Some People Are a Worry
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Brisbane Australia
Posts: 525
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Some People Are a Worry
I caught the train out to the Richmond Airshow on the weekend and was sitting adjacent to four enthusiasts, one of whom held a PPL. I couldn't help overhearing the conversation which went like this.
"I was flying into Griffith and held to let a bloke go in front of me. I held in cloud at 400' but that was no problem."
"How did you find the place?"
"I used the ADF."
"What's that?"
"Oh, that's the AUDIO Direction Finder. Yeah, but anyway, my plane has a composite propeller and I had heard that rain can cause delamination and when I landed, it certainly had. But I also heard that you can fix them with araldite so I glued it back together and it got me back to Port Macquarie. After the cloud cleared though, I saw that I'd been holding over the hill with the NBD tower on it!"
That was virtually word for word. You really have to worry about some people.
"I was flying into Griffith and held to let a bloke go in front of me. I held in cloud at 400' but that was no problem."
"How did you find the place?"
"I used the ADF."
"What's that?"
"Oh, that's the AUDIO Direction Finder. Yeah, but anyway, my plane has a composite propeller and I had heard that rain can cause delamination and when I landed, it certainly had. But I also heard that you can fix them with araldite so I glued it back together and it got me back to Port Macquarie. After the cloud cleared though, I saw that I'd been holding over the hill with the NBD tower on it!"
That was virtually word for word. You really have to worry about some people.
I held in cloud at 400' but that was no problem."
After the cloud cleared though, I saw that I'd been holding over the hill with the NBD tower on it!"
Tossers
That's gold - reminded me of last night. Departed Moorabbin to head east, tuned into Melbourne Radar and I hear this. (he was talking in free speech)
"Melbourne Radar, this is XLR, we are departing Baccus Marsh for Point Cook at 2,000ft. There's a lot of of traffic around here at the moment and a lot of them are Rookies and I'm not happy about mixing it with them so I'd like to arrange for a clearance to transit from Baccus Marsh to Point Cook at 3,500ft. Is that ok? Most of these guys don't seem to know what they are doing."
He got his clearance and I chuckled to myself about who the "rookie" actually was...
"Melbourne Radar, this is XLR, we are departing Baccus Marsh for Point Cook at 2,000ft. There's a lot of of traffic around here at the moment and a lot of them are Rookies and I'm not happy about mixing it with them so I'd like to arrange for a clearance to transit from Baccus Marsh to Point Cook at 3,500ft. Is that ok? Most of these guys don't seem to know what they are doing."
He got his clearance and I chuckled to myself about who the "rookie" actually was...
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Earth
Age: 52
Posts: 242
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nine Lives
Some people are just Temporary Citizens, looking for places to kill themselves. You see it on the roads, on the water and you dont often see it in the air, and you sure hope you never do!
Too bad if he had no transponder and a RPT of some sort happend to bump into him.
Some people are very very selfish....and foolish!
Unfortunately I too have heard of illegitimate IFR ops at VFR levels in IMC, and in a/c not equiped to deal with it.
6969
Too bad if he had no transponder and a RPT of some sort happend to bump into him.
Some people are very very selfish....and foolish!
Unfortunately I too have heard of illegitimate IFR ops at VFR levels in IMC, and in a/c not equiped to deal with it.
6969
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Sydney NSW Australia
Posts: 3,051
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Interesting to note i have read ever increasing reports (well not reports but mentiones on various sites in Oz on Oz aviation) of the breakdown of seperation, and the lack of basic airmanship in the Melbourne area, general complaints coming from that part of the world...
including this posted somewhere else recently, regarding flying in the region
including this posted somewhere else recently, regarding flying in the region
The reason I ask is that today, while in the circuit at Shepparton with three other aircraft, all newish 172s, I had to abort activities in the circuit and depart the flight plan due to what can only be described as a breakdown in separation.
I was halfway along the base leg of the circuit in a Tecnam with my instructor, when I heard the very badly spoken call of a Cessna 172 turning base.
My instructor looked over his shoulder and was startled to see the 172 bearing down on and level with us. At this time in the circuit, the Tecnam was at 60kts with first stage of flaps.
At about 200m apart and seconds from my turn for finals, I aborted the landing and departed the circuit, flying firstly to the right and then up. I commenced the manouvre at the same time the instructor issued the command.
There was no acknowledgement from the 172 pilot that he had seen us, let alone received our standard calls.
The three 172s were essentially a flight of three students whom my instructor suspected were on their first solo navex and were from Moorabin.
Any comments?
I was halfway along the base leg of the circuit in a Tecnam with my instructor, when I heard the very badly spoken call of a Cessna 172 turning base.
My instructor looked over his shoulder and was startled to see the 172 bearing down on and level with us. At this time in the circuit, the Tecnam was at 60kts with first stage of flaps.
At about 200m apart and seconds from my turn for finals, I aborted the landing and departed the circuit, flying firstly to the right and then up. I commenced the manouvre at the same time the instructor issued the command.
There was no acknowledgement from the 172 pilot that he had seen us, let alone received our standard calls.
The three 172s were essentially a flight of three students whom my instructor suspected were on their first solo navex and were from Moorabin.
Any comments?
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Victoria
Age: 56
Posts: 55
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hey Ultralights,
I think I see where you are coming from. I'll put my sentiments a bit more bluntly
:
On 2 occasions in the last 3 months I have had to turn and backtrack when inbound to destinations in the Point Cook area.
Why? - because of unintelligible calls from other aircraft causing a breakdown in VFR separation.
On the first occasion, I was inbound (VFR) to YMAV at 2000' from the SE. Made the CTAF call and worked out separation with a jet* A3something in the circuit. Then comes the (barely understood) call that a 172 is inbound from the West at, you guessed it....2000'. I contacted this fellow (Echo something something), but try as I might, his speech was so heavily accented that I could NOT safely discover his intentions.
I waited for the instructor to come in and sort it out, but he must have been solo navexing because it never happened. It was toward sunset, he was coming form the west, so I just turned tail and fled.
Second event not dissimilar, although different location (to the East)
I understand that the money from the Asian training markets is important to local GA, BUT..... the instructors and regulators must become aware the hazard a number of these guys represent. They are no doubt smart kids, but a certain minimum standard of ARTICULATION of speech MUST be maintained. Or they must have a safety pilot / instructor / Radio operator in the Right hand seat.
It will cause some bent metal at some stage I fear.
I think I see where you are coming from. I'll put my sentiments a bit more bluntly
:On 2 occasions in the last 3 months I have had to turn and backtrack when inbound to destinations in the Point Cook area.
Why? - because of unintelligible calls from other aircraft causing a breakdown in VFR separation.
On the first occasion, I was inbound (VFR) to YMAV at 2000' from the SE. Made the CTAF call and worked out separation with a jet* A3something in the circuit. Then comes the (barely understood) call that a 172 is inbound from the West at, you guessed it....2000'. I contacted this fellow (Echo something something), but try as I might, his speech was so heavily accented that I could NOT safely discover his intentions.
I waited for the instructor to come in and sort it out, but he must have been solo navexing because it never happened. It was toward sunset, he was coming form the west, so I just turned tail and fled.
Second event not dissimilar, although different location (to the East)
I understand that the money from the Asian training markets is important to local GA, BUT..... the instructors and regulators must become aware the hazard a number of these guys represent. They are no doubt smart kids, but a certain minimum standard of ARTICULATION of speech MUST be maintained. Or they must have a safety pilot / instructor / Radio operator in the Right hand seat.
It will cause some bent metal at some stage I fear.
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Victoria
Age: 56
Posts: 55
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ultralights,
I think I see your point - I'll be little more blunt with mine
On 2 occasions recently I've had to reverse or change course because of what I perceived to be unacceptable collision risks.
Approaching YMAV late afternoon (VFR) from the SE at 2000' I had arranged separation with a jet* A3something in the circuit. At 2 miles out a (barely decipherable) call came from a 172 (Echo something something) inbound from the WEST at, you guessed it, 2000'. Despite clear and patient radio calls on my behalf, it proved impossible to get any other information about his current location or intentions. He was (it seemed) coming out of the sun, and I felt the safest option was to reverse course and leave - the place I was most sure he wasn't was behind me, but even that gave me the heebies. I know I could (and possibly) should have asked Radar for traffic, but I didn't.
All this time, I was waiting for his instructor to come on the horn and sort it out, but he must have been solo navexing because that never occurred.
Second event was not much different, but was to the east of Melbourne.
I know that the income generated by Asian market trainees is important to local organisations, but the Instructors and Regulators MUST be aware of the hazard that exists with some of the trainees at present. Indeed, do any of you ATC folks have any sympathy with this?
No doubt they are smart kids, but a certain mimimum level of ARTICULATION must be applicable, for the safety of all of us.
I bet the training market will collapse pretty rapidly if some metal gets bent.
I think I see your point - I'll be little more blunt with mine
On 2 occasions recently I've had to reverse or change course because of what I perceived to be unacceptable collision risks.
Approaching YMAV late afternoon (VFR) from the SE at 2000' I had arranged separation with a jet* A3something in the circuit. At 2 miles out a (barely decipherable) call came from a 172 (Echo something something) inbound from the WEST at, you guessed it, 2000'. Despite clear and patient radio calls on my behalf, it proved impossible to get any other information about his current location or intentions. He was (it seemed) coming out of the sun, and I felt the safest option was to reverse course and leave - the place I was most sure he wasn't was behind me, but even that gave me the heebies. I know I could (and possibly) should have asked Radar for traffic, but I didn't.
All this time, I was waiting for his instructor to come on the horn and sort it out, but he must have been solo navexing because that never occurred.
Second event was not much different, but was to the east of Melbourne.
I know that the income generated by Asian market trainees is important to local organisations, but the Instructors and Regulators MUST be aware of the hazard that exists with some of the trainees at present. Indeed, do any of you ATC folks have any sympathy with this?
No doubt they are smart kids, but a certain mimimum level of ARTICULATION must be applicable, for the safety of all of us.
I bet the training market will collapse pretty rapidly if some metal gets bent.
Guest
Posts: n/a
I'll comment on that.. you've been stealing posts again from www.ultralight.net.au/forum (a lame ultralight forum run by some guy who owns an ultralight).
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: OZ
Posts: 269
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Gday
From my experience,
Without those nice people in the tower at MB sequencing these rabbits or should I more correctly say pandas they just blunder around area taking little notice of any other traffic, then again I still hear ozzy rabbits giving themselves as traffic when separated by several thousand feet.
Cheers Q
From my experience,
Without those nice people in the tower at MB sequencing these rabbits or should I more correctly say pandas they just blunder around area taking little notice of any other traffic, then again I still hear ozzy rabbits giving themselves as traffic when separated by several thousand feet.
Cheers Q
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Melbourne, China
Posts: 324
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
With the breakdown in separation in the circuit, may be lodging an incident report is in order? Surely it will help get the message across to the pilots in the most professional manner?
It's difficult to say anything without being branded a raciist. However, to be constructive, I suggest that an english test should be administered by an appropriate Embassy or Consular official before a visa is provided. That might provide sufficient motivation to excel.
My partner teaches, and has a never ending problem with kids from other places whose English is substandard and who don't really went to learn, moreover, they posess cultural imperatives to say "yes'" when the real answer should be "I don't understand a f&8*ing thing you just told me".
Thats what has been at the back of my mind about the NAS "recommended calls", God knows my voice procedure is not perfect, but at least I try. What worries me is the guy who is not sure what to say or how to say it, and therefore shuts up completely.
The poor CFI's have a lot on their plate.
My partner teaches, and has a never ending problem with kids from other places whose English is substandard and who don't really went to learn, moreover, they posess cultural imperatives to say "yes'" when the real answer should be "I don't understand a f&8*ing thing you just told me".
Thats what has been at the back of my mind about the NAS "recommended calls", God knows my voice procedure is not perfect, but at least I try. What worries me is the guy who is not sure what to say or how to say it, and therefore shuts up completely.
The poor CFI's have a lot on their plate.
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Victoria
Age: 56
Posts: 55
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hmm..
Ultralights, QNIM,
I can see the thrust of your posts - allow me to put my views a bit more bluntly:
On 2 occasions recently I had been in potential collision risk because of breakdown in comms. Specifically:
Late afternoon, I'm inbound to YMAV at 2000' from the SE. I've made the requisite CTAF call at 10 nm and worked out separation with a jet* A3something in the circuit. About 2 nm out comes a barely decipherable inbound/overflying call. From what I can gather this is a 172 to the west at my altitude. I contacted this fellow (Echo XXXX XXXX) but despite my patient and repeated attempts, it was simply impossible for me to understand his current position and intentions.
Since he was coming out of a lowering sun, I felt unable to maintain VFR separation. I felt my best choice was to descend and reverse track.
I waited for the instructor to get on the horn and sort it out, but it never happened - must have been a solo navex.
A similar incident occured about 2 weeks later to the East of Melbourne.
I could have called ATC I suppose and hassled them for traffic, but it was after all VFR, and this should not have been necessary.
I am aware that the Asian training market is lucrative for local organisations, but there is a genuine safety hazard with some of these pilots. No doubt they are smart kids, but a certain minimum level of ARTICULATION of the English language should be required. In my opinion, both the training organisiations and the regulator need to address this issue.
I imagine the ATC folks have more than an occasional problem with this as well.
I can see the thrust of your posts - allow me to put my views a bit more bluntly:
On 2 occasions recently I had been in potential collision risk because of breakdown in comms. Specifically:
Late afternoon, I'm inbound to YMAV at 2000' from the SE. I've made the requisite CTAF call at 10 nm and worked out separation with a jet* A3something in the circuit. About 2 nm out comes a barely decipherable inbound/overflying call. From what I can gather this is a 172 to the west at my altitude. I contacted this fellow (Echo XXXX XXXX) but despite my patient and repeated attempts, it was simply impossible for me to understand his current position and intentions.
Since he was coming out of a lowering sun, I felt unable to maintain VFR separation. I felt my best choice was to descend and reverse track.
I waited for the instructor to get on the horn and sort it out, but it never happened - must have been a solo navex.
A similar incident occured about 2 weeks later to the East of Melbourne.
I could have called ATC I suppose and hassled them for traffic, but it was after all VFR, and this should not have been necessary.
I am aware that the Asian training market is lucrative for local organisations, but there is a genuine safety hazard with some of these pilots. No doubt they are smart kids, but a certain minimum level of ARTICULATION of the English language should be required. In my opinion, both the training organisiations and the regulator need to address this issue.
I imagine the ATC folks have more than an occasional problem with this as well.
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: YMEN
Age: 66
Posts: 78
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Squawk7700
Thanks for the report
Yes a young and keen CPL trainee doing the right thing - Maybe too much radio! - Debriefed, Thank you,
BTW - Shouldn't the rego be "###"
Paul
Thanks for the report
Yes a young and keen CPL trainee doing the right thing - Maybe too much radio! - Debriefed, Thank you,
BTW - Shouldn't the rego be "###"
Paul
Last edited by OZAZTEC; 25th Oct 2006 at 00:51. Reason: Spelling
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Victoria
Age: 56
Posts: 55
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sunfish,
Stating facts does not make you a racist, just an astute observer.
I too have had experiences like this. Around the Point Cook area especially.
Twice I've had to change course tom avoid potential collisions with Echo XXX XXXX 172's.
It's fine if they have an instructor aboard, but on solo nav's some of them are simply dangerous.
I suggest that the instructors and regulator must enforce more than just English language written proficiency - there MUST also be intelligible DICTION and ARTICULATION. It's a mystery to me that some of these students get a radio operators licence.
ATC folks must surely notice these problems - often enough I've heard them having to repeat themselves.
At least with english-articulate students, even when nerves and inexperience get the better of their radio calls (and we can all remember that), simple plain-language instructions can be issued.
Cheers
Stating facts does not make you a racist, just an astute observer.
I too have had experiences like this. Around the Point Cook area especially.
Twice I've had to change course tom avoid potential collisions with Echo XXX XXXX 172's.
It's fine if they have an instructor aboard, but on solo nav's some of them are simply dangerous.
I suggest that the instructors and regulator must enforce more than just English language written proficiency - there MUST also be intelligible DICTION and ARTICULATION. It's a mystery to me that some of these students get a radio operators licence.
ATC folks must surely notice these problems - often enough I've heard them having to repeat themselves.
At least with english-articulate students, even when nerves and inexperience get the better of their radio calls (and we can all remember that), simple plain-language instructions can be issued.
Cheers
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Melbourne, China
Posts: 324
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
AEROPLANE and helicopter pilots and air traffic controllers will be assessed for English proficiency under new rules developed
by the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO). ICAO representative Paul Lamy said native English speakers and highly-proficient non-native speakers were considered to be at the expert level and could be
assessed during a normal flight test. The test would ensure they spoke English using a dialect or accent understandable to the aeronautical community and would only need to be taken once.
Other people will have to be formally tested and will need to qualify to an “operational level” to be authorised to fly in airspace in which English is used. Their knowledge of English will need to be retested regularly. The rule will apply to all ICAO's 188 member states and is contained in an amendment to the organization's “International Standards and Recommended Practices for Personnel Licensing”. The new rule will become a Recommended Practice on 28 November 2003 and an International Standard on 5 March 2008.
by the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO). ICAO representative Paul Lamy said native English speakers and highly-proficient non-native speakers were considered to be at the expert level and could be
assessed during a normal flight test. The test would ensure they spoke English using a dialect or accent understandable to the aeronautical community and would only need to be taken once.
Other people will have to be formally tested and will need to qualify to an “operational level” to be authorised to fly in airspace in which English is used. Their knowledge of English will need to be retested regularly. The rule will apply to all ICAO's 188 member states and is contained in an amendment to the organization's “International Standards and Recommended Practices for Personnel Licensing”. The new rule will become a Recommended Practice on 28 November 2003 and an International Standard on 5 March 2008.
Thief
Ultralights - mate looks you've been stealing other peoples posts from www.ultralight.net.au/forum/default.asp YET again!
For those that don't know said forum, it's for the ultralight fraternity and heavily moderated. For those that think PPrune is even remotely moderated, think again!
Thanks Woomera!
For those that don't know said forum, it's for the ultralight fraternity and heavily moderated. For those that think PPrune is even remotely moderated, think again!
Thanks Woomera!