Formation Flying - definition
Thread Starter
Formation Flying - definition
Having searched high and low, I can't find any CASA definition of what counts as formation flying - nor 'in company', for that matter.
Would appreciate any wisdom from the gallery.
Thanks
Would appreciate any wisdom from the gallery.
Thanks
As far as CA$A is concerned, it is 2 aircraft in the same FIR on the same day.
In reality, 2 or more aircraft operating as a unit, with one designated leader who organises clearances, maintains lookout, and makes the decisions regarding aircraft attitude, heading, altitude, speed etc.
The other elements maintain a relative position from the leader, or the next aircraft in the formation as briefed, and despite the leader being in charge of lookout, each element must ensure obstacle separation for itself.
"In company" might not have any legal meaning, but it is usually 2 aircraft from the same company / school operating with less than the VFR distances between themselves, but more than formation distances. ATC treats them as one aircraft for clearances, no formation endorsement is needed because each machine can manoeuvre independently of the other and each is responsible for obstacle clearances.
Any advances on that?
In reality, 2 or more aircraft operating as a unit, with one designated leader who organises clearances, maintains lookout, and makes the decisions regarding aircraft attitude, heading, altitude, speed etc.
The other elements maintain a relative position from the leader, or the next aircraft in the formation as briefed, and despite the leader being in charge of lookout, each element must ensure obstacle separation for itself.
"In company" might not have any legal meaning, but it is usually 2 aircraft from the same company / school operating with less than the VFR distances between themselves, but more than formation distances. ATC treats them as one aircraft for clearances, no formation endorsement is needed because each machine can manoeuvre independently of the other and each is responsible for obstacle clearances.
Any advances on that?
This US based definition fits perfectly with what I’ve always believed it to be:
What I would like to know is if you pull up behind /near someone you know or don’t know, what distance is the legal minimum for separation?
Definition. Formation flight. A flight consisting of more than one aircraft which, by prior arrangement between the pilots, operates as a single aircraft with regard to navigation and position reporting, as well as clearances issued by ATC.
CASA’s Flight Operations Regulations - Consolidated Dictionary is fairly clear although some of my friends choose to twist the words to give a different meaning.
“flying in formation
2 or more aircraft are:
(a) flying in formation if they:
(i) are operating as a single unit with regard to navigation, position reporting and control; and
(ii) are so close to each other that any change in height, heading or airspeed of any aircraft used for station-keeping results in a need for one or more of the other aircraft to manoeuvre to maintain station or avoid a collision; and
(b) taken to be flying in formation:
(i) when the aircraft are changing station; and
(ii) during join-up or breakaway.”
“flying in formation
2 or more aircraft are:
(a) flying in formation if they:
(i) are operating as a single unit with regard to navigation, position reporting and control; and
(ii) are so close to each other that any change in height, heading or airspeed of any aircraft used for station-keeping results in a need for one or more of the other aircraft to manoeuvre to maintain station or avoid a collision; and
(b) taken to be flying in formation:
(i) when the aircraft are changing station; and
(ii) during join-up or breakaway.”
The following 3 users liked this post by djpil:
IIRC it used to be something like “shall not operate so close as to constitute a collision hazard.” Can’t recall under part 91.
The following users liked this post:
Late 70's was one of two helos in company inbound to Mascot to have the aircraft loaded onto a QF Combi 747, at the boundary when lead asked for clearance for a flight of two was asked "do you have approval to fly formation in the zone", answered in the negative, so ATC split up and handled as separate flights.
[I]n closer proximity to another aircraft than 600 metres horizontally and 500 feet vertically.
My 'rule of thumb' was to treat another aircraft like a cloud below 5,000' AMSL.
It seems now that the rule is: don't collide.
It's funny watching the cycle of these things go from prescriptive rule to outcomes-based rule. Fuel management is in the prescriptive phase of the cycle; getting close to other aircraft is in the outcomes-based phase.
Meanwhile the accident/incident rate remains pretty constant.
Last edited by Lead Balloon; 27th Mar 2023 at 10:15.
The following 2 users liked this post by Lead Balloon:
Late 70's was one of two helos in company inbound to Mascot to have the aircraft loaded onto a QF Combi 747, at the boundary when lead asked for clearance for a flight of two was asked "do you have approval to fly formation in the zone", answered in the negative, so ATC split up and handled as separate flights.
The following users liked this post:
DJPIL’s definition is correct. An actual numerical distance is not defined- it’s about the technique used.
“In Company” is simply a term used to fly in formation, when you don’t have a rating. If you don’t use the formation techniques, you’ll risk colliding.
“In Company” is simply a term used to fly in formation, when you don’t have a rating. If you don’t use the formation techniques, you’ll risk colliding.
The following 2 users liked this post by djpil:
The following users liked this post:
The following users liked this post:
