Microlight pilot Red Arrows near-miss
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Far flung shores
Posts: 202
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Microlight pilot Red Arrows near-miss
From: http://www.thisisbrighton.co.uk
Pilot's Red Arrows near-miss
by Sam Thomson
A microlight pilot taking the scenic route drifted into the flight path of the Red Arrows display team.
Alexander Stevenson's tiny craft was spotted seconds before the famous aerobatic flight prepared to roar across the sky.
Thousands of spectators at the Airbourne Festival on Eastbourne seafront watched as the microlight was forced to fly out of the danger zone.
The Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) launched an investigation following the near-miss in August last year.
Bank clerk Stevenson, 26, was yesterday fined after admitting flying within the restricted area.
Roderick James, representing the CAA, told Eastbourne magistrates how event organisers spotted the light aircraft seconds before the Red Arrows were due to launch into their 500mph display.
He said: "The RAF pilot had been in a holding area inside the restricted zone and was just about to leave when he was alerted to the fact there was another aircraft in the display area."
He said although the flying restrictions were temporary, all pilots were legally required to read the Notices To Airmen (NOTAMS), which detail no-go areas, before taking off.
Ray Blount, defending, said Stevenson, from Ringwood, Hampshire, and his father, Michael, had been flying from Kent to Wiltshire when they decided to change course to admire the scenery.
He said: "They were originally going to fly cross-country on a route that took them near the Gatwick area.
"As they got towards Sussex they thought, because it was a beautiful day, they would change their route across the coast.
"They had not checked the NOTAMS for that area and did not know the air show was on."
Imposing the fine, Sally Wallace, chairwoman of the bench, said: "I'm sure you are well aware if you change your flight plan you are supposed to make every possible effort to clear the route and make sure you are not going to be infringing any restrictions."
After the hearing, Stevenson said: "I have learnt my lesson and I will never make the same mistake again."
Their air show, which took place in August last year, attracted 650,000 people to Eastbourne.
Event organisers Eastbourne Borough Council said the incident caused a "small delay" and every precaution was being taken to ensure this year's show runs to plan.
A spokeswoman said: "We remind pilots of small aircraft to ensure they operate within the normal safety procedures."
Stevenson, of College Road, admitted flying below 5,000ft above sea level in a restricted area, at Eastbourne Magistrates' Court.
He was fined £250 and ordered to pay £350 costs for creating a "potential danger".
by Sam Thomson
A microlight pilot taking the scenic route drifted into the flight path of the Red Arrows display team.
Alexander Stevenson's tiny craft was spotted seconds before the famous aerobatic flight prepared to roar across the sky.
Thousands of spectators at the Airbourne Festival on Eastbourne seafront watched as the microlight was forced to fly out of the danger zone.
The Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) launched an investigation following the near-miss in August last year.
Bank clerk Stevenson, 26, was yesterday fined after admitting flying within the restricted area.
Roderick James, representing the CAA, told Eastbourne magistrates how event organisers spotted the light aircraft seconds before the Red Arrows were due to launch into their 500mph display.
He said: "The RAF pilot had been in a holding area inside the restricted zone and was just about to leave when he was alerted to the fact there was another aircraft in the display area."
He said although the flying restrictions were temporary, all pilots were legally required to read the Notices To Airmen (NOTAMS), which detail no-go areas, before taking off.
Ray Blount, defending, said Stevenson, from Ringwood, Hampshire, and his father, Michael, had been flying from Kent to Wiltshire when they decided to change course to admire the scenery.
He said: "They were originally going to fly cross-country on a route that took them near the Gatwick area.
"As they got towards Sussex they thought, because it was a beautiful day, they would change their route across the coast.
"They had not checked the NOTAMS for that area and did not know the air show was on."
Imposing the fine, Sally Wallace, chairwoman of the bench, said: "I'm sure you are well aware if you change your flight plan you are supposed to make every possible effort to clear the route and make sure you are not going to be infringing any restrictions."
After the hearing, Stevenson said: "I have learnt my lesson and I will never make the same mistake again."
Their air show, which took place in August last year, attracted 650,000 people to Eastbourne.
Event organisers Eastbourne Borough Council said the incident caused a "small delay" and every precaution was being taken to ensure this year's show runs to plan.
A spokeswoman said: "We remind pilots of small aircraft to ensure they operate within the normal safety procedures."
Stevenson, of College Road, admitted flying below 5,000ft above sea level in a restricted area, at Eastbourne Magistrates' Court.
He was fined £250 and ordered to pay £350 costs for creating a "potential danger".
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Surrey, UK.
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
6th August 2002 was when the new AIS NOTAM system came online.
I wonder why he didn't use that as his defence.
Only now (April 2003) are we again able to reliably get NOTAM information.
Although you might think he would have seen 650,000 people in Eastbourne.
I wonder why he didn't use that as his defence.
Only now (April 2003) are we again able to reliably get NOTAM information.
Although you might think he would have seen 650,000 people in Eastbourne.
Moderator
Join Date: Jul 1997
Location: Europe
Posts: 3,228
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And the counter prosecution case might be that he could have used the freephone number which has been available for years ??
There are two available.
One which is a recorded message giving airspace upgrade information and temporary Restricted Area information.
0500 354802
And one which will put you through to a human where you can get a more specific brief on the same.
0800 515544
Either would have made this pilot aware of the display and the airspace affected.
Both are detailed in GA Safety Sense leaflet 18A Military Low Flying published in 2000 (the previous version was no doubt published a lot earlier).
GA Safety Sense Leaflet 18A
The pilot admitted that he had learned his lesson and, by inference, that his airmanship was not what it might have been.
Let's not try and blame the system but for once let the pilot take responsibility for his actions. He will be a better pilot for the experience and all are fortunate that the incident did not have far reaching consequences for himself, the Red Arrows, and the public.
There are two available.
One which is a recorded message giving airspace upgrade information and temporary Restricted Area information.
0500 354802
And one which will put you through to a human where you can get a more specific brief on the same.
0800 515544
Either would have made this pilot aware of the display and the airspace affected.
Both are detailed in GA Safety Sense leaflet 18A Military Low Flying published in 2000 (the previous version was no doubt published a lot earlier).
GA Safety Sense Leaflet 18A
The pilot admitted that he had learned his lesson and, by inference, that his airmanship was not what it might have been.
Let's not try and blame the system but for once let the pilot take responsibility for his actions. He will be a better pilot for the experience and all are fortunate that the incident did not have far reaching consequences for himself, the Red Arrows, and the public.
Why do it if it's not fun?
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Bournemouth
Posts: 4,779
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
PPRuNe Radar,
I understand what you're saying, and I don't disagree with any of it. But I think the point which rustle is trying to make is that the change to the Notams system did cause safety problems, and although every effort has been made to resolve these problems, no one from any official body has so far admitted that any of the problems were safety-related.
Of course this pilot should have made every effort to obtain Notams before his flight (or his change of route). So should every other pilot who stopped reading Notams when the new system was introduced. Many people have admitted falling into this category - and although the responsibility falls firmly on the shoulders of the pilots concerned, it would be nice to hear someone admit that the skies were less safe after the introduction of the Notams system, for whatever reason.
Anyway, back to the case in hand - glad that everything worked out ok. The fact that the microlight was spotted shows the professionalism of these guys - how many of us, flying much slower aircraft, have trouble spotting a lone microlight pilot, let alone spotting him somewhere we're not expecing him to be? Well done to everyone concerned.
FFF
---------------
I understand what you're saying, and I don't disagree with any of it. But I think the point which rustle is trying to make is that the change to the Notams system did cause safety problems, and although every effort has been made to resolve these problems, no one from any official body has so far admitted that any of the problems were safety-related.
Of course this pilot should have made every effort to obtain Notams before his flight (or his change of route). So should every other pilot who stopped reading Notams when the new system was introduced. Many people have admitted falling into this category - and although the responsibility falls firmly on the shoulders of the pilots concerned, it would be nice to hear someone admit that the skies were less safe after the introduction of the Notams system, for whatever reason.
Anyway, back to the case in hand - glad that everything worked out ok. The fact that the microlight was spotted shows the professionalism of these guys - how many of us, flying much slower aircraft, have trouble spotting a lone microlight pilot, let alone spotting him somewhere we're not expecing him to be? Well done to everyone concerned.
FFF
---------------
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Surrey, UK.
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"Let's not try and blame the system but for once let the pilot take responsibility for his actions."
Not blaming the system, guv.
More cases are won/lost on smaller technicalities than this.
Maybe his "narrow route brief" was too narrow
The key lesson, I would have thought, is that ALL pilots realise the importance of checking NOTAMs, not only for where they have planned to fly, but where they might end up flying - and a "narrow route brief" might not be the best instrument to achieve this...
This thread originally started in "Rumours and News" and not "Private Flying"
Not blaming the system, guv.
More cases are won/lost on smaller technicalities than this.
Maybe his "narrow route brief" was too narrow
The key lesson, I would have thought, is that ALL pilots realise the importance of checking NOTAMs, not only for where they have planned to fly, but where they might end up flying - and a "narrow route brief" might not be the best instrument to achieve this...
This thread originally started in "Rumours and News" and not "Private Flying"
I recall an incident, later in the same month, when I did check the NOTAMS, failed to see in 30+ pages of largely irrelevant text an airshow going on and was only saved later from my own severe embarrassement by an early radio call to an airfield en-route, which was holding said airshow. So, I think that the defence of the NOTAM system chaos would be useable - if he'd tried to check the NOTAMS and failed to spot the report.
Notwithstanding that, it would appear from this that he didn't check NOTAMS, and didn't make any radio calls to local services which would have alerted him to the show going on.
I do ask myself however if prosecuting somebody who made a genuine mistake, has admitted to it, and says that they've learned from it is either sensible or consistent with the "no blame" philosophy we are supposed to try and operate in civil aviation.
G
N.B. On a purely technical point, this was reported elsewhere as the aircraft type being a Pulsar, which is a homebuilt light aircraft, not a microlight. Credit where it's due
Notwithstanding that, it would appear from this that he didn't check NOTAMS, and didn't make any radio calls to local services which would have alerted him to the show going on.
I do ask myself however if prosecuting somebody who made a genuine mistake, has admitted to it, and says that they've learned from it is either sensible or consistent with the "no blame" philosophy we are supposed to try and operate in civil aviation.
G
N.B. On a purely technical point, this was reported elsewhere as the aircraft type being a Pulsar, which is a homebuilt light aircraft, not a microlight. Credit where it's due
Last edited by Genghis the Engineer; 17th Apr 2003 at 00:21.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Spanish Riviera
Posts: 637
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
OK, shoot me down. In my opinion ignorance is no defence. We all work (and pay) for the privileges of our various licenses. There are certain things we are required, by law, to ensure. Airworthiness, aircrew fitness, NOTAMS etc etc....
If we do not personally ensure these aspects, we are failing in meeting our responsibilities. Yes, AIS may also have failed, but an individual cannot use this as a counter-argument.
If we do not personally ensure these aspects, we are failing in meeting our responsibilities. Yes, AIS may also have failed, but an individual cannot use this as a counter-argument.
You make this sound like an academic argument. Somebody will get killed. Red Arrows cut short a practice at Holbeach last week because a number of microlights infringed the TRA. I don't dispute their right to fly in unrestricted airspace but this shows lack of discipline and poor training.
This is not a legal argument. The TRA is there for a very good reason. Let's not bandy words about " technicalities"; these people are breaking the law.
We all quibble about over regulation but there are quite clearly pilots out there who are a flight safety hazard; no argument.
[Edited to register a vested interest and a few beers}
This is not a legal argument. The TRA is there for a very good reason. Let's not bandy words about " technicalities"; these people are breaking the law.
We all quibble about over regulation but there are quite clearly pilots out there who are a flight safety hazard; no argument.
[Edited to register a vested interest and a few beers}
Last edited by Megaton; 17th Apr 2003 at 03:06.
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Surrey, UK.
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not a "shoot down" as such, I gave them up in October 2002, but the reason we have CHIRP, MORs, etc is because things don't always turn out as "expected".
Ignorance is no excuse, agreed.
However,
With the cutover to the new NOTAM systems there were problems. Fact. Acknowledged by AIS, NATS and CAA.
Someone diligently relying on "the system" to give them the information they required could easily have been mislead (or worse, completely uninformed) about the air-display times and/or location.
To expect pilots, no matter how diligent, to telephone and check NOTAMs after they have pre-briefed from the State's AIS site is näive and not "real world".
The fault, if any, is with the pilot for not talking to 124.6 and checking the NOTAMS enroute once the decision to re-route was made.
If there were no issues with the briefing system, why have NATS spent >£100K and 8 months fixing it?
Ignorance is no excuse, agreed.
However,
With the cutover to the new NOTAM systems there were problems. Fact. Acknowledged by AIS, NATS and CAA.
Someone diligently relying on "the system" to give them the information they required could easily have been mislead (or worse, completely uninformed) about the air-display times and/or location.
To expect pilots, no matter how diligent, to telephone and check NOTAMs after they have pre-briefed from the State's AIS site is näive and not "real world".
The fault, if any, is with the pilot for not talking to 124.6 and checking the NOTAMS enroute once the decision to re-route was made.
If there were no issues with the briefing system, why have NATS spent >£100K and 8 months fixing it?
Red Arrows diplays and practice displays do not suddenly appear. Certainly not before somebody gets airborne.
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Surrey, UK.
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ham Phisted "Red Arrows diplays and practice displays do not suddenly appear. Certainly not before somebody gets airborne."
No-one here has said they do.
What I have suggested is that where previously the whole FIR NOTAM brief was available nearly everywhere, this pilot may have briefed his planned route and then changed his mind.
Re-read what has been said, and tell me I'm wrong.
BTW, I did a quick PPRuNe search and found that you've never actually contributed to any of the NOTAM discussions before, so if you have a moment please have a read of these and see how wonderful it was:
http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthr...threadid=80805
http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthr...threadid=81901
http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthr...threadid=78771
http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthr...threadid=81663
http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthr...threadid=81582
http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthr...threadid=77242
http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthr...threadid=75945
http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthr...threadid=66083
http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthr...threadid=69630
http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthr...threadid=71660
http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthr...threadid=63902
http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthr...threadid=69506
http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthr...threadid=64873
No-one here has said they do.
What I have suggested is that where previously the whole FIR NOTAM brief was available nearly everywhere, this pilot may have briefed his planned route and then changed his mind.
Re-read what has been said, and tell me I'm wrong.
BTW, I did a quick PPRuNe search and found that you've never actually contributed to any of the NOTAM discussions before, so if you have a moment please have a read of these and see how wonderful it was:
http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthr...threadid=80805
http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthr...threadid=81901
http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthr...threadid=78771
http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthr...threadid=81663
http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthr...threadid=81582
http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthr...threadid=77242
http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthr...threadid=75945
http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthr...threadid=66083
http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthr...threadid=69630
http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthr...threadid=71660
http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthr...threadid=63902
http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthr...threadid=69506
http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthr...threadid=64873
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: North Uist, Outer Hebrides
Posts: 58
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I was involved in the organising of another Air Display some years back. During the course of the day, and despite the event being NOTAM'd months in advance, and despite the fact that there were thousands of people on the ground, and 10-15 aircraft parked on an otherwise disused airfield, 2 light aircraft flew straight through the display causing an RAF Hawk and a civvie Mustang to break off from their displays.
Unfortunately for the 2 pilots involved, a CAA man was there...
He managed to trace one of them by calling a nearby airfield where his mate worked, and he got the aircraft followed on radar.
Not sure if they got taken to court, as there wasnt any TR airspace in force, but I think they certainly got their knuckles rapped for poor flight planning.
Unfortunately for the 2 pilots involved, a CAA man was there...
He managed to trace one of them by calling a nearby airfield where his mate worked, and he got the aircraft followed on radar.Not sure if they got taken to court, as there wasnt any TR airspace in force, but I think they certainly got their knuckles rapped for poor flight planning.
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Savannah GA & Portsmouth UK
Posts: 1,784
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Rustle
The Manager of UK AIS may be on holiday but he's watching you!
He points out that the new website went live on 19 August last year. Airbourne took place on 15-18 August with the Reds scheduled to display on 15-17 August.
6 August was when ADIMS went live, not when the website went live. The old A8's were still available when this flight took place.
Mike
The Manager of UK AIS may be on holiday but he's watching you!
He points out that the new website went live on 19 August last year. Airbourne took place on 15-18 August with the Reds scheduled to display on 15-17 August.
6 August was when ADIMS went live, not when the website went live. The old A8's were still available when this flight took place.
Mike
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Surrey, UK.
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Cheers Mike (and Phil) 
Guess that answers this: I wonder why he didn't use that as his defence
Lucky I only suggested and used words like might instead of definitives like some of the other posters
Guess that answers this: I wonder why he didn't use that as his defence
Lucky I only suggested and used words like might instead of definitives like some of the other posters
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 2,410
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Rustle, darling,
We all know that the entire AIS/Notam saga is very close to your heart. I and I am sure many others are very grateful for the time and effort you and your confreres made to contribute to the improvements that have made the site into the useable format that it has today.
However with all due respect I think that you are now barking up the wrong tree.
At any time you could ring the friendly folk from the briefing room and they would tell you exactly what was going on and which NOTAMs were active,
The pilot was wrong and he has accepted that.
To suggest to claim that it was somebody else's fault would have been a bit of b*ll*x.
The fine and costs seem to have been a small price to pay for the transgression made, a wise lesson learned.
FD
PS: Don't think you are entirely fair on HF for stating that he would not have known what was going on re the AIS just because he did not contribute to the threads. After all some people have a life outside PPRuNe and not the compulsion to be as prolific on here as you (and I!)
We all know that the entire AIS/Notam saga is very close to your heart. I and I am sure many others are very grateful for the time and effort you and your confreres made to contribute to the improvements that have made the site into the useable format that it has today.
However with all due respect I think that you are now barking up the wrong tree.
At any time you could ring the friendly folk from the briefing room and they would tell you exactly what was going on and which NOTAMs were active,
The pilot was wrong and he has accepted that.
To suggest to claim that it was somebody else's fault would have been a bit of b*ll*x.
The fine and costs seem to have been a small price to pay for the transgression made, a wise lesson learned.
FD
PS: Don't think you are entirely fair on HF for stating that he would not have known what was going on re the AIS just because he did not contribute to the threads. After all some people have a life outside PPRuNe and not the compulsion to be as prolific on here as you (and I!)
And one can actually read a thread without having to contribute. (Cheap defence since I'm unlikely to read any threads which contain the phrase AIS!)
aceatco, retired
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: one airshow or another
Posts: 1,431
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Pilots have been busting display airspace since time immemorial and trying to link it to the relatively recent AIS troubles, however dear to your heart, rustle, as FD says, is barking up the wrong tree.
I was involved in a bust by a light a/c of a Reds' display at Henlow several years ago (not sure if it was a TRA in those days.) Once the intruder was seen to be leaving the area (I was on radar) the Reds ran in, only for the intruder to turn round and come back!
I'm involved in several special events in the course of the year and we go out of our way to publicise them, both through offical channels and directly with adjacent airfields. It still doesn't work, sigh.
A balloon lifted off just north of Old Warden last year with a Spitfire displaying. The balloon had a very famous name on it!!
I imagine the passengers appreciated the look of the Spit they must have got.
I was involved in a bust by a light a/c of a Reds' display at Henlow several years ago (not sure if it was a TRA in those days.) Once the intruder was seen to be leaving the area (I was on radar) the Reds ran in, only for the intruder to turn round and come back!
I'm involved in several special events in the course of the year and we go out of our way to publicise them, both through offical channels and directly with adjacent airfields. It still doesn't work, sigh.
A balloon lifted off just north of Old Warden last year with a Spitfire displaying. The balloon had a very famous name on it!!
I imagine the passengers appreciated the look of the Spit they must have got.
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 5,197
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The pilot made a mistake, admitted it and learned an embarrassing lesson. A stiff warning letter or a 'no tea and biscuits' meeting with the CAA would have been sufficient. As Genghis said earlier, prosecuting him was OTT.
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Bletchley
Posts: 101
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Microlight pilot Red Arrows near miss
I picked up on this thread earlier in the day - the NOTAM system was working, the information was also available on two seperate Mauve AICs, one listed Jet Formation Displays, the other one specically referred to the event at Eastbourne. Lets all take a lesson from this and be a bit more diligent in our pre-flight planning - as previously mentioned sooner or later someone is going to get hurt
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: North Uist, Outer Hebrides
Posts: 58
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Heliport,
Sorry, but you're wrong here. Prosecution is always the last resort, but a TRA is just that - Restricted airspace! It's there for a reason. If the pilot had flown through any Nuclear Restricted area, or firing range, or weapons area, he would also have been prosecuted. Same as he would have been if he had flown from North to South across the London CTR
Just imagine if the Microlight pilot flying along the coast had actually collided with the 9 RAFAT Hawks in the middle of the display! Nine Hawks into a crowd of 100,000 spectators would definately have made the news that night.
I think he got what he deserved..
FYI, he was one of about 5 aircraft who flew through the display, unfortunately, he was unlucky cos he got caught!
Sorry, but you're wrong here. Prosecution is always the last resort, but a TRA is just that - Restricted airspace! It's there for a reason. If the pilot had flown through any Nuclear Restricted area, or firing range, or weapons area, he would also have been prosecuted. Same as he would have been if he had flown from North to South across the London CTR
Just imagine if the Microlight pilot flying along the coast had actually collided with the 9 RAFAT Hawks in the middle of the display! Nine Hawks into a crowd of 100,000 spectators would definately have made the news that night.
I think he got what he deserved..
FYI, he was one of about 5 aircraft who flew through the display, unfortunately, he was unlucky cos he got caught!