, on behalf of all those involved at Elvington today both in the air and on the ground, may I say thank you to all those pilots who took the time to call York Radio today to ensure that our mutual operations did not conflict. As a result, we did not have any uncomfortable moments today and we were able to provide appropriate traffic information to those enjoying their Sunday aviating around York. If you called when we were temporarily unmanned and got no response, please accept my apologies but a man's bladder can only hold so much! :bored:

Regards,
Max

[batninth]

<Puts on asbestos underpants ready for being flamed>

Ok, but I could I ask what feels like simple question:

Elvington doesn't have a aerodrome ICAO code so the only way to find that NOTAM is to look under EGTT FIR & read through all of the posts? (I'm asking to see if there is a better way)

When I just read this I thought "Don't recall seeing that when I checked the weekend NOTAM on Friday night, but that is because I have set up a list of local aerodromes which I pull up and check

So, is there a better way, or is it that to spot the Elvington NOTAM (or Sleap, or Perth etc etc) that you do have read through the whole EGTT list?

[Max Alpha Limited]

batninth

If you do a route brief or Aerodrome brief that included Church Fenton, you would find it in Nav Warnings as well as in the FIR Brief.

Ensuring that you include aerodromes along your intended route as well as departure and destination will help cut out a lot of the chaff that you may not need to trawl through.

All briefing systems require some time spent with them to find the functions that suit you best. If the HELP tab on the NATS AIS website is baffling to you, then give them a ring and they will guide you through the most appropriate briefing function for your requrements.

:ok:

[Flyingmac]

I flew into Elvington on saturday. From several miles away it was evident that the airfield wasn't presenting it's usual picture of a huge, empty runway with an equally huge, empty hardstanding. The large number of marqees, display and visiting aircraft and numerous parked cars etc gave me just the tiniest clue that something was going on. Notam read or not. A quick call on 119.625 would have confimed it to anyone intending to practice aeros. They had the same view as I did. This wasn't the usual fly-through of a notammed event. And this guy did it twice!, departing to the west after the first session then turning back for the second. No excuse. End of story.

[englishal]

If you do a route brief or Aerodrome brief that included Church Fenton, you would find it in Nav Warnings as well as in the FIR Brief.
What about if you did A to B (which went close to CF) but did not specifically put CF in the brief, and then did say 20nm route width. Would it show then?

I often only put in the departure and destination and a wide corridor if it is reasonably straight track and use that for my brief.

[IO540]

That's right - if an event appears under aerodrome notams only, then a narrow route briefing will not pick it up.

And it is not reasonable for a pilot flying A to B to seek aerodrome briefings for airfields along his route. That would be completely nuts; not even the most diligent pilot will be doing that and it isn't the way the notam system is supposed to work. If this really was needed then the notam was filed incorrectly.

[Max Alpha Limited]

englishal

Yes that will do it.

IO540

If you do a route brief or Aerodrome brief that included Church Fenton

Not sure what your point is as you can include aerodromes in route briefings without having to specify an aerodrome brief.......

Surely if you are flying close to an aerodrome en-route it is good airmanship to check the notams for the aerodrome and the area surrounding it in case of the requirement to use it as an en-route diversion or availability of the aerodrome, its surfaces, aids and ATC services? No?

[BackPacker]

Surely if you are flying close to an aerodrome en-route it is good airmanship to check the notams for the aerodrome and the area surrounding it in case of the requirement to use it as an en-route diversion or availability of the aerodrome, its surfaces, aids and ATC services? No?

I don't agree. A reasonable cross-country flight might take me close (as in < 20 miles close) to tens of dozens, if not hundreds of airfields. If I don't fly to that airfield, nor fly in their ATZ, I'm not interested in things like:
- runway closures, WIP on taxiways
- fuel availability
- amended operational hours
and so forth.

What I am interested in is anything related to any of my *planned* diversion fields, and these airfields are of course added to the NOTAM brief request. I'm also interested in any *en-route* navaids problems (VORs, DMEs, NDBs, but not ILSs and their associated markers) and other *en-route* issues (TRAs and similar, changed operational hours of en-route ATC units and so forth)

That's what IO540 is claiming: if a NOTAM is only of interest to those that will actually be landing on that airfield (or using it as a planned diversion), it should be marked as an airfield-only NOTAM. If it's interesting for pilots who are simply passing by, then it should be marked as a whole-FIR NOTAM, with appropriate lat/long information and radius so that a narrow route briefing will pick it up.

[Max Alpha Limited]

I think much is being lost in translation and interpretation here, and before the thread creep goes completely off topic, it is fair to say we are now splitting hairs over what constitutes an en-route diversion - planned or otherwise. We could be here for months with that one. :ouch:

However, I hope it is fair to say that the point has been made regarding the airmanship points raised and that there was no excuse for the behaviour of the pilot concerned on Saturday.

For the avoidance of any doubters, the Elvington NOTAM was contained in the en route NOTAMs and not the aerodrome information for CF. CF was merely used as an example of an aerodrome that may be used within a route brief. Any further discussion on individual planning preferences are really not relevant to the thread. Suffice to say that as long a reasonable planning is taking place, then that satifies the requirement in the ANO.

[BackPacker]

And the other thing I can we can agree on, is that not enough time is spent in the PPL curriculum (both initial and recurrent training), on the way NOTAMs are structured, generated, submitted, stored and promulgated, and the way you can selectively retrieve them via the internet.

As others have said, if you do a narrow route briefing on the AIS website, or smartly use any of the other tools that are available on the internet, the list of NOTAMs that you have to wade through is relatively small. But you have to know how to use these tools smartly, and that requires a little knowledge about what the contents of a NOTAM actually is (including the non-textual lines) and how a computer uses that information to filter out the NOTAMs that are relevant to you.

[englishal]

if an event appears under aerodrome notams only, then a narrow route briefing will not pick it up.
That is interesting as I wouldn't normally pick up notams for the aerodromes on my route of flight, apart from a diversion or two.

Perhaps it is time for the Air Law exam to be amended to include picking up pre-flight notams and such like? Not sure if it has any such questions as it is a decade since I did it...

[IO540]

Surely if you are flying close to an aerodrome en-route it is good airmanship to check the notams for the aerodrome and the area surrounding it in case of the requirement to use it as an en-route diversion or availability of the aerodrome, its surfaces, aids and ATC services? No?

One gets airfield notams only for departure, destination, and planned alternates. Not for a pile of airfields along the route.

Perhaps it is time for the Air Law exam to be amended to include picking up pre-flight notams and such like?

Yeah, should be... I do think notams are taught more these days, but the whole topic is inextricably wrapped up with the availability of the internet where it is needed, etc.

With most new pilots chucking it in more or less right away, there are many more "old" pilots (in the sense of having been flying for many years) flying than there are new pilots flying, so the place to attack this is on the 2-yearly check flight, but there is no requirement to do that on that, either. The only way you don't get signed off is if the instructor does not survive the flight :)

[BackPacker]

Maybe it's an idea for a magazine article? A bit on NOTAM background, and then tracing a NOTAM (e.g. one for an aerobatics competition) through the system from initial draft, submission, promulgation onto your AIS narrow brief? Alongside an explanation of the various options that the NOTAM submitter has (airfield, whole FIR, IFR/VFR etc) and how this affects the narrow route brief filtering?

I realise that not everybody reads these magazines, but still...

[snapper1]

Anyone on here use this?

Spine stands for “Soaring Pilot's Intelligent NOTAMs Editor”. For use in the UK only, it provides a simple interface to the AIS web site for downloading ...
www.enborne.f2s.com/gliding/spine.

[gpn01]

With most new pilots chucking it in more or less right away, there are many more "old" pilots (in the sense of having been flying for many years) flying than there are new pilots flying, so the place to attack this is on the 2-yearly check flight, but there is no requirement to do that on that, either. The only way you don't get signed off is if the instructor does not survive the flight :)

Demonstrating that you're competent to access and read NOTAMs seems a fairly sensible refresher check to me (even though it doesn't seem to be part of any formal requirement). Maybe an alternative would be for the CAA to cross-reference how often pilots access the AIS site vs how many hours they claim to fly. If you don't log in for two years, you presumably haven't flown during those two years....so, voila your licence is revoked! [Takes cover under nearest rock....]

[liam548]

I for one do check NOTAMS before EVERY flight. It is easy enough to do and now even easier with graphical displays such as that on Airbox Fastplan.

I think more people would use it if the NATS version was just as simple to use.

[ShyTorque]

Maybe an alternative would be for the CAA to cross-reference how often pilots access the AIS site vs how many hours they claim to fly. If you don't log in for two years, you presumably haven't flown during those two years....so, voila your licence is revoked! [Takes cover under nearest rock....]

So if you use a computer where a user has already logged in (such as at many flying clubs, or flying schools), you would have your licence revoked?

What utter rubbish. :ugh:

[gpn01]

So if you use a computer where a user has already logged in (such as at many flying clubs, or flying schools), you would have your licence revoked?

What utter rubbish. :ugh:

No, you logout and login with your own userid. Just like people do with webmail, PPRUNE, etc. It's not difficult and I'm sure within the capability of most PPL holders.

[Mike Cross]

Ok, but I could I ask what feels like simple question:

Elvington doesn't have a aerodrome ICAO code so the only way to find that NOTAM is to look under EGTT FIR & read through all of the posts? (I'm asking to see if there is a better way)

Not quite accurate. Nowt to do with whether or not it has an ICAO code, everything to do with whether the aerodrome information in the AIP is accurate or not. Unlicensed a/d do not have entries in the AIP and so you won't see a/d NOTAM for them, even if they have an ICAO code (Popham EGHP, Lee on Solent EGHF and North Weald EGSX are all examples). The numbers will increase as a/d drop out of being licensed now they no longer have to be for training but retain their ICAO indicators.

What you will get is a Nav Warning. The Q Line for the Elvington NOTAM was
Q) EGTT/QWALW/IV/M/W/000/050/5355N00058W003

This is what is used to select whether or not it appears in your brief. Here's the decode

EGTT - the FIR
QWALW - QWA=Air Display LW=Will Take Place
IV - of interest to IFR and VFR
M - Miscellaneous NOTAM
W - Nav Warning
000/050 - affects surface to FL050
5355N00058W - co-ordinates of the centre of the activity
003 - Radius of Influence in nm from the centre

So - if you take a Narrow Route Brief from the AIS site it will use the route width you choose to define a corridor within which your flight will take place. If the circle describing the RoI intersects that corridor the NOTAM will appear in your brief.

Simples!

[ShyTorque]

No, you logout and login with your own userid. Just like people do with webmail, PPRuNe, etc. It's not difficult and I'm sure within the capability of most PPL holders.

I know how the system works; I 've been using it in a professional capacity since it launched. However, what you propose is impractical. What about folk like myself, who sometimes operate from field and other locations with no internet access?

A licence holder's personal logbook provides proof that flying has been carried out by an individual, not the AIS website.

[Zulu Alpha]

Elvington doesn't have a aerodrome ICAO code so the only way to find that NOTAM is to look under EGTT FIR & read through all of the posts? (I'm asking to see if there is a better way)

Try

UK 48-Hour Notams : Warnings and Restrictions (http://metutil.appspot.com/static/maps/48HourWarningRestrictionMap.htm)

[Gertrude the Wombat]

I know how the system works; I 've been using it in a professional capacity since it launched. However, what you propose is impractical.
It's what I do, log out the airifeld computer, log in as myself, leave the audit trail. Works fine for me.

[gpn01]

I know how the system works; I 've been using it in a professional capacity since it launched. However, what you propose is impractical. What about folk like myself, who sometimes operate from field and other locations with no internet access?

A licence holder's personal logbook provides proof that flying has been carried out by an individual, not the AIS website.

If you don't have internet access how do you check for NOTAMs before you fly then?

[Mike Cross]

You do it before you go to the field,

or

You ring the AIS information line on 0500 354802 (free from a landline) if you are in the UK or on 020 8750 3939 if you are outside the UK. That gives you all of the RA(T) and temporary airspace upgrades.

or

You ring an ARO and ask them for a brief (if you can find one)

or

You ring the AIS Duty Officer on 020 8750 3773 (H24) and ask him.


What you don't do if you want to stay within the law and avoid a prosecution under Part 10 of the ANO is to go flying without checking first.

[Crash one]

Totally agree with that.Ridiculous notion. Are we not regulated enough. What happens to the poor sod that rents from a club & reads the Notams off the notice board?

[Fuji Abound]

I believe there are two issues:

1. Are there weaknesses in the way in which we deal with NOTAMS, being it their content, format or distribution and

2. Is that reason not to review the NOTAMS before flight.

For me it is simple.

1. The system should be overhauled. There are weaknesses in every aspect,

2. but that is insufficient excuse for not reviewing the NOTAMs.

I dont think that message should be lost in this thread.

[IO540]

I think the basic message is that the NATS narrow route briefing actually does work pretty well.

[ShyTorque]

IO, I agree.

Mike, the other method of checking NOTAMs is to ring base and ask them to check the route for me. They use the company log-in to access AIS; as I understand it, it gets logged on at the beginning of the flying day and is left "live" so anyone who needs it can readily access the site.

[FREDAcheck]

I think the basic message is that the NATS narrow route briefing actually does work pretty well.Yes it works. And telex would work (if the networks still existed). And morse code would work. But it's not as good as it could be, and I find it error-prone.

I do check NOTAMs every trip. But I know I've made mistakes before now in wrongly placing NOTAMS from the NATS system. It might have been a name that I thought I recognised but is somewhere totally different, or I just misplotted lat/long.

An interesting exercise is to get NOTAMs from the NATS site, check which are relevant, and then repeat the exercise using a map-based tool (e.g. UK 48-Hour Notams : Warnings and Restrictions (http://metutil.appspot.com/static/maps/48HourWarningRestrictionMap.htm), Notamplot, Airbox Fastplan, metutil etc) . When I do that, every now and then I see a NOTAM on the map that I'd missed in the list.

An example: there's a current NOTAM "FLYING OF LARGE MODEL ACFT. 1NM RADIUS 5205N 00123E (WOODBRIDGE AD, SUFFOLK) OPS INFO VIA RAF WATTISHAM 01449 728126. AUS 10-04-0309/AS2."

That's at Woodbridge, but when I read that I got Wattisham. When I saw it on the map, I realised my mistake. Before you brand me as a careless moron, that's exactly the sort of mistake that humans (including pilots) make, even when they're trying to be careful. Wattisham is a much more likely location for a Notam, and Woodbridge is inactive for most purposes, so the name "Wattisham" stood out more. Most mistakes are screamingly obvious when you analyse them, but everyone makes them.

As they say, there are 3 sorts of pilot:

Those that make mistakes and admit it
Those that make mistakes and don't admit it
Those that make mistakes and don't know it.

The system works, but it could be so much better and could help people avoid mistakes.

[IO540]

Freda - how often do you actually have to plot shapes from coordinates?

I fly 100-150hrs/year and the bigger part of that is in the UK. The number of instances where I see shapes that need plotting is in low single digits per year. In 2010, not yet.

You mention a model aircraft flying notam. You should not actually read dross like that, never mind plot it. Unless you fly at levels where you will get done for low flying, model planes are irrelevant.

All that matters is stuff that actually affects your flight - bearing in mind that you are in Class G.

For example a notam saying that some plane will be flying in some area, not in accordance with rules of the air, that is garbage, because in Class G most people fly not IAW the rules of the air ;)

99% of the text of the average NRB is skipped in seconds.

Maybe this is where so many people are going wrong. They actually read all the garbage... kite flying, unlit chimneys, military a/c flying with transponder codes allocated by General Hooton............... :ugh:

[FREDAcheck]

I fly 100-150hrs/year and the bigger part of that is in the UK. The number of instances where I see shapes that need plotting is in low single digits per year. In 2010, not yet.
Not many complex shapes, but figuring out any lat/log is error-prone for me. I've got less than 500 hours total, and fly much less than you. I'm sure that you don't make as many mistakes as I do.
You should not actually read dross like that, never mind plot it.
I defer to your wisdom, but for me, I need to read pretty much everything to figure out whether or not it's dross.
transponder codes allocated by General Hooton
I think he's a Squadron Leader. Don't know what's happened to the poor chap, but his Notam seems to have disappeard. I'll miss his transponder codes.

More seriously, I think a graphical map-based presentation is a great dross filter. I know when I read 9 pages of cra... I mean Notams (yes: a narrow route brief today would have been 9 pages according the my browser's print preview), if I skip-read over the dross, there's a good chance I'll miss something I should have read. You're probably better at it than me. But why make it hard for pilots? Several of those that have done map presentations have said how relatively cheap and easy it would be.

[gpn01]

You do it before you go to the field,
or
You ring the AIS information line on 0500 354802 (free from a landline) if you are in the UK or on 020 8750 3939 if you are outside the UK. That gives you all of the RA(T) and temporary airspace upgrades.
or
You ring an ARO and ask them for a brief (if you can find one)
or
You ring the AIS Duty Officer on 020 8750 3773 (H24) and ask him.
What you don't do if you want to stay within the law and avoid a prosecution under Part 10 of the ANO is to go flying without checking first.

All good options (and so good in fact I've quoted it back so everyone can refer to it!) My suggestion of linking AIS logins to licence val;idation was said tongue in cheek aimed at seeing if anyone would bite. Nice to see a response with some good suggestions.

[IO540]

figuring out any lat/log is error-prone for me

figuring out any lat/log is error-prone for absolutely everybody and is the absolutely last thing which any human should be doing, which is why (e.g.) one plans a route around waypoints which are already in the GPS database, and one never uses user waypoints.

The only occassions I have had to use lat/long since I got my PPL were

- enter a user waypoint for LEAX (in Spain) - since fixed

- enter some user waypoints for a DIY GPS approach (which I then checked by flying it in VMC)

- plot some air show TRA shape on the map, 2x I think so far

The basic point I was making is that you seem to be reading dross which you should just skip.

Let me do an example. I have just done an NRB from EGMD (Lydd) to EGSH (Norwich). Here we go... my comments in RED

Aerodrome Information
Aerodrome (departure) - EGMD (LYDD)
Q) EGTT/QFAAH/IV/NBO/A/000/999/5057N00056E005
B) FROM: 10/03/28 07:30C) TO: 10/10/30 18:00

E) AD HR 0730-1800. EXTENSIONS BY PRIOR ARRANGEMENT THROUGH CUSTOMER
SERVICES TEL 01797 322400.
Good one - opening hours do matter

C1569/10
Aerodrome (destination) - EGSH (NORWICH)
Q) EGTT/QOBCE/IV/M/A/000/999/5241N00117E005
B) FROM: 10/07/30 16:30C) TO: 10/08/19 17:00

E) CRANE OPR DAYLIGHT HR BTN TWY E AND D, MAX HGT 98FT.
GARBAGE
HANGAR STRUCTURE UP TO MAX HGT 38FT. HANGER LIT AT NIGHT.

C3584/10
Q) EGTT/QFAHX/IV/BO/A/000/999/5241N00117E005
B) FROM: 10/07/21 12:00C) TO: 10/08/31 12:00

E) INCREASED BIRD ACTIVITY 2NM NORTHEAST DIRECTION FROM RWY 27 THR
GARBAGE - birds are 100% legal to fly in Class G so why notam this?

C3454/10
Q) EGTT/QFAXX/IV/NBO/A/000/999/5241N00117E005
B) FROM: 10/05/11 11:15C) TO: 10/09/30 20:30

E) INCREASED DEER ACTIVITY ON AD
GARBAGE - if you see a deer on the runway then obviously you go around, so why notam this?

C2458/10
Q) EGTT/QMXXX/IV/NBO/A/000/999/5241N00117E005
B) FROM: 10/05/12 05:30C) TO: 10/08/10 20:30

E) DUE WIP A NEW TWY LINK REPLACES THE PORTION OF TWY E BTN HOLDING
POINT E1 AND JUNCTION OF TWY D AND TWY E AND WILL BE KNOWN AS TWY
ECHO. THE NEW TWY LINK CL STARTS 15M SOUTH OF HOLDING POINT E1 AND
ADJOINS TWY D AT 319M SOUTH OF HOLDING POINT D1.
TECHNICAL DETAILS AS FOLLOWS:
WIDTH 8.5M SURFACE CONCRETE STRENGTH 8/R/C/W/T
THE TWY IS AVBL DURING THE HOURS OF OFFICIAL DAYLIGHT ONLY.
ALL GARBAGE

C2446/10
Q) EGTT/QMXXX/IV/NBO/A/000/999/5241N00117E005
B) FROM: 10/05/19 07:00C) TO: 10/08/19 17:00

E) WIP BTN TWY E AND D 0700-1700 DAILY, ALL WORK AREAS BARRIERED AND
LIT AT NIGHT. HEL NOT PERMITTED TO OVERFLY THE WORKS SITE.
GARBAGE

C2569/10
Q) EGTT/QSPLT/IV/BO/A/000/999/5241N00117E005
B) FROM: 10/04/29 16:06C) TO: 10/10/29 20:30

E) RWY 09/27 SRA TO 1NM NOT AVBL
GARBAGE - this was a VFR briefing

That's it for Lydd and Norwich... now we get to enroute

C2302/10
En-Route Information
EGTT: LONDON FIR
Q) EGXX/QAFTT/IV/BO/E/000/999/5441N00219W999
B) FROM: 10/07/29 00:01C) TO: 10/08/11 23:59

E) TRIGGER NOTAM/AIP AMDT AIRAC 8/2010 WEF 29 JUL PERM
GARBAGE GARBAGE GARBAGE GARBAGE GARBAGE
AREA INVOLVED IN TRANSFER OF ATS RESPONSIBILITY WI SHANNON FIR
ATS ROUTES L151 L186 M189 M605 N615 N859 N864 Q70 Y47 UL6 UL18 UL151
UL186 UL983 UM89 UM189 UM605 UN615 UN859 UP600 UQ70 UY47 CHANGES.
SIGNIFICANT POINT DESIGNATORS.
NORTHER NORTH SEA, SUMBURGH RADAR SECTOR AMENDED.
AWY N57/B226 REDESIGNATED N864.
AWY A47 REDESIGNATED M605
AWY UP14 REDESIGNATED UM89
UPPER AND LOWER ATS ROUTES (SOUTH AND NORTH SHEET) CHANGES.

B1324/10
Q) EGXX/QCSCS/IV/B/E/000/999/5441N00219W999
B) FROM: 10/07/26 00:00C) TO: 10/10/24 23:59

E) SSR CODE 4574 WILL BE ASSIGNED TO CERTAIN MINISTRY OF
GARBAGE GARBAGE GARBAGE GARBAGE GARBAGE
DEFENCE
ACFT PERFORMING FLYING TRAINING AND OPS OUTSIDE OF CONTROLLED
AIRSPACE (EITHER IN FORMATION OR AS SINGLE ACFT) AND NOT RECEIVING
AN AIR TRAFFIC SERVICE. THE CODE WILL BE UNVALIDATED AND
UNVERIFIED. OPS CTC 01264 784456.
(this was the General Hooton one but he must have got promoted to Rear Admiral as a result of the heavy recruitment into the Services from the GA pilot population - well done old chap)
AUS 10-07-0757.

B1736/10
Q) EGXX/QXXXX/IV/M/E/000/100/5441N00219W999
B) FROM: 10/07/29 15:23C) TO: PERM

E) THERE IS AN ERROR IN THE ATOTN (AIR TRAFFIC OPR TEL NETWORK)
DIRECTORY. LONDON MIL LJAO (LONDON JOINT AREA ORGANISATION) NUMBERS
GARBAGE GARBAGE GARBAGE GARBAGE GARBAGE
DO NOT BEGIN WITH 7590. LONDON MIL LJAO NUMBERS BEGIN
7500, CONSOLE NUMBERS ARE AS FOLLOWS:
LJAO NORTH SUPERVISOR 2408
LJAO NORTH EAST 5291
LJAO EAST 5292
LJAO NORTH WEST 5299
LJAO SOUTH SUPERVISOR 2417
LJAO CENTRAL 5298
LJAO WEST 5296
LJAO SOUTH WEST 5296
LJAO SOUTH EAST 5997
LJAO OVERLOAD 1 5294
LJAO OVERLOAD 2 5293

U2179/10
Q) EGXX/QNVTT/IV/BO/E/000/999/5441N00219W999
B) FROM: 10/01/19 11:30C) TO: 10/11/24 13:30

E) TRIGGER NOTAM. NAV AID OUTAGES JAN-DEC 2010. SUP 043/2009 REFERS
GARBAGE - this was a VFR briefing

B0002/10
Q) EGXX/QCSCS/IV/B/E/000/999/5441N00219W999
B) FROM: 10/07/26 00:00C) TO: 10/10/24 23:59

E) SSR CODE 7013 WILL BE ASSIGNED TO CERTAIN MINISTRY OF DEFENCE
GARBAGE GARBAGE GARBAGE GARBAGE GARBAGE GARBAGE
ACFT PERFORMING FLYING TRAINING AND OPS OUTSIDE OF CONTROLLED
AIRSPACE (EITHER IN FORMATION OR AS SINGLE ACFT) AND NOT RECEIVING
AN AIR TRAFFIC SERVICE. THE CODE WILL BE UNVALIDATED AND UNVERIFIED.
OPS CTC 01407 766623. AUS 10-07-0757 AS 2.

B1735/10
Q) EGTT/QSEAH/IV/B/E/000/065/5327N00018W250
B) FROM: 10/06/07 10:40C) TO: PERM

E) AMEND ANGLIA RADAR OPR HR TO:
0630-2200 DAILY WINTER (SUMMER 1HR EARLIER)
AIP ENR 1-15-1 REFERS
Where is Anglia Radar?

B1248/10
Q) EGTT/QAFXX/IV/NBO/E/000/999/5300N00040E080
B) FROM: 10/07/29 00:01C) TO: 10/08/12 23:59

E) LONDON MIL EAST WILL SPLIT TO FORM 2 NEW SECTORS,
GARBAGE
LONDON JOINT AREA
ORGANISATION (LJAO) EAST AND LJAO NORTH EAST. FOR SECTOR BOUNDARIES
SEE EN ROUTE CHARTS. LJAO EAST INITIAL CONTACT FREQ (ICF) ARE
259.600MHZ AND 135.275MHZ AND SSR MODE 3/A ALLOCATIONS 6040-6057.
LJAO NORTH EAST ICF ARE 275.500MHZ AND 135.075MHZ AND SSR MODE 3/A
ALLOCATIONS 6060-6077. SSR MODE 3/A ALLOCATIONS 6101-6107 AND
6140-6147 REMAIN HELD BY LONDON MIL FOR OVERLOAD USE.

U2125/10
Q) EGTT/QAZCD/IV/NBO/E/000/030/5231N00125E005
B) FROM: 10/07/22 09:56C) TO: 10/12/31 23:59

E) SEETHING ATZ. FOR THE PURPOSE OF RULE 45 OF THE RULES OF THE AIR
REGULATIONS 2007 THE SEETHING ATZ IS INDEFINITELY SUSPENDED.
GARBAGE (practically speaking)

B1715/10
Nav Warnings
EGTT: LONDON FIR
Q) EGXX/QWWXX/IV/NBO/W/000/999/5441N00219W999
B) FROM: 10/05/21 12:00C) TO: 10/08/15 23:59

E) UK VOLCANIC ASH NOTAM POLICY. FROM 1005181200
GARBAGE GARBAGEGARBAGE GARBAGE
VOLCANIC ASH NOTAM
DEFINE TWO AREAS FOR THE APPROPRIATE FIR/UIRS. ONE AREA EQUATES TO
THE GREY AREA DEPICTED ON THE VOLCANIC ASH CONCENTRATION CHARTS
(VACC) AND IS REFERRED TO AS A TIME-LIMITED ZONE (TLZ). FLIGHT WI THE
TLZ WILL BE AVAILABLE TO THOSE OPERATORS WHO HAVE AGREEMENT FROM
THEIR ORIGINAL EQUIPMENT MANUFACTURER (OEM). OPERATORS WITHOUT SUCH
AN AGREEMENT MUST TREAT THE TLZ AS A NO FLY ZONE. THE OTHER AREA IS A
NO-FLY ZONE (NFZ)(ICAO DEFINITION: AREAS OF HIGH CONTAMINATION) THAT
EQUATES TO THE BLACK AREA ON THE VACC. IN ADDN THERE ARE VOLUMES OF
AIRSPACE WHERE ADDITIONAL PROCEDURES MAY APPLY (ENHANCED PROCEDURE
ZONES) (EPZ) (ICAO DEFINITION: AREAS OF LOW CONTAMINATION). THE
DIMENSIONS OF THE NFZ TLZ AND EPZ ARE AVBL FM THE VAAC AT
HTTP://WWW.METOFFICE.GOV.UK (SEARCH FOR LONDON VAAC-ISSUED GRAPHICS
LINK). UK ACFT OPR CERTIFICATE (AOC) HOLDERS PLANNING TO OPR WI AN
EPZ OR A TLZ SHOULD COMPLY WITH THE LATEST FLT OPS DIVISION COM
(FODCOM) DOCUMENTS, AVBL AT HTTP://WWW.CAA.CO.UK (SEARCH FOR: FODCOMS
PUBLICATIONS AND FODCOMS FOR GENERAL AVIATION). ALL NON-UK AOC
HOLDERS PLANNING TO OPR WI THE EPZ OR A TLZ SHOULD SATISFY THEMSELVES
THAT THEY ARE ABLE TO OPERATE SAFELY. OPERATORS SHOULD NOTE THAT WHEN
NFZ/TLZ ARE ESTABLISHED SEPARATE NOTAM FOR THE TLZ AND NFZ WILL BE
ISSUED. ONE NOTAM WILL DEFINE THE TLZ THE OTHER NOTAM WILL DEFINE THE
NFZ. BOTH NOTAM MAY CONTAIN UP TO 3 TLZ/NFZ FOR EACH FLIGHT LEVEL
BLOCK. BOTH NOTAM WILL CROSS-REFER TO THE OTHER ENSURING OPERATORS
HAVE THE DIMENSIONS OF BOTH THE TLZ AND NFZ.

LOWER: SFC
UPPER: UNL
H1645/10
Q) EGTT/QWCLW/IV/M/W/000/005/5230N00119E001
B) FROM: 10/08/02 20:00C) TO: 10/08/06 04:00

E) CAPTIVE UNMANNED HELIUM BALLOON AT 5230N 00119E (NEAR
GARBAGE GARBAGE GARBAGE GARBAGE

You will get prosecuted for hitting this because the only way to hit it is to fly below 500ft
HEMPNALL,
NORFOLK). BALLOON WILL BE LIT IN ACCORDANCE WITH RULE 52 OF RULES OF
THE AIR REGULATIONS 2007. ON-SITE CTC, TEL 07713 148348.
10-08-0097/AS 5.

LOWER: SFC
UPPER: 500FT AMSL
SCHEDULE: SS-SR
H3339/10
Q) EGTT/QWGLW/IV/M/W/000/065/5228N00109E010
B) FROM: 10/07/31 00:00C) TO: 10/08/08 23:59

E) GLIDING RALLY, INTENSE ACTIVITY WI 10NM RADIUS 5228N 00109E
(TIBENHAM AD, NORFOLK). AUS 10-07-0740/AS 2.
So, avoid Tibenham

LOWER: SFC
UPPER: 6200FT AMSL
SCHEDULE: HJ
H3214/10
Q) EGTT/QWZLW/IV/M/W/000/065/5228N00109E002
B) FROM: 10/07/31 00:00C) TO: 10/08/08 23:59

E) LARGE MODEL ACFT FLYING. ACTIVITY WI 2NM RADIUS 5228N 00109E
(TIBENHAM AD). 10-07-0740/AS 2.
GARBAGE

LOWER: SFC
UPPER: 6200FT AMSL
SCHEDULE: HJ

Anyway I am sure you get my drift. That notam took me 37 seconds to read, and decide there is nothing of relevance except avoiding Tibenham by a few miles at least (better still fly high; extremely few microlight pilots fly above 2000ft).

Re opening hours I always phone the place anyway.

[FREDAcheck]

IO540, I'm pleased it takes you only 37 seconds, but it takes ME longer than that, and I know I am more likely to make mistakes from a text-only presentation. By the way, another one I got wrong, and rather more pertinent: I got the location of an aerobatic display wrong a little while ago somewhere near Sheerness. Again, it was only when I saw it plotted on a graphical display that I realised my mistake.

Let's just hope I'm in a slow and careless minority.

[Gertrude the Wombat]

Where is Anglia Radar?
I was vaguely sort-of under the impression that it was somewhere in the middle of the North Sea, so I always ignore NOTAMs that contain those words.

[IO540]

Freda - I just read the E) line of each notam item.

To summarise:

E) AD HR 0730-1800. EXTENSIONS BY PRIOR ARRANGEMENT
Relevant only if you didnt phone them
E) CRANE OPR DAYLIGHT HR BTN TWY E AND D, MAX HGT 98FT.
GARBAGE
E) INCREASED BIRD ACTIVITY 2NM NORTHEAST DIRECTION
GARBAGE - birds are 100% legal to fly in Class G so why notam this?
E) INCREASED DEER ACTIVITY ON AD
GARBAGE - if you see a deer on the runway then obviously you go around, so why notam this?
E) DUE WIP A NEW TWY LINK REPLACES THE PORTION
ALL GARBAGE
E) WIP BTN TWY E AND D 0700-1700 DAILY, ALL WORK
GARBAGE
E) RWY 09/27 SRA TO 1NM NOT AVBL
GARBAGE - this was a VFR briefing

That's it for Lydd and Norwich... now we get to enroute

E) TRIGGER NOTAM/AIP AMDT AIRAC 8/2010 WEF 29 JUL PERM
GARBAGE GARBAGE GARBAGE GARBAGE GARBAGE
E) SSR CODE 4574 WILL BE ASSIGNED TO CERTAIN MINISTRY OF
GARBAGE GARBAGE GARBAGE GARBAGE GARBAGE
E) THERE IS AN ERROR IN THE ATOTN (AIR TRAFFIC OPR
GARBAGE
E) TRIGGER NOTAM. NAV AID OUTAGES JAN-DEC 2010.
GARBAGE - this was a VFR briefing
E) SSR CODE 7013 WILL BE ASSIGNED TO CERTAIN MINISTRY
GARBAGE GARBAGE GARBAGE GARBAGE GARBAGE GARBAGE
E) AMEND ANGLIA RADAR OPR HR TO:
Where is Anglia Radar? The point here is that you are not going to cancel a flight because you cannot get some radar service... half the time on any nice day one cannot get a radar service even if the unit IS open.
E) LONDON MIL EAST WILL SPLIT TO FORM 2 NEW SECTORS,
GARBAGE
E) SEETHING ATZ. FOR THE PURPOSE OF RULE 45 OF
GARBAGE (practically speaking)
E) UK VOLCANIC ASH NOTAM POLICY. FROM 1005181200
GARBAGE GARBAGEGARBAGE GARBAGE
E) CAPTIVE UNMANNED HELIUM BALLOON AT 5230N 00119E (NEAR
GARBAGE GARBAGE GARBAGE GARBAGE
E) GLIDING RALLY, INTENSE ACTIVITY WI 10NM RADIUS 5228N 00109E (TIBENHAM AD, NORFOLK). AUS 10-07-0740/AS 2.
So, avoid Tibenham
E) LARGE MODEL ACFT FLYING. ACTIVITY
GARBAGE

37 seconds is no problem.

[kharmael]

IO540

PPLs pootling around at 5000ft in puddle jumpers probably aren't affected by a lot of the NOTAMs you've referred to as garbage, however comma:

Pilots who may or may not fly below 500ft and who make full use of radar services such as Anglia Radar are pleased to be informed of changes to hours, and the presence of solid objects in their path. :ugh:

Are you actually dismissing birds as garbage? Seriously? Flying straight into a flock of birds during climbout or during circuits is garbage?

Correct me if I'm wrong :eek:

[IO540]

Who said 5000ft?

Below 500ft is kinda of tricky given that if there is a man (or a woman), a cow, a cat, a wombat, a house, a garden shed, down below, you are flying illegally. And you are not going to get a radar service at 500ft ;)

Re birds, I would like to know how they know where the birds are. I mean, even the met office with its £1BN computer cannot forecast the weather but somebody has found a way to notam where birds are, days ahead. I think that is pretty amazing and that person would make a fortune in weather forecasting.

[kharmael]

Never trust a weatherman unless they have excessive facial hair or a speech impediment! :ok:

If lots of people are passing back reports of bird activity or it's a recorded and statistically noted breeding area/ whatever then why not have that extra situational awareness?

All I am saying is that as someone who has flown round East Anglia well below 500ft (legally:8) and made use of Anglia Radar etc I would have made use of all those NOTAMs had I been passing through, and I suspect any rotary operators would have as well.

[IO540]

why not have that extra situational awareness?

Sure but will you cancel a flight to some place because birds are notamed there? I don't think so.

Enroute, it doesn't make sense at all to worry about that.

If you fly extremely low (legally) then you have far more to look out for than the stuff in the notams.

But rather than argue over a particular route briefing, the basic point I am making is that there is an easy way to speed read the briefing. Most of it will always be garbage. It need not be a subject generating gigabytes of pilot forum server bandwidth since 2003.

[FREDAcheck]

37 seconds is no problem.
IO, you're obviously much smarter than I am, because, as I said
it takes ME longer than that, and I know I am more likely to make mistakes from a text-only presentation.
I'm not fibbing, honest. I really think I'm a better authority on how long it takes ME than you are.

PS - we could go on like this for ever, and it's really a bit pointless.

I'm sure you are absolutely right that the text-only NOTAM service is adequate for you, and a map-based display would be no benefit to you.

And I'm sure I'm absolutely right in saying that it would help me, would be quicker for me, and safer for me, as I make less mistakes with such a presentation.

Perhaps I'm in a minority of one. But I doubt it.

[IO540]

Fair enough; how long does it take you to plan the flight, etc?

[FREDAcheck]

how long does it take you to plan the flight, etc?
A long time (except for a local flight). Flight planning is part of the fun, so I probably spend several hours planning a long flight.

[IO540]

Several hours :confused:

I won't ask how long it would take you to read the E) lines :) but it cannot be more than 1% of the time you spend planning a flight - surely?

[tggzzz]

Anyway I am sure you get my drift. That notam took me 37 seconds to read, and decide there is nothing of relevance except avoiding Tibenham by a few miles at least (better still fly high; extremely few microlight pilots fly above 2000ft).But gliders frequently go significantly higher, and Tibenham is home to the Norfolk gliding club. If there's a competition on, then there will be a lot of plastic in the sky, up to cloudbase and within clouds that are sucking.

[douglas.lindsay]

IO540, it's encouraging that I'm not the only one thinking a bunch of these NOTAMS are pointless (I was worrying that I was missing something!)

FREDA, I also enjoy the planning, and it takes me a couple of hours to really do a proper job too - though like you, that's partly because I enjoy it and quite like spending a bit longer than I really have to on it. That will probably change in due course, but if it means I get 4 hours' enjoyment and only pay for 1, hey, I think that's a bonus :ok:

Edit: for "pointless", read "not that relevant to me"... oops!

[IO540]

I am sure different notam items will be relevant to different people.

Even the General Hooton notam might be relevant to somebody. Cannot possibly imagine who though - maybe somebody in ATC who is watching radar and wondering what some codes are - but surely such stuff should have instead been communicated directly to ATC units, not notamed to pilots.

Gliders... should one notam a gliding site? The site should be depicted on the map with a big G. Why notam it as well? It is Class G airspace in which everybody can fly freely. Are you going to keep a better lookout because the possibility of gliders (or microlights) has been notamed?

If you fly a helicopter at 200ft then you may be interested in a 200ft high obstacle, but then there will be so many such obstacles anyway (anything below 300ft does not need to be mapped) that you need to keep a serious lookout, so why notam any particular object?

I think the reason for most of this dross is because it is easy for various people to obtain the authority to generate notams. And they generate them, lots of them. If your job involves checking the thickness of chocolate bar wrappers then it is by definition a global-level important job and if you think there is a possibility of under-spec wrappers being sold then you will notam it.

[BackPacker]

If there's a competition on, then there will be a lot of plastic in the sky, up to cloudbase and within clouds that are sucking.

I've had that a while ago when flying to Berlin (VFR at 3000'-ish). There was a NOTAM about increased glider activity at a certain field which was at least 50km from my route. So that NOTAM went into the "garbage" department.

Turned out that their assignment for that day crossed my flight path. Actually one of their turning points happened to be one of my waypoints too. So all of a sudden I was confronted with at least 50 gliders, all at different altitudes, all crossing my flight path. Fortunately I was able to climb above the base of the clouds to remain clear but it was one of those ILAFFT moments...

My point here: why are the assignments, the actual routes that the gliders need to fly, not NOTAMed? Is it a timing issue where a NOTAM cannot be promulgated fast enough after the competition director decides on the route, or is it because they don't want to spoil the competition by releasing the route too early?

Even this would help me enormously:

E) INCREASED GLIDER ACTIVITY AT XXXX DUE TO GLIDING COMPETITION WITH 50+ GLIDERS PARTICIPATING. COMPETITION ROUTES UP TO 200 KM AWAY FROM XXXX ARE PUBLISHED EACH MORNING AT 0900LT. INCREASED GLIDER ACTIVITY CAN BE EXPECTED ON THESE ROUTES FM 1000' TO CLOUDBASE, FM 1100LT TO SUNSET. ROUTES ARE SET OUTSIDE CAS ONLY. MOST GLIDERS NOT TRANSPONDER EQUIPPED. FOR ACTUAL ROUTES CONTACT XXX INFORMATION ON YYY, CALL +XXXXXXXXXX OR [someurl].

[gpn01]

My point here: why are the assignments, the actual routes that the gliders need to fly, not NOTAMed? Is it a timing issue where a NOTAM cannot be promulgated fast enough after the competition director decides on the route, or is it because they don't want to spoil the competition by releasing the route too early?


The final decision on what task will be flown often isn't decided until an hour (or sometimes even less) than when the gliders begin to launch. This because the Competition Director, working with the Met Man, Task Setter, airspace liaison person and anyone else in the competition organisation team, is looking to set a task that makes the best use of the weather window as it becomes available.

[IO540]

There is no way to notam that, nor should it be notamed because it is in Class G airspace.

[englishal]

To be fair to the gliding competitions, last summer when there was a major competition on I subscribed to their daily email and got the charts emailed through on a daily basis which was very helpful.

[thing]

'My point here: why are the assignments, the actual routes that the gliders need to fly, not NOTAMed?'

Gliders don't 'fly routes', they 'proceed in a general direction', which could be any direction at any given time........I've flown cross countries where I've been 10-15 miles off track desperately scratching for some lift..........and unless you're somewhere like Aboyne where people go for the wave up to 25,000 ft and more then expect gliders up to 10,000 ft at least.

[tggzzz]

why are the assignments, the actual routes that the gliders need to fly, not NOTAMed?Because the route is not known in advance; at most the turning points will be pre-declared. In competitions the TPs are only decided on the day immediately before the competition starts - because they take account of the weather.

To see glider tracks, goto Daily Scores (http://www.bgaladder.co.uk/Enquiry.asp) then clicking on any of the "tasks" will popup a log of that flight showing track and altitude. One relevant example (both height and track) from Tibenham is Flight Details (http://www.bgaladder.co.uk/dscore.asp?FlightID=27529)

[tggzzz]

Gliders... should one notam a gliding site? The site should be depicted on the map with a big G. Why notam it as well?Well that's true, but if it was sufficient then it wouldn't be necessary to have CAA documents line this: http://www.airproxboard.org.uk/docs/423/gab15web.pdf

Some of the incidents are hair-raising.

[IO540]

Sure, but just because these things happen doesn't mean they can be solved by publishing more stuff.

Every pilot must be capable of buying a paper map, but many (most?) are not on the internet so they will never get notams, or traditional aviation weather (they get it off BBC TV).

Like I say, Class G is Class G. Everybody has to find a way of co-existing with their neighbours. In CAS, IFR, FL150, you could close your eyes for the next few hours - even if you keep them open the chances of getting visual with another (relevant) plane is about 1%. You have to keep your eyes open so you don't fly into something big dark and nasty :) In Class G, there are many potential conflicts: piston GA, gliders, very occassionally even a heli straying where it shouldn't be ;) You have the map with the big Gs on it, and ATC even tell you (sometimes) of known glider activity. But you could meet a lone-ish glider anywhere.

The Class G mid-air defences comprise of means to reduce the risk. 1) Fly above about 2000ft (eliminates nearly all piston GA, microlights, etc). 2) fly above the clouds if you can (the most effective method by far - eliminates nearly 100% of piston GA and - in the absence of mountains - 100% of gliders). 3) Fly in clouds (statistically - UK - 100% effective; eliminates some 99% of piston GA, and most if not all gliders). 4) Don't hang around the circuit (most mid-airs happen there).

If I was flying at say 1000ft, I would be dodging all kinds of traffic, constantly. I know a lot of people like to fly low, presumably for the view, but they must decide on their priorities in life. And with any surface wind, it can be damn rough down there.

If everybody had a transponder, or an ADS-B transmitter, there would be an excellent technological solution, but this is some way away, especially with gliders.

[thing]

I've always wondered why transponders aren't fitted to gliders, I think they have the weight down to about 1 kilo now don't they? Not sure what the current draw is, but modern competition gliders have panels like something out of USS Enterprise so I would imagine they could cope.

I've had several 'that was a bit close' moments, not counting other gliders of course as we tend to thermal together. Closest was a pair of Tucanos who just brushed the edge of our site at the mandatory 2,000 ft. I had just come off the cable (it was a windy day straight down the strip) They never saw me but I estimate we were about 100 metres apart on a reciprocal heading, same altitude.........

I think the problem with GA is that they spend a lot longer with their heads down, looking at maps etc, plus they get lulled into the 'I'm on radar, I'm safe' mentality. Maybe I'm wrong I don't know. I would say glider pilots spend 99.9% of their time head out. It always seemed to be me that spotted a potential conflict and me that took avoiding action whilst Joe GA carried on burrowing his hole in the sky blissfully unaware. I suppose you have to say that the vis in a glider is infinitely better than a spamcan so we're going to spot conflicts probably before the GA pilot would. But that's the name of the game. That's why we wear parachutes.........

[FlyingStone]

If everybody had a transponder, or an ADS-B transmitter, there would be an excellent technological solution, but this is some way away, especially with gliders.

Technology is here and now, I've flown couple of SEP aircraft that have round transponders that would easily fit in ANY glider aircraft. What I think is the problem with gliding, the people rather spend thousands of euros on brand new GPS than buying the most simple C-mode transponder, because if they have flown 50 years without it, they can do it for the next 50 years as well.

I think they really don't have the mentality of someone with CPL or IR, who has respect for air safety and air traffic separation. Especially when you hear bragging about near collision when they were 500m away from airliner on same level. :eek: Not to mention that some of them think it isn't neccessary to advise your intention when joining traffic pattern on uncontrolled airport - sure the glider has priority, I don't mind turning away or extending the downwind, but I have to know that glider is there - I really don't like when a glider passes me from right to left 100m before me and 50 ft above. So much about safety...

[ProfChrisReed]

Technology is here and now, I've flown couple of SEP aircraft that have round transponders that would easily fit in ANY glider aircraft. What I think is the problem with gliding, the people rather spend thousands of euros on brand new GPS than buying the most simple C-mode transponder

1. It won't just fit in many, probably most gliders. Look inside one - space is extremely limited, especially in the panel. Which instrument must I throw out to make space?

2. Weight and balance is also critical, and most units are too heavy.

3. Where are the extra batteries for the power supply (no generator remember) to go?

4. In the UK, we are only allowed to fit a Mode S transponder, and there is currently only one model which is remotely possible in terms of weight and power consumption.

5. Under EASA rules we can only fit a transponder in accordance with the manufacturer's approved scheme. There is no such scheme for most gliders.

In my 1968 glider I happen to have space to fit 7ah worth of 12v DC power, so for me it's only the other 4 problems that make it impossible. Plus the cost, which I reckon to be around 25% of hull value.

[IO540]

Picking up just one point - transponder weight - surely that argument is nonsense, given the variation in pilot weights, and the huge increase in the average pilot weight during the certification lifespan of the average glider.

I am 77kg. 12 years ago I was 71kg. 6kg is one helluva lot of hardware; my entire KFC225 autopilot system (1 computer, 3 servos, other little bits) might weigh 6kg.

Loads of pilots are 100kg...

Under EASA rules we can only fit a transponder in accordance with the manufacturer's approved scheme. There is no such scheme for most gliders.

I genuinely don't want to start yet another 'transponder' thread but if I was flying a glider I would buy a Mode C transponder and install it, and to hell with silly rules for certified aircraft. I can legally install a Garmin 530W in my Toyota... maybe not a transponder (in the Toyota; it would be 100% legal to install but it would be illegal to make it radiate). This would make me visible to many others, and might just save my life one day. Remember: Class G is Class G.

[BackPacker]

I'm booked for another week of glider flying lessons next week at a club in the Netherlands. All their gliders have a mode-S transponder fitted. So don't tell me it can't be done because of weight, panel space, electrical requirements or certification issues.

I agree that there might be some types of (older) gliders for which one or two of the problems you mentioned may be insurmountable, but that's certainly not the case across the entire fleet.

But the main issue I have to agree about is the cost/benefit issue. You can get an old wooden glider (in good condition) for less than 10 grand. Spending 2 grand or more on a transponder installation is a lot of money then. But how often do these old wooden gliders really leave the vicinity of the glider site? I'm not too worried about them flying around without transponders. It's the high performance gliders that fly competitions all over the place, sometimes in dense packs, that I'm worried about.

[Jan Olieslagers]

Remember: Class G is Class G.
Sorry Peter, but I'm slow in the uptake tonight. Your quote could be read as either
"whatever we do to be more visible, we should continue to beware"
or
"we can never contribute too much to our visibility"
For as little as I have learned, I could heartily subscribe the first, but have concerns about the second, weight not the least as I fly ultralights, where every extra pound is at least an ounce too much.

[IO540]

By "Class G is Class G" I simply mean that nobody controls who goes there, and everybody in there has an equal right to be there, anywhere, anytime.

So criticising somebody for not reading a notam about gliding activity (or perhaps reading it and disregarding it) is meaningless, because those gliders could just as easily be 50nm away from the notamed spot, and they are just as entitled to be there as in the original place.

Same with notams of military aircraft. You could meet these anywhere, anytime.

One may as well notam a flight by a PPL student, on the grounds that his cockpit workload will be higher so his lookout may be not as good. Actually I better not give people any ideas :)

Not everybody likes Class G. Some pilots prefer to fly in CAS, for the extra protection they get. But I think G is very valuable and makes flying very easy in the UK, and anyway it suits the UK "user pays" system because there is no guaranteed service provided, which saves NATS a load of money.

[fivegreenlight]

I was at an aerobatic competition yesterday and despite it being notam'd we had 3 harriers fly through the overhead at approx 3000ft( aerobatics up to at least 3000ft ) and a spitfire meandered through at no more than 3000ft. I would expect these pilots to know better. I assume the spit pilot was a fairly experienced pilot.

[24Carrot]

I dare say the Harrier pilots had some experience too!

[Genghis the Engineer]

Probably, but you could be an operational Harrier pilot at, say, 23 with 500 hours potentially, whilst nobody's going to let anybody that inexperienced near a Spitfire these days.

All a bit irrelevant - they should certainly all have known about anything NOTAMed and stayed out of the way.

G

[Anonystude]

Unless you get the MoD to agree to a Mandatory Temporary Avoid then your NOTAM goes down as a 'warning' only. No requirement to avoid it. After all, it's "still Class G", and those Harriers have as much right to that piece of airspace as your aerobatic aircraft...

[fivegreenlight]

Anonystude,
I agree but we are talking about airmanship:ugh:
Good airmanship would mean reading notams and avoiding, so would self preservation.

[vee-tail-1]

fivegreenlight could you post the NOTAM here, as I can't find it, and perhaps the Spit & Harriers couldn't also.

[youngskywalker]

Peterborough Connington right next to RAF Cottesmore zone perhaps?

[Anonystude]

You mean the Conington that sits right under the Wittering instrument approach path? You did speak to Wittering ATC, right?

[explorer99]

If an event which is out of the ordinary is being held in Class G, then all the more reason to issue a NOTAM about it.

Going back to the original Elvington example, then the 'intruding' aerobatic pilot had every legal right to carry out aerobatics in the overhead in Class G, no doubt using the enormous runway as a handy line feature. However, had he/she heeded the NOTAM warning of the Wings 'n Wheels event, then the chances of meeting head-on with a T-6 while inverted at the top of a loop would have been completely avoided. Taking the glider comp example, while the gliders could be almost anywhere there is a strong likelihood that the 'host' airfield will be significantly busier than usual and, blow me, gliders are hard to spot at the best of times. Surely common sense and a healthy survival instinct should tell you to avoid such places if possible? I know mine do...

Again referring to Elvington, I assume that the event attracted a number of cars, stalls, aircraft, vehicles etc all coverinng areas of grass and tarmac that would normally be bare; didn't the 'intruding' pilot notice all these big hints? I'll be blunt: what sort of numbnuts proceeds to carry out aerobatics over an airfield with such obvious clues underneath him/her? (If I've missed something obvious, apologies for the bluntness.) I'd also like to think that the aerobat was in receipt of a Basic Service from, say, Fenton, and that ATC might have mentioned something about the event.

A long time ago, as a 17 year old with about 25 hours under my belt, I was pax in the back of a Cherokee flying from Scotland to Lincs. As we trundled towards Church Fenton at about 2000' the chaps in the front couldn't raise CF on the radio, so decided to continue through the MATZ as it was a Sunday and, surely, a military airfield would be closed on Sunday? (Error, in Fenton's case.) I remember looking down and idly wondering why there were hundreds of cars and a funfair on the airfield, and also (being a schoolboy spotter) why a P-3 Orion would be parked at Fenton. I then pondered the date, Sunday 16 July 1989; SSAFA day airshow at Fenton...the penny dropped..."Guys!!!" A lesson learned and never forgotten.

To return to my original point, NOTAMs are there to warn us about something abnormal and, by extension, a potential risk to our own flying. To assume that you can safely ignore a NOTAM, or even that you can fly safely without checking NOTAMs, just because you are in Class G, is arrogant and dangerous. Plenty of us will privately admit to having accidentally infringed a NOTAM, either through a lack of planning or forgetfulness - though I've never flown either a Spitfire or a Harrier! - but we should do everything possible not to do so, irrespective of the class of airspace, in order to fly as safely as possible.

E99

[ProfChrisReed]

if I was flying a glider I would buy a Mode C transponder and install it, and to hell with silly rules for certified aircraft.

The CAA is currently running a programme of glider checks, so there's at least an appreciable chance that you would, at the least be grounded. My guess is there are also criminal penalties.

The weight and balance issue is critical for some gliders, and don't forget these are single seaters, not four-seat aircraft, so the margins are tighter. Space is generally more of an issue, especially in the panel. Don't forget that weight includes the batteries to run the thing, and that's where the problem often lies.

I'm booked for another week of glider flying lessons next week at a club in the Netherlands. All their gliders have a mode-S transponder fitted. So don't tell me it can't be done because of weight, panel space, electrical requirements or certification issues.

Maybe true of the Netherlands, but try this with the CAA - the certification issues are very real. I believe that most Dutch pilots who do more than short local flights do them in Germany, and I imagine they simply turn off the transponder once across the border, thus conserving power. There is one model only which might conceivably run for, say, 6 hours from a standard glider battery, assuming there is space to fit an extra battery. 6 hours is not an exceptionally long glider flight.

I agree that there might be some types of (older) gliders for which one or two of the problems you mentioned may be insurmountable, but that's certainly not the case across the entire fleet.

It's currently true for about 90% of the fleet (my estimation). I'm pretty sure it's true for 100% of the gliders at my club. To be fair, not totally insurmountable - I could pay the manufacturer to produce an installation scheme for my glider, then pay the CAA its minor mod fee, then pay for the instrument and installation. I don't think I would see change from 5 grand.

But the main issue I have to agree about is the cost/benefit issue. You can get an old wooden glider (in good condition) for less than 10 grand. Spending 2 grand or more on a transponder installation is a lot of money then. But how often do these old wooden gliders really leave the vicinity of the glider site? I'm not too worried about them flying around without transponders. It's the high performance gliders that fly competitions all over the place, sometimes in dense packs, that I'm worried about.

You're out of touch on prices - an old wood glider runs 2-4 grand, and much of the glass fleet is in the 8-15 grand range - and those glass gliders go long distances. My sub-10 grand glider is perfectly capable of a 500km glight, though I haven't managed one yet.

Cost is a real issue - my costs of sole ownership, including flying costs, are in the region of £2,500 per annum, so installing a transponder is likely to cost me 2 years worth of flying. A second-hand mode C might be less than a grand installed, but the CAA won't allow that. And anyway, I'd have to leave it turned off most of the time, only using it when near controlled airspace, because I can't carry enough batteries.

Returning to the notams issue, I agree that the level of clutter is so great that the usefulness of the whole system is reduced. Checking the notams for today, of 177 there were only three which were in any way relevant for glider flying within a 100nm range of my airfield.

The major gliding competition notams seem to me to be potentially useful though, because between 50 and 100 aircraft will be launched and will hang around the vicinity waiting for the start gate to open. That's probably worth being aware of and avoiding! Once they're off on task the notam tells you nothing worthwhile about where to expect them, and the reasons why have been explained earlier.

This thread started with a nav warning notam - some replies seem to think that a warning is much the same as an RAT. I'm never going to fly through the middle of an aerobatics competition with such a notam (unless I've missed the notam somehow), but I do have a perfect right to do so if I comply with the rules of the air. It's just a warning to me that there are extra dangers there, and to be careful. I won't do it because I always try to comply with my wife's instructions: "Fly nicely".

[eharding]

fivegreenlight could you post the NOTAM here, as I can't find it, and perhaps the Spit & Harriers couldn't also.

H3344/10 (http://maps.google.co.uk/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=http:%2F%2Fmetutil.appspot.com%2FNotamData%3Ftype%3DKML%26 ids%3DEGTT-H3344%2F10&sll=50.55,-5.38335&sspn=0.709414,1.783905&ie=UTF8&ll=52.464377,-0.266418&spn=0.340111,0.891953&t=p&z=11)

Would have been visible via the NATS site until the end of the posted duration of the competition.

[chrisN]

To amplify on what Prof Chris Reed has posted, I have probably the only glider that my club that could physically accommodate a Trig 21 transponder, but contrary to what others have posted, I cannot do it, because there is no EASA approved modification, in sufficient detail to satisfy the CAA, for my glider. I have a hole in the instrument panel ready to accommodate the control unit; there is enough spare weight capacity to accommodate the extra batteries required for long flights; but there is no paperwork to cover it.

It is no good people saying that they have them on the continent. I have been in correspondence with people on the continent who have fitted transponders in gliders, and at least some of them did it before there was an approved EASA modification. Those who did it on my model of glider have subsequently seen an approved modification submitted by the glider manufacturer. Unfortunately, it does not cover installation of extra batteries, nor the installation of a separate power unit located in the fuselage and not the panel which is what the Trig 21 has - and that is the only one that would fit in my glider, I believe. The BGA, and the inspector I have most recently had doing work on my glider, both tell me that without that sufficiently detailed approved modification, I cannot legally fit a transponder. It is no good saying they did it on the continent. It is no good saying that I should go ahead and have it installed illegally. The inspector won't do it. The next ARC would not be renewed if it is there.

Unless the posters on here, who say it can be done, are themselves the right person with the right authority in the CAA, they just don't know what they're talking about.

If you are the right person in the CAA, and do have the right authority, why have you and/or your colleagues told the BGA and my inspector differently?

So Flarm and PCAS is all I can do at the moment to have technology assist me in collision avoidance, unless I invest in a completely new instrument panel and layout, with extra batteries, and the cost and inconvenience of drawing up a very detailed modification proposal covering all that which would be required, and paying for it to be officially approved - a burden which is prohibitively expensive and time-consuming, requiring skills I do not have.

Chris N