200th infringement
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
the 200th infringement of CAS around the London TMA airfileds since the 1st of April this year.
and the sole navigation method which is taught in the PPL syllabus dates back to which decade of the early 20th century ...... ??
No use moaning about CAS busts. They will go on.
As the PPL population gets older and its mean income goes down, they will get more frequent because pilots will be flying fewer and fewer hours - even less than the present very small annual average.
The only way out of this is forward.
and the sole navigation method which is taught in the PPL syllabus dates back to which decade of the early 20th century ...... ??
No use moaning about CAS busts. They will go on.
As the PPL population gets older and its mean income goes down, they will get more frequent because pilots will be flying fewer and fewer hours - even less than the present very small annual average.
The only way out of this is forward.
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 166
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I fly, I also control, I do not fly near the edges of the sky particularly the bits that have dotted lines alongside them. 
Before I fly I look at a map and I see all the pretty dotted lines drawn on it. I plan to avoid those lines by far more than a whisker.
Before I fly I look at Notams and TRA's, I do not want to be the 10th member of the Red Arrows.
I do not have a GPS, or a transponer, or a VOR or anything other than a radio so I follow my VFR route by looking out of the window and using the map. How many of these 200 infringers were VFR? I will bet a months salary it was nearly all of them.
Student pilots I will give some degree of leeway to, after all they are still learning (although the instructor authorising may get a call)
Most of it is sloppy flying, or a commercial drive to save money by keeping track distances to a minimum
Awaiting the incoming tirade of abuse.
Before I fly I look at a map and I see all the pretty dotted lines drawn on it. I plan to avoid those lines by far more than a whisker.
Before I fly I look at Notams and TRA's, I do not want to be the 10th member of the Red Arrows.
I do not have a GPS, or a transponer, or a VOR or anything other than a radio so I follow my VFR route by looking out of the window and using the map. How many of these 200 infringers were VFR? I will bet a months salary it was nearly all of them.
Student pilots I will give some degree of leeway to, after all they are still learning (although the instructor authorising may get a call)
Most of it is sloppy flying, or a commercial drive to save money by keeping track distances to a minimum
Awaiting the incoming tirade of abuse.
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: ...back of the drag curve
Age: 61
Posts: 558
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Fly around non-radio without Txpdr. It means you dont have some nob of an Air Trafficer routing you all over the place for no reason (or maybe to make life easier for the commercial guys). Example. I flew past Boscombe Down a few months ago and requested MATZ crossing East to West. Given a FIS, squak etc. Not a lot happening at BD (I could see it, even though they were on UHF) and was told to route via Alderbury (a very insignificant place for those not local to Salisbury). After going about 20 miles out of my way, and just as I was about to go en-route, squaking 7000 etc etc, said controller then routes me direct to my destination.
Essex radar have never given me a crossing of the Stansted Zone in the last 10 years, apart from once, and then only because Stansted was my final destination! So I now just skirt the zone very carefully, and remain outside CAS, knowing that if I ask, the chances are i will not get a crossing clearance. Southampton, on the other hand, have always given me a crossing clearance.
As soon as ATCers realise that not all GA pilots are potential infringers, then maybe they might be tempted to give a better service......But then navigation standards have to get better, without blind reliance on the black box of the devil..
Essex radar have never given me a crossing of the Stansted Zone in the last 10 years, apart from once, and then only because Stansted was my final destination! So I now just skirt the zone very carefully, and remain outside CAS, knowing that if I ask, the chances are i will not get a crossing clearance. Southampton, on the other hand, have always given me a crossing clearance.
As soon as ATCers realise that not all GA pilots are potential infringers, then maybe they might be tempted to give a better service......But then navigation standards have to get better, without blind reliance on the black box of the devil..
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: UK,Twighlight Zone
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As a regular user of "your" services under IFR, I have never had rose tinted spectacles.
You do however do a great disservice to the ATC proffession.......
Making it clear to PPL's that you won't provide a service rather than giving advice on what they should consider doing is just plain arrogant.
As IO540 rightly points out while people defend outdated navigation methods in a piss poor PPL sylabus and controllers show your lack of tolerance we will continue to have busts.
At least most of the time I go over you not under.
You do however do a great disservice to the ATC proffession.......
Making it clear to PPL's that you won't provide a service rather than giving advice on what they should consider doing is just plain arrogant.
As IO540 rightly points out while people defend outdated navigation methods in a piss poor PPL sylabus and controllers show your lack of tolerance we will continue to have busts.
At least most of the time I go over you not under.
You and others are IGNORANT to what ATC at approach units in the south east actually does.
They are not there to provide people with a RIS when it is 40kms and Sky Clear (people ask daily). That is the job of a LARS unit. The fact that there is NOT eough LARS cover for busy airspace is not the fault of these approach units. Perhaps you should vent your anger at the poorly trained PPLs who call us daily who lead us to dislike GA more and more. (or the CAA for not funding LARS)
And no I and other ATCers don't neccessarily hate GA. F ar from it in fact. It can be a pleasure to work and help people who have a modicom of common sense.
We hate idiots who cannot avoid some airspace, don't appreciate the strain on the system or expect the earth for nothing.
Frankly I don't care what you think of me.... sorry to have ruined your rose tinted spectacle view of me or UK ATC!
Kirstey, the point is that I can call the traffic and the IFR traffic STILL takes an RA. So why bother calling me! Especially as 70% of the traffic know not to bother as we are too busy. If everyonecalled we could give accurate Traff Info.
(Not an invitation for everyone to call!!!)
So - why not:
1. Listen out on the frequenecy and gauge how busy the unit is first. If you here "Number four on standby" and you are not inbound to the zone or prepared to hold then just carry on outside CAS.
2. If you are that unsure as to your track keeping when flying 1/4 mile form the zone boundary, and the freq is busy why not just MONITOR the freq! You will get the feel of the traffic sceanrio. Also, I make blind calls on the freq if I see something come into the zone without authorisation.
Stay safe!
They are not there to provide people with a RIS when it is 40kms and Sky Clear (people ask daily). That is the job of a LARS unit. The fact that there is NOT eough LARS cover for busy airspace is not the fault of these approach units. Perhaps you should vent your anger at the poorly trained PPLs who call us daily who lead us to dislike GA more and more. (or the CAA for not funding LARS)
And no I and other ATCers don't neccessarily hate GA. F ar from it in fact. It can be a pleasure to work and help people who have a modicom of common sense.
We hate idiots who cannot avoid some airspace, don't appreciate the strain on the system or expect the earth for nothing.
Frankly I don't care what you think of me.... sorry to have ruined your rose tinted spectacle view of me or UK ATC!
Kirstey, the point is that I can call the traffic and the IFR traffic STILL takes an RA. So why bother calling me! Especially as 70% of the traffic know not to bother as we are too busy. If everyonecalled we could give accurate Traff Info.
(Not an invitation for everyone to call!!!)
So - why not:
1. Listen out on the frequenecy and gauge how busy the unit is first. If you here "Number four on standby" and you are not inbound to the zone or prepared to hold then just carry on outside CAS.
2. If you are that unsure as to your track keeping when flying 1/4 mile form the zone boundary, and the freq is busy why not just MONITOR the freq! You will get the feel of the traffic sceanrio. Also, I make blind calls on the freq if I see something come into the zone without authorisation.
Stay safe!
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Most busts probably are indeed in VMC but there is a slight problem to which there is no apparent solution:
The CAS boundaries are not drawn on the ground below. One has to work out where one is, using a process called navigation. That is where people go wrong.
No use talking about poor airmanship.
It's a bit like my business; electronic manufacturing. You make 10,000 circuit boards. 1% are duff due to defects which are visually detectable (with a microscope). It doesn't matter whether you pay an inspector 10k, 30k, 100k, 200k (pounds p.a.) - he/she will never spot more than a proportion of them. A Chinese one will spot more of them than a Brit one (despite getting 1/10 of the dosh) but the only way to address the issue is to modify the process so that the issue is less likely to arise in the first place.
Human errors cannot be prevented. All one can do is modify the process so they are less likely. All the talk about "airmanship" is completely useless bull.
The CAS boundaries are not drawn on the ground below. One has to work out where one is, using a process called navigation. That is where people go wrong.
No use talking about poor airmanship.
It's a bit like my business; electronic manufacturing. You make 10,000 circuit boards. 1% are duff due to defects which are visually detectable (with a microscope). It doesn't matter whether you pay an inspector 10k, 30k, 100k, 200k (pounds p.a.) - he/she will never spot more than a proportion of them. A Chinese one will spot more of them than a Brit one (despite getting 1/10 of the dosh) but the only way to address the issue is to modify the process so that the issue is less likely to arise in the first place.
Human errors cannot be prevented. All one can do is modify the process so they are less likely. All the talk about "airmanship" is completely useless bull.
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Dublin
Posts: 2,547
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
When it is busy, our IFR traffic is quite simply at risk from Joe Bloggs Muppet in his light aircraft telling me he is going from A to B via C nowhere near me. Inevitably this happens when two light aircraft wanting to actually enter the zone to transit. The life story from Joe Bloggs means that the first two are unable to get cleared in (there is only so much RT time). So who loses out, the despondent 1 and 2 who end up saying "going around now"??
Presumably when an airport requests controlled airspace they must be able to demonstrate that they have sufficient controllers to work all aircraft arriving and departing, and all aircraft wishing to transit, or alternatively to fill the airspace to safe capacity, which ever is the greater. This is an assumption on my part, and I'm open to correction, but I'd be surprised if it's wrong.
Why then doesn't that airport have to ensure that there is sufficient controllers to deal with all aircraft wanting to use the airspace in the following years? If the airspace is there, then in my humble opinion, it should be staffed sufficiently.
There will always be unusual occasions when everyone calls at once, and it's simply not possible for the controller to deal with everyone. But when this becomes a regular occurrence then it needs to be fixed. Fixed by getting additional controllers, and additional frequencies if necessary, and not fixed by saying "Remain outside of controlled airspace" to traffic wishing to transit.
Airspace being full to safe capacity is a different matter of course.
dp
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Apa, apo ndi kulikonse!
Posts: 1,757
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You are right - I filed only 3 of the 12 or so CAS busts I saw last month.
Perhaps the CAA will see how bad things are if we file on EVERYTHING.
The last one I filed on went through three ATZs, a CTR and into the LTMA. My fault because I was not talking to EVERY PPL in the sky no doubt.
Bose-x - 75% of the people who I speak to are Average to Excellent on the RT and they get through everytime. Thanks for the advice of how we should do our JOB.... when you are playing at yr hobby.
Perhaps the CAA will see how bad things are if we file on EVERYTHING.
The last one I filed on went through three ATZs, a CTR and into the LTMA. My fault because I was not talking to EVERY PPL in the sky no doubt.
Bose-x - 75% of the people who I speak to are Average to Excellent on the RT and they get through everytime. Thanks for the advice of how we should do our JOB.... when you are playing at yr hobby.
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Surrey
Posts: 1,217
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Is there any source online (or offline) where the 'gory details' of infringements are recorded (Airprox style) and hopefully some analysis of impact and root cause?
There is a general tone in the discussion that infringements are VFR hobbyists. Of the ones I am aware of they range from a Citation on his departure climb not levelling off before entering controlled airspace, a TBM700 airtaxi operator cutting up the London Zone, a French PPLsailing through the TMA at about FL70, a poster here cutting an edge while IFR, another poster entering CAS before being cleared in on a handover plus the lost and the careless.
This random sample seems to indicate the problem is more complicated than Muppet VFR PPLs with duff Mark I eyeballs.
There is a general tone in the discussion that infringements are VFR hobbyists. Of the ones I am aware of they range from a Citation on his departure climb not levelling off before entering controlled airspace, a TBM700 airtaxi operator cutting up the London Zone, a French PPLsailing through the TMA at about FL70, a poster here cutting an edge while IFR, another poster entering CAS before being cleared in on a handover plus the lost and the careless.
This random sample seems to indicate the problem is more complicated than Muppet VFR PPLs with duff Mark I eyeballs.
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: 180INS500
Posts: 137
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Alan M
Your JOB is service provision, which you chose to do; so what if someones hobby is flying? A very large number of passengers today are only flying for leisure purposes.
Somehow I think that if there were a CRM type of requirement for controllers to demonstrate how much they enjoyed providing a service and went the extra mile to provide constructive assistance and advice you wouldn't score too highly. It is NOT your airspace - it is airspace that you have custodianship of on behalf of ALL airspace users and you should apply your skills equitably for the benefit of ALL airspace users.
I fully understand the stress you perceive that you are under - but if you do not have the staffing to provide the required service then maybe you should direct your feelings towards your employer. I wonder how much it might affect your conscience if a refusal of service to a pilot with poor RT (as you perceive it) results in an accident or incident to that pilot. I seem to recall that the best guidance was given along the lines of 'nothing in these rules or regulations shall prevent a controller undertaking such actions as may be necessary to ensure safety'.
Your JOB is service provision, which you chose to do; so what if someones hobby is flying? A very large number of passengers today are only flying for leisure purposes.
Somehow I think that if there were a CRM type of requirement for controllers to demonstrate how much they enjoyed providing a service and went the extra mile to provide constructive assistance and advice you wouldn't score too highly. It is NOT your airspace - it is airspace that you have custodianship of on behalf of ALL airspace users and you should apply your skills equitably for the benefit of ALL airspace users.
I fully understand the stress you perceive that you are under - but if you do not have the staffing to provide the required service then maybe you should direct your feelings towards your employer. I wonder how much it might affect your conscience if a refusal of service to a pilot with poor RT (as you perceive it) results in an accident or incident to that pilot. I seem to recall that the best guidance was given along the lines of 'nothing in these rules or regulations shall prevent a controller undertaking such actions as may be necessary to ensure safety'.
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: west sussex
Posts: 217
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
hobby versus job
Alan
Quite a few of the people who fly for fun also fly professionally. Some people who fly for fun fly to professional standards. Some professionals perform at their jobs in an amateur way.
Not sure in which capacity you put yourself - but I will sometimes speak with ATC even when I don't want to enter a zone because you often find the ILS approach is outside the zone - e.g. Southend.
Given the choice, what would you rather have:
- a safer life where sensible communication is encouraged (I take on board you comments about useless communication with life histories etc blocking more important transmissions...), or
- a life made easier for ATCOs so they can eat dougnuts, drink tea, and read Hello magazine without disturbance?
sorry other ATCOs.
Quite a few of the people who fly for fun also fly professionally. Some people who fly for fun fly to professional standards. Some professionals perform at their jobs in an amateur way.
Not sure in which capacity you put yourself - but I will sometimes speak with ATC even when I don't want to enter a zone because you often find the ILS approach is outside the zone - e.g. Southend.
Given the choice, what would you rather have:
- a safer life where sensible communication is encouraged (I take on board you comments about useless communication with life histories etc blocking more important transmissions...), or
- a life made easier for ATCOs so they can eat dougnuts, drink tea, and read Hello magazine without disturbance?
sorry other ATCOs.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: united kingdom
Age: 63
Posts: 248
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Back to the original thread!
OK chaps this is very interesting - So far no one has answered the questions posed BUT one reply said that PPLs dont get enough flying to stay current in his opinion and that it will get worse, another said that the syllabus isn't good enough to teach navigation properly but it is not their fault. Another said that its really demanding flying in the SE of England and yet another said that flying within 1/4mile of a CAS boundary is fine.
One reply suggested that if pilots monitored APP frequencies then a blind call might stop an infringememts.
Recently an approach controller did just that - the infringing pilot switched off his altitude encoding TXPDR and continued through the zone. Not only did he cause a lot of avoiding action, he also took away the other pilots last line of defence for stopping collisions - TCAS.
It is actions like that that turn controllers in to cycnical people
But seriously for the education of people who read this forum - just what is the real number of infringements, have you infringed, were you traced and what happened - or is it too traumatic?
One reply suggested that if pilots monitored APP frequencies then a blind call might stop an infringememts.
Recently an approach controller did just that - the infringing pilot switched off his altitude encoding TXPDR and continued through the zone. Not only did he cause a lot of avoiding action, he also took away the other pilots last line of defence for stopping collisions - TCAS.
It is actions like that that turn controllers in to cycnical people
But seriously for the education of people who read this forum - just what is the real number of infringements, have you infringed, were you traced and what happened - or is it too traumatic?
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: UK,Twighlight Zone
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You arrogant ****.
I have a CPL/IR and 2000hrs which I believe is the same as the sky gods that you perceive deserve greater attention than the mere PPL's.
As pointed out here, you are in a service industry, serve or find another job better suited to your temperment.
I have a CPL/IR and 2000hrs which I believe is the same as the sky gods that you perceive deserve greater attention than the mere PPL's.
As pointed out here, you are in a service industry, serve or find another job better suited to your temperment.
You are right - I filed only 3 of the 12 or so CAS busts I saw last month.
Perhaps the CAA will see how bad things are if we file on EVERYTHING.
The last one I filed on went through three ATZs, a CTR and into the LTMA. My fault because I was not talking to EVERY PPL in the sky no doubt.
Bose-x - 75% of the people who I speak to are Average to Excellent on the RT and they get through everytime. Thanks for the advice of how we should do our JOB.... when you are playing at yr hobby.
Perhaps the CAA will see how bad things are if we file on EVERYTHING.
The last one I filed on went through three ATZs, a CTR and into the LTMA. My fault because I was not talking to EVERY PPL in the sky no doubt.
Bose-x - 75% of the people who I speak to are Average to Excellent on the RT and they get through everytime. Thanks for the advice of how we should do our JOB.... when you are playing at yr hobby.
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Apa, apo ndi kulikonse!
Posts: 1,757
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
watch your tongue, bosey boy
Oh, and to provide you with a service needs some form of payment.
You have all the arrogance of a typical know it all. Thank god I never to have to speak to you
AND FOR THE LAST TIME IS IT NOT I THAT PRIORITISE THE SKY GODS, BUT THE AIRPORT AUTHORITIES WHO CONSTANTLY CONTACT US TO ASCERTAIN THE DELAYS FOR IFR AIRCRAFT.
Don't shoot the messenger
Oh, and to provide you with a service needs some form of payment.
You have all the arrogance of a typical know it all. Thank god I never to have to speak to you
AND FOR THE LAST TIME IS IT NOT I THAT PRIORITISE THE SKY GODS, BUT THE AIRPORT AUTHORITIES WHO CONSTANTLY CONTACT US TO ASCERTAIN THE DELAYS FOR IFR AIRCRAFT.
Don't shoot the messenger
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: UK,Twighlight Zone
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What you gonna do kick me around the play ground?
Service does not require payment. Or are you looking for tips?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: united kingdom
Age: 63
Posts: 248
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BOSE-X and ALAN M
Take a breath and relax.
BOSE-X you have a lot of experience yet you seem to be saying that infringements are caused by the attitude of controllers in not wanting to give a service to GA. Take a look at the other replies on this thread. It is not just inexperienced ppls who infringe and there have been some reasoned replies as to why certain pilots do and others don't.
How about something constructive from both of you rather than playground jet blast rants
Take a breath and relax.
BOSE-X you have a lot of experience yet you seem to be saying that infringements are caused by the attitude of controllers in not wanting to give a service to GA. Take a look at the other replies on this thread. It is not just inexperienced ppls who infringe and there have been some reasoned replies as to why certain pilots do and others don't.
How about something constructive from both of you rather than playground jet blast rants
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Massachusetts Bay Colony
Age: 57
Posts: 476
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Let's not perpetuate the myths and let's start talking in facts or we're going to help put ourselves out of the sky.
Pitts2112
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Surrey
Posts: 1,217
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There is a remarkable consistency between controllers who work controlled airspace and have a view of 'you don't pay you don't get' and controllers who have to provide a service OCAS (i.e Bristol last year) who seems to seek much more communication with people in the open FIR.
I suspect this reflects a fundamental management attitude of the ATC business that airlines are their owners and pay their bills therefore airlines get the service and we (ATC management) will cut staff to all other areas to maximise profits - (which are doing very nicely in pre-IPO NATS). This then seems to be communicated both formally and informally to the ATCOs - who in my experience generally trying to do a good job for everyone within the rules and resources they have been given.
I also suspect this management attitude is very much in the background when application for additional CAS is being made - 'the Class D zone won't really effect VFR traffic as they will just call up and get a zone transfer and by able to continue to fly just as they do now in our area - trust me'. I also suspect this attitude wasn't part of the deal Ministers were told they had done on privatising ATC - probably the only case of privatising a monopoly provider where the monopoly is defined in statute.
I suspect this reflects a fundamental management attitude of the ATC business that airlines are their owners and pay their bills therefore airlines get the service and we (ATC management) will cut staff to all other areas to maximise profits - (which are doing very nicely in pre-IPO NATS). This then seems to be communicated both formally and informally to the ATCOs - who in my experience generally trying to do a good job for everyone within the rules and resources they have been given.
I also suspect this management attitude is very much in the background when application for additional CAS is being made - 'the Class D zone won't really effect VFR traffic as they will just call up and get a zone transfer and by able to continue to fly just as they do now in our area - trust me'. I also suspect this attitude wasn't part of the deal Ministers were told they had done on privatising ATC - probably the only case of privatising a monopoly provider where the monopoly is defined in statute.
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Surrey, UK.
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Pitts2112
I'd be interested in seeing some hard numbers on this. According to the CAA's own statistics, only 34 infringements in an 18 month period (Jan 04 to Jun 05) resulted in a deviation to commercial transport operations. Granted that wouldn't take into account a Cessna causing a separation problem for a Cherokee on final to Redhill, for example, but before we go saying things like "a large number" and "some of the most serious", I'd be interested in seeing some data to back that up.
Pitts2112
Pitts2112
Last edited by rustle; 7th Sep 2006 at 07:48. Reason: FA is a fool.