Rough reception at Popham!
Join Date: May 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 4,631
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I know nothing of this incident.
I have been to Popham more times than I can recall. I havent had any "issues".
I have a few observations.
1. There has always been a great deal of confusion about the remit of an A/G operator. Without doubt I have heard many A/G operators going well beyond their remit. From a regulatory point of view their remit is clear for good reason and I suspect legally there is even better reason that they should take great care not to push the boundaries. Equally they are often well placed to observe dangerous situations developing. None of us should want to allow a dangerous situation to develop and in this case if the A/G operator felt that was what was happening I dont have an issue with him drawing the pilots attention to the danger.
2. Neither the pilot or the A/G operator has any business turning the exchange into a "debate". To the extent that either or both do, they are culpable, the pilot no more excused than the A/G operator. There is no more or less reason why if the pilot feels the A/G operator wants a debate he shouldnt say "please can we discuss this later on the ground, or over the telephone" - that line is not reserved for the A/G operator!
3. Follow these simple rules and you have just avoided any dispute over the radio.
4. If you as the pilot have an issue I cant see why you would not want to discuss your issue with the A/G operator personally, or if he refuses to do so, the next person up the chain of command - whoever that might be. If the discussion doesnt go well and you feel you are in the "right" then by all means air your grievance further (and perhaps on here) but it would seem unreasonable to do so without at least having the discussion. Surely it is only fair to at least give the other fella a chance to explain his side of the story.
5. I know that all might sound too civilised and butter wouldnt melt, but after all it is not road rage where the other person might just be a total nut, but this should be an exchange between two professionals who are prepared to take very seriously what we do because when we get it wrong the consequences can be all too serious.
I have been to Popham more times than I can recall. I havent had any "issues".
I have a few observations.
1. There has always been a great deal of confusion about the remit of an A/G operator. Without doubt I have heard many A/G operators going well beyond their remit. From a regulatory point of view their remit is clear for good reason and I suspect legally there is even better reason that they should take great care not to push the boundaries. Equally they are often well placed to observe dangerous situations developing. None of us should want to allow a dangerous situation to develop and in this case if the A/G operator felt that was what was happening I dont have an issue with him drawing the pilots attention to the danger.
2. Neither the pilot or the A/G operator has any business turning the exchange into a "debate". To the extent that either or both do, they are culpable, the pilot no more excused than the A/G operator. There is no more or less reason why if the pilot feels the A/G operator wants a debate he shouldnt say "please can we discuss this later on the ground, or over the telephone" - that line is not reserved for the A/G operator!
3. Follow these simple rules and you have just avoided any dispute over the radio.
4. If you as the pilot have an issue I cant see why you would not want to discuss your issue with the A/G operator personally, or if he refuses to do so, the next person up the chain of command - whoever that might be. If the discussion doesnt go well and you feel you are in the "right" then by all means air your grievance further (and perhaps on here) but it would seem unreasonable to do so without at least having the discussion. Surely it is only fair to at least give the other fella a chance to explain his side of the story.
5. I know that all might sound too civilised and butter wouldnt melt, but after all it is not road rage where the other person might just be a total nut, but this should be an exchange between two professionals who are prepared to take very seriously what we do because when we get it wrong the consequences can be all too serious.
Avoid imitations
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
Posts: 14,573
Received 422 Likes
on
222 Posts
As an unlicensed airfield Popham are unable to publish NOTAMs.
At the time I was enquiring about a "permanent" NOTAM, about kite flying from a strange location on a regular route I flew. It was supposed to be active every day, from sunrise to sunset. Having got in touch with the individual concerned, using the phone number supplied, I discovered it was unnecessary because it was requested by a hobbyist who had given up flying kites at low heights from there, so there was no need to avoid the area at anywhere near the published altitude.
I also queried another one about kite flying, this time requested by a chap training hawks to fly to a lure, with no other aviation connections.
Obviously, neither were operating a licensed airfield!
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Savannah GA & Portsmouth UK
Posts: 1,784
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ST. Anyone can indeed request that a NOTAM be published, however the request will be refused if it concerns facilities at an a/d which does not appear in the UK AIP. Go read the definition of NOTAM. If the information is not in the UK AIP then any change to it won't get published.
BTW last time I looked NOTAM had little to do with Gatwick. They are issued by the Airspace Utilisation Section of the CAA who unless they have moved are at Kingsway in London and published by NATS AIS on the A4 just outside Heathrow.
On the subject of Popham I've flown from there for a number of years. CT is unfailingly courteous, I've never seen him get ratty. He's also a very experienced pilot in his own right.
BTW last time I looked NOTAM had little to do with Gatwick. They are issued by the Airspace Utilisation Section of the CAA who unless they have moved are at Kingsway in London and published by NATS AIS on the A4 just outside Heathrow.
On the subject of Popham I've flown from there for a number of years. CT is unfailingly courteous, I've never seen him get ratty. He's also a very experienced pilot in his own right.
Last edited by Mike Cross; 16th Jan 2013 at 21:34.
Avoid imitations
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
Posts: 14,573
Received 422 Likes
on
222 Posts
If the information is not in the UK AIP then any change to it won't get published.
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: On the wireless...
Posts: 1,901
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by FleetFlyer
Come on Popham! You used to be great, and now you're driving customers away. If you're unsure how your radio operators ought to behave, go to a club like White Waltham, and ask them to show you
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Oxford, UK
Posts: 1,546
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Regarding NOTAMS. Can be issued by anything or anyone that may affect aviators. Shenington Gliding Club issued a NOTAM for our 1940's Hangar Dance.....because part of the fun was a genuine funtioning WWII searchlight!
Kept trying to capture a Ryanair but they were keeping well clear.....
Kept trying to capture a Ryanair but they were keeping well clear.....
I wasn't there either so I cannot really comment too much.
I have been to Popham many times in my old PA-28 and I have never, ever had less than a friendly reception.
The bit that I find fascinating is that OZ finds it necessary to tell us all that he has 10,000 hours and is a CAA R/T examiner.
I personally found the first 10,000 hours to be a bit of a learning curve and I would never have thought it relevant to mention that I was a CAA TRI/TRE and an FAA Check Airman just to reinforce my argument.
I obviously have still got a lot to learn when it comes to negotiating skills.
I have been to Popham many times in my old PA-28 and I have never, ever had less than a friendly reception.
The bit that I find fascinating is that OZ finds it necessary to tell us all that he has 10,000 hours and is a CAA R/T examiner.
I personally found the first 10,000 hours to be a bit of a learning curve and I would never have thought it relevant to mention that I was a CAA TRI/TRE and an FAA Check Airman just to reinforce my argument.
I obviously have still got a lot to learn when it comes to negotiating skills.
Fuji Abound wrote 'Without doubt I have heard many A/G Operators going beyond their remit'
Could this be because once they have the Certificate of Competence in their hand, there is no form of regulation to ensure they 'stick' to this remit? OK the C of C has to be signed by the radio station licence holder, but there is nothing written down to say that the licence holder MUST ensure the A/G Operator is competent and maintains that competency.
ATCOs and FISOs have to have their competency checked at regular intervals by an approved Local Competency Examiner and the results of that check have to be notified to CAA/ATSD. All ATC communications MUST be recorded and the CAA recommend that FISO communications are recorded, but nothing like this exists within the AGCS.
Don't forget the CAA read these pages and by complaining about levels of service, contributors may trigger action by the CAA, either to require some sort of competency check for A/G Operators or maybe invoke the regulation that says 'The CAA can require an airport operator to provide a particular minimum level of Air Traffic Service' ie FISO instead of A/G or ATC instead of FISO.
Would you really want that to happen?
Could this be because once they have the Certificate of Competence in their hand, there is no form of regulation to ensure they 'stick' to this remit? OK the C of C has to be signed by the radio station licence holder, but there is nothing written down to say that the licence holder MUST ensure the A/G Operator is competent and maintains that competency.
ATCOs and FISOs have to have their competency checked at regular intervals by an approved Local Competency Examiner and the results of that check have to be notified to CAA/ATSD. All ATC communications MUST be recorded and the CAA recommend that FISO communications are recorded, but nothing like this exists within the AGCS.
Don't forget the CAA read these pages and by complaining about levels of service, contributors may trigger action by the CAA, either to require some sort of competency check for A/G Operators or maybe invoke the regulation that says 'The CAA can require an airport operator to provide a particular minimum level of Air Traffic Service' ie FISO instead of A/G or ATC instead of FISO.
Would you really want that to happen?
Join Date: May 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 4,631
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Chevvron
You raise a good and interesting point.
I have wondered what ongoing training of ATCOs takes place - if any.
I do recognise the problem. If ongoing "training" was a requirement then inevitably some one must pay and I assume ATCOs are neither well paid and if their employers met these additional costs it would be yet another expense for hard pressed small airfields.
That said perhaps the CAA should take responsibility for "vetting" ATCOs say once a year without charge as part of their responsibility to ensure standards are maintained.
It does seem to be the way that whenever someone is excercising a professional skill that impacts on others some form of vetting is de rigueur.
You raise a good and interesting point.
I have wondered what ongoing training of ATCOs takes place - if any.
I do recognise the problem. If ongoing "training" was a requirement then inevitably some one must pay and I assume ATCOs are neither well paid and if their employers met these additional costs it would be yet another expense for hard pressed small airfields.
That said perhaps the CAA should take responsibility for "vetting" ATCOs say once a year without charge as part of their responsibility to ensure standards are maintained.
It does seem to be the way that whenever someone is excercising a professional skill that impacts on others some form of vetting is de rigueur.
Fuji
You seem totally confused about the difference between an Air Ground operator and an Air Traffic Controller. Mind you, whatever their merits otherwise, the operators of Popham add to that confusion on their website by their reference to the Air Ground Communication Service as "ATC" ("because that's how other people refer to it"), in quote marks initially but then eventually even dispensing with them in a further reference. To my mind, they should be told by CAA to get their house in order and refer to the service correctly - as should a certain other aerodrome not a million miles away that advertises "Air Traffic Control" on the tower building - again, only an AGCS.
2 s
You seem totally confused about the difference between an Air Ground operator and an Air Traffic Controller. Mind you, whatever their merits otherwise, the operators of Popham add to that confusion on their website by their reference to the Air Ground Communication Service as "ATC" ("because that's how other people refer to it"), in quote marks initially but then eventually even dispensing with them in a further reference. To my mind, they should be told by CAA to get their house in order and refer to the service correctly - as should a certain other aerodrome not a million miles away that advertises "Air Traffic Control" on the tower building - again, only an AGCS.
2 s
Join Date: May 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 4,631
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sorry - I have no idea why I said ATCOs - other than a few glasses of fine wine!
Of course I meant A/G - thanks for pointing that one out
- yes we are definitely on the same script - or are now.
Of course I meant A/G - thanks for pointing that one out
- yes we are definitely on the same script - or are now.
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: On the wireless...
Posts: 1,901
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by 2 sheds
a certain other aerodrome not a million miles away that advertises "Air Traffic Control" on the tower building - again, only an AGCS.
Last edited by Talkdownman; 17th Jan 2013 at 21:56.
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Preston
Age: 32
Posts: 105
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
every pilot should carry a emergancy falsh tash (i keep mine in my handy arm pocket) then in the event of sudden grief from some one be it another pilot or atc or atc wannabe then proudly affix your tash square up to the culprit dishing out the grief and say "what ho squiffy i dont like your jib! now be a good old chap fill the kettle to tabs and get a cuppa on" Any incoming threats should be replied to as "now thats just not cricket" and if it all goes tits up swift back hand slap and run like the clappers!
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: london, UK
Age: 57
Posts: 550
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
WITHOUT CHARGE!! Are you having a giraffe!!??!!
Someone in the heavily subsidised cafeteria on the top floor will have just dropped a cheap doughnut because of that shocking remark.
I went to Popham once and it rained. Popham, how do you expect to attract visitors when you can't even drum up a sunny day for me to quaff my tea?
Buck your ideas up. And move your airfield nearer to my house. I need an airfield close to my house.
When I am on my deathbed I am going to wish I had the 20 mins I spent reading this thread back. Lifes too short - OP, if the bloke don't answer, the bloke aint heard. AG operator, its astonishing how easy it is for someone who's under a bit of stress to take something you say the wrong way. CAP 413 doesn't let you call someone a **** on the radio but if you are thinking it then it gets transmitted in the tone of your voice. And some folk are more sensitive than others.
(I only posted to mentally justify reading it all in the first place)
Someone in the heavily subsidised cafeteria on the top floor will have just dropped a cheap doughnut because of that shocking remark.
I went to Popham once and it rained. Popham, how do you expect to attract visitors when you can't even drum up a sunny day for me to quaff my tea?
Buck your ideas up. And move your airfield nearer to my house. I need an airfield close to my house.
When I am on my deathbed I am going to wish I had the 20 mins I spent reading this thread back. Lifes too short - OP, if the bloke don't answer, the bloke aint heard. AG operator, its astonishing how easy it is for someone who's under a bit of stress to take something you say the wrong way. CAP 413 doesn't let you call someone a **** on the radio but if you are thinking it then it gets transmitted in the tone of your voice. And some folk are more sensitive than others.
(I only posted to mentally justify reading it all in the first place)
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: u.k
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Having read CT's side of events I think this is a case of ' One man's constructive criticism being taken as a another man's bollocking' over a scratchy radio above a screening 2-stroke, its not hard to see how, this is why we have standard phraseology, and to vary from it is a risky thing. Next time I think the phrase "Please report to the club house on landing" would be a far better bet.
That way at least I would get time to form a defence..
That way at least I would get time to form a defence..
I would suggest that to clear up any confusion, the airfield operator should change any mention of 'ATC' to read 'ATS', the reason being that AGCS is a type of Air Traffic Service along with ATC and FIS.