Keep clear of controlled airspace!

[coolbeans]

Edit for Double post

[coolbeans]

I cant 100% remember if its laid down in our MATS pt2 but we are taught to instruct any aircraft heading towards CAS to remain outside, especially if they are going onto another unit.

I believe this is purely down to the type of traffic (lots of GA, foreign visitors etc) worked and abundance of CAS around the airport.

I believe the use of ROCAS specifically at my airport (in my skys ) is very warranted.
I cant say for other units though.

I noticed some hatred for the license protecting, ass covering reason for using ROCAS. Whats the beef with this? Im aware that a pilot shall not enter without a clearance therefore any blame for an infringement should lie with him, however, every infringement I have witnessed the controller has been asked if he told the aircraft to remain outside controlled airspace.

Inclusion of the phrase reiterates the pilots responsibilty and protects my license.

and thats whats important


However JD I agree that In every case at every unit it has the potential to be misused

[Jumbo Driver]

I rather doubt it would be just in your MATS Part 2 - although I'd be interested to know if it is. However, if it is there, that wouldn't be publicly accessible as most Part 2s are generally kept discrete, as "Confidential" or "commercially sensitive" publications.

Incidentally, unless para. 21 applies, I don't think simply re-iterating what is clearly the pilot's own responsibility does in fact help to protect your licence/validation. You say that in "every infringement (you) have witnessed the controller has been asked if he told the aircraft to remain outside controlled airspace." I suggest this is not the same as implying that the controller is otherwise responsible for the pilot's infringement. If the controller has complied with MATS Part 1 (& 2), then no blame can attach to him/her.

In other words, provided you have complied with para. 21 and unless there is some hitherto undiscovered further requirement to say "ROCAS", it would be totally inequitable for you to be held responsible for any CAS "bust" in such circumstances.


JD

[coolbeans]

Right you bugger, make me read through my own mats 2

If the controller has complied with MATS Part 1 (& 2), then no blame can attach to him/her.

And I do just that by instructing aircraft routing north of me to Rocas

Your right I'm almost certainly not going to lose my license due to a pilot infringing CAS on his own recognizance.

Unless its a really serious one and they decide I haven't discharged my Duty of care....

[Jumbo Driver]

I'm sure reading your MATS Part 2 will prove to be very good for the soul ...


JD

[Still Wee Jock]

I retired a while back and this 'remain outside controlled airspace' thing was a bone of contention then - we were made to say it, can't remember if it was unit instructions or best practice or whatever but we used to get moaned at by the suits if we never said it. I thought then, and I still do, that it's a complete waste of time and dumbing down of standards - if you're driving a car and you encounter a red traffic light, you've passed your test and you know to stop, there isn't a big notice saying 'stop when the light is red'. Can't see that pilots knowing they have to route outside CAS unless they have a clearance is any different. Too much yapping used to get on my nerves, god knows what it did to the pilots.

And wotcher Bren, still loving retirement? Me too!

[Jumbo Driver]

... my views exactly, Still Wee Jock ...

and put so much more succinctly ...

JD

[Cows getting bigger]

Today (without a word of a lie):

"XXX radar, G-CD" (There's a clue in the abbreviated C/S)
"G-CD, remain outside controlled airspace, pass your message"
"G-CD, G-YZ is trying to call you to say he is going en-route"

So, how much thought went into that particular pearl of wisdom from ATC?

[Talkdownman]

All the jobsworths are using it indiscriminately as thoughtless automatons.
The phrase is already devalued.
121.5 doesn't seem to use it....

[tribekey]

I think it's a pointless phrase, it's become overused and is ineffective, however, something needs to be done about infringement. Two examples from the last few days.

I used the phrase twice to two separate aircraft leaving CAS because there is adjacent CAS where infringements are common. On both occasions the pilot subsequently infringed CAS within ONE MINUTE, one into an airway the other into another units CAS. Pretty much renders the phrase pointless?

However, this is not unusual, it happens not monthly or weekly but almost daily. The answer is not a change in phraseology but an improvement in the standard of G/A. In the same period (saturday and sunday)that the two infringements happened above i counted maybe fifteen different pilots who either wouldn't read back or didn't know they had to read back the service they were given, the clearance they received, acknowledged traffic information..etc

Perhaps the CAA should stop tweaking phraseology and actually take some action to suspend licences and try and improve the situation.

[Cows getting bigger]

Yep, you're absolutely right.

[landedoutagain]

tribekey - perhaps if this is such a common problem for your specific circumstances a better (and clearer?) phrase could be used. "XXX you are leaving controlled airspace, basic service, caution solent control zone five miles south east of you"

Or something like that. Im not advocating the caa introduce anything new though!

[Voroff]

I used the phrase twice to two separate aircraft leaving CAS because there is adjacent CAS where infringements are common. On both occasions the pilot subsequently infringed CAS within ONE MINUTE, one into an airway the other into another units CAS. Pretty much renders the phrase pointless?

Sad thing is and what most atco's have learned is that when something like this happens they will get blamed for these incursions if they haven't said the phrase, So the phrase has become a cover your ass thing.

[Talkdownman]

Yes, because it has always been much easier to blame an ATCO because he got it very slightly wrong than to bother, even, to blame the intruding pilot because he got it grossly wrong. I have read an enormous amount of misappropriated criticism in reports by misguided and inexperienced ATC incident investigators over the years who repeatedly failed to get to the root of the problem eg. "we can't prosecute because you failed to tell him what type of service he was under/to remain outside controlled airspace/because you didn't notice him being naughty straight away". CAA Air Regulation Enforcement action taken against some very serious perpetrators has been pathetic. Small wonder ATCOs can't be bothered to file reports when it is possible for the ATCO to be grilled in court and end up seeing a negligent pilot get off scott-free because the ATCO didn't dot an 'i' or cross a 't'. Navigation refresher training should be mandatory in the case of CAS busters regardless of experience and the Old Boys' Network, not Mickey-Mouse five bob fines......

[Red Four]

Well said TDM!

[throw a dyce]

TDM,
Most of the CAS infringements I have seen have been from aircraft not on frequency.About 90% of them are military.The RCOCAS phrase is useless,if they aren't listening.Even blind calls make no difference as the mil haven't even got you on guard.
I don't know what action is taken with the mil,but from where I sit it seems very little;They are ''professionals'' as well.

[tribekey]

landedoutagain

Several different similar phrases have been used e.g 'remain clear of adjacent controlled airspace' etc etc




The basic problem is that there has been a slow but steady increase in the number of such incidents matched with a slow but steady decrease in the standard of r/t. As i said i took a snapshot over a recent couple of days but talking to other ATCO's you will find the similar experiences are regular.

Perhaps a points system similar to that for road vehicle licences should be introduced?

I'm not saying that ROCAS should never be used but that using it regularly is not having any noticeable effect. I know that many ATCO's simply don't bother reporting infringements any more because the reporting system is perceived as ineffective.

[splitduty]

Talkdownman.
I agree with you completely. You describe why the phrase ROCAS must be used routinely. The question is- do pilots understand what you are talking about?


Cows getting bigger.
The reason the phrase was used on first contact was probably to ensure no infringement of cas would takes place DURING the passing of the message if a zone transit was going to be requested. (yes, seen it happen many times). The fact it was something else-- well so what!

[Cows getting bigger]

splitduty, it wasn't first contact (hence the abbreviated callsign). I had been under a BS for the best part of half an hour!! As for my proximity to CAS, I was 25nm laterally and 7000ft vertically clear of any CAS.

[splitduty]

Just demonstrates how without all the details it`s difficult to comment on a particular circumstance. eg. were you radar identified? therefore, did ATC know exactly where you were? were you now close to cas and calling for transit / join etc? I could go on - but I`m sure you can see how we don`t all view events through the same perspective. Hence the reason for ATC covering themselves.