To the glider muppets who ruined the Reds display at Silverstone. [Archive]

Mooneyboy

23rd Aug 2010, 22:12

gpn01

23rd Aug 2010, 22:57

Thanks for the link Rod1. Its good to see it has been followed up and the right people have put their hands up.

Maybe the CAA should start releasing notams in a more user and friendly way. A lot of people are getting smart phones now, why couldn't the CAA release an official app for notams? A pictorial 3D method linked up to Google earth would also be a good method of improving situational awareness ( I think this has already been done but mainly for the US but I maybe wrong).

I can understand that picking up thermals and constant turning must make it tricky to accurately pin point your position in a glider (unless they all carry GPS I'm not sure) but Silverstone is pretty big and easy to spot. When I fly its our SOP to always maintaining a listening watch on 121.5, do gliders do this? Then again would this be an appropriate method of telling someone they infringed airspace?

And Sir George sorry for my grammar. Unfortunately my A level English is fast becoming a long distant memory eroded down by spell checker and texting:(.

I think in this particular case whether the NOTAM'd RA(T) had ben available in a graphical format or not wouldn't have made much of a difference as to whether it was spotted or not - I believe (albeit third hand, so I acknowledge that this could be wrong) that the NOTAM WAS mentioned at the briefing for the competition being hosted at Bicester but it wasn't said that it was an RA(T). Either way, irrespective of whether it was simply a NAVW or RA(T), it was an example of poor interpretation/direction by the organisers and poor airmanship by the many competitors who ended up in the area. I sense that this point has been recognised by all involved and that hopefully everyone will learn something from it.

To pick up on the point about pinpointing your position in a glider - yes, Silverstone is usually easy to spot, but how accurately can a pilot (power or glider) visually ascertain that they're 6NM from a location? The short answer is that without a lot of validated practice (or electronic aids), you can't. Also, no, gliders don't generally monitor 121.5. Many gliders don't even have a radio. Some do, but they're constrained to gliding frequencies only, and others have 720ch radios which have the ability to listen on 121.5 but the reality is they'll be tuned to a gliding frequency (particularly in a competition where everyone will be monitoring the frequency designated for that competition's use).

BillieBob

24th Aug 2010, 07:40

....the competition organisers were partly to blameI should say that the organisers bear most of the responsibility. To change the route, with very little notice, to one that passes only 200m from the southern edge of a NOTAMed TRA appears reckless in the extreme, However, this does not in any way mitigate the admitted failure of the pilots involved to read the relevant NOTAM. Perhaps it is as well that EASA intends to increase so significantly the regulation of gliding throughout Europe.

goldeneaglepilot

24th Aug 2010, 07:54

Wow... It is disturbing to read this thread, Mary is right, Glider pilots are trained to check Notams (or at least I was when I flew gliders) I have looked at the other forum quoted, at least one person admitted their mistake, how about the other 22 who he says were also in infringement?

It was a RAT, there is no dispute in that, to listen to the pathetic excuses including "did the Red Arrows boss ring the gliding competition to discuss the airshow with them" He did not need to.. Neither did he need to ring local airfields such as Turweston - It was Notamed, it’s the pilot’s responsibility to check before the flight

I quote below the posting of the pilot who owned up to the infringement:

I am flying in the competition at Bicester, and I busted the airspace pretty badly, along with 22 others.

Of course, it is our responsibility as pilots to check the NOTAMs and avoid situations like this - we have all accepted responsibility for what we did and have filled in the requisite forms of confession and sent them off to the CAA today. That said, there are a few factors which made it very easy to slip up this time. I offer these not as excuses, but rather, as explanations.

The original task took us well clear of the Silverstone, however, it was changed 20 minutes before launch due to new weather information to one which took us 200m south of the RA(T). At this point, you have to get ready to fly or else loose your spot in the queue, so there wasn't much chance to individually check the NOTAMs en route.

We were briefed about silverstone, but IMHO, not fully enough. It wasn't designated a 'penalty zone', and was only listed on the task sheet as a 'navigational warning'. I didn't find out that it was actually a RA(T) until after I landed. Again, I am not trying to shift the blame - it was up to me and the other pilots to properly check this and we didn't, but there would have certainly been less trouble if the full extent of the NOTAM had been drilled into us.

This is the Junior gliding championships. I've done a few of these and have no excuse, but there are quite a few pilots here who are very inexperienced - I fetched one girl out of her first field landing, and for quite a few this modest 200km task was the longest they've ever done.

The weather was unhelpful; to the south of the zone was the overcast frontal clag - any reasonable pilot would have steered north of track if he/she wasn't aware of the dangers at silverstone.

So all in all, lessons to be learnt - and there will be. We got an hour long bollocking this morning, and I am sure changes will be made to how briefings will be done in the future as a result. I am just glad no one got a red arrow in the wing.

And the view of the display was spectacular!

It seems to imply that the responsibility lay with the organiser of the competition to inform the pilots, that’s utter rubbish. At the end of the day it’s the pilot’s responsibility to check his aircraft, route and weather are safe. Yes it would have been helpful if they had been briefed, however that is a bonus, and it’s the pilot’s responsibility to check.

It seems to me that the BGA need to review its training methods, 23 pilots ignoring a RAT is inexcusable, so are excuses that its difficult to accurately work out your position in a glider - the only reason for that can be that someone has not been trained how to read a map in flight.

Equally disturbing is talk of some of the blame being due to young and inexperienced pilots. That again is inexcusable; they should not have been doing the task without adequate supervision or training if that was the case. Yes they do need to gain experience but not at risk to themselves or others.

I hope that the CAA do act upon this and at the very least identify the apparent weaknesses in training and implement a system to avoid this in the future. I hope that the CAA have the contact details of the 23 made available to them by the BGA and the organisers of the competition so that they can be educated to help them in the future.

1 pilot infringing is unfortunate, however 23 is beyond excuse.

ShyTorque

24th Aug 2010, 08:55

I believe (albeit third hand, so I acknowledge that this could be wrong) that the NOTAM WAS mentioned at the briefing for the competition being hosted at Bicester but it wasn't said that it was an RA(T).

There is no excuse for either the organisers or the individuals. Red Arrows UK displays always involve an RAT and the locations / dates / altitudes are published online weeks, often months, ahead, as a Mauve AIC. Last weekend's details were published on the AIS website on the 15th July!

http://www.nats-uk.ead-it.com/aip/current/aic/EG_Circ_2010_M_054_en.pdf

MichaelJP59

24th Aug 2010, 09:10

Various threads have discussed gliding and how they are used to flying in close proximity to each other. It must be very difficult to look down and read a map at the same time as keeping a lookout to see and avoid several close range aircraft.

Did this mass infringement occur because of a sheep type of flocking where everyone assumed that everyone else knew where they were going?

oversteer

24th Aug 2010, 09:16

I see a new NOTAM has been issued for the gliding competition, should keep everyone clear:

Q) EGTT/QWGLW/IV/M/W/000/999/5155N00108W250
B) FROM: 10/08/24 00:00C) TO: 10/08/29 23:59
E) MAJOR GLIDING COMPETITION INCLUDING CROSS-COUNTRY RTE.
INTENSE ACTIVITY SOMEWHERE WI 250NM RADIUS 5155N 00108W
(BICESTER AD). UP TO 80 GLIDERS AND 8 TUG ACFT MAY PARTICIPATE.
GLIDERS WILL NORMALLY OPR BLW INVERSION LVL OR BTN THE TOPS
OF ANY CU CLOUDS AND (IF AN INSTRUCTOR WATCHING) 500FT AGL.
AIRCRAFT WILL BE UNABLE TO COMPLY WITH RULES OF THE AIR.
LOWER: SFC
UPPER: UNL

:p

fisbangwollop

24th Aug 2010, 09:23

Whats the point in having the Red's and showing off our Airforce when we dont have one anymore??? :*:*:*

mary meagher

24th Aug 2010, 09:26

Rod1, thank you very much for the link, it certainly is a thorough discussion of the incident.

At least there was a cloud of gliders, drawing attention to something happening that shouldn't have happened. A whole bunch of gliders is easier to notice than the odd looney who bimbles off on his own without checking the notams.

Another poster has given good advice here. If it is a wonderful cross country day, particularly on a weekend, or when a competition has been NOTAMED,
a useful way of avoiding the traffic is to

(1) Fly below 1,500'. Gliders get nervous below that level, and prefer to work the height band between 2,000 and cloudbase.

(2) Fly above cloud if you can. It will be smoother up there anyhow.

(3) And of course, you are always looking out, right?

Rod1

24th Aug 2010, 09:46

“I see a new NOTAM has been issued for the gliding competition, should keep everyone clear:”

It is not intended to keep anyone clear, it is a navigation warning “intense gliding activity be careful” not an exclusion zone.

Rod1

172driver

24th Aug 2010, 10:33

INTENSE ACTIVITY SOMEWHERE WI 250NM RADIUS

Well, that's really narrowly defined then......

dont overfil

24th Aug 2010, 10:33

Hi Oversteer,
Tell me there is a decimal point missing in that notam.
250nm radius???
DO.

Gertrude the Wombat

24th Aug 2010, 11:14

AIRCRAFT WILL BE UNABLE TO COMPLY WITH RULES OF THE AIR
Why?

(And some extra chacters for the nanny.)

BackPacker

24th Aug 2010, 11:16

Of course, it is our responsibility as pilots to check the NOTAMs and avoid situations like this

Out of curiosity I just checked the three textbooks by Dick Corporaal which are the books used for the education of glider pilots in the Netherlands, up until well past the GPL level. These can best be compared to the Jeremy Pratt or Trevor Thom series, but in Dutch and for gliding. They are considered the standard texts. Glider exams are based on their content - in fact I believe Dick Corporaal is (or has been) part of the committee that drew up the exam regulations.

The word "NOTAM" is not mentioned anywhere.

Perhaps it is as well that EASA intends to increase so significantly the regulation of gliding throughout Europe.

I've got a PPL with 200 hours PIC and I've just finished my fourth midweek learning to glide. I have 40+ solo starts/landings and - apart from the two theory exams for which I do not get a waiver - I've almost completely fulfilled all requirements to do the GPL exam.

What I have seen is that gliders are excellent pilots but they're very bad at integrating their activity with other activities in the sky. The complete ignorance of the RA(T) as described here is a prime example, but here are several others:
- Complete ignorance of what a (mandatory in NL) transponder does and how it should be operated. Normal practice where I flew is to turn the transponder on (mode ACS) when the aircraft is pre-flighted in the morning, and not to touch it anymore until the aircraft is parked in the hangar for the night. But I've also stepped into aircraft which had done a number of flights earlier in the day, with the transponder still on standby.
- There are only few glider pilots who have a radio license. Lacking that they're not allowed to use 121.5, information services or other services, or transit controlled airspace. And even the few frequencies that they are allowed to use, are not used. No circuit calls for instance, but also no consisent monitoring of the designated field frequency on the ground. So even if a SEP that would be passing by would know and use the proper frequency, he'd get no answer to his request for traffic information.
- No proper altimeter setting procedures. At the start of the flight the altimeter is set to zero (QFE) and that's it. No reset to 1013.2 above the TL, even though there was a rather significant change of airspace class at FL65 where I flew.
- I have yet to see a glider pilot who sat down behind an internet terminal to check METARs, TAFs, NOTAMs or anything else that we consider standard practice in powered flying. The CFI does a briefing in the morning consisting of maybe two sentences about the expected weather and that's it. Even for pilots planning significant x-countries.

Now I wouldn't mind if it's just a few "old hands" who are going to do a local flight near the field, who ignore the NOTAMs and cannot be bothered to learn the proper operating procedures of all this newfangled technology. But it's actually not, or not properly, ingrained in the education of the new guys. And that's my greatest worry.

In that respect, it might indeed be a good idea if EASA takes a good look at education methods, tools, textbooks and the GPL exams, to see if they would require changing to bring them in line with international (ICAO) standards.

(Of course I can only speak for the glider club I went to. I hope that the image I got of the glider community there is not totally accurate in this respect.)

John G

24th Aug 2010, 11:22

Major Gliding Competition Including Cross-country Rte.
Intense Activity Wi 5nm Radius 5155n 00108w (bicester Ad). Up To 80
Gliders And 8 Tug Acft May Participate. Gliders Will Normally Opr
Blw Inversion Lvl Or Btn The Tops Of Any Cu Clouds And 500ft Agl And
Avoid Controlled Airspace Unless A Prior Clr Has Been Obtained.
After Launch Many Gliders May Be Concentrated Just Downwind Of The
Site Or On The First Leg Of The Cross-country Rte. For Info On Rte
For The Day And Likely Etd Contact Glider Contest Ctl Tel
07711844345 Or 01869 252493. Rtf 130.125mhz.
10-08-0274/as 2.

airborne_artist

24th Aug 2010, 11:26

Quote:
AIRCRAFT WILL BE UNABLE TO COMPLY WITH RULES OF THE AIR
Why?

(And some extra chacters for the nanny.)

Some yachts-people also think they are absolved from the rules, too, and also have trouble with knowing their position, reading charts, understanding tides etc., and have the added advantage of expecting that the RNLI is at zero minutes readiness to haul them off rocks/mud/sandbanks etc.

Similarly cyclists often go up one-way streets the wrong way, overtake un-safely in traffic etc.

Something in the psyche of these people who move without an engine?

chrisN

24th Aug 2010, 11:32

Oversteer's "NOTAM" is a spoof - adulterated from the real one - as far as I can see.

Clue - his emoticon.

Chris N.

airborne_artist

24th Aug 2010, 11:49

UP TO 80 GLIDERS AND 8 TUG ACFT MAY PARTICIPATE.
GLIDERS WILL NORMALLY OPR BLW INVERSION LVL OR BTN THE TOPS
OF ANY CU CLOUDS AND (IF AN INSTRUCTOR WATCHING) 500FT AGL.
AIRCRAFT WILL BE UNABLE TO COMPLY WITH RULES OF THE AIR.

Doh! Love it, though :=

CapeCodCowboy

24th Aug 2010, 11:54

C'mon guys!
Did anyone actually read the spoof??

Bit of a worry if you pay such a scant regard to the real NOTAM's!!

:=

goldeneaglepilot

24th Aug 2010, 12:04

Have a look at the competition website, it seems to carry the briefing from Sunday.

22 Aug 2010

Start/Finish 130.125

QNE 180ft 1023Mb

Prohibited:

Weston On The Green

Hinton in the Hedges

Sibson

Langar

Nav Warnings:

Silverstone 6nm radius, 12:50-13:30 Local time, otherwise 3nm radius

Northampton/Sywell 3nm

Hot Air Balloons Northampton

Wyton 3nm

First possible launch: 11:00

Soaring Spot - juniors2010 - task (http://www.soaringspot.com/juniors2010/results/mixed/task/day1.html)

BNW Bicester NW6.2km125°To Next Point, R=5.0km, Angle=180°BLY Bletchley34.6km080°Symmetrical, Rmin=1640ft, Rmax=20.0km, Angle=90°, Cylinder R=1640ftOUN Oundle56.8km017°Symmetrical, Rmin=1640ft, Rmax=20.0km, Angle=90°, Cylinder R=1640ftCAX Caxton Gibbet37.7km139°Symmetrical, Rmin=1640ft, Rmax=20.0km, Angle=90°, Cylinder R=1640ftBC1 Bicester Finish78.0km244°Cylinder R=1969ft
It is a bit scant to say the least, but should have been checked / cross referenced by the pilots, Its a great shame that the organisers did not set the first point of the triangle further south (according to their published map) I hope that the pilots did use a proper map and not the one published on the website......

dont overfil

24th Aug 2010, 12:25

#13 Ah! :D
DO. or should it be Doh.

RatherBeFlying

24th Aug 2010, 13:48

I have yet to see a glider pilot who sat down behind an internet terminal to check METARs, TAFs, NOTAMs or anything else that we consider standard practice in powered flying.This glider pilot does check NOTAMs before heading out to the field and when internet is down phones for a briefing. Yes, many glider training curricula don't cover NOTAMs, but in the process of gaining an IR, the habit was beaten into my brain.

Instead of METARs and TAFs, cross country glider pilots use graphic weather websites tailored for the glider community. If it's a half decent XC day, it's serious VFR;)

I characterise many glider clubs as environments where wonderful, nice people will cheerfully and unknowingly set you up to kill yourself:uhoh:

The contest organisers in this case are one of many such examples. The pilots assumed that the organisers had properly researched the situation.

A question for the pros: Do you check the weather and NOTAMs yourself or simply accept what dispatch hands you?

mary meagher

24th Aug 2010, 14:01

For your information, of 44 young glider pilots (under the age of 25, I believe) taking part in Sunday's task at the Junior Nationals, 22 managed to avoid busting the Red Arrows Airspace. The rest received major penalties, with many having minus scores.

Sadly, it looks more and more that good cross country days are going to be scarce this week. Most gliding competitions are planned for nine days, looking ahead, you may want to keep an eye out on Saturday.

Cambridge Gliding Club is also holding a Regional Competition. They have flown one day so far.

Lasham, near Alton, is holding two competitions, and so far have not managed to fly at all.

Its enough to make you weep, contending with UK weather.

However, in June, Husbands Bosworth and Bidford were fortunate. Their
competitions resulted in NINE DAYS OF CROSS COUNTRY DELIGHT!

That's why we do it, I guess.

Backpacker, your comments on flying in Holland fill me with pity and alarm.

I presume you share your gliding site with power traffic at a controlled airfield, thereby needing to turn on transponders, hold a radio license, and be qualified to respond to requests for airfield information.

And you say you have never seen a glider pilot sitting down at the computer before flying to check NOTAMS and weather? Well, we do exactly that on a regular basis, we are, however, lucky enough to fly at a dedicated gliding field.

As for use of transponders in gliders, can you imagine the enroute controller faced with 23 returns as the gaggles follow each other and share thermals, up to 15 or 20,( usually no more than 2 at any one level, however) in a good climb? The sky is quite big enough and we do take good care to observe thermal discipline.

Flarm seems to be helpful in gliders, this may be the more useful tool for
collision avoidance.

gijoe

24th Aug 2010, 16:13

gpn01

24th Aug 2010, 16:36

'For your information, of 44 young glider pilots (under the age of 25, I believe) taking part in Sunday's task at the Junior Nationals, 22 managed to avoid busting the Red Arrows Airspace.'

Mary,

Are you saying 22 didn't manage to avoid it?

If not, I think the competition organisers and pilots need to be chased to the Courts by the CAA. That is their job, right?

This year there have been competition runners on the south side of Old Sarum on more occasions that I want to say 'near miss'.

One spent the time bleating about 'I am in sink, I am in sink, I think I am going to have to come in...' on 123.2

Don't worry about those freefall parachutists above you then as per the NOTAM!!

It really is big stick time for some glider pilots.

:ok:

And while the big stick is out maybe it should apply also to the 423 other airspace infringements that have been reported by NATS so far this year (very few, if any, I believe were by gliders)?

Lets use the same big stick whenever a NOTAM is incorrectly put onto the AIS site.

Lets use the stick whenever GA traffic enters an ATZ which is technically active but from whom a resposne on the radio wasn't obtained (e.g. some military airfields at weekends).

Use the stick for any traffic that flies at 1000' over a gliding site that's on the half mil chart ?

How about a big stick for imprecise RT which isn't consistent with CAP413?

And a big stick for anyone who damages an aircraft on landing (as they're presumably done something wrong).

Another big stick for any pilot who clearly hasn't read the NIOTAMs and is asked by ATC if theyr'e aware of something that's in their way?

The list of opportunities to apply a big stick grows and grows and before you know it we'll all be grounded. I'm not suggesting this as a reason for not adhereing to NOTAM's etc. but I am mindful that everyone is capable of making a mistake and we need to ensure that lessons are learned. OK, if someone keeps making mistakes then I agree they need retraining or ultimately grounding.

JohnR-K

24th Aug 2010, 16:45

At our gliding club there is a formal briefing before each day's flying. The duty instructor will draw the attention of every pilot to the NOTAMS within 50km of the club. The DI also warns any pilots who are going beyond this to check NOTAMS for themselves and to discuss their plans with them. The same or similar has been true at all the gliding clubs I have visited.

Copies of the day's NOTAMS are pinned to a dedicated noticeboard and in the launch cabin.

Miroku

24th Aug 2010, 16:51

I am flying in the competition at Bicester, and I busted the airspace pretty badly, along with 22 others.

This from pgscott who was one of the offenders. So no, there weren't 22 offenders, there were 23!

I'm surprised they all managed to miss seeing 9 red jets spewing out red, white and blue smoke! And not come to the possible reason!

flybymike

24th Aug 2010, 17:36

The list of opportunities to apply a big stick grows and grows and before you know it we'll all be grounded.

Well said . There is a danger of us all turning into Vigilantes here. Lets not forget no one deliberately sets out to infringe and we are all capable of making mistakes including Gijoe.

FREDAcheck

24th Aug 2010, 17:50

If not, I think the competition organisers and pilots need to be chased to the Courts by the CAA. That is their job, right?
Don't think so. Their job is to help prevent things going wrong. As a last resort, they might take people to court for particularly serious offences. And by "serious" I don't mean thath the consequences are serious, but that the offence was the result of major negligence or deliberate breach. Punishment is rather shutting the stable door, and (in general) has rather less deterrent effect than Hang 'em and flog 'em people would like.

There are only 3 types of pilots:

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
Every mistake looks after the event like a grievous and wilful crime for which death is too slight a punishment. In this case, it looks like a combination of lack of thought by both organisers and pilots.

Of course it shouldn't happen. But it does. And those that don't believe that they could ever do something like that are just possibly in my type 3 above.

ShyTorque

24th Aug 2010, 17:58

A question for the pros: Do you check the weather and NOTAMs yourself or simply accept what dispatch hands you?

Dispatch? That's me; so I always check NOTAMS myself.

I read through the lot, using the AIS website. Note that I do NOT rely on "clever" third party graphic displays, either. Any mistake or omission is then between myself and the AIS.

Experience has proved to me that the greater the number of links in the chain, the greater the likelihood of a weak link existing.

This incident has proved just that!

eharding

24th Aug 2010, 19:22

Hmmm - on the face of it, we may be in for a Red vs. Glider rematch tomorrow:

NOTAMs EGTT-H3505/10 & EGTT-H3786/10 (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-H3505%2F10:EGTT-H3786%2F10&sll=51.488271,-0.778424&sspn=0.168243,0.308647&ie=UTF8&ll=52.663058,-0.834961&spn=2.622042,4.938354&t=p&z=8)

Of course, the route lines only interpolate between the stated transit waypoints, but with 80 gliders in the vicinity, I'd assume the Reds will be steering well clear of the place.

Crash951

24th Aug 2010, 20:03

I doubt it. From the link you posted the Reds' transit is due to start at 09:24 and end at 10:05 - I seriously doubt if any of the Bicester competition pilots will be airborne at that time.

BackPacker

24th Aug 2010, 20:16

Backpacker, your comments on flying in Holland fill me with pity and alarm.

I presume you share your gliding site with power traffic at a controlled airfield, thereby needing to turn on transponders, hold a radio license, and be qualified to respond to requests for airfield information.

This is a dedicated glider site. No powered flying except for the home-based motorglider. But Holland is a TMZ for all things flying, from 1200' up. There may be a Transponder-not-mandatory zone around the glider site, but that only applies to non-transponder-equipped gliders. If the glider has a transponder (and the clubs aircraft all do) it needs to be turned on in flight. (To be precise, it needs to be turned on at the top of the launch, and turned to standby after landing - as per the AIC.)

No, you don't technically need a radio license to use the fields radio frequency, but I did not see getting a radio license encouraged, even for pilots who were ready for serious x-country work.

As for use of transponders in gliders, can you imagine the enroute controller faced with 23 returns as the gaggles follow each other and share thermals, up to 15 or 20,( usually no more than 2 at any one level, however) in a good climb? The sky is quite big enough and we do take good care to observe thermal discipline.

When Mode-S was first introduced (and made mandatory) in the Netherlands this was indeed a significant problem. Loads of VFR returns which conflicted with the relevant IFR returns. Much has been said about this then, but all ATC units now have filters in place to filter out all 7000 returns (just show the primary return, not the secundary data block), or anything above/below a certain height.

But even without those filters, if ATC were to call me and report "traffic is multiple gliders from your 11 o'clock to 1 o'clock, three miles, lowest at XXX, highest at YYY" I'd be happy and take some action. I don't need to know the individual position and altitude of all 23 of them.

But a transponder is not just used by ATC. There's also TCAS and, increasingly popular, PCAS. Both which require transponders to be active.

Flarm seems to be helpful in gliders, this may be the more useful tool for collision avoidance.

Flarm seems to be used excusively in the glider world. Pity, since it's a lovely tool - although the range and sensitivity probably need to be increased if it were to work for fast-moving aircraft. But international regulations and aircraft certification requirements will probably prevent it from getting widespread adoption outside the glider world.

However, this seems to be a very interesting unit. Now if they would only make the transponder receiver directional such as the Zaon XRX, and interfaceable with a GNS430 or similar...

PowerFLARM (http://www.butterfly.aero/powerflarm/fly/)

Jan Olieslagers

24th Aug 2010, 20:32

<<off-topic>>
FLARM is a commercial product offered by a private company. Their prime interests are financial.

ISTR a rant about expensive mandatory software upgrades, but am unsure of details; neither did I find any in a brief web search.

ProfChrisReed

24th Aug 2010, 20:41

Purely on the Notams point, I have not flown at a UK gliding club (and I've flown from more than a dozen) where the Notams were not checked by the duty instructor for local flying, and made available to any intending cross-country pilots. Of course some may not bother reading them, but I really haven't come across any.

You'll never see me checking the Notams at my club because I check them before I leave home.

When flying in a competition I've always relied on the organisers to obtain a copy of the Notams, and this has always been available. The Bicester briefing was clearly defective on this point - and I'd be amazed if it happened again for some years as organisers remind themselves "Remember Bicester".

The gliding movement, and the clubs themselves, are very conscious that gliding is different from other kinds of flying, and work hard to avoid conflicts with other airspace users. We have out share of mavericks and cowboys, as does all GA, but I think no more than any other sector.

From memory the last Red Arrows bust by a glider was more than 5 years ago. With 3-5 busts each year, that suggests to me that we are no more cavalier about RA(T)s than anyone else.

Oh, and I agree with all that has been said about the usability of the Notam system. I use a tool to help me filter the Notams, but read every entry which is filtered out. It's a dull and tedious task to reduce the 100+ Notams to the 5 which are relevant to my flight, and the system means that I'm never 100% confident that I've not missed something.

Time to reduce the clutter and make Notams more accessible please.

FREDAcheck

24th Aug 2010, 21:24

Oh, and I agree with all that has been said about the usability of the Notam system. I use a tool to help me filter the Notams, but read every entry which is filtered out. It's a dull and tedious task to reduce the 100+ Notams to the 5 which are relevant to my flight, and the system means that I'm never 100% confident that I've not missed something.

Time to reduce the clutter and make Notams more accessible please.
I completely agree, but the usual response is along the lines of:
If it were good enough for my father and his father before him, it's good enough for you, lad. You people today don't know you're born, why in my day we had to read it it morse code... Who's going to pay for it... Has to conform to international telex standards...
And so on and so on. We have a system that is error prone and tedious, and unfortunately a lot of people that defend the indefensible.

But we know it can be done properly, and I've got access to at least 4 graphical presentations of Notams - but none of them is "official", and so we should really check the AIS site as well. We just get a lot of sniping about pilots that can't be bothered to check (I can, but I find however careful I am I make mistakes with the text-only system).

NATS have shown that they do understand that it's not just a matter of punishing infringers - viz the Airspace Aware initiative, and the improvements to Farnborough LARS. Now if only someone would take the really quite small step to produce a 21st Century Notams interface, and preferably before the century is out...

gpn01

24th Aug 2010, 21:35

This is a dedicated glider site. No powered flying except for the home-based motorglider. But Holland is a TMZ for all things flying, from 1200' up. There may be a Transponder-not-mandatory zone around the glider site, but that only applies to non-transponder-equipped gliders. If the glider has a transponder (and the clubs aircraft all do) it needs to be turned on in flight. (To be precise, it needs to be turned on at the top of the launch, and turned to standby after landing - as per the AIC.)

When Mode-S was first introduced (and made mandatory) in the Netherlands this was indeed a significant problem. Loads of VFR returns which conflicted with the relevant IFR returns. Much has been said about this then, but all ATC units now have filters in place to filter out all 7000 returns (just show the primary return, not the secundary data block), or anything above/below a certain height.

But even without those filters, if ATC were to call me and report "traffic is multiple gliders from your 11 o'clock to 1 o'clock, three miles, lowest at XXX, highest at YYY" I'd be happy and take some action. I don't need to know the individual position and altitude of all 23 of them.

But a transponder is not just used by ATC. There's also TCAS and, increasingly popular, PCAS. Both which require transponders to be active.

Flarm seems to be used excusively in the glider world. Pity, since it's a lovely tool - although the range and sensitivity probably need to be increased if it were to work for fast-moving aircraft. But international regulations and aircraft certification requirements will probably prevent it from getting widespread adoption outside the glider world.

However, this seems to be a very interesting unit. Now if they would only make the transponder receiver directional such as the Zaon XRX, and interfaceable with a GNS430 or similar...

PowerFLARM (http://www.butterfly.aero/powerflarm/fly/)

So, if I understand your post correctly about gliding in The Netherlands:

If you don't have a transponder then that's ok.

If you DO have a transponder then you're required to turn it off when below 1200' or when being launched. Therefore it's not usable as a collision avoidance device by fellow gliders when in the circuit (generally considered to be the highest risk phase of flight for collisions).

With the introduction of Mode-S, secondary returns (i.e. transponder squark codes), are filtered by ATC to instead just show primary returns on their radar. Don't know much about radar but I didn't think that primary returns show anything other than location, i.e. don't show height and so ATC can't say if something is above//below you. But you're happy simply to know that there are gliders in the area...something that most radars can already achieve without even the need for gliders to be Mode-S equipped.

This al seems to be getting awfully confusing! Perhaps the Dutch implementation is a good opportunity for the various other authorities to learn how NOT to implement such requirements.

BackPacker

24th Aug 2010, 21:53

If you don't have a transponder then that's ok.

No. If you don't have a mode-S transponder you are confined to the airspace below 1200' (which is a bit awkward for gliders) or you are limited to a few Transponder Free Zones - little circles around well-known glider sites. You can forget about doing any significant x-country work unless you manage to pull that off below 1200'.

If you DO have a transponder then you're required to turn it off when below 1200' or when being launched.

Again, no. If you do have a transponder the principle for all aircraft (powered or otherwise) is to have it turned on as soon as you enter the runway ready for departure, and to turn it off upon leaving the runway. The exception to this is a winch-launched glider. They have such a high rate of ascent that TCAS-equipped aircraft several 1000s of feet above will do an extrapolation and give a warning or even a mandatory traffic avoidance resolution. After all, TCAS does not know that the winch will run out of steam at 1500' or so. And that TA is not fun for the SLF in the back. So the advice given in the AIC to gliders specifically is to only activate the transponder once the launch is finished. Obviously once it's on, you leave it on until you're well and truly back on the ground in the landing field. So yes, it's on while thermaling and it's on in the circuit, even below 1200'.

With the introduction of Mode-S, secondary returns (i.e. transponder squark codes), are filtered by ATC to instead just show primary returns on their radar. Don't know much about radar but I didn't think that primary returns show anything other than location, i.e. don't show height and so ATC can't say if something is above//below you. But you're happy simply to know that there are gliders in the area...something that most radars can already achieve without even the need for gliders to be Mode-S equipped.

Again, no. It's the Air Traffic Controller him/herself who can control the filtering, not some anonymous programmer in a consultancy firm far away. So if there's a gaggle of gliders it's the controller who elects to see less information about them on the screen. Generally known as de-clutter. But as soon as detailed information is required, it's there. Courtesy of mode-S.

Perhaps the Dutch implementation is a good opportunity for the various other authorities to learn how NOT to implement such requirements.

I agree that other ATC providers can definitely learn lessons from the way the Dutch handled the mode-S implementation. But your post is a bit too simplistic for that.

gpn01

24th Aug 2010, 21:59

@Backpacker - thanks for the clarification!

Oldpilot55

24th Aug 2010, 21:59

I stand to be corrected by ATCOs but is it not partly true to say that the large number of CAS infringements is a result of improved radar and increased use of transponders by light aircraft. Gliders are less likely to show up on radar due to a universal non-use of transponders. As I bimble about I often hear controllers advising of traffic that could be gliders or microlights. I do understand the argument that gliders rarely have enough power or room for transponders.

biscuit74

24th Aug 2010, 22:13

This was an embarrassing show of incompetence by the gliding movement - and by the BGA, right to the top. This has been waiting to happen for some time, sadly.

I consider myself a glider pilot first and foremost. I am, or have been, proud of that. I have long held that on balance, pilots trained as glider pilots first are better, safer pilots than the average. Right now, this event makes me seriously doubt that. All UK glider pilots should feel embarrassed at this shambles.

Anyone can make a mistake of course. I've made plenty. But what sort of half asleep characters set a task to within such a short distance of an RA? These should be fairly senior, competent people. (And while I thoroughly approve of the contest directors reading a major riot act the next day, I hope they also did a 'mea culpa'. They surely needed to !)

This was a Juniors contest, so the pilots are likely to need more guidance and supervision, support. Of course, these folk are supposed to be amongst our brightest and best (wince) young pilots, so the fact that apparently more than half the field can't do basic navigation is a fairly damning indictment of the BGA's training system these days. They will include pilots from all over the UK, so it's a generic problem, not just a local one.
Who taught these young pilots navigation and airmanship? Who has been supervising them? Evidently, no-one, or not sufficiently. One or two getting it wrong would be understandable. Half the field? Come on.

Looking around the current BGA set up, sadly, I am not surprised. We have too many, at best marginally capable, 'instructors' who can just about teach to a safe level of mechanical action. I challenge what deeper understanding they can give our young pilots. Apparently, darn little.

In the modern touchy feely, 'everyone is as good as everyone else', 'don't let's be unkind to anyone' world, these people are not encouraged to either develop their own competence to teach or get out. There is not enough positive criticism given or accepted. All too often folk are allowed to continue without improvement in too many cases.

This event, to my way of thinking, is exactly the sort of result to be expected, eventually. Fortunately nothing worse than embarrassment and annoyance, though it is bad enough. I hope the gliding movement at large learns a lesson from this and sharpens up its act. They desperately need to. I see notably higher standards of flying, training and supervision elsewhere in the gliding world now.
We used to think we were amongst the world's best; it would nice to head back that way, so -
Come on folks - surely we can do better than this. There are a bunch of lessons to learn here !

flybymike

24th Aug 2010, 22:43

After all, TCAS does not know that the winch will run out of steam at 1500' or so.

I know nothing about gliding but do know that many UK gliding sites are marked on the charts as cable hazards to in excess of 3000ft.
Can cables really go this high? or does this hazard just relate to tow releases?Allowing for the slant angle at time of cable release it would seem to necessitate runway lengths well in excess of 1000metres?

BackPacker

24th Aug 2010, 22:51

When you have a 1000m field, your cable length will be about that length too. Maybe a little extra, but not much. Theoretically if the wind is strong enough you can "kite" all the way up and since you're being released almost on top of the winch, you would be released at almost 1000m.

In practice, with a moderate headwind and moderate technique the average height you can reach is more like 500m. Nil wind and you might be lucky to reach 350m.

The number marked on the chart will probably be the max release height.

@Backpacker - thanks for the clarification!

You're welcome. And sorry about my last sentence. It might have come across a little more condescending than intended.:uhoh:

flybymike

24th Aug 2010, 22:57

Ah yes, Thank you. the possibility of "kiting" hadn't occurred to me. I had assumed that the winch would have to keep running for the whole launch or at least until the point at which it started to drag the glider back down again.

Jim59

24th Aug 2010, 23:10

I know nothing about gliding but do know that many UK gliding sites are marked on the charts as cable hazards to in excess of 3000ft.
Can cables really go this high? or does this hazard just relate to tow releases?Allowing for the slant angle at time of cable release it would seem to necessitate runway lengths well in excess of 1000metres?

My site has approval to winch up to 3,000'. I've been to 2,700' on the winch.

As a glider pilot I'm pretty embarrassed by the infringements of the red arrows RAT. Having looked at the task set (available on the web) the outbound and return tracks are unforgivably close to the RAT. It should never have been set. Although gliders are using GPS technology most will not have the NOTAMed areas shown on a moving map so in many cases eyeball has to be used to judge distance in such a case. The task should have been set to give a minimum of 5 miles clearance between the RAT and the task track. This was not the case.

If court cases result it should be the task setter as well as the pilots facing the music.

oversteer

24th Aug 2010, 23:55

God forbid a glider pilot has to carefully navigate close to controlled airspace!

Imagine if some gliding sites were actually located next to controlled airspace, both laterally and vertically, just imagine the carnage that could ensue..

chrisN

25th Aug 2010, 00:15

No emoticon this time, oversteer?

For the benefit of people who might otherwise think that oversteer has a serious point, there are of course gliding sites close to or beneath controlled airspace, and local pilots learn to observe landmarks on the ground, and/or use GPS and moving map displays, to avoid incursions.

Of the large numbers of incursions recorded by NATS each year, almost all are by powered aircraft and very few are by gliders.

Chris N

WorkingHard

25th Aug 2010, 06:44

"Of the large numbers of incursions recorded by NATS each year, almost all are by powered aircraft and very few are by gliders"
ChrisN that MAY have been true until this year but you have certainly skewed the charts this time. Please dont try and deflect the cockup by glider pilots by introducing powered aircraft into this. This thread is about one incident and you cannot deflect from that.

goldeneaglepilot

25th Aug 2010, 06:47

Biscuit74 - well said. You have hit the nail on the head. Hopefully the BGA will take ownership of this problem and review its procedures with regards instruction.

I know from past experience that the CAA can be very harsh if it wants to be, sometimes even petty with regards its enforcement policies. I hope this time they do make a stand and look at the whole problem globally rather than as something in Black and white, yes the infringements happened, yes they could prosecute. It would be more useful to examine WHY it happened, over 50% of the pilots on the day appeared to be unable to read a Notam, yes they are sometimes a pain to read, yes it might not be an ultra modern system which is employed to publish them. None the less, the system works (it could be made better) The information is freely availible. It is not excusable for the pilots to have been unaware of the RAT - or to rely on the competition organisers to brief them, it takes seconds to check and is only good airmanship.

I started my flying with gliding and worked through to Silver C, My training at the time was scant with regards map reading and airlaw. I had no idea how scant until I converted my silver c to a ppl. That was again reinforced with my written atpl exams. Thirty years later I would have thought those gaps might have been addressed. Its clear from Sundays events and the subsequent postings on here, that the issues may have been addressed at some club sites, but not on a national uniform policy basis. The training system seems to be too varied, the scope of what is taught does not seem standardised. It may produce glider pilots who can fly, but seems to not be so good at producing pilots with knowledge and skills to intergrate safely into busy and complex UK airspace.

There is the question about the wisdom of the person who set the task so close to the RA(T), I guess that NONE of the competitors thought (or dared) to raise the question at the briefing as to why the route had to take them so close. At least 50% of the competitors did not even know it was a RA(T).

The whole of this episode has highlighted some serious questions about the training of glider pilots in the UK, lets hope that lessons are learnt and things move rapidly forward for the better

oversteer

25th Aug 2010, 08:48

There is the question about the wisdom of the person who set the task so close to the RA(T), I guess that NONE of the competitors thought (or dared) to raise the question at the briefing as to why the route had to take them so close. At least 50% ofthe competitors did not even know it was a RA(T).

It is stated on another forum that the route chosen was to suit the weather, which was quite unsoarable from the other Bicester start points. All pilots should be Silver badge holders, they should know not to just follow a line on track ignoring all airspace in the way.

With a rapidly changing weather situation the intention was presumably to get the gliders in the air ASAP. All of them could have waited before starting, or the director could have delayed the launch.

There is no single person to blame here. Seems a classic "holes in the cheese" situation:

- pressure to get the gliders launched in an awkward day
- task changed at last minute
- pilots forced to launch or lose their space in the launch grid
- weather south of track not condusive to soaring
- insufficient prominence attributed to the RA(T) in the brief
- director expecting gliders to route south of track line
- perhaps, no checking of NOTAMs by competitors 'as the directors would brief us of everything'
- pilots under pressure flying in a competition, perhaps for the first time
- pilots not familiar with the area features (is that Buckingham or .. ?)
- difficulty in referencing 6nm from Silverstone on a half mil map
- tendency for pilots to follow the 'gaggle' and think that 'if he's doing it it must be OK'

tinpilot

25th Aug 2010, 09:14

What pompous tosh.
(not you oversteer)

First of all, it is completely impractical for 40+ pilots to individually self-brief using the limited resources at a small airfield. The BGA know this. The competition rulebook states very clearly that a briefing must be held each morning and include:
Airspace restrictions and hazards that might affect competitors and are additional to those shown on the latest aviation maps, i.e. NOTAM information and active parachute zones to be treated as prohibited airspace.It is not unreasonable for a competition field to rely on the organisation for airspace alerts and sensible tasking. The task setting & timing of launch indicates that the organisation were unaware of the significance of the NOTAM.

Secondly, the requirements for an XC endorsement include passing an airlaw exam (equivalent to the power exam) and demonstrating an ability to navigate. This is all clearly stated in the BGA syllabus for those who care to look it up.

None of these pilots are incompetent. Some of them are more experienced than others but they will all have received an adequate level of training. I believe one of the infringers is a military pilot, I wouldn't be surprised if there is an airline/commercial pilot or two amongst that group as well.

On a human factors note, the task planning & scoring software will not know what a RA(T) is. I believe it will present any temporary airspace as a 'Nav Warning' but this airspace should not be interpreted in the same way as a NOTAMed Nav Warning.

Ranting on about inadequate BGA training is wrong; none of these pilots got lost so:the fact that apparently more than half the field can't do basic navigationis clearly wrong. The failures here were inadequate daily briefing and monumentally inappropriate task setting. Although the pilots have to shoulder the blame, the fault lies squarely with the task setter and competition director in whom they put their trust. The sheer stupidity of the chosen task is what makes me think that the organisers were unaware of the nature & extent of the NOTAM, an attitude which was probably passed on to the pilots.

If biscuit74 believes his club instructors are incompetent, the fault lies with his CFI, who is responsible for standards at his club.

I'm prepared to believe that the BGA Bronze badge (which requires the ability to acquire, understand & use NOTAMs) post-dates goldeneaglepilot's dim & distant gliding experience.

shortstripper

25th Aug 2010, 10:49

What a shame so many on here seem to love glider bashing! Yep the bust was bad, but one thread down as I write this, is another about a GA pilot busting the Reds display as well :rolleyes:

I started as a glider pilot but have flown GA for the best part of the 20 years since. Last year I went back to do a bit of gliding and had forgotten how to use my eyes! I thought my lookout was good .... How wrong I was! Glider pilots have skills many GA pilots don't, and vice versa. We tend to become honed at the skills we use the most and then expect others to be just as good, but forget that we may lack skills in other areas, that others would expect us to have.

We are all lovers of the air. We need to respect the rights of others to fly their particular aircraft and the right to airspace needed to allow it. Even the best pilots have been know to make mistakes and bust airspace. How it's dealt with needs to be proportional and not vindictive. Clearly in this case, an in depth review of "why?" is needed ... but a single aircraft popping up in the wrong place at the wrong time presents just as much danger and just as worthy of scrutiny.

SS

oversteer

25th Aug 2010, 16:04

Statement from RAFAT's OC on Saturday's cancellation:

After the unfortunate airborne cancellation of our display at Silverstone on Sunday, I would like to take this opportunity to explain why the establishment of Restricted Area (Temporary) airspace for Red Arrows displays is required and the implications therein of its infringement ...

RAF Red Arrows - The Red Arrows Team News (http://www.raf.mod.uk/reds/teamnews/index.cfm?storyid=A9119FF0-5056-A318-A8054E383083343D)

Anonystude

25th Aug 2010, 16:16

Tinpilot -- I'm a glider pilot myself (after a fashion). I've done my CCE, and am on my way to finishing the Silver C. I'm also a professional powered aircraft pilot, and I take issue with several of your points.

First of all, it is completely impractical for 40+ pilots to individually self-brief using the limited resources at a small airfield.

Put simply, this is balls. Take a half mil, some sticky-back plastic and a pen. Put map behind plastic, hang on side of launch point bus, DI draws notams for local area / task on map. No excuses. Yes, it still relies on one chap with the notam, but if you stick the printout next to it for people to cross-reference, then errors get spotted. This system works, it's simple, and pretty fail-tolerant.

the requirements for an XC endorsement include passing an airlaw exam (equivalent to the power exam)

No -- they're nowhere near equivalent in depth and breadth. Compare the JAR-PPL(A) theoretical requirements (http://www.vluchtvoorbereiding.nl/documenten/jarsyllabus.pdf), especially Air Law, with the single page six of this one (http://www.gliding.co.uk/forms/Syllabusv4June08.pdf) .

If biscuit74 believes his club instructors are incompetent, the fault lies with his CFI, who is responsible for standards at his club.

He's not the only one -- I (as a relatively experienced PPL(A) at the time) had to fully rebrief my then-club CFI about NOTAMS (this was when I started gliding, c. 2004). He had *no* idea. I've since seen similar levels of knowledge from other BGA-rated BIs through to club CFIs.

I'm prepared to believe that the BGA Bronze badge (which requires the ability to acquire, understand & use NOTAMs) post-dates goldeneaglepilot's dim & distant gliding experience.

It doesn't post-date mine...! And I don't recall a single question about NOTAMs in my Bronze theory exam, nor even meeting the concept during the training. Nor, come to think of it, during my CCE flying -- apart from the aforementioned discussion with the then-CFI...

I have another question for those who question the need for the Red Arrows transit NOTAMS (and, in extremis, the need for a RA(T)!) -- take a moment to try and understand the workload required to manoeuver a nine-aircraft formation, of fast jets at low level, through cluttered airspace whilst doing all the other good stuff that comes with a long navigational flight. Now imagine doing that at three times the speed of your average light aircraft. Can you now begin to see why poor Red 1 might appreciate it if you could possibly not bitch and whine about why the 'Reds expect us to get out of their way in our God-given and inviolate Class G' as some people seem to think, and just do the poor bugger a favour and stay out of the way temporarily?

Miroku

25th Aug 2010, 16:24

Imagine if some gliding sites were actually located next to controlled airspace, both laterally and vertically, just imagine the carnage that could ensue..

Dunstable Gliding Club in Luton's class D airspace seem to manage OK............

Croqueteer

25th Aug 2010, 16:27

:confused:As has been said before, why can't notams be published in a usable format, ie a pictorial presentation? It takes ages to plot out the existing pile of co0ordinates.

John G

25th Aug 2010, 16:43

I have started using spine which gives an excellent display on map. You can highlight to read. I do a normal route brief on the AIS site to be safe.

Spine (http://www.enborne.f2s.com/gliding/spine.htm)

Hope this is of some help.

John (glider pilot from a club like most I know that always post local notams, has a culture of checking them before cross country flights and includes it thoroughly in cross country endorsment training!)

Rod1

25th Aug 2010, 17:03

“I have another question for those who question the need for the Red Arrows transit NOTAMS “

I don’t think we were questioning the Notam, but the whole idea of fast jets charging about all over the UK at 2000 ft at the weekend. This is madness for all the reasons you give.

“Can you now begin to see why poor Red 1 might appreciate it if you could possibly not bitch and whine about why the 'Reds expect us to get out of their way.”

The Reds have every right to expect us to keep out of the way within the RA(T), the transits are however only nav warnings, which can be very misleading in terms of the exact course and height. If it is absolutely necessary for the reds to transit at 2000, then lets at least get them to transit at 2000, on the exact path specified, and lets make it temp class A (or RED airspace if you prefer). This would make them and us safer. Alternatively perhaps we should decide we do not want to pay for them at all.

Rod1

goldeneaglepilot

25th Aug 2010, 17:09

Tinpilot, Its very easy for 40+ pilots to self brief, I think if somone can't afford a £20 mobile phone from Tescos then they should not be flying, sorry safety has to come first. Its interesting to hear your comments about commercial pilots and military pilots possibly being part of the group (especially with the age limit) - was it a case of excitement and pressure of a comp placing people at stress and then pilots failing to do what they should have done - CHECKED...

Ask any military pilot - he is responsible for the safety and compliance of his flight and that includes checking briefings, notams, weather ect. Yes there is a structure to help him (as with any type of flying). I agree that the system of Notams is antiquated, but it does work and its the best that we have got until someone changes it. The fact that it has not got whistles and bells / pretty graphics does not absolve the pilot of not checking it.

Yes I did my silver c a long time ago, but I have recently flown gliders at three different clubs and have managed 26 hours of gliding in the last twelve months, not a lot, but I am not as far out of touch as you infer.

I find gliding a refreshing change to my day job which often involves hours just flying IFR and following its procedures. Its nice to look out and see something out of the window rather than clag...

My flying now is split between the UK and the states, I think that had this happened in the States then the FAA would have been seeking blood, especially in view of post 911 events.

In the UK I hope that lessons are learnt, procedures reviewed and new ones adopted - without the need for restrictive legal restrictions, as seems to be the trend now. Its not about bashing glider pilots, I am one myself, its about learning from mistakes, reviewing faliures and making things better for the future. A head in the sand attitude achieves little and forces others (eg CAA) to take action to alter things.

When I have gone gliding I normally have an idea of what I am doing on the day - if its a cross country, I plan where I aim to go, and check the Notams before I leave, it takes a few seconds but allows me a more relaxed time in the air.

Task planning software not recognising a RA(T) is incredible, if it can't then it should be seriously questioned as to its ability to do a job. Can you imagine the uproar if an IFR flight /pilot said he could not do what the controller asked because his pencil had broke....

Anonystude

25th Aug 2010, 17:12

Rod1 -- fair one, except that the vast majority of airshows are at the weekend. That tends to be when the public want to see jets turning AVTUR into noise for pleasure. So how else do you propose they get to their display venue?

The NOTAMs unfortunately have to be a bit vague and the route flexible, after all the weather isn't always as nice as they might like, et cetera. I'm sure everyone would love more RA(T) / 'purple' airspace ('red' airspace?), especially when it would go unused so much of the time....

Rod1

25th Aug 2010, 17:58

“The NOTAMs unfortunately have to be a bit vague and the route flexible,”

That makes it very hard to avoid them!

“So how else do you propose they get to their display venue?”

Supposing we want them at all, at 6000 ft plus. Using the current approach it is only a mater of time before some poor sod gets swatted out of the sky, and remember he will not be infringing, he will just be flying along trying to see and avoid.

Rod1

ShyTorque

25th Aug 2010, 18:33

“The NOTAMs unfortunately have to be a bit vague and the route flexible,”

That makes it very hard to avoid them!

Very much the same for glider competitions... :hmm:

goldeneaglepilot

25th Aug 2010, 18:47

I was just looking at a posting - which quickly vanished... It seems from what was just said that the briefing was not in a briefing room, but "out on the grid" so the pilots had no access to Notams.

If that is true and the pilots were being put under pressure by the comp organisers, then I sincerely hope that comes out in the CAA inquiry into this. We all need to learn from that.

It also said that the other (previous) tasks had been to the SW - thus well clear of the RA(T)

BackPacker

25th Aug 2010, 20:17

Still, I don't think that's an excuse. Here you are. Glider pilot on your way to a competition that will last for, what, nine days? You know tasks are going to be set that may take you as far as 100km away (Junior comp.) from a certain airfield.

So you spend hours packing bags, tent, clothing and whatnot. Plus cleaning and prepping the aircraft, studying the charts, weather forecast and everything. How hard is it to do an area NOTAM search then and see what might be relevant in the next few days?

It's not as if the RA(T) popped up unexpectedly. The NOTAM about it was in the system, what, three months ago already?

Yet at least half the pack had no clue whatsoever. Maybe even all of the pack had no clue, since apparently nobody piped up during the pre-flight briefing.

I don't think this is an incident. It's a symptom.

Gertrude the Wombat

25th Aug 2010, 20:37

Supposing we want them at all, at 6000 ft plus.
Bit of a bummer for all the village fetes and birthday parties they'd agreed to fly past on the way.

tinpilot

25th Aug 2010, 20:40

Take a half mil, some sticky-back plastic and a pen. Put map behind plastic, hang on side of launch point bus, DI draws notams for local area / task on map. No excuses. Yes, it still relies on one chap with the notam, but if you stick the printout next to it for people to cross-reference, then errors get spotted. This system works, it's simple, and pretty fail-tolerant.
. . .is not my definition of individual self-briefing. It is what should happen at the morning briefing, albeit with an overhead projector rather than a paper chart. The briefing should also include a detailed explanation of each relevant NOTAM, i.e. nature, timing & geographical extent.

The convention that the organisation provide an airspace briefing dates back to the early days of XC competition when NOTAMS were distributed through teletype & then fax. When it is properly applied, the system works well. The 0500 number provides updates and latest news, it does not give the full picture.

Airspace infringements are penalised, there is no competitive advantage in taking a shortcut. The fact that so many pilots, including experienced pilots, passed through the RA(T) indicates that the briefing was inadequate. Setting a task so close to NOTAMed airspace suggests that the task setter was unaware of the nature or extent of the RA(T).

Re-tasking on the grid is no excuse. BNW as a start is a very, very poor choice; BIC, BIE or even CAL would have been infinitely preferable. Plotting the first leg in some gliding software & then drawing in the NOTAM is jaw-dropping. Looking at the results suggests that the startline opened at about the same time the RA(T) became active. No sensible, informed task setter would have set that task at that time.

The BGA airlaw exam does not replicate the PPL exam; there is no requirement to understand the different types of ATC, or marshalling signals, customs procedures, wake turbulence etc. It is equivalent in that it examines all the details relevant to glider operations, including the rights and responsibilities of pilots with regard to airspace classifications. These pilots did not infringe because they did not know what a RA(T) is, or how to get NOTAMs. They infringed because they relied on the decades old convention that the organisation would inform them of any relevant airspace and set appropriate tasks.

Ability to acquire & understand NOTAMs is part of the oral exam, not the written exam - part 5, page 2 (http://www.gliding.co.uk/bgainfo/onlineforms.htm).

People who are active in gliding will have heard of SeeYou. Slovenian in origin, it is probably the most popular flight planning, analysis & scoring software in the world. I don't use it myself, AIUI it includes a facility for task planners to plot temporary airspace on a briefing map. It delineates the airspace, it doesn't define or explain it - that's the task planner's job. The problem arises when the airspace is not properly explained & then people interpret the phrase Nav Warning in the same way that they would a NOTAM nav warning.

The lessons to be learned are that the existing standards need to be properly applied. The failure is not of training but in application of the existing rules.

I agree that there should be regulatory action. I'm usually a pretty laissez-faire person but I understand that this requires a certain amount of personal responsibility. I would suggest that any pilot (power or glider) who infringes airspace should have his/her licence suspended pending successful completion of further training. If gliding competition organisers found half their entry list grounded mid-comp it might encourage a more responsible attitude towards pilot briefing & task setting.

goldeneaglepilot

25th Aug 2010, 21:07

I quote below the information from the GASCo web site, In my experience ringing the number DOES give access to the days restrictions. In my opinion - no excuse not to ring.... The author of the article below is correct.

GASCo - Problems Getting NOTAMS - A Simple Guide (http://www.gasco.org.uk/pages/news_item.asp?i_ToolbarID=1&i_PageID=281)

"Problems Getting NOTAMS - A Simple Guide

GETTING THE NOTAMS

INTRO: A simple person’s guide to mastering the AIS NOTAM website - you know you ought to. It is my private belief, based not upon any actual statistical research but simply on knowledge of the practices of many flying colleagues, that few private pilots ever bother to get the NOTAMs. Those who fly from clubs or airfields with adequate self briefing facilities may riffle through the NOTAMs covering the entire Flight Information Region stuck up on a notice board but there is so much information presented there, most of it irrelevant to the proposed flight, that many give up around page five and hope for the best as regards the unseen remainder. They should know that the time spent to so little advantage would have been far more profitably employed if they had simply made a free call to 0500 354802. From the pre recorded information on that line they would quickly have learned of any air displays, royal flights or other major hazards taking place on that day."

From the CAA website:
<B>AIS INFORMATION LINE
</B>The AIS Information Line is an additional service designed to supplement the information available from the website. It is not intended to replace the need to obtain a full briefing.
Information is recorded by AIS staff the evening before the next day’s activities and is updated during the day should any change or addition be required.

0500 354802
International +44 (0)208 750 3939

The message provides information on restricted areas (to notify Red Arrows activities) airspace upgrades (to notify Royal flights operated in fixed wing aircraft) and emergency restrictions of flying (to prohibit flight in the vicinity of an accident or incident).

And from the NATS website:

The UK Air Navigation Order, Article 52 says: “The commander of an aircraft registered in the United Kingdom shall take all reasonable steps to satisfy himself, before the aircraft takes off, that 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.”

To support that requirement, the UK Aeronautical Information Services provides a range of data and on-line services to airlines, pilots and all those involved in flight planning and navigation in the UK and beyond.

Ultimatly its the pilots responsibility - its the pilot who will stand in the dock in court.

gpn01

25th Aug 2010, 21:29

The UK Air Navigation Order, Article 52 says: “The commander of an aircraft registered in the United Kingdom shall take all reasonable steps to satisfy himself, before the aircraft takes off, that 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.”

Unfortunately the competitors thought that they had taken reasonable steps by listening to the briefing provided by the competition organisers. Don't know the specifics but any route planning, task setting and NOTAM reviewing is normally done by a team comprising a Task Setter, Competition Director and is scrutinised where needed by a panel of safety pilots.

goldeneaglepilot

26th Aug 2010, 11:31

Just been talking to a friend of mine who is the CFI at the gliding club I normally go to. He is in a state of utter disbelief about the whole thing, he showed me the page on the BGA website which lists the Silverstone display, he says its been on there for some time. He also showed me the BGA newsletter from August 2006.

I feel that the BGA are doing their best. However there are some serious failings of others

British Gliding Association >> Airspace >> UK Aeronautical Information Service (http://www.gliding.co.uk/bgainfo/airspace/rats.php?date=2010-08-22)

From the BGA Newsletter:

<B>Temporary Restricted Airspace. </B>
The list of TRAs most likely to affect gliding

operations over the next few months has been updated and can be found at

http://www.gliding.co.uk/bgainfo/airspace/introduction.htm#AICS
. New

notices include a list of jet formation display sites, including the Red Arrows, for

August to October. Pilots should remember that the BGA web site list is not

definitive and that they should check the AIS web site (http://www.ais.org.uk) or the AIS Information Line 0500 354802 regularly to ensure that they are aware of air space changes that might affect them, in addition to checking NOTAMs before every flight.

Another Red Arrows display had to be abandoned last month because

of a glider incursion – this must stop.

'Chuffer' Dandridge

26th Aug 2010, 17:36

Can I just put in a plea from all the other display pilots out there who regularly get their displays busted by microlights/gliders/fixed wing/helos/Paramotors and jets, mostly because the to$$ers can't be bothered to read the NOTAMS.. Jeez, I can even get them on my phone these days.

Fair dos, a NOTAM Nav Warning is just that, but it's not rocket science to realise that coming head to head with a large piece of metal coming out of a loop at 300+kts will spoil your whole day and maybe spoil your Raybans and pilot case too. The Diamond Star that went through the Rougham overhead a few weeks ago whilst the display was on will realise this..:rolleyes:

Most of us don't take up a huge 6NM radius chunk of Restricted Airspace for 25 mins, but all displays where CAA permissions have been granted will at least have a NOTAM Nav Warning..