|
The times I have used Farnborough, they have sometimes be protective of "their" even though they didn't really own it. I have been turned but then just left to my own navigation. If they get to own the airspace, I can see VFR transits being more difficult than from Solent. This is going to cause mid-air collisions by forcing VFR traffic into ever smaller rat-runs or choke-points. Maybe someone should count the number of infant schools, puppy farms, hospitals, and the like under the choke-points and ask the question what will happen when two aircraft collide and land on a school full of children, then give that to the Daily Wail.
The document they present is factually incorrect. If you look at the figures for movements at Bournemouth, they must be counting only scheduled traffic, not the huge number of IFR movements due to private flights and training by the flying schools. Now, if someone deliberately or otherwise gives incorrect information to gain advantage, then the application should be thrown out. |
Hmmm, ceding a big chunk of the Odiham ATZ (never mind the MATZ) to Class D, and putting SIDs and STARs straight through a HIRTA that extends to 10,500 feet? I can't see the MoD or the CAA agreeing to that.
|
To be honest now with this ATCOCAS pish you might as well be in class D at least the controller can let you visually separate yourself from traffic. What Farnborough are trying to get is the authority to hold/delay other traffic to give preference to their own movements. |
I blame it all on TCAS.
Farnborough are trying to create a 'known traffic' environment in order to avoid pilots and controllers having to fill out endless reports due to TCAS RAs. Every RA generated, all parties concerned have to fill in a report you see, whereas prior to TCAS, the controller gave traffic information or avoiding action and everybody was happy. Although TCAS has its uses in class G, it's very annoying (and potentially dangerous) when you pass details of a non transponder aircraft to an aircraft with TCAS, then the aircraft with TCAS gets an RA from other traffic and climbs or descends straight at the non-squawker!! |
Thankfully our TCAS doesn't give RA's. I look at it and decide what action to take so no reports need generating.
The annoying thing is GA pilots who have a transponder equipped aircraft but choose to use it on Mode A only, not C. Some say: "But that's what my (200 hour TT) instructor told me to do...!" |
The annoying thing is GA pilots who have a transponder equipped aircraft but choose to use it on Mode A only, not C. Some say: "But that's what my (200 hour TT) instructor told me to do...!" There are also those of us that leave the transponder off entirely.. and for good reason. Somehow we're still alive. ;) |
There are also those of us that leave the transponder off entirely.. and for good reason. Somehow we're still alive. MJ :confused: |
Originally Posted by The500man
There are also those of us that leave the transponder off entirely.. and for good reason. Somehow we're still alive. ;)
|
When not flying predominantly straight and level. Think of the poor controller trying to pass traffic information to other aircraft.
The idea some have that if they are not in receipt of a radio service and using a transponder that they will have a collision is slightly ridiculous. Class G isn't a known traffic environment and for GA's sake let's hope it stays that way. |
When not flying predominantly straight and level. Think of the poor controller trying to pass traffic information to other aircraft. MJ |
That's not a good reason!
|
Think it through guys. What kind of flying activity are you involved in that you don't want anyone to see?:suspect: MJ |
Quite so. What's it to you/us anyway? Squawking is not just for a "known traffic environment".
Let the radar jockeys do what they're paid for - they can always ignore you when they see you are manoeuvring, or outside their area of interest - but they might still want to factor your presence into their decision making - and why not? Also, the PowerFLARM and TCAS users can be alerted to you if necessary, which is a bonus to you as well as to them as you say. Even the best lookout might not be sufficient, as quite a few people have unfortunately found out over the years. As a civil operator then if you have a xpdr I can see no good reason not to use it to its fullest extent. Stack the decks in everybody's favour. |
Couldn't agree more. Furthermore, if you're "constant changing of direction" etc. involves aerobatics, why not squawk 7004. Then at least every radar controller around will KNOW what you're doing and provide appropriate separation/traffic info to those who do choose to use a service.
Makes everyone's life easier, including yours. Better than just being called as another primary only contact that I suspect many will just chuck out another "roger" for and carry on along their merry way in your vicinity... :uhoh: |
The500man,
Good grief! That is one of the most naive, if not stupid, posts I've read in my 18 years on PPRuNe, and in almost 40 years of professional aviation. You obviously have no real idea of how TCAS is used, or what it does and you show ignorance of how ATC and more knowledgeable pilots operate in Class G airspace. TCAS is used as part of a normal lookout scan; it takes a split second to look down at the screen, which is why it's situated at the top of the instrument panel. There is also an audio warning system which alerts the crew about aircraft getting threateningly close. The equipment enables me to see transponding aircraft over ten miles away. If I see an aircraft on TCAS, I assume the pilot hasn't yet seen me (he/she/you won't have at ten miles), and will take avoiding action much earlier than is possible when constrained by the limitations of the human eye. Judging by the lack of adherence to the rules of the air by many light aircraft pilots we see (they don't see us), I know it's an invaluable piece of equipment. It helps provide an extra level of safety to all parties involved, not just ourselves. Obviously, if you insist on not using your transponder, in your ignorance, belligerence, or whatever, you deny yourself and your fellow occupants that extra margin of safety that is there for the taking. |
I think that part of the "anti Xpdr" problem is a result of the CAA using a squawk to identify and prosecute the pilot who bust the Red Arrows RAT in 2003' whilst the other four non transponding aircraft all got away unidentified and unprosecuted. A definite shot in the foot for the CAA.
Mode S with specific aircraft ID exacerbates this problem. |
Farnborough have been nice to me in the past but we don't want to depend on them being reasonable for ever more. Except for Special VFR in Control Zones (CTRs), scope for reduced flight visibility of less than 5 km below 3000 ft in the VMC minima at SERA.5001 is limited to Classes F and G airspace. This will result in the removal of the current Rule 27 and associated UK Difference to ICAO Annex 28, resulting in more restrictive operating conditions to that which currently exist in the UK FIRs. It is acknowledged that this may lead to pilots opting to route around affected Control Areas (CTAs) in deteriorating weather rather than seek clearances through the affected airspace. Alternatively it may compel pilots to request Special VFR (SVFR) or IFR clearance through CTRs with consequential impact on air traffic control workload. Both may lead to an increase in demand for air traffic services for which service providers may not always have the capacity to meet. 4.6.2 It is additionally recognised that prevailing traffic conditions within a CTR or CTA may be such that clearances to cross a particular airspace when most needed (i.e. in adverse or deteriorating weather conditions) may not be forthcoming. All may in turn contribute to the creation of bottlenecks in or around particular airspaces that lead to increases in the possibility of airborne conflict. The change in VFR minima from current UK to the SERA standards are acknowledged to potentially lead to more pilots needing to reroute, or obtain a SVFR or IFR clearance in deteriorating weather. However, the CAA is of the view that, from an ATC perspective, the SERA procedures are simpler and ensure that VFR flight in CTR is conducted in meteorological conditions that ensure pilots are able to comply with their collision avoidance responsibilities in airspace within which ATC do not separate VFR flights from IFR flights. (P.S. at the same time they introduce the semicircular rule to replace the quadrantal rule below FL195.) |
Does this mean that the 10k vis requirement for SVFR will be scrapped?
|
Does this mean that the 10k vis requirement for SVFR will be scrapped?
Current rule SERA.5010 Special VFR in control zones Special VFR flights may be authorised to operate within a control zone, subject to an ATC clearance. Except when permitted by the competent authority for helicopters in special cases such as medical flights, search and rescue operations and fire-fighting, the following additional conditions shall be applied: (a) by the pilot: (1) clear of cloud and with the surface in sight; (2) the flight visibility is not less than 1 500 m or, for helicopters, not less than 800 m; (3) at speed of 140 kts IAS or less to give adequate opportunity to observe other traffic and any obstacles in time to avoid a collision; and (b) by ATC: (1) during day only, unless otherwise permitted by the competent authority; (2) the ground visibility is not less than 1 500 m or, for helicopters, not less than 800 m; (3) the ceiling is not less than 180 m (600 ft). SERA.5010 Special VFR in control zones Special VFR flights may be authorised to operate within a control zone, subject to an ATC clearance. Except when permitted by the competent authority for helicopters in special cases such as medical flights, search and rescue operations and fire-fighting, The following additional conditions shall be applied: ... |
500man, now you are being foolish.
A transponder with ALT reporting help others from colliding into you as it alerts both aircraft traffic alert systems and ATC systems. Switch it off if you so please but don't run back to us if someone rams up your rear. :ugh: |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 15:10. |
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.