PPRuNe Forums - Rough reception at Popham!

Page 6 of 6

« First

Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page

PPRuNe Forums (https://www.pprune.org/)

- Private Flying (https://www.pprune.org/private-flying-63/)

- - Rough reception at Popham! (https://www.pprune.org/private-flying/505275-rough-reception-popham.html)

mad_jock

18th Jan 2013 10:42

How about getting rid of the TLA's and just name it Pophams Airfield Information Service.

Quote:

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

To be honest some form of compentcy check would be a good thing.

And as the digital recording of the frequency is relatively cheap and easy these days maybe htat would also be the way forward.

And BTW I also think that the pilot side of things need changed as well so that there is some form of panel which un acceptable behaviour can be forward to.

Fuji Abound

18th Jan 2013 10:43

Quote:

WITHOUT CHARGE!! Are you having a giraffe!!??!!

You are right - a moment of weakness, it must have been the wine.

Next I will be suggesting the CAA freeze all charges given the present economic climate.

flybymike

18th Jan 2013 11:17

Quote:

And BTW I also think that the pilot side of things need changed as well so that there is some form of panel which un acceptable behaviour can be forward to.

I say Jock old chap, what a frightfully spiffing idea. We could have the gentleman pilot's club where any transgression results in an interview with the committee and a dishonourable discharge. ;)

2 sheds

18th Jan 2013 11:32

chevvron:

Quote:

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.

The UK adopts the ICAO definition of ATS and does not include AGCS as an Air Traffic Service. The operator should use precise terminology and not this regrettable slang.

2 s

Flyingmac

18th Jan 2013 12:08

So. This guy turned onto final ahead of a Pietenpol that was too far out to be inconvenienced, endangered or hindered in any way?

As I read it, the Pietenpol trundled on down final and landed on a clear runway. No eggs broken. Hardly worth five or six pages.

Talkdownman

18th Jan 2013 12:54

Quote:

Originally Posted by chevvron

AGCS is a type of Air Traffic Service along with ATC and FIS

CAP452 states that AGCS is not viewed as a type of Air Traffic Service:

Quote:

Originally Posted by CAP452

Air Ground Communications Service (AGCS) is a service provided to pilots at specific UK at aerodromes. However, it is not viewed by the UK as an Air Traffic Service because it does not include an alerting service as part of its content.

As an AGCS Examiner you should be thoroughly familiar with CAP452 and therefore know that... :=

So AGCS is not ATC nor ATS so why not call it 'AGCS'? What could be simpler? Why muddy the 'already-muddied' waters even further?

dont overfil

18th Jan 2013 13:32

I must say I am amazed at the casual response OscarZulu has offered the forum after his initial lambasting of Popham Radio.

Quote:

over a scratchy radio above a screening 2-stroke,

If OscarZulu had simply reported. "Have AC on final in sight." it would have allowed CT to relax.

Then again of he had tried again to get a response to his initial call. Or if he had joined overhead. You get the drift.

Some of the airmanship I have witnessed as an AG operator has been absolutely shocking. Two VERY near mid air collisions has made me nervous of non standard joins. Probably CT feels the same.

D.O.

All times are GMT. The time now is 23:18.

Page 6 of 6

« First

Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page