unprofessional flying

[floppyjock]

To the pilot of the aircraft that flew over the parachute club dropzone at Errol (7miles west of Dundee) without speaking to either the DZ, Dundee ATC, Leuchars radar or Scottish at 1330 local today. On a heading of approx 040. I hope your proud of your standard of flying. Your actions nearly cost the lives of 4 skydivers as well as your own.

Rant over. Slowly calming down now.:mad: :ugh:

Floppy

[thing]

I've seen that happen at Langar near me. You have to ask how some people got their license.

[Echo Romeo]

Didn't you get the reg?

[floppyjock]

Didnt get it due to the sun in my eyes. Called Dundee, Luechars and Scottish but they had no joy as they werent speaking to it. If i did get the reg i wouldnt have posted on here. I would be having a one way conversation with them by now.

Floppy

[Jan Olieslagers]

Sure enough you'll get replies enough, with ample wagging of old wise beards, but not the one you hope for ("sorry, twas me, I'll never do it again")

[Halfbaked_Boy]

I would be having a one way conversation with them by now.

Such is the way of many now...

How do you know it wasn't a student on their first solo XCC, got a bit lost, panicking etc? In which case it really wouldn't help to start the call with accusations and a generally destructive tone.

It probably was some d**k who didn't care where they were, but flying's the wrong game to be making assumptions in. Need facts.

[Pace]

This says to me to always be vigilent and never take anything for granted?
Do not drop parachutists unless you are absolutely sure the airspace is clear and some clot has missed your airspace on his chart, is lost or off course and is about to drive through?

I almost hit a glider in cloud a few years back while flying a twin in the descent so take nothing for granted including your airspace.

Pace

[thing]

I almost hit a glider in cloud a few years back while flying a twin in the descent so take nothing for granted including your airspace.I kind of agree but if you're plummeting to earth at 120mph you haven't got the chance to getting out of the way. Someone who looks like they may be about to infringe a drop zone is already too late if you're taking the minute or so drop from 15,000'. I was lurking about the general area of Langar last year when I heard a guy give his pos rep as 'Overhead Langar' to East Midlands to which East Mids gave the reply 'Live drop live drop vacate immediately'. But if you're overhead any way is the quickest way out. I just can't get my head around some pilots, who the hell would fly over a drop zone unless they were specifically told it was cold?

[S-Works]

Unfortunately our DZ is bust on an almost daily basis. Even pilots are told to keep clear they ignore it. I heard a guy argue with the controller once when I was on descent, he wa told there was a twin turboprop passing FL120 and he tried to argue that he would belong gone before I got there. The controller pointed out I was coming down at 7,000fpm......

[cambioso]

"Who the hell would fly over a drop zone unless they were specifically told it was cold?"

The guy with his nose glued to the Go-To function on his GPS/iPad/iPhone (without the faintest idea where he is) of course................You sound surprised, the sky is full of them these days.

Rejoice in the present, things can only get worse!

Jezza

[floppyjock]

I wouldnt dream off having a go at a student. Weve had them come through in the past but when you explain to them the problem they go away having learned something. Hey weve all been there. If a student reads this and realises its them im not going to bollock them.

But there are some experienced pilots out there who should know better. Especialy the one who thought it was ok to fly at 50ft up our runway while parachuting was going on. He had an interview without coffee with a nice chap from the CAA.

If you want to take anything away from this threat. Please if you intend to fly in the vacinity of a DZ or gliding site etc please give us a call. I dont mind people flying by and talking to us that way at least i know what your doing and your intensions so i dont have to worry if your going to turn and fly straight through the overhead. If your in the area were on 129.90 Errol DZ.

Stay safe

Floppy

[A and C]

I think that unprofessional flying is the wrong title for this thread being as most of the people on this forum are not professional pilots.

I would have described the incident as unsafe flying, wreckless flying, irresponsible flying or stupid flying, the word professional should not come into it or should professional be used as an indication of high standards.

I have met professional pilots that I would not trust with a used pair of roller skates and Private pilots who I would trust with my life, getting paid to fly is no assurance of quality or high standards, the use of the word professional in this context is careless use of the English language.

['Chuffer' Dandridge]

Like cambioso said, probably somebody who didn't have a clue where he/she was, but their GPS was on and following a GoTo somewhere so must have been ok.

I was accused by an R44 pilot once of illegal formation flying (once the CAA received the MOR) when i followed him to get the registration after he blatantly flew through our DZ with jumpers under canopies.

The sky is so full of incompetent cretins these days, it's every man for himself I'm afraid. On virtually every flight in GA land, I see examples of plain stupidity. Unfortunately, common sense and intelligence are not examined at any licence level. :confused:

[Fuji Abound]

The controller pointed out I was coming down at 7,000fpm......

Why so slow?

[Contacttower]

the use of the word professional in this context is careless use of the English language.

I always like to think I can deploy the English language reasonably well so while I'm not the OP on this thread I'm going to respectfully disagree with you on that one...:)

Professional is obviously primarily a noun, ie someone who is a 'professional' is someone who makes a living at a profession of some sort. In this context it is obviously incorrect to describe anyone who does not fit this description as a 'professional' and the word carries no positive or negative connotation; it is merely descriptive of someone's status.

However I would argue that it does also have a secondary use as an adjective or adverb that carries a positive connotation, ie one can say someone is "doing something in a professional manner" for example which usually means they are proficient to a high degree at something. To give another example my instructor might say to me "your radio manner sounds very professional"; that does not mean I am a professional radio operator it merely means I come across well on the radio.

Nothing is clear cut in language but I think most people would agree that the word "professional" carries a positive connotation when used in the above way...therefore logically unprofessional carries a bad one.

Apologies for this non-aviation post, whatever the adjective one uses to describe the crossing of an active DZ it is clearly poor airmanship.

[lenhamlad]

I obtained my licence in June this year. Last week I was asked to go to Little Gransden in Cambs to collect a part for another ac. Being in the South East I was not too comfortable with having to jink around London at short notice - this was too close to the edge of my envelope so I asked my instructor to accompany me. He did the nav and I did the flying and everything was ok until we called the airfield blind and stated our intentions. My instructor was aware of the glider site at Gransden Lodge however to my surprise, having started my descent on the deadside of runway 28 I was faced with a glider coming in the opposite direction although he/she was higher. We both took appropriate action and I continued in the circuit and landed safely. It was only when checking in at Little Gransden did I see the joining instructions which showed I should have not ventured north of the field. My fault entirely I admit but I would not say it was unprofessional flying.

[Gertrude the Wombat]

Nothing is clear cut in language but I think most people would agree that the word "professional" carries a positive connotation when used in the above way...therefore logically unprofessional carries a bad one.
In straightforward everyday English "professional" does indeed mean that you get paid for it, but "unprofessional" means you're a cowboy ... they're not, it seems, opposites, as you might have expected.

(And of course a (real) "cowboy" was no doubt professional.)

[NorthSouth]

floppyjock: what was the aircraft type?

NS

[thing]

It was only when checking in at Little Gransden did I see the joining instructions which showed I should have not ventured north of the field. My fault entirely I admit but I would not say it was unprofessional flying.

It is on their airfield info which I assume you carried/studied before you took off? I'm not being high and mighty here as I'm a low time pilot myself but surely you have been taught (and if not why not) to have a look at the airfield you are landing at? It's not you as a low time pilot I'm worried about, it's your instructor.

[floppyjock]

Not sure on type. My recognition skills are not that good when it comes to light aircraft. (Neither is my use of the English language apparently) But it was yellow and what looked like black, single engine low wing. Why was it you ?

Floppy ;-)

[Pilot.Lyons]

Wow! Its so entertaining reading these replies!

Thanks everyone!

Boy there are some anoraks out there...... Chill people.... To argue over the use of the english language is a bit silly really.....

There are crazy pilots and there are experienced pilots and inexperienced pilots who make some mistakes that can have serious consequences....

Ive seen stupidity from private owners visiting our field and im sure plenty of others see much more on other days.... I just hope people realise their mistakes and seek to remedy the problem and learn so it cannot happen again thus making the skies safer and more enjoyable for all of us....

Keep safe people and hey.... Lets not stress and digress into poor use of english or whatever else... Lifes too short

[Il Duce]

This sort of flying is all too commonplace and it's more by luck than judgement that more serious consequences don't occur. Bad enough that pilots flying around without taking advantage of an ATC service conduct themselves in this way but I have to say that time after time I and my colleagues (ATC) have warned GA pilots of activity at glider sites, DZs etc and they seem to take it as an invitation to fly directly at that point.

[Contacttower]

Keep safe people and hey.... Lets not stress and digress into poor use of english or whatever else... Lifes too short

It's all in good humour I'm sure; I actually find discussion about language use and its implications or meanings quite interesting...

['India-Mike]

Whether student or qualified pilot, the incident is inexcuseable. Strathallan, Fife and Errol all have parachute symbols superimposed on them on the charts. Scottish will pass info on activity too, as will Dundee and Leuchars. This is an issue of airmanship, and situational awareness (or lack, thereof).

I'm sure we've all seen this

Parachute Near Miss! - YouTube

Catastrophic just doesn't begin to describe the consequences of even a glancing blow - to either party.

I got a briefing on join, transit and departure procedures at a paradropping strip, from a jump pilot some years ago. I learned a lot from him, not all of which was necessarily obvious. Perhaps a CAA safety sense leaflet would help.

[mad_jock]

There isn't that many yellow planes in Scotland.

[pshz11]

I had oposite problems few weeks ago. Paragliding guys blocked runway on my home aerdrome by their cars. I've done low pass to show them intensions but they did not move. After 2 hour cross country I've decided to land on the rest of runway (500 meters enough for C172) and then they told me they have low battery on their car! And they had no radio at all to talk to me. What did they forget in the sky with such approach?:eek:

[Big Pistons Forever]

One thing that I have seen in pretty much every country I have flown in is a widespread reluctance on the part of recreational pilots to use ATC enroute radar services.

Part of the issue is IMO insufficient emphasis on this in the PPL. New pilots do not feel confident in utilizing enroute ATC services because it is often never demonstrated and practiced in training. They are afraid of making a mistake or sounding stupid on the radio and so fail to utilize the extra level of safety it gives. I was personally saved by ATC one day flying in the airspace East of Vancouver at 8500 feet one hazy afternoon. The quick call from ATC saved what would almost certainly have been a mid air when another aircraft not talking to anyone turned into me.

The bottom line: Use ATC to the maximum extent practicable and if you are unsure of how to access it, get some instruction.

[lenhamlad]

Thing,

It is on their airfield info.

Sorry to be pedantic, but I cannot see on the Little Gransden site that one should not descend to circuit height deadside. I certainly did not enter area "A" but I cannot be entirely sure I did not enter area "B"when descending deadside. As someone who flies near to several glider sites I am aware of the need to be vigilant. Only two weeks I encountered two in my home airfield zone. When this was passed to air/ground, a third party mentioned the presence of a third pretty close to our "final". Very shortly thereafter I spotted two gliders in a field just outside our zone. At no point were they on our zone's frequency which would have helped newbies like me.

[Jan Olieslagers]

@BPF: And my experience is that if I can't demonstrate a least class C transponder my local FIS don't care - unless I might have been busting some airspace of course. If they have no more interest in me, then surely I am not going to bend over backwards to please them.

[Jan Olieslagers]

they told me they have low battery on their car

I hope you reported to your local administration/authority? Such "aviators" ought to be banned from ever again going airside - let alone driving or flying.

[Crash one]

There isn't that many yellow planes in Scotland.


Mine is one of them, I think Floppyjock knows what it looks like & it's been in the hangar since 19 Aug.
& I also know where & what Errol is.
Just clearing my yardarm before someone measures the distance to Errol.

[DX Wombat]

most of the people on this forum are not professional pilots.
On what evidence do you base that highly insulting remark? Having a CPL or ATPL does NOT make somebody a professional pilot it makes that person someone who has a qualification which allows him or her to be employed in a professional capacity. There are very many truly professional pilots who have nothing more than a PPL.

[Big Pistons Forever]

@BPF: And my experience is that if I can't demonstrate a least class C transponder my local FIS don't care - unless I might have been busting some airspace of course. If they have no more interest in me, then surely I am not going to bend over backwards to please them.

ATC exist to serve you, not the other way around. You are not bending over backwards to please them, you are fully utilizing a service that increases your flight safety. However they can't help you if they can't see you so yes a mode C transponder is the "price" for accessing this service.

[thing]

Sorry to be pedantic, but I cannot see on the Little Gransden site that one should not descend to circuit height deadside.

Lt Gransden flying clubm - EGMJ (http://www.littlegransdenflyingclub.co.uk/)

It says join downwind, beware of glider site 1 mile to the north and the cct patterns are all south. I would have thought that a glider site 1nm to the north would have made no deadside joins a no brainer. As I say, I'm still a wet behind the ears power guy myself, it's not you I have the issue with but your instructor for not seeing the problem. If I can see it as a novice why can't he.

I've never been to Gransden by the way, didn't even know where it was until I read your post.

[Sir George Cayley]

I've been contacted by the Apostrophe Police about this thread. Apparently, a number of posts have been sadly lacking.

Instead of taking further action they've kindly donated some apostrophes to sprinkle around as req'd.

'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' '' ;);)

SGC

[Pilot.Lyons]

Lol haha ' lol' haha

' ' '''''''

[24Carrot]

One thing that I have seen in pretty much every country I have flown in is a widespread reluctance on the part of recreational pilots to use ATC enroute radar services.
...
Part of the issue is IMO insufficient emphasis on this in the PPL

In the UK, in my experience, PPL training anywhere near London pretty much assumes you will ask for a LARS service.

[Big Pistons Forever]

I've been contacted by the Apostrophe Police about this thread. Apparently, a number of posts have been sadly lacking.

Instead of taking further action they've kindly donated some apostrophes to sprinkle around as req'd.

'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' '' ;);)

SGC

Since the possessor, the Apostrophe Police, is in the form of a regular plural you should have written apostrophes with an apostrophe after the final "s". :p

And I betcha you thought I was just another dumb pilet ;)

[NigelOnDraft]

I was accused by an R44 pilot once of illegal formation flying (once the CAA received the MOR) when i followed him to get the registration after he blatantly flew through our DZ with jumpers under canopies. I am not sure he was wrong to do so :confused:

AFAIK, it is perfectly legal to fly through a Drop Zone at will. Same with a Glider site. These are on the map as potential "Hazards", but they are not prohibited/restricted areas, nor is it prosecutable to fly through one I believe?

Yes - it is hardly best practice, it is poor airmanship, it risks you, your Pax, the parachutists etc., but it is Class G airspace and free to all. I trust the parachutists are trained it is just "advisory" for aircraft to avoid, and that they accept that risk? I am all for some education of individuals re the Hazards, but "outraged" threads / chasing people for their registrations strikes me as a bit OTT :ooh:

At Air Displays and Aerobatic competitions there tend to be observers keeping a lookout for passing aircraft, and advising participants - who have missed or ignore the NOTAMs. Do Para Zones employ similar?

NoD

[peterh337]

I've been contacted by the Apostrophe Police about this thread

Wasn't me :)

but it is Class G airspace and free to all

Exactly.

If it is notamed as a PJ then the pilot should have avoided it, but most pilots don't get notams....

[Mariner9]

The guy with his nose glued to the Go-To function on his GPS/iPad/iPhone (without the faintest idea where he is) of course...........

Or the guy flying with his nose glued to the chart desperately trying to match ground features to the chart due to winds aloft being different to those forecasted several hours ago :ugh:

[Unusual Attitude]

There is a Black and Yellow low wing type in the Hanger at Perth but I'd be pretty sure the owner knows to stay clear of Errol.....indeed our local FISO is excellent at advising traffic heading in that direction when Errol is active.

I also have a yellow aircraft at Perth (well yellow and silver) but mine has been stripped for permit for the last few weeks and wont be in the air again until this coming weekend....

[NigelOnDraft]

Quote:
but it is Class G airspace and free to all

Exactly.

If it is notamed as a PJ then the pilot should have avoided it, but most pilots don't get notams.... I'm not actually sure? I would place a standard NOTAM and a PJ Zone on the map as about the same - a warning / request / suggestion to avoid. However, most NOTAMs, similarly, do not carry any legal requirement to avoid unless specifically enacted e.g. RA(T), Temp CAS.

Given the number of Glider sites and PJ zones on the map, and some areas of the country cluttered, then a NOTAM stating high levels of activity is a good idea during competitons etc. (as Glider sites do). But as before, unless an RA(T) is obtained, it is only advisory IMHO ;)

As an aside, how many freefall drops (@ 7000fpm!) occur in a typical "active" day here, and how many such "active" days a year?

NoD

[S-Works]

A typical active day for us would involve upto three aircraft each dropping around 16 jumpers and doing around 25-30 lifts each aircraft. At a competition which in the summer is every weekend you can expect much higher numbers. We also have aircraft that come down faster than 7,000fpm.

We fly every single droppable day from Feb through to December (when we then get our muc deserved holiday!) and remember the requirement is for the Jump master to see the ground and have a ceiling higher than minimimum pop height. This means that we are climbing and descending through cloud most of the time as well.

I have some great pictures of our SET aircraft descending with the jumpers in free fall right next to them and then being airborne again with the next load before the previous canopies are even on the ground.

Don't underestimate the pace of commercial parachute operations and the sheer volume of flying going on. Assuming that the drop aircraft is still at the top or somewhere high does not give you mcuh time. It is also means that jumpers are already in freefall and you have to remember that we do not drop them over the DZ as we have to account for wind to ensure that when they actually pop the canopy they can got back to the spot. It is not uncommon to drop a tandem over 2 miles from the DZ. Then you have tracking groups and the wing suit flyers.

This is the reason why we issue NOTAM on the activity to give you the information needed to plan wisely. Also don't be afraid to talk to the DZ, generally speaking one of the pilots will respond and tell you whats going on. You will find that we are a very sociable bunch!!

[Contacttower]

Or the guy flying with his nose glued to the chart desperately trying to match ground features to the chart due to winds aloft being different to those forecasted several hours ago :ugh:I know the area quite well having been at Perth for a few years. I find it hard to believe that anyone, even if they did not know the area, could have been lost since the field in question is on the north bank of the Tay estuary with a major town just a few miles to the east of it, it is also quite obviously a disused airfield.

Assuming they knew that they were on the east coast of Scotland and that they didn't think that they were over the Fourth estuary I can't really imagine were else they would have thought they would be. Much more likely I think is that the pilot either did not see the DZ on the chart/GPS, did know it was there but failed to visually identify it and assumed that his track would take him clear or did identify it but assumed that it was inactive.

As for not talking to ATC, yes it is a PPL disease but there is the possibility that s/he didn't have a radio...

[dont overfil]

I think it was Peter who astutely pointed out that there is a whole generation of pilots out there who were trained when notams were difficult to get and convenient flight planning was some time away. Many of these pilots, especially those who operate in isolation, still do not check notams or stay up to date with the airspace they use.

The appeal of this piece of airspace around Errol escapes me. Especially for those who choose to talk only to Perth Radio or even nobody. Many times I'll give pilots a "heads up" about Errol to be told they are operating a couple of miles to the north. (In the Dundee instrument approach chevvrons). Sometimes it's a couple of miles to the south. (Under the Leuchars MATZ stubs where there's a semi permanent notam for fast jet aerobatics).

Maybe reading the forums should be compulsory to see how other airspace users expect them to behave.

Edited to add. While it is not an excuse, if he was using a Jeppesen database Erro,l like most dropzones doesn't appear.

D.O.

[mad_jock]

There are a group of pilots who have been flying for years in scotland who won't under any circumstances speak to ATC. They will do there 1 hour with an instructor miles away from where they are based or with one of the Strut/gliding instructors who they have known for years.

They won't turn on a transponder either because last time they did they busted P600.

Instructors/examinors over the years have tried to do the good thing but its completely impossible when they own thier aircraft and have a mate who signs them off and they in the main operate into private strips.

[peterh337]

I did my PPL in 2000/2001 and notams were not covered.

In 2003 I busted a French power station TRA when the stuff was not in the (then just barely usable) internet notam briefing system (ais.org.uk).

And I am pretty savvy when it comes to internet use, including mobile internet. I've had mobile internet since this trip (http://www.peter2000.co.uk/aviation/leax/index.html) in 2003.

It is a safe bet that no pilot who got his PPL more than 10 years ago (90% of the UK PPL community?) has been trained to get notams, and a large % of those trained more recently don't bother.

[maxred]

I have not seen a Notam for Errol, in a long time. This is due possibly, because I am one of the aged PPL who also struggled to find them. Only recently, the advent of Sky Demon, where they pop up perfectly on the RHS of the page, have I actually started looking in more detail at them. That said, in over 1000 hrs of flying, I have never contravened a NOTAM (that I am aware of).

I fly over, or close to, Errol, almost every week, and I have never heard Perth Radio, give a warning about Errol being active. Nor Leuchers.

Dundee will tell you if it is active, but again, and I may be wrong, it is closed more often than it is open.

I was also unaware that it was an active ATZ, unless notified on a NOTAM:\

[NigelOnDraft]

Errol was not NOTAMed on day in question AFAIK...

NoD

Edit: altering whole post by addition of "not" - sorry :{

[Contacttower]

Perhaps someone older than me could satisfy my curiosity; before online NOTAMs if one was at a small airfield in the middle of nowhere how did one get them, did you just call someone up for a briefing?

[peterh337]

I believe there were faxback numbers. You had to have a fax machine with a handset on it; you dialed the number and when you got the fax tone you put the handset down and the fax came through.

You got area briefings that way, and some schools pinned them to a noticeboard.

Obviously no route briefing was possible.

But there was also much less stuff in the notams back in those days. Today, every damn kite is notamed

Start : 2012-07-16T04:04:00 End : 2012-10-16T17:04:00 Schedule : HJ Lower : 0 Upper : 8 Location : Uckfield(50.967,0.083) - Radius 1nm Code : QWCLW Traffic : IV E) KITE FLYING 1NM RADIUS 5058N 00005E (UCKFIELD). CTC FOR FLYING TIMES, TEL 07752 634574. 12-04-0089/AS 5.

Realistically, what you did was ignore everything except TRAs.

The other thing is that somebody navigation using DR, and who doesn't know the area, is likely to be working hard enough and is not likely to be avoiding PJ zones. With GPS, avoiding multiple notamed spots is easy.

[mad_jock]

Well to be honest the Errol site never had a very good reputation when I was flying alot of GA round there. They seemed to rely on Dundee ATC to spread the word and considered the airspace as there's if they were jumping or not.

The one over in fife always seemed alot better setup and also at distrubting notams when they were operating. It was years ago and only a personal opinion. I did get reported once for over flying it. I was scud running to get into Dundee and going up the estuary side at 600ft to get runway 10 in dundee and the tops where at FL80 which is where I had just been. I did know about the jumping because I was speaking to Leuchars and NOTAMS. But they said nothing had moved all morning and to be honest i thought that with OVC at 700 and 4k viz they won't be jumping and have forgot to call leuchars to say so. Apparently not they still reckon it was still thiers. The fact that a bodged wind corrected timed procedural approach for 10 will also put you in that airspace is also ignored.

Folk not talking to Dundee goes back to the days when they used to try and get a 15 radius of sterile airspace whenever the dornier passed TLA. And they had that demented harpie screaming at everyone. I must admit I avoided talking to them if she was on and I knew it was inbound and I wasn't landing there.

[dont overfil]

When I mentioned notams I was thinking about pilot behavour in general. Errol is not generally notamed probably because it is already on the charts as a parachute zone. If anyone was speaking to Dundee, Perth, Leuchars or Scottish Info they would be told whether Errol was active.

Back in the old days (When we thought the world was still cooling down) notams were retrieved by fax and hung in the aero club. If you were out in the boondocks, only by talking to an agency could you get route info.

What does seem different nowadays is the proliferation of microlight types operating outside the flight school environment. Dare I say it the abbreviated course may also be a factor.

D.O.

[dont overfil]

Folk not talking to Dundee goes back to the days when they used to try and get a 15 radius of sterile airspace whenever the dornier passed TLA. And they had that demented harpie screaming at everyone. I must admit I avoided talking to them if she was on and I knew it was inbound and I wasn't landing there

Ha! And the manager before her:ok:

D.O.

[DX Wombat]

most pilots don't get notams.... Really? How do you know? Have you asked them all? If you don't check NOTAMs then that's your lookout but please do NOT try to taint the rest of us with such unfounded claims.

[peterh337]

Come to Shoreham and see how many say the ATIS doesn't work :)

My guess, from 11 years' flying, is a good 75% don't get notams.

But there will be a certain correlation between those doing short trips, and not getting notams.

[7120]

It's always been a mystery to me why parachute planes can't broadcast a warning on the local FIS frequency five minutes before tipping out their cargo into uncontrolled airspace.

Anybody from from the parachute world know why not?

[piperboy84]

While we are on the sunbject of Dundee ATC, I was out flying on Sunday and have a question regarding the correct transition procedure (and no it was not my flying that initiated the OP too start this thread).

I was flying from Forfar to Kingsmuir (Fife) via Monikie reservoir between the restricted area of Barry Buddon to my left and Broughty castle to the right over the mouth of the Tay and along the shoreline passed Leuchers and over St Andrews. On the way there and about 5 miles before passing the castle I called Leuchars for a transition which was approved, as I approached the castle knowing that that is the main VRP point and basically a funnel for Dundee traffic from the north and west I asked Leuchars to go off frequency ( this is still prior to entering their matz) for a second to give Dundee a heads up I was crossing what is essentially their “approach path” (although not entering there airspace) then returned to Leuchars prior to entering the MATZ , all this went fine.

Upon the return leg I received a MATZ transition and immediately upon existing the MATZ about mid channel across the Tay I asked Leuchars for a frequency change for the purpose of advising Dundee that I would be passing back over through the busy VRP Broughty castle area to which the Dundee tower advised me to “stay with Luechars”. Which I thought was a strange one.

My question is as follows, do military controllers and civilian ATC work seamlessly and do hand offs and exchange traffic info? Should I have treated the Leuchars MATZ transition much the same way I do a basic vfr “flight following” type service from Scottish Information on routes that do not involve MATZ transitions assuming basically that my service continues even after i have left the MATZ? Would the Leuchars controller have advised Dundee that I was skirting their airspace and this would explain why Dundee felt that there was no need to talk to them and requested me to “stay with Leuchars? even though I was out of the MATZ

[Crash one]

When I was doing the NPPL 5+yrs ago I was required to navigate to Burnside from Fife. This I did via Freuchie.
After a few PFL etc I was then told "OK return to Fife" The instructor indicated "that way" which would have put us right over Portmoak.
I pointed this out & she said "Its just there, we can fly past it."
I elected to fly via Strathmiglo Freuchie etc & mentioned the extent of the activity at Portmoak, This was met with a disinterested " OK, whatever" kind of attitude.
Another instructor pointed out at that time that "They don't own the bloody airspace, they don't have an ATZ, it's class G, we have as much right there as they do".
Another occasion I was receiving post PPL spin training. Overhead a point between Balado, West Lomond, Kinross. 5000ft we spun the thing several times, then entered cloud for exercise several times. I felt this was a bit of two fingers up to Portmoak. & would have felt happier overhead Schiehallion doing spins.
If this is the way Instructors behave no wonder the rest of aviation ignores the big G & pictures of parachutes.
Things may well have changed since & perhaps my experiences were isolated, who knows.
My opinion as an ex glider pilot is they should be classified as D, R or P areas.

Piperboy, Iwas up there about 3PM, too windy for me, so washed flies off it & went home.

[Dan the weegie]

Piperboy, Leuchars have radar and can see most traffic to affect so will be best placed to know if there's traffic for you to know about. They also talk regularly with the guys in the Dundee tower. If I was flying in that area I'd be talking to Leuchars until I was west of Broughty castle and below 2000ft or I was going in to Dundee.

That said, you can tell Leuchars to shove off and change to Dundee if you like there :)

Crash one, it's a bit of a complicated situation there because Fife is so close but what you're basically suggesting is that it's bad airmanship to fly within 10 miles of a gliding site. I know that the gliders like to soar on west lomond but you weren't over there doing spins and it really is anyones airspace. Gliders can be just about anywhere round Scotland so long as you're following sensible airmanship, RT and lookout there's no reason to be upset about it. Flying right over the field below 3000 ft without talking to them is poor airmanship though, if that's what she did then it was a bit silly. Any time I tried to talk to portmoak all I got was silence so perhaps that's where the attitude came from.

[OutsideCAS]

Yellow and black ? aren't some of the RAF Tucano's resplendent in a similar colour scheme ? not that i'm suggesting it was of course;)

[Steve6443]

@BPF: And my experience is that if I can't demonstrate a least class C transponder my local FIS don't care - unless I might have been busting some airspace of course. If they have no more interest in me, then surely I am not going to bend over backwards to please them.


That must be a UK thing because I have used the FIS in Germany, Austria, Hungary and so forth, they have always been keen and willing to help, they have never turned down my request for traffic services even though they are not legally obliged to offer it in periods of high workload.

One Saturday in particular I called Langen Information, having first heard this poor overworked air traffic controller saying "call you back" to everyone. Sure enough, she repeated my call sign, told me she would call me back and 8 minutes later, did so. Although her workload was so heavy, she was still prepared to offer traffic services and gave me warnings of potential conflicts....

In any case, flying with the added assurance that an air traffic controller is watching over you surely outweighs any minimal risk of appearing a right dork on the radio - after all, I'd rather be thought a dork and increase my safety than stay quiet and increase my chances of a mid air incident......

Not only that, the more frequently you speak with ATC, the more proficient your calls become.... My one key rule: Think about what you want to say to them in advance, plan it in your head, think what they will say back to you and what your response should be - if you're new to radio, run it through your head so that a question from them doesn't surprise you.

It's just plain annoying for them when you call them and, once they have acknowledged your call, you come back with something like "Golf-Echo-X X X, Cessna 182, ahhh.... VFR, errrr......Altitude uhm 4000 feet, uhm..... ahh....... position is....... ahm..... wait a minute....... uhh....... where are we now?" and block the frequency....

[Steve6443]

It's always been a mystery to me why parachute planes can't broadcast a warning on the local FIS frequency five minutes before tipping out their cargo into uncontrolled airspace.

Anybody from from the parachute world know why not?

In Germany, the FIS is divided into 3 sectors, Langen, Bremen and Munich so broadcasting on the actual FIS (call sign information) would probably mean, on a day with heavy PJ activity, the FIS would be full of calls about jumpers.

If, by local FIS, you mean the actual airfield frequency (call sign info), in Germany we receive a 2 minute warning about Parachute Jumpers *if* they are landing on the field. If they land (eg) to the north of the field outside of the traffic pattern, there are no warnings given, the warnings are to ensure that, when the jumpers drop, no props on aircraft are turning (although to be honest, I can't remember whether the Pilatus had it's turbine turned off when they were landing).....

So even if it were transmitted on the local airfield frequency, you would be requiring the aircraft in the air first to have 2 radios (no leaving the FIS frequency without approval ;)) and constantly selecting the next airfield frequency you are approaching to listen in, just in case.....

[maxred]

My question is as follows, do military controllers and civilian ATC work seamlessly and do hand offs and exchange traffic info? Should I have treated the Leuchars MATZ transition much the same way I do a basic vfr “flight following” type service from Scottish Information on routes that do not involve MATZ transitions assuming basically that my service continues even after i have left the MATZ? Would the Leuchars controller have advised Dundee that I was skirting their airspace and this would explain why Dundee felt that there was no need to talk to them and requested me to “stay with Leuchars? even though I was out of the MATZ

No, is the answer. I have been dumped out of a MATZ service, straight into CTA, down South mind you, and I started a thread on PPRUNE on the subject.

Leuchers also tried that with a colleague of mine, recently, and I told him to QSY immediately to Dundee, as he was on course, still speaking with Leuchers, to go overhead Dundee.

And they had that demented harpie

She would not have been best pleased.

[S-Works]

DZ's have there own common frequency, 129.9 and all drops are called two minutes ready to drop and drop complete descending.

There is no policy for having props stopped when there are canopies in the air, if we did that we would never get any work done. We asking visiting private pilots to do so as its easier than worrying what they are doing as they don't know where to look for the canopies, we do.

Pretty much every DZ I know of also works a local FIS/RADAR unit and the calls are also made to them on the frequency. Short of announcing on London Info which would make the frequency rather more busy than it already is and would be highly confusing when you consider the sheer volume of DZ traffic and the fact the London Info is rebroadcast across the entire frequency there is not much more we can do!!

It's not difficult, read the map, talk to the DZ or the local radar/FIS unit and keep out the way!

[maxred]

It's not difficult, read the map, talk to the DZ or the local radar/FIS unit and keep out the way!

Yes, well that brings us to the point that the parachute lot were never the most welcoming in aviation. Present company accepted Bose:)

The welcome at Strathallen, post Wullie days, was a sawn off shotgun. They tried for a while to civvy up, put in a cafe, but posted rotweillers at the door to ward off unassuming aviators.

Was the most beautiful of airfields, but went rarely due to the 'welcoming committee.

Perranporth seem a receptive, knowledgeable and well rounded sort, for para droppers that is:uhoh:

[piperboy84]

MJ And they had that demented harpie

LOL I had forgot all about her till now, she was right piece of work, I remember getting multiple bollockings from her back in the mid 90's . I remember once i was flying a Varga Kachina in the pattern and she gave a student a traffic advisory for a Varga knowing full well the student would not have a clue what that was ( she didn't either) but when the student enquired what that was she gave him a real deep breathe sighing tut tut response like he was a complete moron.

Yeap she was a friggin nightmare

[dont overfil]

Was the most beautiful of airfields, but went rarely due to the 'welcoming committee

I can't agree. The summer "Big Pan Doo" was legendary at Strathallan. Keiron went out of his way to welcome and educate visitors. I've seen 80 aircraft visit for the event.

However don't turn up un announced. But that is the case for nearly every private or ordinary licence airport.:uhoh:

The only difference is I'm too polite to bollock you.;)

D.O.

[maxred]

Agree the fly in was superb, and agree re hospitality, problem was the rep for the previous decades was very poor. Damage had already been done I am afraid.

Great shame

[RJ.146]

Too Polite to bollock everyone but me D.O.!

Would also have to agree with D.O. about Strathallan, let them know your coming, do as your told and you'll get on great.

[dont overfil]

Too Polite to bollock everyone but me D.O.!


Oops sorry whoozat.

D.O.

[Jim59]

Perhaps someone older than me could satisfy my curiosity; before online NOTAMs if one was at a small airfield in the middle of nowhere how did one get them, did you just call someone up for a briefing?


Most airfields and glider sites subscribed to a twice weekly list of NOTAMs that arrived by post. It was typically 70 to 100 pages long. This would be kept in a prominent position available to all pilots.

P.S. I started flying light aircraft in the early '70s and was expected by my instructor to check through the list of NOTAMs if we were going to leave the circuit.

[MOREOIL]

As far as I can see a DZ is an area where permission has been granted to drop parachutists, it is not controlled, restricted, prohibited or protected for this purpose at all. The parachutist and the pilot have equal right to be there, however the Caa advise that pilots do not fly through unless they can be sure it is cold. It could be a very unfortunate mistake for parachutists to believe they have any overriding right to exclusive use of a DZ.

[RJ.146]

A colleague D.O., think the wrong approach to 27 ;)

[Pugilistic Animus]

Yep...we've all done it at times---Before quick hop around the pattern we all do performance, weight and balance and a full weather briefing and file a flight plan....:rolleyes:

:zzz:

Always do the 'preflight' though...:=

[S-Works]

It could be a very unfortunate mistake for parachutists to believe they have any overriding right to exclusive use of a DZ.

Rules of the air?

[dont overfil]

Rj.146
UHF doesn't count.
D.O.

[RJ.146]

Good Shout!

[floppyjock]

Errol is listed in the AIP as well as depicted on charts.

Prior to the aircraft taking off for the first lift of the day the following are informed of max alt and when we will finish
(which is 1800 local at the latest)
Scottish
Leuchars
Dundee
Perth
After jumping has finished they are called again and infromed that we are complete for the day.

On lifting the pilot calls Dundee with the flights details ie dropping hieght and remains on Dundees freq
2 mins prior to drop the pilot informs Dundee and gets clearance from the DZ on the 129.90. ( the pilot monitors 2 radios at all times)
After drop he calls Dundee that the drop is complete and descending.
Pilot also calls Dundee on short finals to Errol.

So if your on Dundee freq you,ll here us and know whats going on. Dundee will also tell you if our aircraft is on the ground and were not jumping.

Moreoil: On reading your last post. i hope that were ever you fly you never leave the circut. Thats a pretty s**t atitude for any pilot.
Heres something for you to ponder. If you fly through and active DZ and a parachutist hits you who do you think will be the one that the CAA take to court. Thats if they live of course. :ugh:

[mad_jock]

Why don't you NOTAM on your drop days?

If you fly through and active DZ and a parachutist hits you who do you think will be the one that the CAA take to court

Nobody because everyone will be dead.

[MOREOIL]

It's not an attitude, it's a fact. On what basis would Caa prosecute? Both have the right to the airspace, you should take care when you fly and when you jump out of an aircraft, but I don't see a legal priority for the parachutist that other posts seem to assume or imply. A DZ IS PERMISSION NOT PROTECTION.

[Crash one]

I know that the gliders like to soar on west lomond but you weren't over there doing spins and it really is anyones airspace.

First, they don't soar much on West Lomond, they soar the Bishop.
Where we were doing spins Portmoak was at a down angle of 30 degrees from 5000ft. Yes we were "outside" the area, yes it is anybody's airspace, I still think it's a bloody silly place to be. Perhaps because I have spun gliders in the same place.
I have been strapped in to a glider at Portmoak & seen 152/172's passing blissfully overhead at 1000ft. I've seen traffic close by & wondered where they are going next. A heli once came over the field at 50ft landed at the launch point without so much as a,by your leave, & asked the way to Aboyne, not a chart to his name, we gave him a chart, showed him where to go, Moron.
It doesn't take much common savvy to avoid places like that, the graveyards are full of people who had the right of way.
The advice I had was. Class G is Injun territory, keep yr powder dry & watch yr back. There's no point going looking for trouble.

[S-Works]

Moreoil, migh I kindly suggest you go and revise a bit of air law. Specifically on who has right of way in the air. The pecking order is quite clear.

I can guarantee that if you were to follow your arrogant assumption and go through a DZ and you were involved in a collision with a skydiver and were to survive, it would be you the CAA would prosecute.

A DZ does not have a legal status, it exists to provide a reminder of the rules of the air and therefore try to reduce the danger of an air to air collision between man and machine.

[MOREOIL]

Floppyjock, the end of your last post could ne interpreted as unpleasant, but I will assume it was Tongue in cheek , I can tell you that I have the same airspace issues when flying a single display at off airfield sites, in spite of full Caa permission and 500 foot rule exemptions and notam action the display only has permission, not protection. I work really hard not only trying to display well and in the correct place but also look out and listen to local RT at 200+ mph and +5-2G, my biggest worry is someone bumbling through my display despite smoke and permissions, you seem to take great care before dropping the meat but please don't assume your DZ gives you any protection, stay vigilant.
Enjoy the sky.

[floppyjock]

More oil: The last part of my post was a general question and not directed at you.

Floppy

[MOREOIL]

Moreoil: On reading your last post. i hope that were ever you fly you never leave the circut. Thats a pretty s**t atitude for any pilot.

[floppyjock]

More oil: Nope sorry I ment every word of that bit

Floppy

[Contacttower]

Moreoil, migh I kindly suggest you go and revise a bit of air law. Specifically on who has right of way in the air. The pecking order is quite clear.

Reaching for my EASA IR notes I can only see references to powered aircraft having to give way to airships, balloons and gliders...no reference to parachutes. :confused:

Reference perhaps?

I'd never thought to look it up because I always try to steer clear of parachute sites anyway but now that you mention it I'd be interested to know where in the rules of the air it is actually written. Quick check of the ANO didn't reveal anything either.

[MOREOIL]

The point I am struggling to get over is that in a DZ , there is no protection. Even if there were rules or laws- say like the Olympic airspace, the government were so confident that laws stop aeroplanes that they had typhoons and helicopter gunships standing ready. In practice, even in so called controlled airspace the best protection you have is your own vigilance.

[Crash one]

This seems to be turning into the usual PPrune battle for supremacy based on "I know what I'm saying is right, therefore you are wrong" I don't think Moreoil is suggesting that as we all have the right to blunder through a dropzone willy nilly we should do so. But that a DZ has no PROTECTION in law. There are quite enough laws & rules as it is without introducing more, I think this is a case where pilots should use common sense & not demand their "rights" just for the sake of it.
There is a public footpath near me that runs through a wooded area that is occasionally used for pheasant shoots. Do I walk my dog there on those days just because I can?

[Pugilistic Animus]

Crash One...Just let'm talk....they're crazy...look at how they walk

Silly Pilots...:p:p:p



Luv it..:ok:

:}:}:}
;):oh:

[Dan the weegie]

C.O. Some people are crazy, flying over a glider site at 1000ft is definitely dumb if you don't call out to say hello. They were probably on the approach to Fife which Portmoak is about 9 miles straight in for so I can see why people would join from there but nonetheless not bright.

As for where you were I know the area very well indeed and would say that it required excellent lookout and a sensible approach to airmanship but isn't such a silly place to spin as you would think, lots of good fields and a runway should you need to land after an engine failure (if you're that unlucky). That's probably why the gliders spin there too. Nothing wrong with either but we are all entitled to our opinion.

As for West Lomond, Bishop's Hill - they are hardly a long way from each other! :) and I've seen soaring on both, from my house and from the top. :)

Totally O.T. though :)

Just because something is legal doesn't mean it's not a stupid thing to do. It's not like there's nowhere else to fly there - bags of space to avoid the dropzone.

[Crash one]

Pugilistic
You're right. I suppose when them wot rote the ANO, they didn't think it necessary to actually state "Give way to parachutes". Where does it say a/c shall give way to the ground?

[Crash one]

Dan.
That area is most definately not on the approach to Fife. Not if you have more than two brain cells.
And I still disagree, pissing about aerobatting in sight of a gliding site is bloody silly.
You say you have seen them from your house. Have you actually been in a 14 a/c gaggle under low cloud along Bishop? Or on the day/weather in question, move out from the hill into the wave lift? cos that's where it comes from.

[S-Works]

Contacttower, basic rules of the air, power gives way to sail to balloon etc. A parachutist in flight has right of way as they have the limited manouverability. If you don't believe contact CAA enforcement and seek an opinion!!

[Dan the weegie]

You're allowed to disagree. It doesn't mean you're right ;)
To me it's a situational thing, as is most stuff. I don't know the conditions you were flying in, what day it was, the location you were in precisely, whether there was active gliding, whether your instructor had in fact called portmoak on the phone before departure.
I've been gliding a couple of times, I don't have the patience for it :)
I have nothing to prove, but you seem to want to.
I mislike this attitude that "this is incorrect, that is not the right way to do it. It must be done like that" pilots seem to spout, particularly inexperienced ones and grouchy Captains.
I hear loads of pilots spout off about what's right and what's wrong and in most situations there is merely what happened at the time was decided correct for the given conditions.

Flying through a DZ while drops were going on and not speaking to anyone on the radio, is unquestionably not a grey area, it was extremely unwise.

Doing spins in a Cessna, 10 miles from a gliding site at 5000ft is totally different. If you can't see why then you need to think about your approach to airmanship.

[Crash one]

Doing spins in a Cessna, 10 miles from a gliding site at 5000ft is totally different. If you can't see why then you need to think about your approach to airmanship.

The distance was nothing like 10 miles for a start.
And I will decide what I think is airmanship.:ugh::ugh:

[Dan the weegie]

And I will decide what I think is airmanship.

That's kind of my point :) you do and you leave no room for being wrong, which can be tricky when you find yourself in a situation where your opinion and someone elses is different either in the same cockpit, or in a situation with traffic nearby. Airmanship isn't about absolutes, although often there are extremes.

[Johnm]

Airmanship isn't about rights it's about responsiblity and good manners. If you fly a powered aircraft it's only good manners to avoid parachuting sites and gliding sites, quite apart from it being a good deal safer!

I flew back IFR from Alderney yesterday at 5000ft in the Class G as I'm entitled to do, however my track took me over and close to gliding and parachute sites as well as danger areas, all of which I avoided by minor changes to track, or crossed with a suitable radar service.

It's not hard for heaven's sake, they are all on the charts, the GPS will tell you precisely where you are, the rest is pretty basic navigation!

[Dan the weegie]

On my CPL exam, my examiner made me do a PFL and then touch and go to a gliding site without once contacting the gliding frequency. That bad airmanship?

It wasn't but I shall let you figure out why for yourself.

It's all situational If it was a soaking wet day or the wind was 40kts at 1000ft or if the vis was low and cloudbase 1000ft I wouldn't consider for one second contacting Errol before flying over them, whether I was talking to Dundee or not, they're not flying. I've already said that flying through a DZ on a nice day when they are dropping and not being on frequency sounds pretty unwise.

The rest is my just winding up Crash One because I don't like this concept of absolutes when it comes to flying, generally speaking there are many ways of doing things and while not agreeing with them, they are often perfectly safe within a given set of parameters. Just because we can, doesn't mean we should but just because I don't think it should be done, doesn't mean it's stupid or dangerous.

[Crash one]

So you are going to decide whether Errol are dropping based on your superior knowledge. Believe me I have seen dropping ops in wx I wouldn't take the dog out in.
Then you pretty much quote me with:
Just because we can, doesn't mean we should
CPL or not you are coming over as a prat.
No doubt your PFL site was closed. Big deal. My examiner pulled the throttle on me about half a mile west of Errol in sunshine. Do you think I called them first? Do you think he did?
As for absolutes that is bull****e. I will decide what I consider the correct piece of airmanship to apply, based on my interpretation of the situation at the time. Do I really have to spell out every thought that might go through my mind?
I suggest you grow up, if it amuses you to try & wind people up.
CPL, my arse:mad::ugh::ugh:

[Dan the weegie]

I will decide what I consider the correct piece of airmanship to apply, based on my interpretation of the situation at the time. Do I really have to spell out every thought that might go through my mind?

No, and that's precisely what I'm saying, you know what's correct based on what you see and clearly get hot under the collar when anyone questions it but you were very happy to criticise other people without knowing the context or having sufficient experience.

I probably am a Prat :) I have nothing to prove and I'm not enjoying winding you up, to me it's debate :). I just don't like the "I am right, they are wrong and I must ensure everyone knows about it" attitude. Which is very common and is fairly unhealthy from a flying perspective and that's something you are unquestionably guilty of.

[7120]

Why not equip parachutists with laser detectors and GA with laser guns........if ur allowed to hunt them you'll surely look out for them :-)

[Il Duce]

Johnm! Steady on. You're at risk of talking sense here.

[Crash one]

Dan the weegie
I don't recall saying "I am right they are wrong". I used those very words to describe the direction this discussion was heading from posts by others.
I certainly did not criticise anyone without knowing the context. I fail to understand how you should come to the conclusion that I have insufficient experience to make a judgment. I do actually know by looking at the airfield whether Portmoak is active or not.
I also am certainly not in the category of "I am right, they are wrong & I must ensure everyone knows about it" I have never in my life said or implied such a thing. I have a NPPL, I have been flying on & off since 1956. I don't consider myself any kind of expert. On the other hand I cannot stand being mis-understood. If you think my remark "If this is the way instructors behave then >>>>" is a bad thing to say then so be it.
I refuse to believe that ALL & EVERY instructor is a GOD. I think I have been around long enough to make that assumption with some justification.
I mentioned a down angle to Portmoak of 30 deg from 5000 ft this equates, acording to my inadequate maths to about 8660ft laterally, 10000ft distant. Hardly 10 miles!
I say again "I do not think I am right & they are wrong" I do still believe that flying in the close vicinity of such places is silly, perhaps I should have added the bit WHEN THEY ARE ACTIVE. I thought that last bit was bloody obvious.
For interest the instructors in these two experiences of mine were both excellent. The remark about no ATZ etc was made by another.
Yes you have pissed me off!

[mad_jock]

On a note there was a fatality today at Portmoak.

BBC News - Man dies after glider crash in Kinross (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-tayside-central-19482397)

[dont overfil]

You beat me to it.

I don't know much about gliding. Wind gusting to close to 50kts.

Should be safe to overfly Portmoak today. They won't be flying.

Aye right.

D.O.

[Crash one]

Sad day R.I.P.

[chrisN]

On the subject of avoiding gliding and para drop sites, two points if I may;

1. “It's not hard for heaven's sake, they are all on the charts . . .”

They are on the official CAA/NATS ¼ and 1/2 million charts, but not all are on the new 1 million, and at least some were not on Jeppesen when an airprox report included as a reason that the pilot was flying with J. which did not show a gliding site . The pilot just missed a launch cable, IIRC.

2. “If it was a soaking wet day or the wind was 40kts at 1000ft or if the vis was low and cloudbase 1000ft I wouldn't consider for one second contacting Errol before flying over them, whether I was talking to Dundee or not, they're not flying.”

I know this was referring to para drops, and for all I know the poster’s judgement may be identical to that of the site operator. But again, I recall an airprox report where a power pilot just missed a gliding launch cable, because he thought they would not be flying with a 1000 foot cloudbase so he did not divert to miss their site. Our judgement of others’ minima, and/or our knowledge of other people’s aviation practices, may not be as good as we think.

Just my 2p’th.


Chris N

[dont overfil]

chrisN

Spot on. Pilot ignorance of the way airspace is used by others is the problem.

For many flyers the only time they give aviation a thought is when they are actually in the air. No planning, no continual learning, no weather, no nothing! Just turn up and fly.

D.O.

[DB6]

Interesting thread, if a little clogged up with rubbish. The fact of the matter is that Errol isn't NOTAMed and while it is depicted as a parachuting site on charts, 90% of the time nothing's happening there - along with most other parachuting and some gliding sites in the area.
A NOTAM drawing attention to times of activity and contact frequencies would be a big help, as it's a little unreasonable to expect people to avoid the area for no reason.

[Dan the weegie]

I thought that last bit was bloody obvious.

No it wasn't :) what I read you saying was that it was bloody silly to do spins near a gliding site :) regardless of activity. If they were flying and you were near them then that's pretty unsafe.

Windy days near a gliding site in Scotland usually means to me they're likely to be flying :).

I know Errol fairly well and avoid it if I'm not briefed and the conditions are suitable.

Sorry Crash one, obviously crossed wires. I thought you were being very hard on the Instructors given I know most of the ones that were there at the time and I knew of none that were either bad or unsafe :). I'm pretty sensitive about that because some people think instructors are meant to know everything and react very badly if the experience differs. It's not easy flying with these old geezers who've been flying for ages and never tell you what they think is going on.

[dont overfil]

AIUI NATS will not accept a notam unless it is a variation of normal OPS.

This would mean a notam when not active and no notam when active.

D.O.

[mad_jock]

I am with DB6 on this.

And Errol in the past has been know to complain about folk flying through the area and no jumping was even planned for the day. The plane was on headings by leuchars at the time.

How do the others manage to do it then?

[Fuji Abound]

Airmanship isn't about rights it's about responsiblity and good manners. If you fly a powered aircraft it's only good manners to avoid parachuting sites and gliding sites, quite apart from it being a good deal safer!

Of course if you lot fitted transponders those of us with TCAS could see you and those of us without might expect ATC to see you. ;)

I know, I know you either cant be bothered, they are too expensive, or they are too heavy. ;) ;)

.. .. but it is the responsible thing to do. ;););)

Oops well over dun my quota of smilies now.

[DB6]

D.O, don't get you. Normal ops at Errol is tumbleweed city Arizona; variation is at the weekend when they sometimes jump.

[mad_jock]

From when I was flying in the area.

You forgeting the cars thrashing about

And aviation wise their is a bloke that flys his bird of prey there.

I have also seen Remote controlled aircraft there. With fists getting shaken at the powered aircraft.

All apparently in the belief that aircraft can't fly through the overhead or near by because its a DZ.

[dont overfil]

[QUOD.O, don't get you. Normal ops at Errol is tumbleweed city Arizona; variation is at the weekend when they sometimes jump.TE][/QUOTE]

I hear what you are saying but I don't think the notam system would allow that.

Probably a note on the chart with a phone number may work. Of course you could always call 129.9 on the radio.

Really we should stop making excuses for bad airmanship. The existing chart logo should be adequete and it's not that inconvenient. As I said before it is not a good place to be anyway speaking to nobody with the proximity of the Dundee approach.

D.O.

[maxred]

D.O - The main point, highlighted by me on post 49, and re-iterated by many, NO ONE IS EVER THERE:O

Dundee has its own control zone, and anyone encrouching is going to be talking to Dundee, otherwise they will bust the Dundee zone.

What good would a phone number do, when no one is there to answer the bloody thing:mad:

[dont overfil]

D.O - The main point, highlighted by me on post 49, and re-iterated by many, NO ONE IS EVER THEREhttp://images.ibsrv.net/ibsrv/res/src:www.pprune.org/get/images/smilies/embarass.gif

Dundee has its own control zone, and anyone encrouching is going to be talking to Dundee, otherwise they will bust the Dundee zone.

What good would a phone number do, when no one is there to answer the bloody thinghttp://images.ibsrv.net/ibsrv/res/src:www.pprune.org/get/images/smilies/censored.gif

Dundee ATZ is 2nm radius but their instrument approach goes 10 nm east in class G and into the Perth ATZ. But you have seen the notam which has been in place for 6 months.:uhoh:

Phone conversations are back and forwards with Perth every half flyable weekend. 01821 642454 is the CURRENT number. Radio 129.90.

D.O.

[10W]

When's the AIRPROX report due out between the Dundee outbound Dornier 328 and the Errol paradrop aircraft ? I believe the Dornier crew had a strong TCAS message and got a bit of a scare. If both were on the Dundee frequency, something has gone a bit wrong somewhere, since they should have been aware of each other and seen and avoided. (OK, technically, they did :ok: )

[Crash one]

Sorry Crash one, obviously crossed wires. I thought you were being very hard on the Instructors given I know most of the ones that were there at the time and I knew of none that were either bad or unsafe http://images.ibsrv.net/ibsrv/res/src:www.pprune.org/get/images/smilies/smile.gif. I'm pretty sensitive about that because some people think instructors are meant to know everything and react very badly if the experience differs. It's not easy flying with these old geezers who've been flying for ages and never tell you what they think is going on.

I said I'd been flying on & off for some time, I've been solo (Ex 14) four times, between gliders & 152s, never got it finished.
For a student pilot to try to tell an instructor what they think, or have an opinion, is tantamount to sacriledge. The only safe way to behave is to shut your big mouth & go through the mill like everyone else. To mention any previous stick time of any kind prior to starting the course made me feel like a knowall, so I said sod all. That is only my feelings & I am probably wrong.
Obviously Instructors know a bloody sight more than I do, those I mentioned were not wafflers, they were very good, but I have come across a couple of :mad:. No names , no pack drill. They weren't at Fife by the way, one of them put the fear of living **** up a, never flown before, female in a glider.
Apology accepted by the way.
As for the airmanship thing, I have been reliably informed by the CFI that Portmoak is a 7days a week operation. Their field of concentrated ops extends a long way from the field. Wx minima are a lot less than mine. As are those of the organ donors. So the chance of me coming across such a site in non flyable wx is remote, hence MY " wouldn't go near them" attitude.

[Dan the weegie]

For a student pilot to try to tell an instructor what they think, or have an opinion, is tantamount to sacriledge. The only safe way to behave is to shut your big mouth & go through the mill like everyone else.

Hmm, I know that's what people feel but I try to encourage any student of mine to ask questions or make suggestions.

It's extremely upsetting when you hear of a student/licence holder who disagrees with you but waited till after you weren't in the room to say "that was not correct, shocking behaviour" etc etc. rather than discussing it in the debrief or in the air over something relatively small but clearly distressed them. It's only happened once to me so far and I took it far too personally. Next time you fly with an instructor for your Biennial and they do something you disagree with, tell them, they will appreciate it :) and they will probably learn a bit more than normal.

What you describe is not dissimilar to flying with Captains from certain Eastern countries who believe they know and see everything and require the FO merely to operate the radio, fill in the paperwork and do any other donkey work required. We got into what I would consider to be a very dangerous situation, wont allow it any more.

[floppyjock]

DB6: try this

http://www.ead.eurocontrol.int/eadbasic/pamslight-79E45486EC381A8D5022628DDAA21B8B/7FE5QZZF3FXUS/EN/AIP/ENR/EG_ENR_5_5_en_2012-07-26.pdf

Mad Jock: I dont know what happened in the past but Dundee will regulary route traffic through the overhead when they know were not jumping or when the aircraft is on the ground. We dont have a problem with that.

10W: Ref the airprox. The parachute aircraft was on Dundee freq at all times. Dundee were called 2 mins to commencing the drop, and drop complete and descending. Both calls were acknowledged by Dundee. Why the " professional" crew of the Dornier got a scare Ive no idea.

Floppy

[mad_jock]

Its not controlled airspace.

Dundee can pass information on the activity of the site but as such they can't route traffic through it and neither can they stop traffic flying through it.

Its always had a bad reputation when jumping in progress but as DB6 states thankfully thats not very often. But its very hard to find out if jumping is going to be occuring until you get close. Then there is the debate about how much room round the place you need to go. I have heard aircraft on the otherside of the Tay going to fife get a mouthful from the jump plane pilot. If you stuck to the 1.5 mile radius nobody would have a problem but if anyone comes with 5 miles of the place all hell lets loose. And wed-sun during daylight hours is a load of rubbish. Do the RC lot and the birds of prey still get there knickers in a twist if anything goes near it?

They will have got scared because the TCAS will have got triggered by the rate of closure coupled with your desent rate and the crew won't have been visual with you.

So was the aircraft right overhead or was it 2 miles away and outside the 1.5 miles as stipulated. If the wind is such that you require more room quite frankly tough if its not safe don't drop you don't drop.

[quilmes]

What type of aircarft is used for para-dropping at Errol?

[DB6]

fj, the link doesn't work. What's it about?

[Contacttower]

Worked OK for me...its an extract from the AIP listing all the drop zones, glider sites etc and their contact details.

[10W]

airpolice

That's the one.

floppyjock

Ref the airprox. The parachute aircraft was on Dundee freq at all times. Dundee were called 2 mins to commencing the drop, and drop complete and descending. Both calls were acknowledged by Dundee. Why the " professional" crew of the Dornier got a scare Ive no idea.



Can't prejudge the Airprox report, but presumably the drop aircraft would also be aware of the Dornier and use the information to their advantage as well. I suspect the Dornier crew got a scare as they routed well to the North of the drop zone (as per the CAA chart) and weren't expecting to encounter a rapidly descending aircraft about 5 miles away from Errol and outside the promulgated area ?

[mad_jock]

The eurocontrol sometimes gets over loaded and comes back bad gateway or the like.

If you try a while later it will work again.

If its coming up not found its more than likely a problem with your ISP which will self heal in 6 hours. If it doesn't change your DNS server.

[stevelup]

You can't deep link to stuff on the Eurocontrol website. They use temporary tokens which time out.

Folks, click here (http://www.nats-uk.ead-it.com/public/index.php%3Foption=com_content&task=blogcategory&id=4&Itemid=11.html), then click on ENR 5.5

[DB6]

Hmmm, OK but I know about Errol. It's not me who needs the info, it's people who don't normally transit the area - or those who do and have read the AIP and know it's inaccurate. Errol is NOT normally active from Wednesday to Sunday during daylight hours, in fact in all the time I've operated from Dundee (10+years) I have never known anything happen outside of Sat/Sun and bank holidays. That's not to say it doesn't but I've never known it.
And the fact that it's in the AIP clearly isn't helping get the information out - I have to confess I don't keep a copy in the cludgie to pore over during those....extended sessions.
At a recent user's meeting at Dundee Airport all present agreed that it would help if Errol activity was NOTAMed, so I would say it is worth looking at.

[gasax]

I appreciate that Errol is very close to Dundee and so that is why the drop aircraft uses that frequency.

Would it not however make more sense to use Leuchars? They have radar - which as I understand it, Dundee do not. Leuchars are the service that most aircraft will use when transiting the area. Getting a traffic service from Leuchars is much more likely to address these matters than talking to Dundee - who mostly will not know what is happening in the area apart from their own inbounds.

If nothing else hearing a paradropping aircraft on the frequency is going to get most peoples' attention.

[mad_jock]

I don't think leuchars is operating at the weekends. They only do it when its in thier interests to protect the traffic at leuchars

[gasax]

For the moment Leuchars are H24 as part of the LARS. What will happen when the Army takes over? Who knows - but for the moment they would seem to offer more 'protection' than Dundee.

[dont overfil]

Gasax

The centre of the Errol drop zone is only 3 miles south of the Dundee localizer centreline. Dundee ATC are the only facility who can offer the proceedural service for the approach to Dundee. It is a requirement to speak to them to be able to use the ILS.

Leuchars and Dundee have a direct land line and Dundee listens out on 126.5.

There is every possible service available to pilots in this area. Speak to ANYBODY and they can tell you the status. If you are non radio stay well clear as you are in an area of intense activity. (Leuchars, Perth and Dundee).

Furthermore there is there is an additional drop zone this Saturday 8th at Errol Polo park operated by the Red Lions. This will be notamed. There is no connection with Paragon at Errol.

Every weekend without fail the parachute club phone Perth at the start and stop of operations. They have not been operating weekdays while I have been at Perth.

Edited to add, I have it on good authority there will be status quo at Leuchars for a few years yet.

D.O.

[MIKECR]

What type of aircarft is used for para-dropping at Errol?

Cessna 182 - owned by Paragon Skydiving Club.

[floppyjock]

MadDog:
I know its not controlled airspace. What I ment by that was that Dundee will tell aircraft were not "active" and inform pilots that they route direct to XYZ or no need to avoid etc.

"But its very hard to find out if jumping is going to be occuring until you get close"

Have you ever heard of "planning" its something that is taught by your instructor during training. Heres a radical idea. Pick up a phone and ask. Failing that, try calling someone in flight ie Scottish, Dundee, Perth or leuchars. :ugh:

"Then there is the debate about how much room round the place you need to go. I have heard aircraft on the otherside of the Tay going to fife get a mouthful from the jump plane pilot. If you stuck to the 1.5 mile radius nobody would have a problem but if anyone comes with 5 miles of the place all hell lets loose."

Give us as much room as you consider safe. When did you hear the jump pilot give anyone a "mouthful" and i,ll get it sorted. As for all hell breaking loose if you come within 5 miles, is a bit of an exaggeration.

"So was the aircraft right overhead or was it 2 miles away and outside the 1.5 miles as stipulated. If the wind is such that you require more room quite frankly tough if its not safe don't drop you don't drop"

The aircraft dropped the jumpers 1/2 mile north of the centre on the DZ and well within the 1.5 radius as stipulated. If the wind was such that we needed more room that would suggest the wind limits were outside the max safe limits for jumping and they wouldnt have taken off.

10W: The 1.5 promulgated area is for the protection of the jumpers. We could confine the flying to the same area but we have to consider the local population and the noise polution it would generate.

DB6: If you prefer we could look at NOTAMing the area 365 days a year if thats what you want. But surely its better for everone if we activate it only when were planning on jumping on a day to day basis and free it up when were not using it. Again its not hard to get the information. Im sure the CAA/NATS etc have looked at this in the past. All DZs are the same. Dont know about gliding sites etc

Floppy

PS Were always on the look out for new jump pilots.

[mad_jock]

I am an instructor floppyjock. And when flying in that area I was always talking to scottish info or leuchars when IFR. And that wasn't just in SEP's it was in twin TP's as well.

And as for commercial crews they won't carry VFR charts although we used to because our ops manual allowed us to cancel IFR. They may only get there briefing pack 10 mins before departure, that pack may include FIR Notams. But always departure, TO alt, destination and alts aerodrome NOTAMS. They will not phone that list of yours. If they don't have local knowledge they won't even know there is a drop site until they get the Dundee plates out if it is mentioned on them. When they will find out depends on what they do if they go the long way round and drop out of P600 it will be mins before arrival if they take the longer transit through class G but shorter track miles its when leuchars gets them.

Folk heading North from England have several choice points depending what the WX is doing cross west/east before Leeds or continue up and do it over fife. Setting off from Turweston I would have a rough idea which way I was going but I would be 100% certain that it would not be anywhere near any line drawn on the chart.

And its not exaggeration, if things have improved thats good. But as I suspect there will be a re-assement of the risk assement (if there is even one) after the airprox report is out we shoud proberly leave it.

And its hardly 365 days a year is it.

Its at the most 100 days, proberly less planned. And less than that actually flown.

And you still haven't answered the question if other users are still using the site and the DZ protection when your not jumping.

[DB6]

floppyjock, I suggested NOTAMing activity, not 365 days a year. Probably a weekend-only NOTAM and additional ones as applicable for bank holidays etc. The advantage of that is that it would then appear on the many graphic NOTAM presentation software packages available. I use this one UK 48-Hour Notams : Warnings and Restrictions (http://metutil.appspot.com/static/maps/48HourWarningRestrictionMap.htm) and it is the dog's bollocks. You will see that today, 7 Sept, the activity at Errol Park and jumping at Fife is depicted; it would be good if Errol was as well.
That's what I call information that is not difficult to get, as opposed to hidden in the AIP - see my point? If you're serious about informing people about your activity - as opposed to covering your back - you really should look at that option.

[floppyjock]

Mad Jock: We have a risk assesment an SOPs. Which have been approved by the CAA and BPA. Im not aware of any other airfield users.

We are the only ones on a weekend. No idea what goes on there during the week. I do know there is sometimes some driver training going on though.

Floppy

[mad_jock]

Suggest you find out who is using it and who is phoning up aircraft owners using G info data then.

If you are barely using it 2 days out of 7, NOTAM is the only sensible option.

And how old is that risk assement? If its more than 8 years old it was when one of the jump pilots was rumoured to be shagging one of the ATCO's at Dundee. And if you having airpox's with CAT on the instrument approaches it needs looked at again.

[piperboy84]

one of the jump pilots was rumoured to be shagging one of the ATCO's at Dundee

Please tell me the sick bastard wasn't bangin the "demented harpie"

[Crash one]

This thread is starting to get interesting:ok:

[mad_jock]

Calm down auld yin and go an change yer colostomy bag.

[Crash one]

:D:D:DNow I need a pee

[mad_jock]

Don't know him after my time. But to be honest thats an even better rumour.

Although slightly unfair if he wasn't working there 8 plus years ago. I am sure if he is that way inclinded he won't be seen dead with your average scottish bloke pilot, meat bomber or not.

[floppyjock]

If anyone is phoned why not ask who is calling, simple. Its not my airfield talk to the owner if its during the week.

The risk assessment and SMS is audited ever two years by the CAA/BPA and updated as required. The CAT was not on an instrument approach. Id wait until the airprox report is out before making any judgements.

Floppy

[mad_jock]

A visual approach is an instrument approach so unless they canceled IFR which I very much doudt they are allowed to do, it will still be a instrument approach.

[floppyjock]

It was not an approach. They were departing.

Floopy

[Bigears]

Out of curiosity, has the pilot of the aircraft which overflew Errol and started this post been traced and words had?