A nagging question before my GST...
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Swindon, Wiltshire
Age: 49
Posts: 862
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I still think you should just route well clear of the obstruction which will inherently give you a lower MSA.
Are you absolutely positive he wasn't trying to gently hint to you that the planned route was unsuitable without actually saying so?
Surely you have to plan your own route anyway? I thought the examiner just told you where you were going, not how to get there. That's certainly what happened on my skills test.
Are you absolutely positive he wasn't trying to gently hint to you that the planned route was unsuitable without actually saying so?
Surely you have to plan your own route anyway? I thought the examiner just told you where you were going, not how to get there. That's certainly what happened on my skills test.
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Amsterdam
Posts: 4,598
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Why are we talking about the MEF figures printed on a chart?
On a long x-country it's a lot of space to check 5nm either side of your track for any obstacle that might be lurking there.
Also, if you are positionally challenged (aka lost), particularly in bad visibility, you are far safer above the MEF+1000 feet or printed MSA figure, than above the MSA figure you calculated assuming you would be able to stay on track. Airspace issues aside of course.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: London
Posts: 59
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That is completely possible but my issue was why I wasn't allowed below MSA. After spending two hours planning my nav, weight, fuel etc a change of route wasn't really on the cards. Giving it a wide berth would have been a solution looking back on it but at the time I had no reason to do so, it was only in the brief just before the flight that I was told. Thats why I wanted a pprune opinion on the subject because it really confused me at the time - I felt penalised for doing something I had been taught was perfectly acceptable.
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: E Anglia
Posts: 1,102
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The answer shirley lies in the term MSA : Minimum Safe Altitude>
A stude taking a Flight exam like the PPL should not fly below the minimum safe altitude as by definition (whether you want to be pedantic or not) he will be flying into unsafe airspace.
Thus you either plan to go around the obstruction or you nail the altitude and don't drift up into CAS.
A stude taking a Flight exam like the PPL should not fly below the minimum safe altitude as by definition (whether you want to be pedantic or not) he will be flying into unsafe airspace.
Thus you either plan to go around the obstruction or you nail the altitude and don't drift up into CAS.
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Amsterdam
Posts: 4,598
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
After spending two hours planning my nav, weight, fuel etc a change of route wasn't really on the cards.
If the plan is no good, throw it away and start again. Don't go flying on a bad plan, thinking (hoping) things will sort itself out once in the air.
But you haven't told us yet what you were using as your MSA. Were you using the grid MSA or did you calculate the MSA based on objects/high ground 5 nm either side of your route?
In the latter case I can well imagine that the examiner doesn't want to see you fly below the MSA. Heck, if you calculate the MSA that way and then fly below it, you actually come reasonably close to busting the low flying rules.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: London
Posts: 59
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I've always used the 5NM off track technique to work out my MSAs. Using the grid MEF always seemed a bit excessive I thought when your MSA could be calculated at being alot higher for an object no where near you.
In retrospect avoiding the obstruction would have made my life an awful lot easier. We learn from our mistakes though so this seems like a good lesson for my next attempt and my future flying. I get the feeling this may have been the suggestion of the examiner. I've always planned my routes above MSA so this was the first time I was faced with the problem. From my point of view though MSAs weren't a legal requirement, the cloud base wasn't forcasted to be an issue so I didn't see the risk in flying just below MSA. I didn't feel like I was jeapodizing the safety of the flight when my intentions were to avoid an infringement. I know there's a difference between what is safe and what is legal but I felt as though the safety of the flight wasn't being compromised.
Thanks for all the advice though it's really appreciated. I'd still like to have a chat about this with my instructor though, it seems like a bit of a hazy area.
In retrospect avoiding the obstruction would have made my life an awful lot easier. We learn from our mistakes though so this seems like a good lesson for my next attempt and my future flying. I get the feeling this may have been the suggestion of the examiner. I've always planned my routes above MSA so this was the first time I was faced with the problem. From my point of view though MSAs weren't a legal requirement, the cloud base wasn't forcasted to be an issue so I didn't see the risk in flying just below MSA. I didn't feel like I was jeapodizing the safety of the flight when my intentions were to avoid an infringement. I know there's a difference between what is safe and what is legal but I felt as though the safety of the flight wasn't being compromised.
Thanks for all the advice though it's really appreciated. I'd still like to have a chat about this with my instructor though, it seems like a bit of a hazy area.
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Dublin
Posts: 2,547
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Because if there's no airspace or cloud in the way, it's far easier to use the MEF+1000 feet or the printed MSA value (Jeppesen) as your flight MSA.
On a long x-country it's a lot of space to check 5nm either side of your track for any obstacle that might be lurking there.
Also, if you are positionally challenged (aka lost), particularly in bad visibility, you are far safer above the MEF+1000 feet or printed MSA figure, than above the MSA figure you calculated assuming you would be able to stay on track. Airspace issues aside of course.
On a long x-country it's a lot of space to check 5nm either side of your track for any obstacle that might be lurking there.
Also, if you are positionally challenged (aka lost), particularly in bad visibility, you are far safer above the MEF+1000 feet or printed MSA figure, than above the MSA figure you calculated assuming you would be able to stay on track. Airspace issues aside of course.
I don't disagree that it's easier, but if it produces an answer that boxes this guy into a small corner, then he should look at the more detailed (but cumbersome) way. If that produces a much easier flight, then it's worth the effort!
But you haven't told us yet what you were using as your MSA. Were you using the grid MSA or did you calculate the MSA based on objects/high ground 5 nm either side of your route?
In the latter case I can well imagine that the examiner doesn't want to see you fly below the MSA. Heck, if you calculate the MSA that way and then fly below it, you actually come reasonably close to busting the low flying rules.
In the latter case I can well imagine that the examiner doesn't want to see you fly below the MSA. Heck, if you calculate the MSA that way and then fly below it, you actually come reasonably close to busting the low flying rules.
Anyway, the examiners requirement is that they fly above that altitude, not at is, so keeping that safety altitude as low as possible, will give them a bigger window to work with.
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Swindon, Wiltshire
Age: 49
Posts: 862
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That particular obstacle is about 1400 feet AMSL so once you've added 1000ft to that, you're at 2400 - just 100 feet below the Class A.
The issue is not the calculating of the MSA (which has been done correctly), rather that there actually is no requirement to fly above the MSA when VFR.
I would still have gone around it though.... Logic suggests not planning to fly over a 1400ft obstacle when there is airspace at 2500ft. A small detour would save all this trouble.
It's all kind of a moot point anyway because you shouldn't fly the same route you already planned. I would expect the examiner to give you a different destination.
The issue is not the calculating of the MSA (which has been done correctly), rather that there actually is no requirement to fly above the MSA when VFR.
I would still have gone around it though.... Logic suggests not planning to fly over a 1400ft obstacle when there is airspace at 2500ft. A small detour would save all this trouble.
It's all kind of a moot point anyway because you shouldn't fly the same route you already planned. I would expect the examiner to give you a different destination.
Está servira para distraerle.
You absolutely should have a chat about this with your instructor and he needs to clear this matter up for you. It is his responsibility to do that and if the matter has arisen already in a briefing with an examiner and has caused confusion then your trainer should have broached the matter with you, either then and there or later, and removed the grey areas. He should have enough empathy with you to realise that you're not a happy bunny. Since he has apparently neglected to do this you will have to bring the matter up but do not relent until you are 100% sure both in what he says and that he is correct in saying what he does. Get him to show you the writing in LASORS or wherever it may be concealed. At the next briefing, if the matter is raised again, do not hesitate to quote your instructor, in front of him, to the examiner and make quite sure that there are no ambiguities on the horizon.
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: London
Posts: 320
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sevenoaks is not a good place to hang around or go to if you don't have to. Biggin traffic uses it as a VRP and it can get a bit fraught there.
Best avoided, at any altitude.
Best avoided, at any altitude.
