Solent Collaborative Airspace Trial

[Andy H]

Has anyone seen any details about this so called Solent Collaborative Airspace Trial ? It seems to have been promulgated with no consultation and will be a bit of an inconvenience (to put it mildly) to many private fliers

Andy H

[Camargue]

there is a thread on flyer forum.

seems they want you to use their listening squawk/frequency over a wider area, ie over IoW and haining island and upto bullingdon cross north.

so you'll end up jumping around between Farnborough west/them.

I guess if ga pilots were better at keeping out of CAS it wouldn't happen!!

[destinationsky]

I don't agree that it will be an inconvenience - when operating in the area you should be wearing the listening squawk or be talking to Solent. That is the best practice way of flying in this country as it is good to have a second pair of"eyes" on the ground to stop you straying too close to CAS. How hard is it to dial into 120.225 and wear 0011? you don't even have to talk to anyone!

The trial is meant to reduce infringements but I am struggling to see how. It is "suggested" that pilots contact Solent or use 0011. It is not mandatory so I'm struggling with the point. What is the success measure?
The CAA have apparently been to GA airfields to talk to them about the trial but they haven't been to mine. Considering the trial commences on 01/08, I have seen little detail.

[Camargue]

It seems to me though that if you are north you will already be/should be talking to Farnborough west who should be able to give you a poke if you look like busting solent, so why listen to them? if you are flying mid week and heading west you'll be wanting to talk to boscomb at the same time as listening to solent whilst leaving Farnborough west...

the IoW bit makes sense, not so sure about the rest to be honest.

[NorthSouth]

If you want an actual service, then talk to the LARS provider for the area. You will then be wearing their squawk and the Solent controllers will see that you are talking to Farnb, Boscombe etc. Then if they want to talk to you they lift the phone to that provider.
The listening squawks do next to nothing for the pilots using them. You get no service whatsoever and no information on potentially conflicting traffic, but in most cases you have to listen to the continuous radio traffic from the aircraft inside CAS. They're exclusively for the convenience of ATC.

[Jan Olieslagers]

It would be nice to know what exactly is being discussed. Any (www) pointers to text and facts?

[Bob Upanddown]

The AIC is due out tomorrow according to the people who are posting on Flyer.

I don't think enforced or encouraged Listening Squawks will end infringments. My thoughts are that infringements are caused by navigation errors, plain mistakes in planning or by people simply not checking the NOTAMs. If you are showing your registration on the radar display (as you will using Mode S), then a Listening Squawk is a good idea if someone is watching and can call you up by registration to turn away. That doesn't address the problem of people not reading the Notams and busting the Red Arrows display.
Anyway, I am waiting to read the AIC and see what it says as I think this is the beginning of a trend.

[The Ancient Geek]

In my opinion the listening squawk idea is complicated overkill. In the USA everyone flying outside of controlled airspace tunes to Unicom. Why do we need so many different frequencies ?.

[Capt Kremmen]

Infringements of CAS would be much less likely if the carriage and use of GPS was compulsory. Its being done with 8.33.

[flybymike]

then a Listening Squawk is a good idea if someone is watching and can call you up by registration to turn away.
I don't expect to be turned away from CAS simply because I'm flying towards it.
it is good to have a second pair of "eyes" on the ground to stop you straying too close to CAS
I expect to be able to get just as close to it as I like.

[NorthSouth]

It would be nice to know what exactly is being discussed. Any (www) pointers to text and facts?
Have a look here (http://www.ead.eurocontrol.int/pamslight/pdf/4e415453/EG/C/EN/AIC/EG_Circ_2016_Y_061_en) - AIC Y061/2016

[hobbit1983]

I don't agree that it will be an inconvenience - when operating in the area you should be wearing the listening squawk or be talking to Solent. That is the best practice way of flying in this country as it is good to have a second pair of"eyes" on the ground to stop you straying too close to CAS. How hard is it to dial into 120.225 and wear 0011? you don't even have to talk to anyone!

(my bold). Why SHOULD you? It's Class G....

[Steve6443]

It seems to me though that if you are north you will already be/should be talking to Farnborough west who should be able to give you a poke if you look like busting solent, so why listen to them? if you are flying mid week and heading west you'll be wanting to talk to boscomb at the same time as listening to solent whilst leaving Farnborough west...

the IoW bit makes sense, not so sure about the rest to be honest.

Such coments make my teeth itch - should be able to give you a poke..... As PIC you and you alone are responsible for your navigation, just wonder how many pilots bimble blithely onwards, blundering through CAS and then wondering why they weren't advised cos the Controller was doing something else....

[sandringham1]

I operate from a farm strip that is outside of the Solent zone but will come under the trial area, I am not transponder equipped so just tune to Solent as I climb out, if Im'e going somewhere I talk to them but I often don't because my flight will remain local. I have heard Solent blind calling a contact that radar shows as infringing or about to infringe, without reply, so I believe that by being on frequency should be good enough if I got it wrong.
What I think is bad is the CAA guide http://www.caa.co.uk/General-aviation/S ... ace-trial/ which shows a modified section of chart with the new zone and text saying SFC-BASE OF CONTROLLED AIRSPACE but this text has completely obliterated the line marking the Solent CTA at its southern edge.
I know its just a guide but someone not familiar with the area might use it innocently and end up in trouble, seems shoddy to me.

[destinationsky]

Ok "SHOULD" was probably the wrong word hobbit. You cannot deny that it is best practice to talk to an ANSP or use a listening squawk if near their airspace - especially Solent as the layout is fairly confusing if you are not used to flying around it. I do understand that you don't have to but why wouldn't you?! All it takes is a slight navigation error and you have infringed -wouldn't you rather have eyes on the ground looking out for you? Same as if you have an emergency, it's better to be talking to someone.

My opinion of this trial is that it will not reduce infringements. Better training and awareness of controlled airspace would.

[flybymike]

Ok "SHOULD" was probably the wrong word hobbit. You cannot deny that it is best practice to talk to an ANSP or use a listening squawk if near their airspace - especially Solent as the layout is fairly confusing if you are not used to flying around it. I do understand that you don't have to but why wouldn't you?! All it takes is a slight navigation error and you have infringed -wouldn't you rather have eyes on the ground looking out for you? Same as if you have an emergency, it's better to be talking to someone.


Non radio aircraft outside CAS don't, and can't, talk to anyone, and probably wouldn't wish to anyway.

[destinationsky]

Non radio aircraft outside CAS don't, and can't, talk to anyone, and probably wouldn't wish to anyway.
That goes without saying...

My point is, if you have the facility to talk to someone or alert them of your presence, why wouldn't you?!

[flybymike]

A lot of people enjoy the peace and quiet. ;)

[ShyTorque]

A lot of people enjoy the peace and quiet. ;)
Not talking or even listening out is fine, but if so equipped, please select the transponder to "Alt" mode. TCAS equipped aircraft (such as most modern IFRr equipped rotary wing aircraft like the one I fly) are alerted to your position and avoid you far more easily, probably even without you being aware.

[hobbit1983]

Ok "SHOULD" was probably the wrong word hobbit. You cannot deny that it is best practice to talk to an ANSP or use a listening squawk if near their airspace - especially Solent as the layout is fairly confusing if you are not used to flying around it. I do understand that you don't have to but why wouldn't you?! All it takes is a slight navigation error and you have infringed -wouldn't you rather have eyes on the ground looking out for you? Same as if you have an emergency, it's better to be talking to someone.

My opinion of this trial is that it will not reduce infringements. Better training and awareness of controlled airspace would.

Where do you draw the line? Should all non-radio aircraft be banned, then? I don't deny that a basic service can be a bonus; however sometimes there is simply nothing wrong with not talking to anyone in Class G.

By your logic, we should all be getting a Deconfliction service, all the time. Safer, right?

[blueandwhite]

I wonder how much effect this will have.

Some people will not comply and it seems are reluctant to participate in attempts to reduce infringements. I don't understand why.

Yes the PIC is the only person responsible for an infringement. But if I'm going past a zone with a listening squawk available I will always select it and listen out, even if I don't want a service. If I'm about to infringe I will be very grateful if a controller has time to tell me.

But look at the size of those buffer zones. They are so small you can be through them in moments.

Looking at the statistics of those who infringe. It seems over 99% of people are NOT using GPS. Its not the man in a simple no electrics plane flying for a local bimble. The main infringes are those using maps and/or VOR's or being distracted. I do wish they would at LEAST invest in AND USE some of the excellent and very cheap GPS units that will warn them of infringements. I think thats the way to cut down on infringements.

IMHO every plane should have at least an AWARE unit running and being monitored. (with the possible exception of the farm strippers who are just having a bimble)

[flybymike]

But look at the size of those buffer zones

I don't think we should endorse their existence by giving them a new name.

If they want to make the CTR bigger then let them go ahead and do so, and then at least we will all know what we are arguing about.

[Capt Kremmen]

The fitting and use of GPS needs to be made mandatory. How do you compel its use ? Wire it unswitched in to the a/c electrical loom. I loathe compulsion in any form but, sometimes the stakes are too high, making such necessary.

[destinationsky]

Where do you draw the line? Should all non-radio aircraft be banned, then? I don't deny that a basic service can be a bonus; however sometimes there is simply nothing wrong with not talking to anyone in Class G.

By your logic, we should all be getting a Deconfliction service, all the time. Safer, right?
That is not my logic at all. My logic is that if you can talk to someone when operating near to CAS then why wouldn't you and you have not given me a good reason? I know that you don't have to but by obtaining a service you are not only giving yourself an extra safety margin you are also alerting others to your presence. Not everyone will be talking to an ATC unit but you are still increasing your aural visibility and helping the controllers by creating a known traffic environment.

Non radio aircraft or non transponding aircraft should not be banned but if your aeroplane is fitted with the equipment then use it!?

Talking to an ATC unit does not increase the workload in the cockpit and will also give you extra peace of mind in the event of loss or confusion of position (which are 2 of the main reasons for infringements)

You clearly don't agree with me but I again pose the question - if you have a radio and a transponder, why wouldn't you use them?!

[Jan Olieslagers]

There is little added value as long as there is not a one to one relation between any defined spot in airspace and a corresponding service/frequency.

While I must admit being not very well acquainted with the UK situation, I understand from the www that several planes may be flying quite close to another, all in class G, each listening and perhaps even occasionally transmitting, but on different frequencies. So they may well be communicating for all they are worth, respecting every rule, yet be on a collision course without anybody warning them. If I've got that right, it means R/T has little worth, OCAS.

[blueandwhite]

There is little added value as long as there is not a one to one relation between any defined spot in airspace and a corresponding service/frequency.

While I must admit being not very well acquainted with the UK situation, I understand from the www that several planes may be flying quite close to another, all in class G, each listening and perhaps even occasionally transmitting, but on different frequencies. So they may well be communicating for all they are worth, respecting every rule, yet be on a collision course without anybody warning them. If I've got that right, it means R/T has little worth, OCAS.

It is possible for aircraft heading towards each other to be talking to different frequency. However even on a basic service the controller will normally advise that there is opposite direction traffic. Even if the other traffic is not talking to anyone. So the situation you are envisaging is absolutely possible, even though it is not something I have ever experienced and don't think I know of a single accident resulting from such a situation. There may well have been an accident, I'm just saying I don't know of it. In theory even if they are speaking to the same controller on a basic service they might not get any notification of a potential conflict. The last time I flew I was on a basic service and go warned about traffic that was not talking to anyone.

HOWEVER. If a pilot is worried about traffic he can just ask for a traffic service. Simples. :) Usually if you sound competent on the radio you will get a traffic service (I have never been refused).

(Hope that comes over as a simple and helpful comment. :) If you see what I mean.)


EDIt to ADD : I've had the situation that I have not been warned about non talking traffic as well. But thats not a UK problem, I've had it the other side of the channel as well.

[Andy H]

According to the AIC the Solent Collaborative Airspace Tril is now operative. However it doesn't appear on any maps or on SkyDemon. How on earth are we going to comply with this?

[hobbit1983]

destinationsky.

I am well aware of the benefits of the various levels of service. My point is that, sometimes, it's just nice to turn of the radio and go for a nice summer's evening bimble. This is permissible, you know :ok: (ever flown a Super Cub with the door open?).

You are responsible for navigation - not ATC. If you think you can navigate safety, without RT, and not infringe, on a clear summer eve, in good weather, with a chart and GPS, over an area you know well, you are allowed to make this choice in the airspace as it is now. You will have to face the consequences of your decisions, however in these circumstances I would be quite happy to do so, given my experience levels. Others may chose to do otherwise, as is their privilege. Yes, ATC may stop you infringing if you cock up; but under certain circumstances the risk is minimal.

Solent/Bournemouth CAS is such that flying from nearby airfields and around it, you could be termed almost always "near controlled airspace", btw.

To add context; I have been flying in and around Solent, in both a private and commercial capacity, for over 10 years. I know the area very well. To guard against human error, I also have a moving map GPS. To my mind, in the above scenario, I am happy - as the responsible commander of the aircraft, - with my navigational skills. To add further context; if I was flying in poor weather, in IMC, near CAS, I'd get a traffic service and talk. If I was flying the work machine, at faster speeds in and out of IMC where see and avoid is much tricker, I'd be on a deconfliction service outside.

The Basic Service, by the way, is IMHO of very limited value on the classic sunny weekend summers day when every bugger is calling up (with poor and over long RT on a fair few calls) for transits and BS. You'll not get traffic information; apart from an alerting service, you'll not recieve much of use. In those circumstances, I'd use the listening squawk. And, y'know, look out...

Incidentally, I agree that a transponder, if fitted, should always be used in ALT mode, as TCAS equipped aircraft and also radar units will derive clear safety benefits. My original point was that the uncontrolled airspace near Solent is not yet a RMZ; you are allowed to weight the options, risks, threats and arrive at a responsible choice. One responsible choice is, surprisingly, non-radio......

[robin]

Flew down Solent today. Solent were unreachable as they were far too busy. Nearly got taken out by an X-Air Hawk not transponding or talking to either Solent or Bournemouth.

Don't think the new arrangments can be in place as yet

[wrecker]

If you read the AIC.
On the first page above paragraph i in bold type it tells you the start date.
1 August 2016!

[pulse1]

Do you really think it is going to make much difference when it is in place? I know a lot of pilots who frequently use the Stoney Cross/Bealieu leg and most of them, including myself, have always listened out to Bournemouth rather than Solent. In my experience there is not a high probability of either service warning you of other traffic but Bournemouth would be a better bet. On a visit to their Tower I asked who I should listen to and they said either would do but please don't fly close to the Bournemouth boundary at 1900' (legal) in a westerly as it stops them using the ILS for 26.

Oddly, the only infringement I know anything about in that area was due to distraction which was partly contributed to by Bournemouth unexpectedly requesting the pilot to change to Solent as he was getting closer to their boundary.

[Nibbler]

Q) egtt/qaexx/iv/nbo/ae/000/065/5050n00132w023
b) from: 16/09/26 16:30c) to: 16/10/16 23:59
e) withdraw aic y 061/2016, sfc/fl065. Collaborative airspace trial in
the vcy of the southampton ctr and solent cta has been terminated.
2016-07-0060/as6