Probably a really stupid question
 

I'm a private pilot(VFR) flying my Maule out off a farm strip here in the glens of Angus. I lived for many years and learned to fly in the US and am now flying here in Scotland, I have this nagging question about which way to turn if in the unfortunate (and extremely unlikely)event I am in a mid-air head on situation. I was trained to fly to the right in this situation. Is this a universal "rule" or is this just in the US where I assume it is the natural reaction based on the side of the road they drive on there. Whereas here in the UK I assume instinct would probably be to turn to the left? Or is there no hard and fast rule?

Any ideas

Well I'm going to presume that there are "right of way" regulations in the UK, as we have in Canada, and the US. Obvioulsy, they should be adhered to as best as possible. Generally, in Canada "right" is the right answer in terms of who has the right of way, and which way to go in case of head on conflict.

I concede that in a nation where the cars are driven in the other direction on the road, it could bring about this question for a North American trained pilot. I'm sure someone will be along to remind me that it is us in North America and continental Europe who drive on the wrong side, and what is to be done in the UK.

I think that right of way rules are based to some degree on the seat normally occupied by the pilot, and surprise surprise, it seems to be left seat by convention for planes just about the world over - a lot like the cars which are build the right way across;). I would think therefore that the logic of right of way as it related to visibiliy, would be the same in the UK as the US, but know the rules locally.

If you maintain good awareness of what's going on around you, the risk of mid air is happily low. This can be managed with good airmanship.

Fly with good awareness, and worry less....

pb84,

This is what you are looking for:

A head on!

Pilot DAR,

Yes, a rules-assisted collision!

No, the vehicle must give way (in the UK, Rule 43). The flying machine does not alter its course.

The thing I worry about when I read a post like the OP's is that people come here with their questions, rather than knowing where to go for the authoritative answers...

frontlefthamster - I think most here will know where to go for the answers BUT knowing where to look and finding is a very different scenario. Firstly the "rule book" as it is written by civil servants is so vast that searching in any logical manner is useless. Secondly when you find the required publication then using the search facility will bring such a myriad of possibilities that it is oft necessary to read the damned publication in full. So the sensible pilot will ask for guidance here because, as with most things in life, someone has been there before and can offer a little help as is the way with PPRUNE.

Not really that daft, if you imagine on a taxiway you are essentially taxiing on the RH side, so to overtake OR pass opposite you go onto the "dead" side of the taxiway. In practice most people taxi in the middle and there is very little overtaking, but if, for example, someone had a problem and needed to stop they should pull to the right, thus allowing both opposite direction and following traffic to pass correctly.:ok:

An interesting observation. On a couple of occasions as an FI but passenger touring with experienced PPLs I noticed that, in head-on situations, they turned the wrong way. Therefore, on biennial training flights, I incorporated a simulated (hopefully!) situation where, on the way out to the 'local flying area', the (experienced) trainee is faced with 'an opposite direction aircraft less than 10 seconds away'. I was staggered to find that a disturbingly large proportion turned the wrong way. The realisation on their faces was priceless! These British PPLs included some private owners with many hundreds of hours. They were all very experienced drivers and I put it down to the fact that here in the UK we drive on the left and that that 'instinct' influences survival.

There is ambiguity in practice, if the two aircraft are well separated but apparently head-on, if their tracks are such that a turn to the left is more appropriate.

Obviously this won't be very good if they both do it, but in practice, invariably, one of them spots the other long before the other one spots the first one.

In an imminent head-on you should turn to the right.

The Rules of the Air were derived from the Rules of Shipping, which were dreamt up well before cars were invented......

It took me one minute and ten seconds to google 'air navigation order', download the document, and do a text search for 'right of way'. The sixth mouse click found 'Right of way on the ground', Rule 42, which is immediately followed by Rule 43...

More than a minute! Six mouse clicks! The T W I T T E R generation has an attention span of 15 seconds - there's no chance of anyone under the age of 25 finding that stuff :)

I seem to recall reading that most pilots turn right instinctively and this knowledge was used by fighter pilots to anticipate the break turn that the target would make when it realised it was under fire.

Anyway, weren't the rules of the air mostly from the French?

H

ps Interesting that I couldn't type the name of the social network without it appearing as twitter (hence the spaces). So I guess birds must twitter?

I'm clearly expecting far too much from someone who is, after all, only licensed to be pilot in command of an aeroplane - hardly any responsibility at all... :rolleyes:

Peter... (oh dear, here we go again)...

When would it be 'more appropriate' to act against the rules of the air? Are you aware that if you did so, you would be assuming responsibility for any consequences?

I must comment, though, that the maritime world is much better not only at teaching the rules but standardising knowledge of their application. Carrying that knowledge across, I would say that the way to view the rules of the air concerning collision avoidance is always to assume that a risk of collision will be believed to exist by the pilot of the other aircraft, and act accordingly. Thus Peter's dubious advice is, once again, found wanting...

:eek:

Derek Robinson describes it in "Piece of Cake", but if I remember correctly it was the other way round - the "natural" break was to the left, so if you were doing the shooting you should anticipate that, and if you were doing the breaking, a break to the right might be a good idea.

Re: acting against the rules, surely as PIC your over-riding responsibility is to avoid collision? If the rules help (as they usually will), well that's fine. I can also imagine circumstances (involving cloud, terrain, other aircraft etc) where not following the rules might be a better solution.

Edited to add: unless the collision really is imminent, of course, because then the immediate aircraft-aircraft separation is all you care about.

24Carrot - your memory almost certainly better than mine!

Does the direction of the rotation of the prop come into this? I mean early aircraft turned much more easily one way or the other, depending on the rotation direction.

H

As a pilot you are responsible for the safe conduct of your flight. If you don't know the rules, you shouldn't be flying until you do know. A rumour network is hardly the place to find the answers on something so fundamental as the right of way rules.

Here is a link to the relevant publication. I suggest you read the lot!

http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/33/CAP393.pdf

Whilst I agree pilots should know the rules, IMHO this was a bit harsh, most pilots on this forum are not full time professionals and as such are often not as up speed with the rules and regs as maybe they should be, I would much rather someone who is in this position feel that he can ask rather than being driven away by responses such as this and remaining in ignorance.:=

I'm still doing PPL training, but one of the exercises that my instructor had me doing was practising "emergency avoidance" - ie - a quick entry, maximum rate turn of 90deg to the right (we practised this as 3 seconds). When I changed to a different aircraft we did it again and it felt considerably different.
Is this something that is regularly practised to make sure we are in the habit of turning right, and something that is practised each time we are getting familiar on a new type?

Harsh or not, I take it the OP did pass the UK Air Law exam?

Sorry, I totally disagree, and so might you, if when out flying one day someone turns the same way as you and you collide....

The Rules of the Air are freely available online these days, for all to read.

I've posted a direct link to the CAP393, so what more do you expect? :=

Another poor guy getting a roasting for asking a question.

No, he probably didn't pass a UK air law exam! Nor do most of the visitors to the UK.:ugh:

It so happens that particular rule is the same in FAA land but a lot of rules are not the same.

Perhaps what we need is someone with a well developed sense of humour to make the rules an easier, even entertaining read the way Rod Machado has done for USA students and pilots.

Curling up in bed ar night with the ANO is not my idea of fun.

D.O.

FLH - I am glad I manage to keep you on your toes, old chum :ok:

Gosh I never knew that following some rule absolved you from responsibility for the consequences. That's really useful to know :ok:

Do you, by any chance, work in ATC?

But seriously, did you actually read what I wrote?

No, and yes.

So... What does the team think?

Two aircraft heading towards each other in each pilots one o'clock. Not quite likely to collide but too close for comfort.

Left or right, climb or decend or pull the BRS?

Is this scenario in the ANO? That question is for those who do take it to bed at night.

D.O.

ST,
Yes, I expect he did, and so I presume did you, but with a 100% pass rate? If so, then well done, but I suspect in line with most of us it was not quite that good in which case even YOU do not know ALL the rules and regs 100% and should back off a bit. I suspect it will not be this guy that hits you, but some other pilot who has been put off asking something else by replies like this.:cool:
(Plainly you also never picked up the bit of instructor lore that "THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS A STUPID QUESTION")

rr83,
You may well do this in your general handling test but then never do it again, most checkouts will not include it and some instructors may do it during a 2 yearly flight with an instructor but once you have your PPL it is really up to you how much you practice things like Emergency Breaks, Stalling, Steep turns, PFLs and other manoeuvres that will keep your flying up to scratch.

If you are FLH and the flight manual says Pull the BRS when other traffic is in view, then you must pull the BRS

http://reddogreport.com/wp-content/u...e-in-cheek.jpg

I wonder what happens in practice?

I have a horrible feeling that, in many cases, neither pilot sees anything and (usually) they do not collide. Neither would be the wiser after the event, so who is to say how often this happens.

Otherwise it is entirely reasonable that one pilot sees the problem first, and takes evasive action, to the right or left, depending on how "one o'clock" it was. Now he is changing shape, showing more wing, and a moving target (sorry, that's definitely the wrong word) in the other's windscreen, and is now much more likely to be seen, and the second pilot can evade in the other direction.

I don't have that many hours, but I have been close to other aircraft at least 3-4 times, that I know of, excluding cases when somebody like Farnborough Radar told me to look out. I don't think the other aircraft saw me in any of those cases. Doubtless there were cases where I was the blind one - I wouldn't know.

That's exactly right.

Also, is the "one o'clock" relative to your heading, or relative to your track.

There are no hard rules on this, if you see other traffic at a long distance.

Of course not. Who gives a toss on which coloured paper the Chicago Convention was printed?

But self-preservation would suggest bothering to learn the right-of-way rules.

And from what he posts in the OP he DID, but in the USA and was asking if it was the same here, this thread is entitled and as an instructor I say again THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS A STUPID QUESTION, if you are not 100% sure as here, for whatever the reason, then ask, and THAT was my point with ST.:}

No such thing as a stupid question! absolutely right. two points arise:

1) When instructing potential glider pilots, I like to ask "two gliders head on, what should they do?" various answers are given.
My answer is BOTH turn right. However, in the case of hill soaring, both turn right except the one that can't - because he would hit the hill!

2) Rules of the road: power gives way to gliders (except the power pilot usually isn't looking out, in the real world!) gliders give way to balloons....love that one! And if one of the power pilots is towing up a glider, the other power plane should give way - but don't count on that either!

Junior National Glider competition at Weston on the Green. Properly NOTAM'd
and so forth. I am tugging up a Navy pilot in a ASW 19, observe a twin climbing out of OXFORD "LONDON" AIRPORT heading straight at us.
So I turned right.
The twin turned LEFT!!!!!!
My only option was to dive. The glider on tow hung on, quite sensibly, because if he had come off tow, there would have been two targets for the opposition. When we discussed it in the bar that evening, the Navy pilot said he paid for a 2,000 foot tow, and wanted his money's worth.....cool!

But the same rule applies in the air that applies at sea; if it is bigger than you, it has the right of way!

frontlefthamster,

To preserve life, of course.

No, not a roasting, but a reminder of a pilot's responsibilities - learn the rules before you fly. But is the OP a visitor to UK? Somewhat understandable if so, but that's not the impression I got.

Foxmoth, the right of way rules and lights required a 100% pass when I did my exams. The rest of Air Law perhaps isn't quite so important and no-one can be expected to know all of it; I certainly wouldn't claim to do so. However, all pilots should know where to find the answer to right of way rules - this is totally fundamental stuff! Or do some of us consider it optional? Would anyone here consider driving a car in another country without knowing at least the basic rules on right of way?

I agree that there is no such thing as a stupid question (if you are a student). However, even the OP thought it might be - see the title! I did politely resist the initial temptation to simply reply "YES" (but the website doesn't allow one word answers, in any case).

The answer is in CAP393, that I linked to; all anyone has to do is to download it and read it. The right of way rules have always been the same for at least the forty years that I've been flying.

Peter wrote:

There's no ambiguity in my aircraft. If the aircraft are well separated, then no risk of collision exists, and the rules are redundant. You have to make this assessment from the point of view of the pessimistic pilot of the other aircraft of course; practically, you must assume that he will decide there is a risk of collision at a very early stage.

Halfbaked Boy wrote:

Quite right. And this should be an extremely unusual occasion; not in any way routine. If you reach this situation, then you have probably missed something important.

Peter wrote:

Yes there are. Rule 9 says: 'when two aircraft are converging in the air at approximately the same altitude, the aircraft which has the other on its right shall give way'.

It does not say: 'which has the other on the right of its track'...

Rule 10 says: 'When two aircraft are approaching head-on, or approximately so, in the air and there is a danger of collision, each shall alter its course to the right'.

Nowhere is track mentioned. Both are in the same air mass. Why would you even think it had anything to do with track?

Well, it doesn't, and I don't know why you present this entirely irrelevant allegation (perhaps it's the best you could come up with ;)), but I'll try to explain (again, since you didn't seem to get it last time): if the flight manual tells you what to do, and you don't do it, then you are entirely and singularly responsible for the consequences. I believe, from your last response on this point, that you didn't understand me...

If you are approaching another aircraft head on, or approximately so, and you turn left, and the other pilot turns right, and there is a collision, it will be your fault. The rule told you to turn right, and you didn't.

The rules only work if you assume that the other pilot knows them and is applying them.

This thread started with someone admitting he didn't know them, and later saying he couldn't be bothered to take a moment to find them. He shouldn't have been aviating until he knew them. How many others are out there?

I agree with Mary, there is no such thing as a stupid question. There are, however, stupid ways of finding answers.

Would anyone care to remind us of the number of mid-air collisions and fatalities resulting from them in the UK in very recent years..?

While the OP is probably not technically a visitor he makes it clear he has recently moved here and is flying on his FAA certificate.

My instructor always told me RTFQ.:rolleyes::ok:

When a question raises more questions maybe it is not so stupid.

Chill.

D.O.

D.O.

It will take more than this lot to take the chill off me or my glass of Chablis...

But I don't get your point... Presumably, you are suggesting that the OP had to learn a new set of rules for avoiding aerial collisions when he moved from the US?

Hang on... If you keep editing your post, it makes a meaningful reply a bit of a challenge...

My original post
 

[quoteIf you don't know the rules, you shouldn't be flying until you do know][/quote]

Very interesting indeed, pondering the above reply and reading the rest of the posts, I have come to a few conclusions as follows:
1. Perhaps I should have read the reg’s.

2. I suspect that a fairly large percentage of VFR sport pilots may not know, or have forgotten the codified response to the hypothetical situation I raised.

3. Taking into account No. 2 above, and my gut feeling that most non professional pilots (hobbyists) will default to “what they know” in a high stress situation, my money (and perhaps life) is on them reacting exactly the same way they would if they met an oncoming car head on on a lovely country lane here in the UK, which is steer into the ditch or up the verge and into the hedge ON THE LEFT.

And finally I am overjoyed that I have found such an open and understanding forum for my current and undoubtedly future “stupid questions”. Being the glutton for punishment that I am, my 3 ex wives and their lawyers from both sides of the Atlantic have afforded me a comprehensive sensitivity as to what a real haranguing truly is . Any roasting, condemnations or bollockings I get here will be a walk in the park.

Right, now with that being said, its time to check the weather to see if I’ll be pulling the Maule out of the tractor shed (to the right of the John Deere of course) and go bollox up a few more xwind landings !!!

Happy ,safe flying folks.

D.O.,

Apologies, I skimmed over this:

It's very simple. If they are each seeing traffic in the one o'clock position, the relative bearings should be changing, and there is no risk of collision. They will pass starboard to starboard. This is in the ANO.

This is not necessarily true if either aircraft is manoeuvring towards the other; the rules do not provide for manoeuvring cases.

Again, the maritime world makes much more of the very simple interaction between nav lights and traffic lights. The situation above (green to green) is safe. If you see a red nav light on a constant relative bearing, you must give way ('stop'). If you see a green nav light ditto, you must 'stand on' (maintain course and speed). Why the aviation world has never cottoned on to this is beyond me...

There's an excellent little book called 'The Seaman's Guide to the Rules of the Road', which examines the relevant rules and their interpretations. Sadly, there is no aviator's equivalent.

piperboy,

1. You should have

2. They shouldn't fly

3. I hope I don't meet them as they come off the ferry at Calais or pull out of the hotel car park in Toulouse

I'm glad you're not taking it too badly. Happy landings in the Maule (a lovely aircraft).