Olympic Airpsace Restrictions
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: UK,Twighlight Zone
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have still not read anything that says a transponder is MANDATORY. So instead of slinging insults please point me at where it says a transponder is MANDATORY. It is not my understanding that it is MANDATORY.
As I understand tithe glider guys who don't have transponders have already established transponder is not required. Two way radio does appear to be the only way you are going to get an approval number. However as I said for a two month period what's up with carrying a handheld and actually talking-to someone?
As I have said a number of times now, I a just trying to provoke some discussion rather pure negativity. I realise that the restrictions are a pain in the ass for those of us flying basic aircraft and I am included in this in my bimbling flying but at the moment I am not seeing anything that can't be worked around with a bit of effort.
As I understand tithe glider guys who don't have transponders have already established transponder is not required. Two way radio does appear to be the only way you are going to get an approval number. However as I said for a two month period what's up with carrying a handheld and actually talking-to someone?
As I have said a number of times now, I a just trying to provoke some discussion rather pure negativity. I realise that the restrictions are a pain in the ass for those of us flying basic aircraft and I am included in this in my bimbling flying but at the moment I am not seeing anything that can't be worked around with a bit of effort.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: In the boot of my car!
Posts: 5,982
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As I have said a number of times now, I a just trying to provoke some discussion rather pure negativity.
My arguement is all about negativity but maybe not in the same way as yours.
My idea of negativity is the huge security industry which has grown up around aviation. Its now mostly about money and far removed from its purpose of security and safety.
Sadly i think it will take a major hit against the train travel network to make government realise that terrorism doesnt equal aviation. Secure aviation and terrorism has gone is not I am afraid the case.
Ie get off our backs and put the attention towards the other security holes that exist unplugged in oither modes of transport because the terrorist threat is unlikely to be from the air.
Pace
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: London
Age: 54
Posts: 232
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bose,
I thought something similar to you, so contacted them. The answer is that to enter the restricted zone, aircraft must comply with the requirements, one of which is to squawk the allocated code.
This is a requirement for microlights, even if only doing circuit practice (at which point, we don't have to file a flight plan). When I asked them what I was meant to do since there is no requirement for a microlight flying in unrestricted airspace to have a transponder, and so the one I was learning in didnt have one, their suggestion was to tell my school they should fit transponders to all the microlights....good eh!
Funnily enough, I haven't suggested this to the school, as I don't want to get shot! Our CFI attitude is that if there is no way round it, then he will try and come to an arrangement with an airstrip just outside the zone. I think there will be some home counties airstrips that will be VERY busy for 2 months!
I thought something similar to you, so contacted them. The answer is that to enter the restricted zone, aircraft must comply with the requirements, one of which is to squawk the allocated code.
This is a requirement for microlights, even if only doing circuit practice (at which point, we don't have to file a flight plan). When I asked them what I was meant to do since there is no requirement for a microlight flying in unrestricted airspace to have a transponder, and so the one I was learning in didnt have one, their suggestion was to tell my school they should fit transponders to all the microlights....good eh!
Funnily enough, I haven't suggested this to the school, as I don't want to get shot! Our CFI attitude is that if there is no way round it, then he will try and come to an arrangement with an airstrip just outside the zone. I think there will be some home counties airstrips that will be VERY busy for 2 months!
A little less conversation,
a little more aviation...
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Bracknell, UK
Posts: 696
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have still not read anything that says a transponder is MANDATORY. So instead of slinging insults please point me at where it says a transponder is MANDATORY. It is not my understanding that it is MANDATORY.
As I understand tithe glider guys who don't have transponders have already established transponder is not required.
As I understand tithe glider guys who don't have transponders have already established transponder is not required.
If you can point to a formal statement confirming that gliders are exempt from the transponder requirement (at odds with the quoted guidelines) then so much the better.....but if you can, why haven't you?
SoCal,
You are perhaps located too far away from this 60 miles around London grounding to have followed its intricacies on our more local if vociferous forums.
It's been discussed by the principal flying organisations and their members since early March when the bombshell dropped. Measured & more formal steps have and continue to be taken to try to get the DfT of HMG to permit a fairer but still secure middle path resolution.
NATS/CAA understand this and are also doing their best, being, till this surprise event, the Government's appointed & competent air usage representatives.
mikehallam
You are perhaps located too far away from this 60 miles around London grounding to have followed its intricacies on our more local if vociferous forums.
It's been discussed by the principal flying organisations and their members since early March when the bombshell dropped. Measured & more formal steps have and continue to be taken to try to get the DfT of HMG to permit a fairer but still secure middle path resolution.
NATS/CAA understand this and are also doing their best, being, till this surprise event, the Government's appointed & competent air usage representatives.
mikehallam
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: UK,Twighlight Zone
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
For a well known self appointed pundit to chime in now two months later than the rest of the very concerned flying fraternity shows at least a certain obtuseness (willful or not !).
I contacted NATS through the contact page and asked what would happen with aircraft that are not transponder equipped and the reply was that they would be dealt with on a case by case basis.
So going back to my original comment, looking at the restriction, if you file a flightr plan, have a radio and if no transponder make appropriate arrangements you are going to be able to operate. In the case of my flying an aircraft with no transponder or radio I will have to take along the handheld to get two way contact and make arrangements in advance for no transponder. I will have to follow the flight planning requirements and I am good to go.
I realise this is a pain in the ass for those whose idea of flying is just doing as they please but it is not like this is a permanent arrangement, its a limited time for a pretty monumental occassion.
As I have said a number of times, if I am interpreting this incorrectly please cut and paste the evidence rather than just insulting me. I have nothing to gain either way, just interestied in discussion rather than mud slinging.
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: USA
Posts: 563
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm with bose-x on this one.
There is a bunch of selfish pilots who have no radio, no transponder and insist on flying everywhere they like, whenever they like. They also belong to the 'civil liberties' group, and don't like controlled airspace and filing flight plans.
They consequently pay no regard to the safety of other airspace users.
There is a bunch of selfish pilots who have no radio, no transponder and insist on flying everywhere they like, whenever they like. They also belong to the 'civil liberties' group, and don't like controlled airspace and filing flight plans.
They consequently pay no regard to the safety of other airspace users.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 4,631
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think there are two aspects to this.
Firstly I suspect there is some sceptism whether the arrangements will work as headlined. Government departments have become very good at leaving themselves plenty of wriggle room and there seems enough in the wording as it currently stands for the number of flights plans that are approved to be restricted.
Secondly there is the more general concern as to whether there is a proven case that these measures achieve the objective intended. It is right and proper that we continue to challenge (in every walk of life) measures that curtail our personal freedom unless and until it is demonstrated that there is a justified case for doing so.
While I dont entirely disagree with Bose equally I also beleive it is very easy for us as a community to accept ever more restrictions on what we do, until the point is reached when most of us cant be bothered to engage in flying any more.
I believe flights to the CIs remain a good case in point. We have legislation left over from NI days that is no longer relevant and cant be justified. Flying to the CIs is a pain, and in theory no longer possible at the drop of a hat and yet it is a tiny group of islands of little concern to anyone less than 40 minutes away for some of us on the south coast. The paperwork hoops to get their are nonesense, we know they are, doubtles so do the authorities, but it would seem no one can be bothered to do anything about it.
Firstly I suspect there is some sceptism whether the arrangements will work as headlined. Government departments have become very good at leaving themselves plenty of wriggle room and there seems enough in the wording as it currently stands for the number of flights plans that are approved to be restricted.
Secondly there is the more general concern as to whether there is a proven case that these measures achieve the objective intended. It is right and proper that we continue to challenge (in every walk of life) measures that curtail our personal freedom unless and until it is demonstrated that there is a justified case for doing so.
While I dont entirely disagree with Bose equally I also beleive it is very easy for us as a community to accept ever more restrictions on what we do, until the point is reached when most of us cant be bothered to engage in flying any more.
I believe flights to the CIs remain a good case in point. We have legislation left over from NI days that is no longer relevant and cant be justified. Flying to the CIs is a pain, and in theory no longer possible at the drop of a hat and yet it is a tiny group of islands of little concern to anyone less than 40 minutes away for some of us on the south coast. The paperwork hoops to get their are nonesense, we know they are, doubtles so do the authorities, but it would seem no one can be bothered to do anything about it.
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Midlands
Posts: 2,359
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
“There is a bunch of selfish pilots who have no radio, no transponder”
That shows a remarkable lack of understanding of the situation. I know a significant number of pilots who are prepared to fit a transponder, but the regulations will not let them. In order to fit such a device to a glider for example there has to be an approved installation, in many gliders this does not exist. Some pilots have been trying to overcome this for 3 years with no success.
Another example is the max empty weight rule. Many “new generation” micros are very close to this limit – 1lb being common. This is the reason aircraft like the Eurostar are unpainted. Under CAA regs if the aircraft is over this weight, even by a small amount, it is a garden ornament. When we were involved in the mode s consultation we asked for an exception to allow the devices to be fitted as has been done in other parts of Europe, but this has not happened. Well over 1000 micros cannot fit the device legally because of this rule.
As for radios, I take it you think any fool can take a hh radio up and just use it? I owned a Nipper with a VW and 2 L4 mags (originally designed for tractors in the 1920’s). This was a factory built aircraft which had transitioned to an LAA permit. I spent over a year trying to suppress the ignition so I could use my hand held. I could get the radio to work at the cost of a misfire, or the engine to work but blanket the radio. I never solved the issue.
It might be worth understanding the subject before grouping pilots as selfish.
Rod1
That shows a remarkable lack of understanding of the situation. I know a significant number of pilots who are prepared to fit a transponder, but the regulations will not let them. In order to fit such a device to a glider for example there has to be an approved installation, in many gliders this does not exist. Some pilots have been trying to overcome this for 3 years with no success.
Another example is the max empty weight rule. Many “new generation” micros are very close to this limit – 1lb being common. This is the reason aircraft like the Eurostar are unpainted. Under CAA regs if the aircraft is over this weight, even by a small amount, it is a garden ornament. When we were involved in the mode s consultation we asked for an exception to allow the devices to be fitted as has been done in other parts of Europe, but this has not happened. Well over 1000 micros cannot fit the device legally because of this rule.
As for radios, I take it you think any fool can take a hh radio up and just use it? I owned a Nipper with a VW and 2 L4 mags (originally designed for tractors in the 1920’s). This was a factory built aircraft which had transitioned to an LAA permit. I spent over a year trying to suppress the ignition so I could use my hand held. I could get the radio to work at the cost of a misfire, or the engine to work but blanket the radio. I never solved the issue.
It might be worth understanding the subject before grouping pilots as selfish.
Rod1
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: In the boot of my car!
Posts: 5,982
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Fuji
I tend to go with your sentiments. After 9/11 there were big words and speeches about protecting our freedoms that many had fought to protect in the past.
Yet we are less free now than ever with more and more governemnt intervention in everything and anything we do.
Sadly for us aviation appears to be regarded as the only target for terrorists and a huge security industry built around it with dire consequences to our freedoms.
Hence why in my posts I have pointed out the total lack of security in an equal target the rail networks.
That makes me bitter as it is double standards by the authorities! Hit aviation because they can ignore the rest because hitting those areas would not be practical. Oh well lets hope for all our sakes the terrorists dont do what they claim they will with the rail networks?
Is This justified? I would think not! If its a matter of security then based aircraft at the airfields in question can easely be identified as can be their owners with no restrictions on those other than specific areas close to the games.
Aircraft that arrive from outside the airfields could pre register their intentions with security so they too can be checked.
If this is more about the huge demand that will be made on the airspace then thats another matter.
Pace
I tend to go with your sentiments. After 9/11 there were big words and speeches about protecting our freedoms that many had fought to protect in the past.
Yet we are less free now than ever with more and more governemnt intervention in everything and anything we do.
Sadly for us aviation appears to be regarded as the only target for terrorists and a huge security industry built around it with dire consequences to our freedoms.
Hence why in my posts I have pointed out the total lack of security in an equal target the rail networks.
That makes me bitter as it is double standards by the authorities! Hit aviation because they can ignore the rest because hitting those areas would not be practical. Oh well lets hope for all our sakes the terrorists dont do what they claim they will with the rail networks?
Is This justified? I would think not! If its a matter of security then based aircraft at the airfields in question can easely be identified as can be their owners with no restrictions on those other than specific areas close to the games.
Aircraft that arrive from outside the airfields could pre register their intentions with security so they too can be checked.
If this is more about the huge demand that will be made on the airspace then thats another matter.
Pace
Last edited by Pace; 12th May 2011 at 11:06.
PPRuNe Bashaholic
Moderator
Join Date: Jun 1997
Location: The Peoples Alcoholic Republic of Jockistan
Posts: 1,442
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
For those who can't respond without casting personal insults, better re-assess your posts before hitting 'Send'. Those who do so in future will be thread banned. Simples.
Debate the issues and don't attack the posters.
Debate the issues and don't attack the posters.
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: UK,Twighlight Zone
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
We are having 2 parallel conversations here.
One is around the percieved threat to our civil liberties and the other is around how we actually operate during the restriction period. As far as the restriction period is concerned I am not seeing any insurmountable issues that 99% of the GA population can't work around with a little effort. As with anything so draconian there are going to be a few people who are just unable to comply but I think the reality is that it will be a tiny tiny minority who are affected and while I have the greatest sympathy I am also pragmatic enough to acknowledge that all the people cant be kept happy all of the time.
I would also argue that even that minority have options open to them if they are really keen to keep flying an prepared to bend a little to the majority situation?
Regarding civil liberties that is a completely different issue and one that I need to dig my soapbox out for......
One is around the percieved threat to our civil liberties and the other is around how we actually operate during the restriction period. As far as the restriction period is concerned I am not seeing any insurmountable issues that 99% of the GA population can't work around with a little effort. As with anything so draconian there are going to be a few people who are just unable to comply but I think the reality is that it will be a tiny tiny minority who are affected and while I have the greatest sympathy I am also pragmatic enough to acknowledge that all the people cant be kept happy all of the time.
I would also argue that even that minority have options open to them if they are really keen to keep flying an prepared to bend a little to the majority situation?
Regarding civil liberties that is a completely different issue and one that I need to dig my soapbox out for......
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: north of barlu
Posts: 6,207
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bosx-x
Lets just see the flying club problems.
I File a FP and the student is 5 min late because of traffic.....Flight Canx
I take a new student on first or second flight.....he is very sick, cant get back as I would be ahead of the return part of the FP to base so divert..... aircraft now stuck for at least 2 hours awaiting new FP...............the 2 following flights Canx due aircraft stuck away from base.
Flight with student going well............transponder fails........... unable to return to base..........have to divert............aircraft stuck away from base were the engineering support is.
So Bose-x all the above are normal club happenings that could normaly be resolved without extra expence but these stupid restrictions put the operating cost up by a huge %. would you like it if it was your business that was being forced towards insolvency?
I File a FP and the student is 5 min late because of traffic.....Flight Canx
I take a new student on first or second flight.....he is very sick, cant get back as I would be ahead of the return part of the FP to base so divert..... aircraft now stuck for at least 2 hours awaiting new FP...............the 2 following flights Canx due aircraft stuck away from base.
Flight with student going well............transponder fails........... unable to return to base..........have to divert............aircraft stuck away from base were the engineering support is.
So Bose-x all the above are normal club happenings that could normaly be resolved without extra expence but these stupid restrictions put the operating cost up by a huge %. would you like it if it was your business that was being forced towards insolvency?
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: UK,Twighlight Zone
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I would think that something like a transponder failure during a flight could be dealt with by sensible collaboration between the controller you are talking to and yourself.
I have been teaching and examining for quite a few years now and don't recall flights due to sick student being aborted as a common occurance. However again as you are in 2 way contact with the controller why do you think they would not be happy to let you abort the flight and return to base?
I don't see anythin the restrictions that preclude the aborting of a flight and return to a base. Again if you can show me something that supports your assumption then I would be glad to read and digest it.
I think there is a lot of assuming and doomsaying going on based on what i think is incorrect interpretation of the restrictions. A very typical British thing to create problems where non exist?
I have been teaching and examining for quite a few years now and don't recall flights due to sick student being aborted as a common occurance. However again as you are in 2 way contact with the controller why do you think they would not be happy to let you abort the flight and return to base?
I don't see anythin the restrictions that preclude the aborting of a flight and return to a base. Again if you can show me something that supports your assumption then I would be glad to read and digest it.
I think there is a lot of assuming and doomsaying going on based on what i think is incorrect interpretation of the restrictions. A very typical British thing to create problems where non exist?
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: north of barlu
Posts: 6,207
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bose -x you just don't get it, the rules say that you have to keep to a route & timings so you can't teach the basic flying inside the restricted area.
So you have to leave the restricted area so carry out this instructional flight, once outside you will have to be on time to made the inbound flight plan, any thing that stops you meeting inbound FP slot will result in you not being given clearance into the restricted zone.
So you have to leave the restricted area so carry out this instructional flight, once outside you will have to be on time to made the inbound flight plan, any thing that stops you meeting inbound FP slot will result in you not being given clearance into the restricted zone.
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: UK,Twighlight Zone
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes I do get it and would appreciate if you would refrain from talking to me like a child.
The situations you are describing are abnormal termination of the flight and I can't imagine for one minute that having described the situation to the controller they are going to force you to land somewhere else. No one is denying that you won't be able to teach the basic stuff inside the area but looking at it the edges are only 10 minutes away and you can teach outside and return. When I have taught in Cyprus and Spain both have required me to transit tom training areas to conduct lessons.
If you are in possession of information that states otherwise then please share it. Otherwise if we are reading the same information I don't know where your assumption is coming from.
However I will write to NATS and ask them to clarify the situation.
The situations you are describing are abnormal termination of the flight and I can't imagine for one minute that having described the situation to the controller they are going to force you to land somewhere else. No one is denying that you won't be able to teach the basic stuff inside the area but looking at it the edges are only 10 minutes away and you can teach outside and return. When I have taught in Cyprus and Spain both have required me to transit tom training areas to conduct lessons.
If you are in possession of information that states otherwise then please share it. Otherwise if we are reading the same information I don't know where your assumption is coming from.
However I will write to NATS and ask them to clarify the situation.
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 10,815
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
bose you are presuming the controller has any choice in the matter. I would think there will be some numbnut with a cheap shiny suit deciding what should be done.
And I don't think NATS will have a clue with what will happen and even if they do they won't be allowed to tell you pre event.
And I don't think NATS will have a clue with what will happen and even if they do they won't be allowed to tell you pre event.
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: UK,Twighlight Zone
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MJ, there is the rub. People are assuming the worst rather than reading the document as it stands. If they need clarification then surely writing to NATS and asking for it rather than assuming the worst is the better option?
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 10,815
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
To be honest I would presume the worse as well.
They don't want light aircraft in the sky full stop for not only security reasons.
They have to be seen to not completely shut everything down or they would have to compensate companys. They have to have to open the door a crack to pretend you can still continue with your business but in reality you will be grounded for all intents and purposes.
They don't want light aircraft in the sky full stop for not only security reasons.
They have to be seen to not completely shut everything down or they would have to compensate companys. They have to have to open the door a crack to pretend you can still continue with your business but in reality you will be grounded for all intents and purposes.