Infringement of .. .. .. ..
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 4,631
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Infringement of .. .. .. ..
Is it just me, but flicking through the latest edition of the Occurence Listing almost every report seems to be of a CZ or danger area infringement. There are pages of it.
Whilst CZ and danger area infringements are rife, there is also a significant number of upper airspace altitude busts and other errors.
Whilst CZ and danger area infringements are rife, there is also a significant number of upper airspace altitude busts and other errors.
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Apa, apo ndi kulikonse!
Posts: 1,757
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The number of airspace infringements has dramatically increased.
Not only do we now have to report them all, but we are seeing more.
Of course there are many that are untraced and if a small light aircraft often unseen on radar.
Not only do we now have to report them all, but we are seeing more.
Of course there are many that are untraced and if a small light aircraft often unseen on radar.
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 4,631
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"that show that old rag&tube, non-transponder, non-GPS types are not responsible"
How will you deduce this information other than the rag and tube component from the reports?
If they havent got a transponder or use the radio how do you know they will be indentified on primary and even if they are, subject to a report?
Please dont misunderstand me I applaud useful statistics, I just wonder how you will obtain these from the published information.
How will you deduce this information other than the rag and tube component from the reports?
If they havent got a transponder or use the radio how do you know they will be indentified on primary and even if they are, subject to a report?
Please dont misunderstand me I applaud useful statistics, I just wonder how you will obtain these from the published information.
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Where did I say that rag and tube types are infringing??? 
I'd expect "vintage types" to rarely infringe airspace. Most rarely fly and when they do they don't venture very far and stick to the well travelled locality.
Other "rag and tube" types (microlights) generally won't get picked up on radar and when they do there won't be any altitude info so level busts won't be detected.
I'd expect most infringements per hour flown to be done by low time VFR pilots who did their PPL years ago and are not up to date with current developments in flight planning.
I'd also expect high-hour operations to feature prominently, simply because of the extra time they spend airborne. The UK PPL average annual airborne is so appallingly low that people who fly 300-1000 hours per year could well account for a lot of infringements. But the reasons will probably be different; they won't be busting airspace because they couldn't find the M25
I'd expect "vintage types" to rarely infringe airspace. Most rarely fly and when they do they don't venture very far and stick to the well travelled locality.
Other "rag and tube" types (microlights) generally won't get picked up on radar and when they do there won't be any altitude info so level busts won't be detected.
I'd expect most infringements per hour flown to be done by low time VFR pilots who did their PPL years ago and are not up to date with current developments in flight planning.
I'd also expect high-hour operations to feature prominently, simply because of the extra time they spend airborne. The UK PPL average annual airborne is so appallingly low that people who fly 300-1000 hours per year could well account for a lot of infringements. But the reasons will probably be different; they won't be busting airspace because they couldn't find the M25
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: ...back of the drag curve
Age: 61
Posts: 558
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The apparent increase in CAS busts wouldnt have anything to do with the increase in the use of GPS would it?
I was horrifed to hear a pilot the other day explaining how to use his new GPS to his mate... "Just need to push the 'Go to' button and it takes you straight there"
Oh dear........
RTFM as my instructor used to say
I was horrifed to hear a pilot the other day explaining how to use his new GPS to his mate... "Just need to push the 'Go to' button and it takes you straight there"
Oh dear........
RTFM as my instructor used to say
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Aberdeen
Posts: 1,234
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It is very noticeable the high proportion of 'occurences' now being infringements - but with ATC being instructed to report them I suppose it is inevitable. It does make me wonder what the purpose of it is though. The Flyontrack initative seems to have died and gone to heaven in terms of anything useful coming from it so that seems a shame.
Then we have a spate of new areas of CAS where the instigation of the airspace is not synchronised with the routine issue of new charts. Much of that new CAS further squeezes the natural transit routes.
So we seem to have an authority that does not want to learn lessons from a major user survey, that promulgates new airspace that isn't on the charts and forces VFR traffic into more choke points. None of this as a single issue is directly responsible for the busts - but it is scarcely helpful and very much indicative of an authority that believes in 'command and control'.
As for the types that cause them - well the higher the exposure hours are, the greater the number of busts and generally I would agree that on a per hour basis anyone who is 'rusty' must be at greater risk.
But again look at the number of TRAs that are springing up. The police seem to be a major source of them - perhaps they have just discovered it is a great way to ensure there operations do not get coverage from news gathering choppers. And then the class A airspace for HRH and family. None of this makes things any easier.
I spent a while this morning trying to sort out where operation Neptune Warrior would impact on my flying - the answer seems to be 'Scotland', which maybe explains the number of Tornados overflying the strip. But the time it needed to decode line after line of lat and long...
Probably just as well the wind is too strong!
Then we have a spate of new areas of CAS where the instigation of the airspace is not synchronised with the routine issue of new charts. Much of that new CAS further squeezes the natural transit routes.
So we seem to have an authority that does not want to learn lessons from a major user survey, that promulgates new airspace that isn't on the charts and forces VFR traffic into more choke points. None of this as a single issue is directly responsible for the busts - but it is scarcely helpful and very much indicative of an authority that believes in 'command and control'.
As for the types that cause them - well the higher the exposure hours are, the greater the number of busts and generally I would agree that on a per hour basis anyone who is 'rusty' must be at greater risk.
But again look at the number of TRAs that are springing up. The police seem to be a major source of them - perhaps they have just discovered it is a great way to ensure there operations do not get coverage from news gathering choppers. And then the class A airspace for HRH and family. None of this makes things any easier.
I spent a while this morning trying to sort out where operation Neptune Warrior would impact on my flying - the answer seems to be 'Scotland', which maybe explains the number of Tornados overflying the strip. But the time it needed to decode line after line of lat and long...
Probably just as well the wind is too strong!
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Midlands
Posts: 2,359
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
IO540
“I'd expect "vintage types" to rarely infringe airspace. Most rarely fly and when they do they don't venture very far and stick to the well travelled locality.”
What do you base this on? The average 1940’s aircraft at my local strip visits Europe several times a year and three of them are off to Norway in a few weeks.
Other "rag and tube" types (microlights) generally won't get picked up on radar and when they do there won't be any altitude info so level busts won't be detected.
I think this is completely incorrect. Most “rag and tube” types are SEP and handled by the PFA. The Super Stinker Pitts with its 250hp engine which parks next to me would make a very interesting micro!
Rod1
“I'd expect "vintage types" to rarely infringe airspace. Most rarely fly and when they do they don't venture very far and stick to the well travelled locality.”
What do you base this on? The average 1940’s aircraft at my local strip visits Europe several times a year and three of them are off to Norway in a few weeks.
Other "rag and tube" types (microlights) generally won't get picked up on radar and when they do there won't be any altitude info so level busts won't be detected.
I think this is completely incorrect. Most “rag and tube” types are SEP and handled by the PFA. The Super Stinker Pitts with its 250hp engine which parks next to me would make a very interesting micro!
Rod1
Moderator
Join Date: Jul 1997
Location: Europe
Posts: 3,228
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just to keep things straight, a 'Level Bust' is not the same as an 'Infringement' (although it might lead to one !!). Both are separate issues and subject to different awareness and action campaigns by NATS and the aviation industry.
A Level Bust is defined as:
A deviation of 300 feet or more from the assigned level
This may take one of three different forms:
1. An aircraft in level flight climbs or descends without clearance
2. An aircraft climbing or descending fails to level off accurately at the correct level (either passing through and continuing the climb or descent, or passing through and then returning to the correct level)
3. An aircraft levelling off at the correct level or altitude, but with an incorrect altimeter setting.
Full information on the Level Best campaign can be found here:
NATS Level Best Website
FlyOnTrack is probably the best place to go for GA Airspace Infringement Information :
FlyOnTrack
A Level Bust is defined as:
A deviation of 300 feet or more from the assigned level
This may take one of three different forms:
1. An aircraft in level flight climbs or descends without clearance
2. An aircraft climbing or descending fails to level off accurately at the correct level (either passing through and continuing the climb or descent, or passing through and then returning to the correct level)
3. An aircraft levelling off at the correct level or altitude, but with an incorrect altimeter setting.
Full information on the Level Best campaign can be found here:
NATS Level Best Website
FlyOnTrack is probably the best place to go for GA Airspace Infringement Information :
FlyOnTrack
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 4,631
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I0540 - I didnt think you ever mentioned rag and bone aircraft in the first place - did you .
Yes, I can tell you how.
Go through G-INFO which will tell you the hours between the last *annuals by type if you are prepared to put the time in. It should given you accurate information albeit over a three year cylce.
Not sure I woudl want to put the work in though .
Who knows maybe if you wrote to the CAA they would tell you along with the number of new PPL/IRs granted last year, the number of new PPLs, and the number of PPLs or medicals not renewed. If they did and you revealed the inforamtion here, you would of course have to shoot yourself .
.Yes, I can tell you how.
Go through G-INFO which will tell you the hours between the last *annuals by type if you are prepared to put the time in. It should given you accurate information albeit over a three year cylce.
Not sure I woudl want to put the work in though
.Who knows maybe if you wrote to the CAA they would tell you along with the number of new PPL/IRs granted last year, the number of new PPLs, and the number of PPLs or medicals not renewed. If they did and you revealed the inforamtion here, you would of course have to shoot yourself
.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Where did I say that rag and tube types are infringing???
It's the people that got their PPL years ago and are outside the system but who fly at a low activity level who are most likely to get into this kind of trouble
GASAX; the only charts not having new airspace are those UK charts not published by the CAA; CAA are the ones you should be using; oh I know Jeppesen VFR GPS charts are cheaper, but they're not subject to UK quality control procedures to ensure their accuracy, and don't have the detail of CAA charts like warnings of cable launch hazards. There was a recent debate in these pages about airspace in Northern Ireland for instance, where (I think) base levels were depicted incorrectly on Jepp 'VFR/GPS' charts.
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Surrey, UK.
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by chevvron
GASAX; the only charts not having new airspace are those UK charts not published by the CAA.
The current "CAA" SE-UK 1:500000 chart is not complete. See Luton new airspace for example.
I don't read GASIL 'cos I don't qualify to receive it; I was given to understand the new SE UK chart had an annotation stating that it wasn't complete and more airspace was to be notified- you wouldn't get that with Jeppesen charts
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I was given to understand the new SE UK chart had an annotation stating that it wasn't complete and more airspace was to be notified- you wouldn't get that with Jeppesen charts
That's not the whole story.
The CAA updates its charts just once a year (as far as anyone can tell) and a particular edition (say, the current Ed 32 for the 1:500k southern VFR chart) could be on sale in a pilot shop for the whole year. So you could be buying data anything up to say 14-16 months old. And we know 99% of pilots aren't going to wonder about the ais.org.uk site looking for some PDF listing the mistakes and updates...
Same with the electronic charts which the CAA sells to Memory Map. They don't change either, within a particular edition number. That is criminal - it's electronic data and it being bang up to date would create an incentive for pilots to use electronic data, but no, the CAA is firmly stuck in WW2
With Jepp, the paper chart situation is the same but at least they do offer an electronic alternative which is updated on the 28-day cycle. It's not dirt cheap - the Raster Charts CD for the whole of Europe is about £200 though that's less than the paper charts would cost - but you get something potentially a lot more current.
Jepp have fallen down on UK chart accuracy, probably because so few UK pilots use Jepp charts, so errors don't get reported. This is a problem that uniformly affects all flight information - have you tried phoning/faxing some number published in the "official" AIP for, say, Croatia or Greece? Jepp also have a good amount of corporate arrogance on e.g. the way airways are depicted on their GPS data. But they do provide data which should be updated frequently; you just have to pay for the updates (no free lunch anywhere).
Ultimately, IMV, the CAA is the bunch to blame. If they did what the FAA does and made all data available in electronic form (including approach plates that are usable in the cockpit, not the "A4 with small fonts" rubbish that is in the AIP) that would be a big step in safety. No need to publish a list of chart amendments - just upload the corrected chart on the internet.
That's not the whole story.
The CAA updates its charts just once a year (as far as anyone can tell) and a particular edition (say, the current Ed 32 for the 1:500k southern VFR chart) could be on sale in a pilot shop for the whole year. So you could be buying data anything up to say 14-16 months old. And we know 99% of pilots aren't going to wonder about the ais.org.uk site looking for some PDF listing the mistakes and updates...
Same with the electronic charts which the CAA sells to Memory Map. They don't change either, within a particular edition number. That is criminal - it's electronic data and it being bang up to date would create an incentive for pilots to use electronic data, but no, the CAA is firmly stuck in WW2
With Jepp, the paper chart situation is the same but at least they do offer an electronic alternative which is updated on the 28-day cycle. It's not dirt cheap - the Raster Charts CD for the whole of Europe is about £200 though that's less than the paper charts would cost - but you get something potentially a lot more current.
Jepp have fallen down on UK chart accuracy, probably because so few UK pilots use Jepp charts, so errors don't get reported. This is a problem that uniformly affects all flight information - have you tried phoning/faxing some number published in the "official" AIP for, say, Croatia or Greece? Jepp also have a good amount of corporate arrogance on e.g. the way airways are depicted on their GPS data. But they do provide data which should be updated frequently; you just have to pay for the updates (no free lunch anywhere).
Ultimately, IMV, the CAA is the bunch to blame. If they did what the FAA does and made all data available in electronic form (including approach plates that are usable in the cockpit, not the "A4 with small fonts" rubbish that is in the AIP) that would be a big step in safety. No need to publish a list of chart amendments - just upload the corrected chart on the internet.
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: In a dreamworld!
Posts: 68
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And we know 99% of pilots aren't going to wonder about the ais.org.uk site looking for some PDF listing the mistakes and updates...
No need to publish a list of chart amendments - just upload the corrected chart on the internet.
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: England
Posts: 146
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Alan M
Am I right in thinking that there has been a change of policy recently? that every infringement no matter how minor or lacking in consequence is to be formally reported.
I seem to be hearing on a reasonably frequent basis in recent months controllers telling pilots "I'm going to file a report on you".
I think one regretable consequence of that is that some folks will not ask for Class d transits, routing around without calling the controlling authority possibly turning transponders off. Surely that cannot be good for flight safety?
Am I right in thinking that there has been a change of policy recently? that every infringement no matter how minor or lacking in consequence is to be formally reported.
I seem to be hearing on a reasonably frequent basis in recent months controllers telling pilots "I'm going to file a report on you".
I think one regretable consequence of that is that some folks will not ask for Class d transits, routing around without calling the controlling authority possibly turning transponders off. Surely that cannot be good for flight safety?
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Aberdeen
Posts: 1,234
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well Chevvron I won't say anything apart from - if you're going to trumpet the greatness of all things CAA you should read GASIL, it is after all available from the CAA website - although finding it can be a pest.
Mixed up - Do pilots use the internet? Well a huge number do not. Look at recent threads here and on the Flyer site regarding the Notam rubbish. Try and find anything specific on the CAA or NATS sites and your best bet is to try and Google it.
Out of a small circle of friends who fly I'm probably the only one who routinely checks the Notams, the other guys have largely given up - unless they are flying 'down South' and then they try. Why? Because compared with almost any other topic getting the information requires either persistence, expertise, memorising the user manual or printing treefuls of paper.
Today that is an unacceptable approach - if your bank, or any other body did that you would vote with your feet, wit these bodies however we are talking about people who are utterly resistant to the ideas of CRM or even accoutability. The CAA are very good at the 'stick approach'. Run out of fuel and we'll prosecute, (so we all plan to actually run out of fuel when we go flying?). Fly low and we'll prosecute, Bust a TRA and we'll....
One of the threads I've been reading says something like" we'll remove all the spedd limit signs and put the data in an internet site which drivers will have to search before going anywhere". Very largely this is what is happening largely because of the resistance to change and lack of understanding of people in these bodies.
In the 'good old days' Notams consisted of important information and the whole of the UK could be printed on a few pages. Now everyone and his dog is raising Notams, most of which are pretty useless - example operation Neptune Warrior - about 7 pages of we are operating everywhere not obeying the rules of the air - look out. And what use is any of this? The outline area (thankyou Notamplot) covers the entire northern half of the British Isles!!!!!
So characters on these fora do use the internet, however many do not and have been alienated by the pathetically poor sites that the official bodies have created.
Will it ever improve? I certainly hope so because at the moment the situation is building towards bad things happening.
Mixed up - Do pilots use the internet? Well a huge number do not. Look at recent threads here and on the Flyer site regarding the Notam rubbish. Try and find anything specific on the CAA or NATS sites and your best bet is to try and Google it.
Out of a small circle of friends who fly I'm probably the only one who routinely checks the Notams, the other guys have largely given up - unless they are flying 'down South' and then they try. Why? Because compared with almost any other topic getting the information requires either persistence, expertise, memorising the user manual or printing treefuls of paper.
Today that is an unacceptable approach - if your bank, or any other body did that you would vote with your feet, wit these bodies however we are talking about people who are utterly resistant to the ideas of CRM or even accoutability. The CAA are very good at the 'stick approach'. Run out of fuel and we'll prosecute, (so we all plan to actually run out of fuel when we go flying?). Fly low and we'll prosecute, Bust a TRA and we'll....
One of the threads I've been reading says something like" we'll remove all the spedd limit signs and put the data in an internet site which drivers will have to search before going anywhere". Very largely this is what is happening largely because of the resistance to change and lack of understanding of people in these bodies.
In the 'good old days' Notams consisted of important information and the whole of the UK could be printed on a few pages. Now everyone and his dog is raising Notams, most of which are pretty useless - example operation Neptune Warrior - about 7 pages of we are operating everywhere not obeying the rules of the air - look out. And what use is any of this? The outline area (thankyou Notamplot) covers the entire northern half of the British Isles!!!!!
So characters on these fora do use the internet, however many do not and have been alienated by the pathetically poor sites that the official bodies have created.
Will it ever improve? I certainly hope so because at the moment the situation is building towards bad things happening.