BEagle CAP413 says I do not think that this clear and unabiguous statement requires any spin or clarification.

I disagree with your comment that WWW is essentially correct since his case is built on ludicrous assertions for which he has provided no supporting data when challenged.

What you are saying is analagous to someone passing a maths exam by guessing the right answers and you may recall that our school masters were as interested in the integrity of the underpinning data and thinking as they were in the result.

Interestingly, the RAF Flight Information Handbook states:

'A secondary task is to provide a navigational 'training fix' service to pilots at flying training units.'

i.e., to practise the use of D&D without the need for a full Practice Pan call.

The CAP413 interpretation is obviously different to this; it originates from the time a few years ago when the revamped fixing system was introduced and knowledge of areas of coverage and operator proficiency training was needed.

Lost pilots using D&D responsibly are to be commended; dishonest use of a 'training fix' is merely crying 'Wolf!'.

Sorry - but your last sentence has lost me......

"if he won't admit to being lost, what else won't he admit to...?"

Define lost?



If all these pilots will not admit they are lost, why do you think changing the law will persuade them to admit they are lost? If they do admit they are lost what have you achieved? Less calls?
Less pilots blundering on? I dont know, but I wish you would answer the question rather than regreting the "silly" comments. Frankly it would be a bit silly to end up with less calls and more airspace infrigments.

Why doesnt anyone answer these questions?



"It is not a US-style 'Biennial Flight Review', nor should it be termed 'a biennial' as that will lead to ambiguity.

Why does this point keep being made to death. Most of us have been through three UK reviews. Most of us have never done an American Biennial or have any idea what is involved (although I do mine at the same time as my UK biennial). Most of us know full well what is involved. I doubt there is any confusion at all now. It takes place every two years - if you want to call it a "two year trainng flight" thats fine by me. In any event the content isnt so very different - oh and I know you can tecnically fail one, the other you cant - great, but I think we have got to grips with that too. Hang on I am confused because they do a driving test in the US and we do one, now which one am I doing :confused: :confused:



"you'll recognise everything within 15 minutes flying time of base anyway"


You can of course insist on precisely an hour but would you? The FI says something like I think you might like to do a review of navigation, and we need to do three landings, and if its OK I will throw in a PFL en route and a little bit of upper air work. Here are three or four land marks in a local circuit - navigate to them accurately - no GPS on this occasion. An hour and a half tops. You might know the local landmarks but I bet the instructor will still have a reasonable idea if the mark one eyeball is up to speed??

It is as if some of us have a hang up about the word lost.

I think I am just north of Farnborough by about five miles, but in view of the closeness of Heathrow I need to be sure. Can I have a fix please? Are you lost?

Final 3 Greens - I don't have 'data' because unsuprisingly I don't keep a log of all the 121.5 chatter heard on a hazy summer weekend in the UK. But a call every 90 seconds or something in that order is true for certain periods on certain days. 4pm on a hazy Sunday afternoon would be likely. I offer nothing more than anecdotal observation.

People are starting to put it into pre take off briefs that Gaurd will be ignored or turned down on departure as it'll be chocca today. I do the same - its sound airmanship.

I fly light aircraft myself you know. I have about 18000hrs Group A (harking back I know Beags) and will have my own aircraft one of these days.

I've sent a goodly number of students into the skies on their early navexs and they've all been able to confidently use 121.5 so I've probably performed more training fixes and a practice pans than most of you.

I've also been grateful for D&D saving both me and several of my students from being horrible lost. I know that feeling.

Still, aviation is doubling every 15 years, the role of Guard has become more important and so perhaps it is time to look at how it has come to be used by all.

Cheers

WWW

Fuji - getting rid of practice pans without an FI would clean up the airwaves somewhat. Changing training fix to lost wouldn\'t but it would at least be:

a) Honest.

b) Indicative to the CAA of the need to improve training syllabus and maps.

c) Take no more airtime that a proper Lost call. Milliseconds anway.

d) More useful to the LOST person (if you can\'t point to me on the map where you ar then you are lost as there is no such thing as unsure of position) as D&D will have the correct take on the situation.

Any issues regards psychology of talking to D&D need to be addressed during training.

------

Now, how about a debate about raising the minimum currency hours required to keep you license current? I don\'t think the present requirements are enough.

If you do less than 25hrs flying a year I don\'t think you should be allowed to keep you PPL - you\'re likely a danger to other sky users. Perhaps if you have over 500hrs TT this could be reduced but certainly not before.

Cheers

WWW

18,000 hrs Gp A? How old were you when you started flying?

"Fuji - getting rid of practice pans without an FI would clean up the airwaves somewhat. Changing training fix to lost wouldn't but it would at least be:

a) Honest.

b) Indicative to the CAA of the need to improve training syllabus and maps.

c) Take no more airtime that a proper Lost call. Milliseconds anway.

d) More useful to the LOST person (if you can't point to me on the map where you ar then you are lost as there is no such thing as unsure of position) as D&D will have the correct take on the situation.

Any issues regards psychology of talking to D&D need to be addressed during training."



All of that makes a great deal of sense and is a rather different take on the problem. My only arguement would now be do b), d) and the bit about "any issues .. .. .." first, which I think would go a long way to solve the problem.



"If you do less than 25hrs flying a year I don't think you should be allowed to keep you PPL"

Ducks very low:D :D :D :D

Istarted flying when I was 7 months old and got a Tiger Moth for my second birthday, err, ummm, actually I meant 1,800 hours ;)

Cheers

WWW

ps Its a nice day - why aren't you two off flying?!?

Six sector lates :( Time to browse the web, read the newspapers and have breakfast before strapping the mighty Dash to my backside for the rest of the day!

WWW Then why dont you use the word "hypothesise" or a similar caveat, rather than making an assertion, at which stage I will start to take your comments seriously.

I am doing my two yearly annual flight review today or tomorrow (:O Beagle). I do hope the FI doesnt read PPrune - always use a GPS myself, wouldnt have much of a clue where I was without it.

Not wishing to engage in threqd drift, but having done several FAA biennials, the airwork portion was quite similar to the UK experience.

The FAA biennial also includes & hour ground work, revisiting airspace rules and other relevant info - very useful.

There is another thread on the Instructors forum, where someone has accused FI's of being pedants. In terms of phraseology I think BEagle has proved that it may be true!;)

Maybe a way around this situation would be for another frquency to be used for training fixes rather than 121.5. I'm sure the technology is there for D&D to still answer the call, but not have it broadcast on guard. We'd all be happy then.

Time to go flying, I'll try not to get lost!

Pedantry
 

No, its actually the opposite, like calling "sheep." What a good idea.

Why not simply use another frequency for "training" fixes ? Great - and simple - idea.

But while we're at it, why not use another frequency for the airline jock who's spending ages moaning on the Tower frequency about his clearance, or his push-back, or his parking-position etc, when I'm on (by now) extremely bloody short finals and looking for clearance to land ?

Or how about one for the heavy driver who spent ages chatting to Stansted the other day about his crap day, the weather etc ? Good job no-one needed a LARS or anything ... oh, wait a minute, they did ...

Or ..... etc.

What ? You mean it's not true that "ATPL" stands for "All Transmissions Precise (and) Legal" ?

I'm in a state of shock ...

FF :ok:

Been away for a few days but I note the same argument is still going round and round!

The main issue seems to be not one of frequency clutter but of a perceived lack of integrity of a student pilot who might wish to confirm his position by using an established procedure!

I flew 24 sectors over the last three days. We heard one practice PAN from a Coventry student who correctly used the facility for a position fix from D&D. However, on every sector we heard a number of airline pilots incorrectly calling on 121.5, mostly inadvertent, some of them answered by other pilots, some of them by D&D.

However, the most blatant, almost unbelievable example of misuse we heard occurred this morning. A "Speedbird" callsign (I have the flight number) made contact on 121.5 then called a company callsign over to 123.45.

This goes against the CAA mandate (NOTAM'ed) that the latter frequency is NOT to be used in UK airspace for air to air informal use as it is allocated to at least one authorised user.

We followed them over to that frequency out of curiosity and were amazed and apalled to hear a two way chat about where someone's wife was going today (it was Amsterdam, apparently).

The integrity of students is the least of our worries if so-called professionals are doing this sort of thing. :rolleyes:

BTW Beagle, Don't forget that the RAF's training procedures were designed for the use of 243.0 MHz, not 121.5, so it is irrelevant to the argument!

"Final 3 Greens - I don't have 'data' because unsuprisingly I don't keep a log of all the 121.5 chatter heard on a hazy summer weekend in the UK. But a call every 90 seconds or something in that order is true for certain periods on certain days. 4pm on a hazy Sunday afternoon would be likely. I offer nothing more than anecdotal observation."

WWW has made his point and accepted he over cooked the data. However as SkyTorque has now said together with the experience of a couple of others of us I think we are left wondering how serious this problem really is.

Maybe there are the very odd occasions when the weather starts as good VMC, it is a weekend so more are flying and unexpectedly and un-forecast detiriates. Maybe it is on those odd occasions D and D is swamped.

I wonder, given all the comment, and now some data, whether WWW will agree he may have slightly lost his way on this occasion and withdraw his letter asking to have the legislation changed and withdraw his report to CHIRP?

After all if you want us all to own up when we are lost so :D .. .. ..

I've been a way for a few days, and haven't time to do more than skim the myriad posts.

But one thing still puzzles me. WHY do people not want to tell D & D they're lost?

Yes, the meaning of lost can vary, depending on the circumstances. Up in North Wales, heading west, no idea exactly where I am as can see nothing but hills, but I'll know when I reach the coast and have some decent ground features. Not lost. Five miles from Heathrow and don't know really precisely where I am. Lost.

And in that second case, please explain in words of one syllable just why you wouldn't want to get on the radio and say so?

.....Because I'd pull the GPS from my bag.......;)

All this talk of VDF fixes seems very WW2 to me. Why don't all pilots have a £100 GPS, and why doesn't the syllabus change to allow instructors to show students how to take a GPS fix, and plot the position on a chart?

"But one thing still puzzles me. WHY do people not want to tell D & D they're lost?"

My suggestion previously was:

"Why are the greater majority less happy to admit mistakes? Perhaps it says something about our society when in many work places admission of mistakes is seen as a weakness or is it society has just become less tolerant of small mistakes. (A speeding ticket for being 4 mph over the limit for maybe only a few hundred yards of a 30 mph zone). Perhaps our reaction to these pressures is that we resist admitting we are wrong?

I think safety has to recognise the human condition. Not a lot is to be gained by saying pilots should own up to being lost if the evidence is they are more likely to blunder on rather than admit their mistake. (and I use the word "if" carefully because I have no evidence to support my contention). "


"Yes, the meaning of lost can vary"

That was exactly my point which you have illustrated so well. One pilot's definition of lost in a given situation may be different from anothers. Someone else suggested "lost" means you cant point to precisely where you are on the map. I am not sure most of us would agree with that?

No one has said it is right to lie. No one has said they will not call D & D for aid if they are lost.

All done using words of one syllable.

One cannot demand a change in regulations or make tabloid journalist type claims of a flight safety issue based upon anecdotal evidence. What next. Do we encourage our children to smoke because my great-uncle smoked fifty a day and lived until he was a hundred and ten? Do we ground an airline because one muppet gets through a command course? Of course not. Definitely the solution is technology. GPS is getting better and just needs to be embraced by some regulators, and it wasn't that long ago when you had five people on the flight deck. Voice frequency clutter will be less of an issue if most communications are via datalink, give it time.

Interesting to see this subject has been covered in September's edition of a popular magazine beginning with P (in case that counts as advertsing:O )

It is interesting that the "expert" FIs seem to support practising calls to D and D and dont get "hung up" at all about admissions of being lost. Whilst I would say this, I thought they have the balance exactly right.

It still puzzles me why some of us seem to have this huge thing about pilots saying they are "lost". You call D and D either because you are lost, a bit lost, or want a training fix. I suspect it is all pretty irrelevant to them, they tell you where you are, and point you in the right direction if you need that as well.

Well said, Fuji. Long may that continue.

And long may airline pilots learn how to operate their radios correctly, too. :hmm:

Say again s l o w l y

Back after a while, just read your post about the DA40 avionics.

I'd say a 2 day course should be mandatory not only for the more integrated "glass cockpits" but for anything as complex as a GNS430/530/KLN94 etc.

The glass cockpit just integrates the stuff into one display unit.

I suppose that nothing happens because people learn it as they go along. That's what I did, but it wasted a lot of time.

I did a Honeywell GPS training course once but very little of it rubbed off, because the instructor just worked through the features, rather than how to use them for real IFR flight. And some of it one isn't ever likely to use, e.g. the specific features for automated sequencing along a GPS approach, or flying back course localisers.

These debates will run and run, because GPS can never be included in the 45hr PPL.

Wow what a lot has been said about this... one of the oldest flying dits going. I've been involved in aviation for 30yrs, and it was one of the first stories I was told... along with the pilot on a solo navex who taxied out of sight behind the hangar, and watching his stop-watch reported back in the radio over each turning point on time... then taxied back into dispersal.

It's not necessarily always for training pilots. Over on the Fl*er forums, D&D is actively soliciting practice pans and training fixes to help bed down a new guy at their end.
http://forums.flyer.co.uk/viewtopic.php?t=17053

Too many people using a GPS and not getting lost, evidently :O :O :O

Sorry been a long day , on the one hand WWW complaining about TF by PPL and on the other D&D pleading for work!

What is a mere mortal PPL to do ?

Why is WWW so vexed when D&D are chilled!

:confused:

A nice, simple answer.

D&D say they want MORE traffic for their trainees to practice with. They also say they get an average of fewer than 9 training fixes/practice pans a day. They should know - they keep the statistics.

It's just a pity that all 9 come in a rush and in Wales, I suppose.

And how many inadvertent calls, on the wrong box, from First Officers? :suspect:

On behalf of all F/O's, that should read "how many times has the Captain stuffed it.";)