Correct use of the coastline as a line feature??
 

One of my favourite short flights partly involves flying north up the east coast. I treat the coast as a line feature and, therefore, fly just over the water with the land on my left. I assume that aircraft flying south should fly over the land with the sea on their left.

Whilst visiting the coast by car and by foot, however, on several occasions (including yesterday at Whitley Bay, Newcastle) I have seen aircraft flying in both directions over the water at a similar distance from the coast. Whilst it is more interesting flying just over the sea, doing this in a clockwise direction surely involves chance of conflict with anticlockwise aircraft.

Any advise or comments please.

Check current legislation?

2 s

There was a lot of traffic past Whitley Bay over the weekend. Most of it (me included)
on the way to or from the Great North Fly-in at Eshott. We were mostly complying with a request from Newcastle ATC to transit up or down the coast. They were very busy at times. Staying off the coast below 1500' keeps you under their CTA and under their approach. Go much inland, and you're into their CTR. They keep an eye on you and tend to advise you of traffic. They don't have to.


It's an example of mutual backscratching that's worked well for years.

ozbeck

The requirement to fly to the right of a line feature was removed some time ago........

It's good airmanship to fly to the right of a line feature when following it. However, as a rule it was hard to apply. There are many things that could be construed as 'line features', and there are many aircraft that find themselves going in roughly the same direction as one without necessarily intending to 'follow' it. So it didn't make a very effective rule. No such system, whether rule or advice, will ever be more than a risk mitigation measure, but as a risk mitigation measure it's good to take advantage of it when you can.

I always thought it was advisory, not a requirement. What if there were two line features parallel?

Flying from the left seat, any line feature is more easily followed if it's kept on your left. Particularly high-wing. Having reciprocal traffic do the same is a bonus. Beats playing chicken.

Of course, you may be in conflict with the helicopter being flown from the right hand seat and using the same logic which is coming the other way.

Helicopter pilots can simply sit above it.:= And flexwings, and gyros, and buzzards. There's even a new-fangled thing called GPS where you can insert your own. I dip my chips in vanilla ice cream.

Perhaps because Newcastle CAS extends just beyond the coast?

Yes, maybe it would but as already pointed out, the "right hand rule " no longer exists.
It's pointless to expect others to follow it even if you choose to continue to do so.

Problem with the rule as it applied to coastlines was that you always wanted to fly on the wrong side in order to give the passenger the best view.

Another problem with that rule as applied to the coast is that e.g. 'to the right' of the east coast if you are flying Northwards covers the entire North Sea...
I exaggerate, but if I wanted to fly 1-2 miles off the coast, should I still have considered myself bound by that rule? Or only if flying within 0.5 nm of it? Or less? Where do you draw the line? (no pun intended)

Apart from that general ambiguity, I think part of the reason the rule was abandoned was that people using GPS nowadays sometimes follow the magenta line and, even if it happens to be on the 'wrong side' of a line feature, they still follow the GPS. Also, more importantly, people's faith in that rule may have given a false sense of security which was misplaced and abandoning the rule *should* mean that people's lookout *should* be better.

Fat chance.

B.

To reduce the risk of collision a bit further, you could fly at an odd height, say 2150' or 2350' rather than the usual 500' increments. I adopt that approach whenever flying cross country at a relatively low level.

Ah, but that assumes that the guy coming the other way and trying to fly at 2000' is actually at 2000' and not enjoying some vertical meanderings... :-)

I have heard it said that you're safer being right on the numbers as most people aren't...

With the average accuracy of altimeters I suspect no one is on the numbers. Good reason not to switch to GPS alt?

Sam Rutherford - yes, but all other things being equal, I feel safer aiming for an odd altitude, even if I'm not always exactly on it.... :)

As an aside, I've done a fair bit of flying/training in mid Wales and was taught that when climbing back up from 500' after a PFL to fly in a 'meandering' or circular pattern and avoid a straight climb. This gives low flying Hawks a better chance of seeing you.......

I think it is still in the legislation - as a UK addition to SERA:

UK GM1 TO SERA SECTION 3 (GENERAL RULES AND COLLISION AVOIDANCE) CHAPTER 2 (AVOIDANCE OF COLLISIONS)
Following Line Features
An aircraft which is flying within the United Kingdom with the surface in sight and following a road, railway, canal or coastline, or any other line of landmarks, should fly to the right of the line feature unless flying within controlled airspace in accordance with instructions given by the appropriate air traffic control unit.

SERA does not include some of the previous UK rules of the air - the CAA still impose a number of exceptions to SERA and some additional rules have been retained. Part of your link says:

Unfortunately, the CAA website and its post-SERA info is as poor as its admin. The piece I quoted earlier is from this consolidation document, page 30, highlighted in yellow - which I think means it is UK Means of Compliance and Guidance Material. They don't make it easy.

https://www.caa.co.uk/WorkArea/Downl...?id=4294975756