Contact 1 ahead etc
If you'd not noticed, there are still quite a lot of non-radio airfields and pilots in the UK, not to mention far more pilots who miss (or make at the wrong point) circuit calls. Lookout is everything !! Radio is firmly secondary.
G
G
Moderator
Join Date: Jul 1997
Location: Europe
Posts: 3,228
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Now often when I fly an aircraft with no radio, I don't make many calls when operating at some A/G fields. Why?- because it is hard to get a word in with all the yak yak yak.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Euroland
Posts: 2,814
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ah, the all seeing radar has spotted it! I should of course have said with radio!!. 
SAS,
If you tell me that you can see every aircraft around you when you are flying, then you are lying through your teeth
When flying in the circuit I do see every aircraft with the exception of those behind me.........that is how we avoid collisions.
There is no legal need to have a radio alot of the time and often it can be a pain, but to intimate that it is not a useful tool is daft. Listening out as well as looking out. Not difficult really is it...
Never said that radio is not a useful tool. In fact it is a very useful tool when properly used and as you say, Listening Out for appropriate position reports is an excellent way of improving one's situational awareness.
there always have been and always will be mid-airs especially in a busy environment. There is no way on earth that flying non-radio will cut the risk. It will almost certainly increase it
If the probability of mid-air collision increased with lack of radio then would it not be wise to say that the minimum visibility for operating non-radio should be more than the minimum visibility when one has a radio.........simlar to the fact that the risk of collision is greather above 140Kt than below and consequently the minimum visibility in class G changes?
I however would say that having a radio has absolutely no effect on the probability of collisions. All the radio does is to provide information that must be digested, understood, interpreted and if necessary acted upon along with all other aspects of situational awareness so that collisions are avoided.
The danger is that improper use of the radio can provide false information to the unwary thus disturbing their situational awareness and could possibly lead to a collision.
An example I believe being when one aircraft transmits "G-xx downwind one ahead"........and the aircraft following looks out expecting to see 2 aircraft and having spotted two aircraft assumes that all the traffic is in sight.
------------
Thanks to everyone for the comments - guess we won't be changing our procedures just yet and will continue to guide pilots on training flights that they should not try to announce how many they think are ahead.
Regards,
DFC
SAS,
If you tell me that you can see every aircraft around you when you are flying, then you are lying through your teeth
When flying in the circuit I do see every aircraft with the exception of those behind me.........that is how we avoid collisions.
There is no legal need to have a radio alot of the time and often it can be a pain, but to intimate that it is not a useful tool is daft. Listening out as well as looking out. Not difficult really is it...
Never said that radio is not a useful tool. In fact it is a very useful tool when properly used and as you say, Listening Out for appropriate position reports is an excellent way of improving one's situational awareness.
there always have been and always will be mid-airs especially in a busy environment. There is no way on earth that flying non-radio will cut the risk. It will almost certainly increase it
If the probability of mid-air collision increased with lack of radio then would it not be wise to say that the minimum visibility for operating non-radio should be more than the minimum visibility when one has a radio.........simlar to the fact that the risk of collision is greather above 140Kt than below and consequently the minimum visibility in class G changes?
I however would say that having a radio has absolutely no effect on the probability of collisions. All the radio does is to provide information that must be digested, understood, interpreted and if necessary acted upon along with all other aspects of situational awareness so that collisions are avoided.
The danger is that improper use of the radio can provide false information to the unwary thus disturbing their situational awareness and could possibly lead to a collision.
An example I believe being when one aircraft transmits "G-xx downwind one ahead"........and the aircraft following looks out expecting to see 2 aircraft and having spotted two aircraft assumes that all the traffic is in sight.
------------
Thanks to everyone for the comments - guess we won't be changing our procedures just yet and will continue to guide pilots on training flights that they should not try to announce how many they think are ahead.
Regards,
DFC
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: U.K.
Age: 46
Posts: 3,112
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The major risk in the circuit is not usually the traffic who is already there, but the traffic that is joining, that is when radio calls and standard routes come in useful. If they aren't following these and are non radio, what warning do you get then? That will obviously increase your chances of not noticing the traffic.
Whilst in the open FIR the helpfulness of the radio diminishes, so changing the viz limits wouldn't be of a huge amount of use, in that case shouldn't we have higher limits for areas of potential traffic congestion? Not very sensible really.
The scenario you mention about seeing 2 a/c is a valid one, but I was told a story today about a problem caused by an idiot instructor in a radio equipped a/c conflicting with a solo student in a non radio microlight. Was this down to a lack of awareness? yes it was and it goes down to stick&rudders point that some do place too much reliance on the radio, but I think we all agree that the radio is an important tool for traffic awareness.
Put it this way, would the London TMA operate safely on a see and avoid principle? Even on a perfectly clear day? How about getting rid of TCAS?
Standard calls and using your loaf are ideal, especially since some pilots do tend to flap if another a/c comes within 50 miles of them, a quick call to reassure them that you can see them or to say exactly where you are can help relax a fractious mind, but if the circuit is busy and there is lots of 'normal' calls, then that is neither the time or the place.
Whilst in the open FIR the helpfulness of the radio diminishes, so changing the viz limits wouldn't be of a huge amount of use, in that case shouldn't we have higher limits for areas of potential traffic congestion? Not very sensible really.
The scenario you mention about seeing 2 a/c is a valid one, but I was told a story today about a problem caused by an idiot instructor in a radio equipped a/c conflicting with a solo student in a non radio microlight. Was this down to a lack of awareness? yes it was and it goes down to stick&rudders point that some do place too much reliance on the radio, but I think we all agree that the radio is an important tool for traffic awareness.
Put it this way, would the London TMA operate safely on a see and avoid principle? Even on a perfectly clear day? How about getting rid of TCAS?
Standard calls and using your loaf are ideal, especially since some pilots do tend to flap if another a/c comes within 50 miles of them, a quick call to reassure them that you can see them or to say exactly where you are can help relax a fractious mind, but if the circuit is busy and there is lots of 'normal' calls, then that is neither the time or the place.
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: Ashbourne Co Meath Ireland
Age: 73
Posts: 470
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"Fox Tango, Left hand down wind for 23"
"Fox Tango, roger, number 6, but we both know that's going to change, continue and call turning final"
Regular exchange. Happened every time we were training in the circuit, in that the other 5 were all 152's or similar, and we were operating at close to 120 Kts, reducing to 90 on very short final, as the VMCA on the aircraft was 105 Kts, so we had to keep at least 105 until certain of a landing.
The exchanges meant we knew how many to look out for, and the other 6 knew that the order of approaches was going to change, as there was a much faster aircraft operating in the circuit.
Made things a little easier for me, and also for the other aircraft in the circuit.
Got interesting on occasions though, we'd pass outside one of them as we turned final, touch a few seconds literally after the previous one had rotated off, and be looking for him and passing him before we turned cross wind.
"Fox Tango, roger, number 6, but we both know that's going to change, continue and call turning final"
Regular exchange. Happened every time we were training in the circuit, in that the other 5 were all 152's or similar, and we were operating at close to 120 Kts, reducing to 90 on very short final, as the VMCA on the aircraft was 105 Kts, so we had to keep at least 105 until certain of a landing.
The exchanges meant we knew how many to look out for, and the other 6 knew that the order of approaches was going to change, as there was a much faster aircraft operating in the circuit.
Made things a little easier for me, and also for the other aircraft in the circuit.
Got interesting on occasions though, we'd pass outside one of them as we turned final, touch a few seconds literally after the previous one had rotated off, and be looking for him and passing him before we turned cross wind.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Euroland
Posts: 2,814
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Irish Steve,
You are talking about ATC. We are talking about uncontrolled airfields - A/G or FISO. Totally different situation.
SAS,
in that case shouldn't we have higher limits for areas of potential traffic congestion? Not very sensible really
We do and it is very sensible..........the 1500m visibility minima can only be used when flights are operating at speeds that will give adequate oportunity of observe other traffic or obstacles in time to avoid collision or in circumstanceswhen the probability of encounters with other traffic is low.
When the probability of encountering other traffic is increased or the speed is increased such as in controlled airspace then the visibility requirements increase also.
Helicopters can be permitted to operate VFR in less than 1500m because they can fly so slow.
a quick call to reassure them that you can see them or to say exactly where you are can help relax a fractious mind
Since A/G, Safetycom and FISO frequencies are not for air to air communication, how do you legally transmit from one aircraft to another in flight? Or do you simply break the law so as to give some (unnecessary) comfort and of course report the infringement when you land????
Regards,
DFC
You are talking about ATC. We are talking about uncontrolled airfields - A/G or FISO. Totally different situation.
SAS,
in that case shouldn't we have higher limits for areas of potential traffic congestion? Not very sensible really
We do and it is very sensible..........the 1500m visibility minima can only be used when flights are operating at speeds that will give adequate oportunity of observe other traffic or obstacles in time to avoid collision or in circumstanceswhen the probability of encounters with other traffic is low.
When the probability of encountering other traffic is increased or the speed is increased such as in controlled airspace then the visibility requirements increase also.
Helicopters can be permitted to operate VFR in less than 1500m because they can fly so slow.
a quick call to reassure them that you can see them or to say exactly where you are can help relax a fractious mind
Since A/G, Safetycom and FISO frequencies are not for air to air communication, how do you legally transmit from one aircraft to another in flight? Or do you simply break the law so as to give some (unnecessary) comfort and of course report the infringement when you land????
Regards,
DFC
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: U.K.
Age: 46
Posts: 3,112
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ahh but a position report is just that. You are just making a general broadcast for the benefit of all, you aren't communicating directly with the other a/c.
The heli's as you say operate "at a speed commensurate to the visibility in sight of the surface." It's nice to also have the option of stopping completely if you really must.
The heli's as you say operate "at a speed commensurate to the visibility in sight of the surface." It's nice to also have the option of stopping completely if you really must.
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: Ashbourne Co Meath Ireland
Age: 73
Posts: 470
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You are talking about ATC. We are talking about uncontrolled airfields - A/G or FISO. Totally different situation
Did quite a bit of flying from non controlled airfields, and they tended to be much as described here, depending on how busy it was, it helped the awareness. Made for problems when it was busy, especially when there were low time students flying solo who were perhaps struggling to fly and deal with the R/T, but that's maybe not such a bad thing, it's for sure better than having someone operate to an airfield that needs radio for the first time, and not really be aware of what's happening.
Key thing for me is brevity.
Fox Tango, left hand downwind for 23
followed later by
Fox Tango final to roll
works, but
Fox Tango is now just becoming downwind for an approach to runway 23 and planning to execute a touch and go.
Fox Tango has turned final and descending for runway 23 and planning to perform a touch and go.
doesn't work at all, I don't need that much bandwidth.
I need the information, not the life history, which some people are only too keen to give at every opportunity.
Cheers
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Euroland
Posts: 2,814
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SAS,
Ahh but a position report is just that
Sorry, I thought that you were saying you would make a call to the other aircraft.
Seems we agree that appropriate position reports are very good for assisting pilots maintain situational awareness. In this respect I have no problem with pilots adding in say a "base" call provided there is a good reason for that call eg aircraft calls joining base and you are laready on base then making a position report would assist the pilot joining.
Regards,
DFC
Ahh but a position report is just that
Sorry, I thought that you were saying you would make a call to the other aircraft.
Seems we agree that appropriate position reports are very good for assisting pilots maintain situational awareness. In this respect I have no problem with pilots adding in say a "base" call provided there is a good reason for that call eg aircraft calls joining base and you are laready on base then making a position report would assist the pilot joining.
Regards,
DFC
