Surveillance Mandatory Zones if infringements aren't cut
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Cambridge, UK
Age: 41
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Surveillance Mandatory Zones if infringements aren't cut
Looks like CAA are getting very miffed (rightly so) about infringements: http://www.flyer.co.uk/aviation-news/newsfeed.php?artnum=2316
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: GLASGOW
Posts: 1,289
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And also how about making it a bit less complicated. The drive for years was to cut infringements, whilst loading up more and more CTZ. Also Military Danger Areas are springing up all over the bloody place. Flying is really not what it used to be....
Failure to achieve the target could see the future introduction of surveillance mandatory zones (SMZ) to provide a conspicuity buffer around particular hotspot, continued the CAA. The aim of the SMZ will be to provide a ‘known traffic environment’ around the hotspot’s class D airspace. This could lead to a requirement for the mandatory use of radios and/or transponders in that buffer area.
Sounds like a policy that will encourage even more pilots to fly with their transponders switched off.
MJ
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Not a million miles from EGTF
Age: 68
Posts: 1,579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Looking over the GA Occurrence reports it is clear there are a lot on infringements, but it isn't clear how serious they are.
My feeling is that certain airfields have been 'encouraged' to report whereas once upon a time, they didn't
I guess it is a drive to create or extend Class D and avoid the hassle of a full-blown airspace change.
We've seen how quickly a TMZ or RMZ can be created compared to a change of Airspace Class. The SMZ is a natural and cheaper extension of this
My feeling is that certain airfields have been 'encouraged' to report whereas once upon a time, they didn't
I guess it is a drive to create or extend Class D and avoid the hassle of a full-blown airspace change.
We've seen how quickly a TMZ or RMZ can be created compared to a change of Airspace Class. The SMZ is a natural and cheaper extension of this
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
I suggest that a lot of infringements occur near "choke points" between CAS. The narrower the gap, the more likely pilots are to bust the adjacent airspace.
We've seen how quickly a TMZ or RMZ can be created compared to a change of Airspace Class. The SMZ is a natural and cheaper extension of this
Just Class D by the back door.
MJ
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Radlett
Posts: 115
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So the solution to infringements is to make the restricted areas bigger?
Sounds like a policy that will encourage even more pilots to fly with their transponders switched off.
MJ
Sounds like a policy that will encourage even more pilots to fly with their transponders switched off.
MJ
“Thank you. Since we decided a few weeks ago to adopt the leaf as legal tender, we have, of course, all become immensely rich. [...]
"But we have also," continued the management consultant, "run into a small inflation problem on account of the high level of leaf availability, which means that, I gather, the current going rate has something like three deciduous forests buying on ship's peanut." [...]
"So in order to obviate this problem," he continued, "and effectively revalue the leaf, we are about to embark on a massive defoliation campaign, and...er, burn down all the forests. I think you'll all agree that's a sensible move under the circumstances.”
"But we have also," continued the management consultant, "run into a small inflation problem on account of the high level of leaf availability, which means that, I gather, the current going rate has something like three deciduous forests buying on ship's peanut." [...]
"So in order to obviate this problem," he continued, "and effectively revalue the leaf, we are about to embark on a massive defoliation campaign, and...er, burn down all the forests. I think you'll all agree that's a sensible move under the circumstances.”
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: GLASGOW
Posts: 1,289
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Superb Londonblue
There are many that could be related to the airspace philosophy
and
There are many that could be related to the airspace philosophy
Ah, this is obviously some strange usage of the word 'safe' that I wasn't previously aware of.
Human beings, who are almost unique in having the ability to learn from the experience of others, are also remarkable for their apparent disinclination to do so.
I'm having fun with one at the moment - allegedly I climbed into a bit of CTA in speeds and climb rates of which the aeroplane I was flying was incapable, on a sortie where I had no reason to fly that high, whilst mode-S was squawking hex code but not reg. We checked the mode S a few weeks later with the same tower, and they could read reg and hex both - no maintenance done on same box in between.
I pointed out that it probably wasn't me for these reasons, and was subsequently the unhappy recipient of an email suggesting that I was not showing the right attitude and probably needed reporting to CAA for licencing action. Everybody can probably guess, without being told, the tone of my response to that.
I don't dispute that putting big and little aeroplanes in the same place at the same time is a bad thing unless properly controlled, but there's a distinct attitude problem in the airspace allocating community that is as much in need of fixing as anybody's navigation here. Also just possibly the technology isn't quite as good as NATS think it is at detecting these things.
G
I pointed out that it probably wasn't me for these reasons, and was subsequently the unhappy recipient of an email suggesting that I was not showing the right attitude and probably needed reporting to CAA for licencing action. Everybody can probably guess, without being told, the tone of my response to that.
I don't dispute that putting big and little aeroplanes in the same place at the same time is a bad thing unless properly controlled, but there's a distinct attitude problem in the airspace allocating community that is as much in need of fixing as anybody's navigation here. Also just possibly the technology isn't quite as good as NATS think it is at detecting these things.
G
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: USA
Posts: 563
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So they made most of UK airspace Class A, extremely complex, inaccessible to VFR flights and boundaries hard to understand.
And now they are having a go at the pilots?
It's completely embarrassing. We can clearly see what needs simplifying.
Source: SkyDemon
And now they are having a go at the pilots?
It's completely embarrassing. We can clearly see what needs simplifying.
Source: SkyDemon
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 2,118
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I pointed out that it probably wasn't me for these reasons, and was subsequently the unhappy recipient of an email suggesting that I was not showing the right attitude and probably needed reporting to CAA for licencing action. Everybody can probably guess, without being told, the tone of my response to that.
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: USA
Posts: 563
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
At 7500ft actually which what I use to cruise over New York.
We don't even have airspace 'alerts' here. Using the popular UK Skydemon tool there's about a dozen 'issues' I still have ta sort out.
We don't even have airspace 'alerts' here. Using the popular UK Skydemon tool there's about a dozen 'issues' I still have ta sort out.
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
Just do it, SH... I'm sure they'll understand; obviously it's just the entire system that's wrong, not you..
P.s. please post pics of the Typhoons on your wingtips.
P.s. please post pics of the Typhoons on your wingtips.
If you think our airspace is complicated .... have you been to France?
In the good old days they had a very sensible Gallic attitude and no one really minded if one flew through the odd bit of red air ... but now they have AA missiles mounted on the power stations
In the good old days they had a very sensible Gallic attitude and no one really minded if one flew through the odd bit of red air ... but now they have AA missiles mounted on the power stations