Infringements

[zkdli]

Its going to be a great weekend for flying. Anyone care to guess how many infringements of CAS will be reported? i will get the number for the LTMA and post it on Tuesday.

[Nipper2]

Sorry but I just don't understand this.

If you have a moving map GPS (yes, I know they are the work of the devil, owned an run by Uncle Sam etc., etc.) with an up to date data-base you really do have to be a half-wit to infringe.

If you look at an up to date map once every ten minutes as well, you need to be a quarter-wit to get into the wrong piece of sky.

Or am I missing something?

[Diddley Dee]

zkdli

Kind of sounds like you are rubbing your hands

DD

[gcolyer]

Originally Posted by Nipper2

If you have a moving map GPS (yes, I know they are the work of the devil, owned an run by Uncle Sam etc., etc.) with an up to date data-base you really do have to be a half-wit to infringe

With a map, compass and stop watch you really do have to be a half-wit to Infringe. And heaven forbid anyone try to use a VOR, DME or NDB these days.

[WorkingHard]

Of course if the amount of CAS was greatly reduced and NATS got it's act together and provided a proper ATC service to all, then the number of GA busts would likely be far fewer than CAT straying outside the much smaller CAS or level busts. Don't you think so?

[chevvron]

If you're referring to better LARS provision, it's not up to NATS but the aerodrome authorities, who then have to be paid by someone. As funding for LARS is not profit making, it's unlikely any expansion will occur in the near future, and with certain people trying to make ATSOCA more complicated, it's quite likely some ATC units providing LARS may opt out.

[AlanM]

Working Hard - the answer is NO.

NATS is no longer a public company providing a public service. It provides ATC around the LTMA airfields under a contract that it has to compete for. It is the airfields who pay and CAA that have let the Lack of LARS funding develop.

As for CAS, it is there to protect the paying public (maybe you and your family?) from having a midair. It is to stop the non paying (you?) PPL from hitting an airliner. I am guessing that you have never visited the LTCC ona busy day and see the system working flat out out in limited airspace to accomodate the mass increase in traffic.

Yes, more needs to be done to help PPLs around the LTMA. NO it is not NATS fault.

Here's hoping that your navving is better than your lack of understanding of the big aviation picture.

[IO540]

If you have a moving map GPS (yes, I know they are the work of the devil, owned an run by Uncle Sam etc., etc.) with an up to date data-base you really do have to be a half-wit to infringe.
If you look at an up to date map once every ten minutes as well, you need to be a quarter-wit to get into the wrong piece of sky.
Or am I missing something?

You ain't missing nuffing. But you will get a lot of stick for saying this

a proper ATC service to all,

There is exactly zero chance of getting this in the UK, due to the principle that everything has to be invoiced to somebody. OCAS, GA is out on its own, and has to manage. Which is not exactly difficult, with GPS etc. I have no problem flying around in Class G, with no service.

And when you need a radar service most (nice weekends like this one) you won't get it "due to controller workload".

AlanM - CAS offers no protection unless people outside it are navigating reasonably accurately. More so when it doesn't extend to the ground, when ATC assume the traffic (if not Mode C) is below it.

[zkdli]

This always gets emotive I have no problems with the current situation re CAS. My position is that if you are considered responsible enough to get a pilot licence, be it a PPL or ATPL, then if you get in to a situation where you are operating around CAS you are responsible enough to know to stay outside of it.
If you get it wrong, you are responsible enough to admit that it is your mistake and not NATS, CAA, or any other person.

The test in law is the man on the Clapham omnibus. Would the man in the street consider it reasonable that a person who is considered qualified to fly an aircraft solo away from an airfield (trained for cross country flying), find it acceptable for that person not to have the skills required to stay outside of well marked areas on the maps that the person should be using? Then when we find that this country has a problem we blame everybody else because they are not looking out for them and keeping them out.

AS a non flyer said, it is a bit like allowing people to drive because they can, but they can't keep on the correct side of the road. It's not their fault because there is no one looking after them to tell them they are on the wrong side

That said I know that when someone has infringed CAS they are normally mortified that it has happened. NATS has a very enlightened policy in this area and I am sure that there are a ew people who read this forum that have had contact with NATS LTCC about this.

Perhaps they would like to share there experiences?

And DD, I am not rubbing my hands, I am dreading this weekend because I know that unless something extrodinary has happened over the Winter, we will be looking at about a dozen infringments.

[High Wing Drifter]

If you have a moving map GPS (yes, I know they are the work of the devil, owned an run by Uncle Sam etc., etc.) with an up to date data-base you really do have to be a half-wit to infringe.

If you look at an up to date map once every ten minutes as well, you need to be a quarter-wit to get into the wrong piece of sky.

Well people do who I would imagine aren't half-wits by any other measurement. Perhaps they too couldn't understand how it would be possible

[AlanM]

IO540
You get what you pay for with ATC nowadays fella. I don't agree to it.

When NATS were sold out by the Gov't then people were warned that in the long term GA would suffer.
If only the GA community was as chirpy then as they (the minority) are now.

How can you say CAS offers no protection?!?!?! That is a truly bonkers statement. It is only as strong as the weakest link I will agree. Which is why we have to steralise the airspace when a numpty is spending too much time getting familiar with his C150 after the winter and strays in.

And NO - it isn't going to get better EVER.

So, as NATS say that they are too busy to do ATSOCA, who else coudl help the WHOLE of the LTMA area:

Northolt could work NORTH OF HEATHROW
Biggin could work SOUTH/SOUTH EAST OF HEATHROW
Southend could be given SSR and encourage people to call them EAST OF HEATHROW
Farnborough (NATS), ALREADY do WEST/SOUTH EAST OF HEATHROW.

Oh - and if you think that having a LARS service is the great saviour, ask the 8 (yes, eight) CAS-T infringers on Thursday who called 125.25 IN the zone - 4 of which delayed the Royal Flight and screwed Blackbushe and Fairoaks up.

[WorkingHard]

AlanM – that was a bit harsh. I was of course referring to GA and not the weekend PPL who may not be one and the same but of course have the same rights and responsibilities.
If you wish to look at paying then by all means. There are huge chunks of CAS for which you pay nothing yet exclude those you do not want there. Please pay for the volume of airspace you “control” then you may have a case for talking about GA not paying.
If CAS is of such great importance to the holiday trade (please remember GA is mostly business users and movements of GA is hugely greater than CAT) then why do some carriers fly from airfields with no CAS?
BTW why do you assume I am a “mere” PPL? I fly company aircraft and have many thousands of hours which makes no difference what so ever to the points raised AND I was not castigating any individuals but the system in general.

[AlanM]

Maybe harsh. And I apologise if you are personally offended.

However, reality can be harsh at times.

I did not assume you are a PPL - maybe assuming that you fly in class G mainly (largely PPL territory) - I never even used the word "mere" which is derrogatory.

CAS does not belong to NATS!! It is delegated to NATS by the CAA, through Statutory Instruments and in a long drawn out process governed by the DAP. It is there to protect the PAYING public AROUND THE WORLD. Therefore, it is for the use of ALL.

Everyone agrees, that something must be done. But if only those on here petitioned the CAA with as much effort, you may get funding for more LARS seats.

Finally, don't take it personally - just how I see it.

[chevvron]

WorkingHard; maybe if you weren't so 'spartan' with your profile, people wouldn't make such assumptions. AlanM and I aren't afraid to let eveyone know we're controllers after all, you don't even say you're a pilot!
Anyway, how about making all present class G airspace above alt 3000ft class E airspace instead; that would mean ATC service to IFR traffic and no exclusion of VFR traffic.

[WorkingHard]

AlanM not offended and my choice of words could be better. Any suggestions, such as class g should be welcomed for consideration.

[PPRuNe Radar]

please remember GA is mostly business users and movements of GA is hugely greater than CAT

WorkingHard

Can you provide the reference which proves your statements please. I certainly don't believe that GA comprises mostly business users going about their company business. I do believe that non Civil Air Transport movements (which comprises GA, gliders, microlights, military, etc) throughout the whole of the UK outnumber Civil Air Transport movements but can't follow your implied logic that there are more GA business movements than Civil Air Transport movements. NATS alone handled over 2 million of the latter last year without including any handled solely by non NATS ATC units or those not receiving any ATC service.

You also state that Controlled Airspace is of great importance to the holiday trade, the implication being the business GA should have a higher place in the pecking order against such flights. Don't you think that many many more business men/women also make use of this airspace whilst in their business class seats than those travelling by 'business' GA throughout the UK ?? I certainly do around 10-15 return air trips per year on business and have dozens of colleagues who do the same. Most flights I make domestically seem to comprise a large proportion of business travellers so I would imagine the numbers using such services each year must be in the millions. Equalling or exceeding those number of business bums on seats would take a hell of an amount of bizjets, twin props, or other GA types flying as business GA. I don't think we have such a vast fleet operating in or into the UK.

[chevvron]

Prune Radar - why not pay a visit to Farnborough if you haven't seen large numbers of business aircraft. Friday afternoons are best/busiest.(except Good Friday of course - limited opening hours)

[Whirlybird]

I thought I was the only person who wasn't out flying on a lovely day like this. I feel better now.

I would have thought likely reasons for infringements were....

1) You haven't flown for a while, and are getting overloaded more easily than you realised you would.

2) The weather has changed, and while it's easy to navigate in infinite visibility, it's a lot harder when it drops to around 5 km, or you're facing into a low, early spring sun.

3) You got distracted at a bad moment - by a passenger who feels airsick, an wasp in the aircraft, another aircraft that suddenly seemed to appear out of nowhere, or something similar.

4) You're not feeling 100% well, but didn't realise this before you took off...one of those low grade viruses that you don't notice you have, till you need to give 100% of yourself, and then find you feel too fuzzyheaded to do it (it's happened to me).

5) A combination of a number of the above...probably the most likely scenario; it's rarely one thing that causes problems.

6) And finally...THE most likely.............you're human, and you made a mistake. You just don't know how, you've never done it before, and probably never will again, but you somehow got yourself in the wrong place at the wrong time.

Right, go ahead and flame me; I won't see it for several hours now.....

[High Wing Drifter]

PPRuNe Radar,

I wouldn't be at all surprised if GA isn't too far short of 2 million movements/year. I think it is highly probable. There must be approaching 30,000 private pilots and several thousand CPLs including instructors, etc. I would guess at around 10,000 active GA aircraft. Modal personal hours are probably in the 50's and average aircraft hours must be 100+, if all our group aircraft are typical of group aircraft then 150+ hours/year per aircraft and a guess at about 1hr/sortie.

Whirly,

I thought I was the only person who wasn't out flying on a lovely day like this. I feel better now.

So do I!

Right, go ahead and flame me; I won't see it for several hours now.....

No need, as usual a practical appreciation of the realities is most welcome rather than the oft wrote 'Why is everybody except me and my mates an idiot'

[PPRuNe Radar]

But do GA business travellers exceed those business travellers who use commercial airlines ?

Farnborough has a limit of 28,000 movements a year I believe. Which (not putting Farnborough or it's ATC down) is small beer in the overall scheme of things. Many of these flights will also use Controlled Airspace at some stage of their flight and so 'enjoy' the protections it offers to their esteemed passengers. To continue the 'protection' at the arrival and departure stages would require Farnborough to submit an airspace case. I have no idea if they have done so.

The position of the CAA is that they try to balance the needs of all airspace users and their passengers. Where there are large numbers of passengers involved (at airports served by reasonable numbers of Civil Air Transport movements), then I think that the protection of the many exceeds the rights of the few and we have Controlled Airspace established. The few will sometimes include me, flying my light single, and sometimes 'business' GA who don't want to be part of the overall system and the controls put in place.

As for what we could have ..... well it probably needs to start with a clean sheet of paper and some plagiarism of the best qualities of airspace systems throughout the world. Things like ring fenced aviation taxation which would pay for everything (although the US who run such a system seem hell bent on changing to the user pays model we suffer here ). Redesigned airspace structures to reflect the navigational and performance capabilities of modern aircraft and traffic volumes, which might mean increased airspace in some areas, decreased in others. Mandatory Mode C veils around major airspace areas or airfields with severe penalties for any who endanger other airspace users by breaking the 'law' which would mandate it. Class E airspace above 6000' to FL195, this still permits VFR flight but offers protection to flights in IMC. A centrally provided ATC system which provides the resources to manage all the above and provide appropriate levels of service .... paid for by aviation taxation and user charges for non tax payers. It's a huge task for someone !!!