|
Originally Posted by scifi
(Post 9717336)
I don't know what range they use when deciding to offer Traffic advice, but it seems to be about 3-5 miles, which with two planes on a closing heading, gives you about 60 seconds warning of the other aircraft.
. Note 1: Traffic is normally considered to be relevant when, in the judgement of the controller, the conflicting aircraft’s observed trajectory indicates that it will pass within 3 NM and, where level information is available, 3,000 ft of the aircraft in receipt of the Traffic Service or its level-band if manoeuvring within a level block. However, controllers may also use their judgment to decide on occasions when such traffic is not relevant, e.g. passing behind or within the parameters but diverging. Controllers shall aim to pass information on relevant traffic before the conflicting aircraft is within 5 NM, in order to help the pilot meet his collision avoidance responsibilities and to allow time for an update in traffic information if considered necessary. Note 2: Good judgement is essential to ensure that traffic information is relevant and timely. Controllers should take account of the aircraft's relative speeds, lateral and vertical closure rates, and track histories. Note 3: Distances displayed on ATS surveillance systems can be at variance to the actual distances between aircraft due to limitations inherent to surveillance systems. Some aircraft may not be displayed at all. |
Out of interest, what could a radio service (such as Stapleford) be able to offer? Are they still only giving "airfield information and known traffic"?
|
Originally Posted by scifi
(Post 9717336)
The only time I have ever asked for a Traffic Service, was when undergoing instruction in IMC conditions.
What has worked for me so far is "assume he's below the clouds and that I'm the only one daft enough to fly in the cloud on purpose". |
Originally Posted by Gertrude the Wombat
(Post 9717785)
And what then are you supposed to do with the "aircraft on reciprocal course, two miles, no height information", as you can't see it?
What has worked for me so far is "assume he's below the clouds and that I'm the only one daft enough to fly in the cloud on purpose". |
Out of interest, what could a radio service (such as Stapleford) be able to offer? What has worked for me so far is "assume he's below the clouds and that I'm the only one daft enough to fly in the cloud on purpose". It is/was normal for Blackbushe based instructors working Farnborough West to ask for RIS/Traffic Service when doing upper airwork and climbing or descending through cloud, reverting to FIS/Basic when clear of cloud. |
Out of interest, what could a radio service (such as Stapleford) be able to offer?
Originally Posted by alex90
(Post 9717925)
Please correct me if I am wrong - but I am pretty sure that Stapleford only has Air-Ground. The only service they are able to provide is an "Air-Ground Communication Service". This means that they are able to talk to you from a ground based radio, pass airfield information, tell you about any traffic that is known to them, along with any other information they feel appropriate for your flight. It is important however, that Air-Ground operators are not generally allowed to "clear" anyone to do "anything", although they may tell you to do something, it is at the pilot's discretion to follow any instructions given by an air-ground operator. (although generally, they have a pretty good idea what's going on, are pilots themselves, and actually do a very good job at helping you)
|
Originally Posted by Steve6443
(Post 9718038)
In other words, a BASIC service
|
I have found that there is often some 'Service Drift' with the type of service you receive, but don't count on it. When flying in the Midlands, maybe tracking towards a VOR, I have been given Traffic information even though I only asked for a Basic service. What really peeves me though is when pilots ask for Traffic service on a gin clear day thereby increasing controller workload and the service they can provide to other traffic. I also understand that when the AEF are flying with cadets on board they are now required to request a traffic service - I guess this is a symptom of the blame culture after the odd collision when cadets have been on board. |
FFB, surely it's up to the ATCO to decide if a traffic service can be provided, or not. I have often heard controllers offering a basic service only, rather than the traffic service requested, "due to controller workload".
Can't say I blame them, sometimes the LARS frequencies become so busy (especially on fine weekends after a period of bad weather) that the amount of chatter becomes counterproductive to flight safety. |
FFB, surely it's up to the ATCO to decide if a traffic service can be provided, or not. I have often heard controllers offering a basic service only, rather than the traffic service requested, "due to controller workload". Can't say I blame them, sometimes the LARS frequencies become so busy (especially on fine weekends after a period of bad weather) that the amount of chatter becomes counterproductive to flight safety. I agree with you about RT workload on LARS at busy times but then when you hear some of the RT procedure...... |
|
Originally Posted by Talkdownman
(Post 9718087)
Not even that in the UK. An A/G service is not even an air traffic service. CAP452 says so. An A/G operator is not authorised to provide Basic Service. Usually an AGCS Radio Licence itself specifies that the equipment is not to be used to provide an ATS.
|
Originally Posted by chevvron
(Post 9773731)
AGCS 'Radio Licence' doesn't exist; it's a 'Certificate of Competence' and unlike ATS licenses such as ATC or FISO, does not require periodic checks of the competence of the holder by a CAA Authorised Examiner.(Yet?)
Air Ground Communications services and services provided by a Clearance Delivery Officer are not Air Traffic Services, but may only be provided by a person holding a Radio Operator's certificate of competence (CA1308) issued by the Civil Aviation Authority and authorised by the Wireless Telegraphy Act licence holder. |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 17:01. |
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.