Are you going to Infringe CAS Tomorrow?

[zkdli]

Okay I know that this has been done to death on the forums but as someone who has spent a lot of time this week and this weekend avoiding lost pilots - I think that the total for the week stands at around 20....

I would just like to be reassured that those of you who read this forum; plan your flights, squawk, and when it goes wrong and you find yourselves in CAS, that you call the unit responsible or D&D.
Please tell me that I am right

I am being charitable and assuming that it has gone wrong, from the way some of them turn off their transponders, you might think that it was deliberate...(only joking)

regards your friendly and frustrated controller.

[conflict alert]

off topic but...

I did my first solo in ZKDLI 30 Jan 1980 at NZPP

[DX Wombat]

zkdli, it won't be of any consolation to you but you were not alone this weekend. I was at Elvington helping at the BAeA Aerobatics competition where there was a NOTAMed TRA in operation. I lost count after about ten, of the infringements of the area. Some of these were incredibly dangerous. Amongst them we had a T tail twin which ploughed it's way through the box and headed SE only to return about 30 mins later on a reciprocal heading once more straight through the box, a VANS RV Whatever which flew overhead the length of the considerably lengthy runway, Gliders - one of which was only narrowly avoided by the poor aeros competitor and a Robin who did aeros for miles on approach then all along the airfield and through the box turning round to repeat the performance in the opposite direction then returning again. We got that one's registration and possibly the Vans' too. All of those pilots were obviously under the impression that they were exempt from reading and acting upon NOTAMs, prefering to rely on what were obviously cheap, nasty, useless, crystal balls. RAF Radar got one of them and there was a reception committee waiting when he landed at his destination. I'm very interested to know what his excuse is going to be. The only box incursion which no NOTAM could have prevented was by two buzzards at about 5,000'. They stayed on the northern edge of the box until the competitor moved to the E then they made their way, still at 5,000' or so, straight across the box to the other side and out of the way. They were by far the best behaved and the only ones who showed any sort of commonsense! Nobody appeared to be listening to the airfield frequency - we certainly made all the correct calls but maybe they can't be bothered with a radio either.

[IO540]

It seems that most pilots still don't get notams, perhaps because it's all internet based and the demographics of the UK GA population work against computer literacy.

And PPL navigation is still in WW1.

What does the CAA (and other interested parties) therefore expect?

I am fairly sure the RAF does not train its pilots to fight a day-only war using maps and stopwatches.

I think the situation is crap too but I have no idea what can be easily done to improve matters.

[Mark1234]

Every flying organisation I've been into (though admittedly a small sample uk side), have an 'office copy' of the days weather and notams printed out and left in a public place where one can pick up and read. (though I do seem to recall UK notams being in a rather unhelpful lat-long notation, rather than related to significant points on the map)

Not the GPS arguament again? As you already pointed out they're not reading the notams, I rather doubt navigational accuracy is the issue in this case. Besides, if the UK GA populace are so computer illiterate they can't get notams, they've got **** all chance of figuring out how to drive the average aircraft GPS.

Personally I'd prescribe some serious slappings until people start taking their responsibilities a bit more seriously, rather than making excuses for them, but hey, that's a bit old fashioned in this day and age..

[zkdli]

Hi Conflict Alert,
Nice off topic! - I soloed at NZPP in 1977 and first flew ZKDLI that year as well!

DX Wombat - I feel for you, we have been trying for years now to reduce the numbers of infringements in the LTMA and failed:
1.we introduced squawks for aircraft operating around the zones so that people could show that they we listening on the frequencies - if they get in to the zones controllers know that they are on frequency and can identify them so that we can then vector them clear.
2. we introduced Farnborough LARS (or is that Farnborough ATSOCAS now?)
3. We are producing VFR guides for flying around the london zones.
4. we give presentations to flying clubs etc about the issues so that pilots can see and understand the disruption.
5. when pilots infringe CAS we try to understand what caused the infringement so that we can see any trends.

Yet the numbers continue to go up. The only trend that we have found is that the pilots who infringe all say that they have a genuine reason for being distracted and getting lost. For example one of the recent infringers on a VFR flight to White Waltham said he flew in to the London Control zone because his ADF was faulty..... (on a VFR flight)

The last resort that we have come to is trying to get Transponder Mandatory Zones around Stansted (where the most infrignments occur) so that at least if an infringment occurs we can then be alerted by our own safety nets and if they fail the commercial aircraft have TCAS as a last resort.

That said, there is strong opposition to this one -
BUT - if pilots were able to stay out of the zones we would not have to resort to it

[BackPacker]

Every flying organisation I've been into (though admittedly a small sample uk side), have an 'office copy' of the days weather and notams printed out and left in a public place where one can pick up and read. (though I do seem to recall UK notams being in a rather unhelpful lat-long notation, rather than related to significant points on the map)

Reading NOTAMs or not doesn't prevent CAS busts (unless CAS was extended by NOTAM) but it would prevent TRA busts and similar. But I have found that on a typical cross-country (or cross-multiple-countries) VFR flight even a rather clever narrow route briefing might easily give you half a dozen pages of NOTAMs. Because of the old telex format, in all caps, filled with abbreviations and more importantly, filled with placenames you don't recognize (particularly if foreign country) and coordinates you can't place.

So yes I tend to read through the whole bunch but if you want to fly at some point in time that day, you have to do a bit of mental filtering, and then still it may take far too long.

What I don't get is why Eurocontrol, who already collect all NOTAMs for Europe, can't extend their NOTAM briefing application (EAD Basic) to include a graphical/clickable overview of NOTAMs. That would make checking NOTAMs a two-minute job.

Amongst them we had a T tail twin which ploughed it's way through the box

Another tendency I have noticed in some fellow pilots is that if they acquire an aviation GPS, they tend to use that for flight planning as well. They are a marvelous piece of kit for that, much faster than the map/flight computer thing to plot your route. But the problem is that the only abundant suitable waypoints that the GPS and the map have in common are the airfields. So a lot of flights are planned via the overheads of airfields. Not good. Maybe it's time for some IFR-like intersections to be introduced for VFR flight, at locations that are easily recognizable from the air, are listed on the map and are included in the GPS database.

[Final 3 Greens]

Well, you could try running the airspace in a similar way to LAX class B and C and providing a consistent, easy to use radar service for all.

But I guess there are a million reasons why the LTMA is different and could not possibly be managed the same way.

[HEATHROW DIRECTOR]

<<But the problem is that the only abundant suitable waypoints that the GPS and the map have in common are the airfields. So a lot of flights are planned via the overheads of airfields. Not good. Maybe it's time for some IFR-like intersections to be introduced for VFR flight, at locations that are easily recognizable from the air, are listed on the map and are included in the GPS database.>>

I am an avid user of GPS, but not for flying. Surely it is possible to programme any location as a waypoint using either Lat/Long or OS grid refs? Or would that be too time-consuming?

<<Well, you could try running the airspace in a similar way to LAX class B and C and providing a consistent, easy to use radar service for all.>>

I don't know how that functions but I definitely do not like the US system of see-and-be-seen close to major airfields!

[BackPacker]

Surely it is possible to programme any location as a waypoint using either Lat/Long or OS grid refs? Or would that be too time-consuming?

Sure, but indeed time-consuming and error prone. Particularly since you'll want the pencil line on the map to correspond to the magenta line on the GPS, normally. Drawing lines from airfield to airfield is easy.

Well, you could try running the airspace in a similar way to LAX class B and C and providing a consistent, easy to use radar service for all.

Don't forget that LAX, together with basically any major airport in the US, has a 30-nm "mode C veil" ring around it. No mode-C transponder, no access, period. From the recent discussion we had following the mode-S situation in the Netherlands, I don't think the UK is ready for any sort of TMZ. So don't just blame the CAA, NATS or the individual controllers, also blame the mindset of a lot of pilots/owners/operators - see zkdlis post above wrt. Stansted.

[soay]

Originally Posted by IO540

I think the situation is crap too but I have no idea what can be easily done to improve matters.

How about toughening up the biennial review, to check competence in preflight planning?

As others have said, even if you do conscientiously get NOTAMS before each flight, interpreting them would be a lot less error prone if there was an option to present information graphically. A crude (NATS only) solution could be for NOTAMS to include a special file name entry which the software on the web server could convert to a clickable link, and allow each NOTAM submitter to upload the corresponding image file.

[Stampe]

Final 3 greens spot on the money.When I,m flying my 767 excellent service from London Air Traffic.Flying my own light aircraft same pilot ,same Instrument rating, same RT style ...service non existent.The NATs budget doesn,t expand to providing a worthwhile service for GA yet that should be the price they pay for having virtually exclusive use of large chunks of the sky in the congested South east.More controllers some dedicated to transiting traffic and much better controller training required ,less rule based and more open minded...it would of course cost money to make flight training in light aircraft and flight deck experience rides mandatory as in the past.VBR Stampe

[S-Works]

How about toughening up the biennial review, to check competence in preflight planning

?

Very good idea.

At the moment it is not a review it is a flight of 1 hour with an Instructor the content of which is the pilot not the Instructors decision. I have just had a couple go elsewhere for their 2 year flight as I would not just fly around for an hour and sign them off. Apparently they did not like have to do a few PFL's steep turns etc.

They have gone to another Instructor who will just sit there for the hour and sign the log book.

It is this type of attitude that is the reason we have so many problems. A proper FAA type BFR would probably help improve things.

[stickandrudderman]

What I know about technology extends only to how to use it, not how to programme it, but I wonder why notams can't be uploaded automatically and compulsoraly onto your GPS so, if you're navigating using GPS as most people do you couldn't avoid having the information presented to you when you enter your route.
Just a thought and probably a testament to my ignorance!

[PompeyPaul]

NOTAM website is to difficult to use

Got crucified for saying that last time, but I still maintain it. It's fine if you are tracking airfield to airfield, or VOR to VOR but if you are just out brimbling randomly, checking out the progress of the hindhead tunnel etc then it's hard to get the NOTAMs that matter.

And whilst it may be my incompetence that makes it hard to use, or even the fact that I'm a danger to myself and everyone else around me etc etc, as a newbie it's still unintuitive, difficult to navigate and plane bewildering. It could be made MUCH more obvious imho. The results are there for everyone to see, infringement central...

[BackPacker]

but I wonder why notams can't be uploaded automatically and compulsoraly onto your GPS so

AFAIK almost all NOTAMs contain lat/long information in a standard format, although this information is not always present in the NOTAM overview (which normally only shows the free-format text field). Exceptions of course are things like whole-FIR NOTAMs.

Technically therefore I don't think there will be major problems to implement something like that. You might need a little more internal memory, but that's about it. In fact, I just googled a bit and it looks like the PocketFMS team already has something like this on their to-do list.

Furthermore, there are several "amateur" websites that already do something like this. It's just a matter of implementing that in a GPS instead of a PC. So there's proof that it is *possible* to interpret the data correctly. (UKGA home and NotamPlot v2 are just two examples.)

As far as making things mandatory - that's going to be difficult. First, of course, it requires everybody to have a suitable GPS - in a day and age where only an ASI, ALT and compass are mandatory for VFR flight. Then the GPS needs to have some sort of interface (via the PC and the internet most likely) to a suitable NOTAM database and this interface needs to work "on the road" as well. Anyone who has tried doing some sort of PC-based flight planning on the road, using WiFi, a cell phone interface as modem, 3G or something like that knows that this is not exactly trivial.

[scooter boy]

WRT LTMA infringements.
IMHO the best way is to have a moving map GPS display showing airspace and to talk to Farnborough LARS.

NOTAMs are more difficult.
There are still obstacles that prevent the online service being at all intuitive.
The other problem is that one often has to deviate off track - usually for weather. So just how wide a track of NOTAMs do you request?

I agree with Stampe the 767 pilot. IFR in the airways is so much easier and the service is fab. No proper service seems to exist to cope with GA IFR flight outside of controlled airspace in the UK. Sometimes you get handed over, sometimes you don't.

BTW I just did my FAA BFR/IPC - in Tarbes yesterday with a great pilot/CFII friend.
He gave me a real workout wrt flying the aircraft and we did all the stuff I generally don't bother to do until I felt comfortable doing it.
I flew Plymouth to Guernsey (filled up with cheap fuel) got DCT Olero from Guernsey and then DCT TBO so the trip was very short - same routing on the way back except I didn't need a fuel stop in the CI and landed in Plymouth with tanks 1/3rd full of cheap CI fuel. French ATC were fantastically laid back as ever.

Well worth the trip.

SB

[HEATHROW DIRECTOR]

<<and much better controller training required ,less rule based and more open minded>>

I'd like to know what that means!! Aviation safety depends on rigid rules so how exactly can controllers become more "open-minded" and "less rule based"?

[englishal]

The problems are, as I see it :-

1) Lack of any sort of reliable radar service OCAS - It is hit and miss whether you get a Traffic Service from a civil unit, especially at weekends. Less than 50% chance I'd say. If everyone was using and encouraged to use a radar service around London, you could eliminate CAS busts.

2) Complicated airspace - the Airspace dimensions are not standard. Around London you have loads of different airspace altitude changes, different types of airspace and it is generally a mess. I remember seeing one post on here where someone posted something like "so if I pass south of Luton, so long as I'm above 2500 I'll be outide their class D" - yea you will, but in the Heathrow class A! why does LHR zone have to be so wide N to S? There is no need for it, you could have 1500' Class A base right next to the airport boundary and there is no way you'd have a problem with any CAT.

3) NOTAMS - difficult to visualise Lat / Long and lots of Numbers. I use SkybookGA which generates a route map with Notams drawn on the map. I also phone the 0500 number just before start up.

4) Navigation - Trying to DR navigate around the LTMA if you are unfamiliar is madness in my mind, with all these airspace changes etc....It can be done if you are very skilled, but in my experience with flying with new PPLs, is that they are not all that skilled!

5) Unclear charts. It is very difficult to see the LTMA boundaries on the half mil if you are not familiar with them. I had a look at some mil helo charts recently and they showed airspace so much clearer, with different colour shading in certain areas. Perhaps there should also be a "London terminal Area chart" published, like they do in the USA around large airports?

6) Mode C vale? Good idea, then my TPAS will provide reliable info - in the USA you CAN enter a mode C vale without transponder as long as ATC agrees.

[Sir Vaylance Radar]

If whilst out in your car you are inadvertantly distracted & drive the wrong way up a one-way street & are caught, there's a fair chance of a fine and penalty points. Just as you might be getting done for doing 35 mph in a 30 zone with a fine and penalty points, above you a pilot could be in CAS without a clearance - if they are caught, chances are nothing more than a written warning from the CAA. Now tell me why pilots shouldn't be treated the same as motorists !