Glou idiot !
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: England
Posts: 518
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Irish um
No I'm not Irish, Im English, and have no intention of working in the US
I wouldn't mind retiring there, buy a new house / car / airplane and spend all my cash in the US, however, the US gov, doesn't allow that
I wouldn't mind retiring there, buy a new house / car / airplane and spend all my cash in the US, however, the US gov, doesn't allow that
Join Date: May 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 4,631
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Tim CPL
You make an extremely good and compelling case for the way things could be done if there was a will.
America has many things wrong with it as do we. Recognise those parts that work and work very well and adopt those parts.
Next time the CAA bring a prosecution for CZ infringement I hope the circumstances of why the pilot infringed are fully explored. So lets see:
1. You were never trained how or where to obtain NOTAM information,
2. You have to rely on third party software to present the information in a half intelligible way, and in order to do so require access to the internet and a computer,
3. CZs are changed without the officially published charts being amended for months,
4. Little or no moving map GPS training was given to you, and you find yourself relying on antiquated navigation techniques that worked very well before the countryside was littered with CSs and aircraft rarely exceeded 100 knots,
5. I find when I want it controllers are often far too over worked to provide a radar service.
Not a compelling case for the prosecution me thinks
.
You make an extremely good and compelling case for the way things could be done if there was a will.
America has many things wrong with it as do we. Recognise those parts that work and work very well and adopt those parts.
Next time the CAA bring a prosecution for CZ infringement I hope the circumstances of why the pilot infringed are fully explored. So lets see:
1. You were never trained how or where to obtain NOTAM information,
2. You have to rely on third party software to present the information in a half intelligible way, and in order to do so require access to the internet and a computer,
3. CZs are changed without the officially published charts being amended for months,
4. Little or no moving map GPS training was given to you, and you find yourself relying on antiquated navigation techniques that worked very well before the countryside was littered with CSs and aircraft rarely exceeded 100 knots,
5. I find when I want it controllers are often far too over worked to provide a radar service.
Not a compelling case for the prosecution me thinks
.
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think, Fuji, this "expose the crap training industry practices" has been tried before, and it worked 
Take that well publicised fuel exhaustion case.
Any half competent aviation lawyer will use this, and rightly so IMHO.
Take that well publicised fuel exhaustion case. Any half competent aviation lawyer will use this, and rightly so IMHO.
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 1,777
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Pity Red Lead didn't get one of the team to intercept the intruder and collect the type and reg.
That would have squared away the individual and stopped the current speculation. Also, whatever happened to radar tracing these days? In times passed, an infringer would have been tracked to destination where the details would have been taken.
Mind you, the Reds displaying paint pretty pictures in smoke writ large against the sky - didn't the twit notice? Or is he registered blind?
That would have squared away the individual and stopped the current speculation. Also, whatever happened to radar tracing these days? In times passed, an infringer would have been tracked to destination where the details would have been taken.
Mind you, the Reds displaying paint pretty pictures in smoke writ large against the sky - didn't the twit notice? Or is he registered blind?
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Cotswolds
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Brize apparently tracked the offender until just the other side of the R105 restricted area and then lost radar contact, reckoning that it went below their radar coverage. Both Bristol and Lyneham were unable to help and the suggestion is that the a/c landed in the triangle between Bristol, Bath & Tetbury. Pretty wide area I know but there cannot be that many strips in that area? Badminton were contacted but could not help. Any other ideas?????
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Not a million miles from EGTF
Age: 68
Posts: 1,579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Fuji Abound
Was the pilot trained in low level radar avoidance techniques 
.
.
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't think a Hawk can fly as slow as a typical club C172 loaded 10% over MTOW 
And if it could, the AOA would be so high, and the fuel flow likewise, a C172 would easily outrun it on fuel endurance alone. It could get the reg OK though.
And if it could, the AOA would be so high, and the fuel flow likewise, a C172 would easily outrun it on fuel endurance alone. It could get the reg OK though.
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Robin
Are you serious about a "bomber"?? This is straight out of the Daily Mail...
AFAIK spamcans are normally intercepted by police helicopters; a twin turbine can easily outrun a C172. A jet could shoot one down too; what it probably cannot easily do is escort it to some airfield as was suggested higher up here.
I know the international interception procedures are supposed to provide for slow aircraft interception by jets, but I am sure 99% of PPLs have never heard of them.
Are you serious about a "bomber"?? This is straight out of the Daily Mail...
AFAIK spamcans are normally intercepted by police helicopters; a twin turbine can easily outrun a C172. A jet could shoot one down too; what it probably cannot easily do is escort it to some airfield as was suggested higher up here.
I know the international interception procedures are supposed to provide for slow aircraft interception by jets, but I am sure 99% of PPLs have never heard of them.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 4,631
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"I know the international interception procedures are supposed to provide for slow aircraft interception by jets, but I am sure 99% of PPLs have never heard of them."
.. .. .. but I thought it was in the PPL syllabus?
.. .. .. arent you also required to carry the card!!!
.. .. .. but I thought it was in the PPL syllabus?
.. .. .. arent you also required to carry the card!!!
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes and Yes, Fuji, but if pilots don't (as is claimed) know about CAS then they are far less likely to know about this. To be honest I haven't got a clue what the procedures are, but the card is in my checklist (on the last page).
In fact I would bet that so few private pilots would know what to do, the police (when using their heli) must have some other procedure to communicate with the pilot.
In fact I would bet that so few private pilots would know what to do, the police (when using their heli) must have some other procedure to communicate with the pilot.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 4,631
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
IO540
It was of course a bit tongue in cheek! As you say should it ever happen the card is there!
I am still at a loss on this.
There appears to be agreement that changes to the PPL syllabus would be a very good thing and should prevent new pilots making this type of mistake.
Of course that in itself does little about the eixsting problem becasue of the time it will take to filter through.
The biennial seems to be the other check point.
The common theme seems to be pleas from the instructors that they are only given an hour and there is a lot to cram in.
I just dont buy that.
Isnt an hour sufficent to take in a bit of CAS or if you happen to be in a part of the country where any CAS is too far away at least the instructor could for the sake of the flight redesignate an ATZ as CAS.
So in the south it might go something like:
"Plan a flight to MAY, ask for a clearance direct X (which takes in a bit of CAS), and then back home by whatever route you wish."
There is plenty of time to throw in a bit of upper air work en route (show me a stall, a bit of slow flight whatever you like) and back home a couple of circuits with a PFL.
Surely as an instructor you come away from that knowing whether the pilot is safe (or not) and whether he is likely to be the next airspace infringer.
It seems too simple
.
It was of course a bit tongue in cheek! As you say should it ever happen the card is there!
I am still at a loss on this.
There appears to be agreement that changes to the PPL syllabus would be a very good thing and should prevent new pilots making this type of mistake.
Of course that in itself does little about the eixsting problem becasue of the time it will take to filter through.
The biennial seems to be the other check point.
The common theme seems to be pleas from the instructors that they are only given an hour and there is a lot to cram in.
I just dont buy that.
Isnt an hour sufficent to take in a bit of CAS or if you happen to be in a part of the country where any CAS is too far away at least the instructor could for the sake of the flight redesignate an ATZ as CAS.
So in the south it might go something like:
"Plan a flight to MAY, ask for a clearance direct X (which takes in a bit of CAS), and then back home by whatever route you wish."
There is plenty of time to throw in a bit of upper air work en route (show me a stall, a bit of slow flight whatever you like) and back home a couple of circuits with a PFL.
Surely as an instructor you come away from that knowing whether the pilot is safe (or not) and whether he is likely to be the next airspace infringer.
It seems too simple
.
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Denver, CO
Posts: 67
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by GK430
When NATS had really good on airport AIS', the charts were plotted for all to see.
I think Guernsey FBU must be about the only one left that I visit where this is still done
I think Guernsey FBU must be about the only one left that I visit where this is still done
useful of course, but pretty pointless plotting out all the in-flight refuelling zones in the north sea
at least it was nice to know that people actually looked at the thing
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Dorset
Age: 49
Posts: 173
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I flew up to Manchester that day from the South... Saw the Notam - If I remember correctly, the TRA was a circle around Kemble and not defined with Lat & Longs.... Not exactly hard to avoid.. I also made sure I was speaking to a radar service the whole way past it (Bristol) for just in case I ran off track.
The more infringements there are, the more justification the CAA will have for over-regulating us..... As for the AIS site, try reading the instructions, I have and it seems to work easily every time!
The more infringements there are, the more justification the CAA will have for over-regulating us..... As for the AIS site, try reading the instructions, I have and it seems to work easily every time!
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As for the AIS site, try reading the instructions, I have and it seems to work easily every time
Most PPLs are not taught to use the AIS website.
And anybody who did their PPL before c. 2003 wouldn't have known about it because it didn't exist.
And, it appears, most instructors either don't know about it or don't tell anybody about it when they do their bi-annual check flights with "old" PPLs.
Most PPLs are not taught to use the AIS website.
And anybody who did their PPL before c. 2003 wouldn't have known about it because it didn't exist.
And, it appears, most instructors either don't know about it or don't tell anybody about it when they do their bi-annual check flights with "old" PPLs.
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Surrey, UK.
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by IO540
And anybody who did their PPL before c. 2003 wouldn't have known about it because it didn't exist.
Not true.
Old style A1/A8 bulletins were on the internet yonks* ago (on the NATS website IIRC).
The new style AIS briefing system was introduced 22 August 2002
* Prior to 1998 at least
Guest
Posts: n/a
Pudnucker,
Beware, LARS won't protect you from flying into CAS, hills, TRA, etc and neither will they be aware that you are moving off your intended track. Radar maps don't have some features, even including some ATZs, never mind transient TRAs. The onus is squarely on you to know where you are and negotiate clearances enroute.
I also made sure I was speaking to a radar service the whole way past it (Bristol) for just in case I ran off track
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The new style AIS briefing system was introduced 22 August 2002
Here we go again.
Almost nobody (outside those who spend their lives on these internet forums) had heard of it back then.
It didn't work properly even by summer 2003. I busted a Frog nuclear power station TRA then, and narrowly escaped having the CAA prosecute me on behalf of the DGAC. I was able to show that a) the info didn't appear in the narrow route briefing and b) I was receiving a Frog radar service at the time and they obviously chose to not tell me (but they did so kindly remember to ask me my full details including my inside leg measurement, so they could fill in the forms). The Frogs were arrogant enough to supply a radar track printout showing the squawk they allocated to me
It works well today, but it's much too late for many pilots, and it will always be too late for the big majority of active PPLs, who fly outside the training system, often flying simple aircraft from nameless farm strips, have better things to do than read the drivel on pprune, drivel on flyer.co.uk, drivel in other pilot forums, and who will probably not discover this for another 10 years.
Got to remember that nearly all those who get a PPL today drop out nearly right away, so even if ab initio training was "fixed" overnight, only a small trickle of people knowing this terrible Masonic secret will find their way into the active PPL community.
Here we go again.
Almost nobody (outside those who spend their lives on these internet forums) had heard of it back then.
It didn't work properly even by summer 2003. I busted a Frog nuclear power station TRA then, and narrowly escaped having the CAA prosecute me on behalf of the DGAC. I was able to show that a) the info didn't appear in the narrow route briefing and b) I was receiving a Frog radar service at the time and they obviously chose to not tell me (but they did so kindly remember to ask me my full details including my inside leg measurement, so they could fill in the forms). The Frogs were arrogant enough to supply a radar track printout showing the squawk they allocated to me
It works well today, but it's much too late for many pilots, and it will always be too late for the big majority of active PPLs, who fly outside the training system, often flying simple aircraft from nameless farm strips, have better things to do than read the drivel on pprune, drivel on flyer.co.uk, drivel in other pilot forums, and who will probably not discover this for another 10 years.
Got to remember that nearly all those who get a PPL today drop out nearly right away, so even if ab initio training was "fixed" overnight, only a small trickle of people knowing this terrible Masonic secret will find their way into the active PPL community.