ACW 335,

There are several schools that regularly fly in the area with such logos, On the day I was, and still am, convinced that it was from a school that I Regularly hire from. But given the fact that It was just a passing glance and some blurry video footage I shant make my consideration public.

On another note I just heard on the radio that the pilot's excuse when questioned by ATC was "Sorry guys I'm having a bad day"

On the one hand I know that we are all human and in my heart I can't really beleive that any aircraft commander would ever put himself and his pax/machine in danger yet it seems that on this occasion I just can't work out how such an error could have been made.

Even from the very edge of the restricted area it would have been possible to see the thousands of people packing the beaches and surrounding land. The tens of huge marquee's and the several static aircraft. Closed off areas of road and stalls all along the seafront from right down the end to the peir. There was a whole flotilla of boats and lifeboats there.....but what has happened is over. The pilot will get a sever telling off and possibly more for what was...probably..just a simple error.

EzY

Mike's quite right that having an FIS should not be taken to absolve the pilot from prior checking of NOTAMs, but it does have the virtue of being more up to date. I have to check the NOTAMs from home, there's no facility to do so from the airfield, and I have to leave home at 0700 to be airborne at 0900, then might not get to see a NOTAM all day if I'm flying between little grass airfields.

If a Soham / Hatfield situation breaks out during the day, only an FIS is likely to keep me out of any unexpected TRAs that spring up.

The difference between a pop up TRA and these events is that the latter are well advertised on the NOTAMs and these TRAs are not.

As it is not compulsory to be in touch with anybody when flying in the open FIR you probably stand a reasonable chance (I suspect) if you infinged one which had been established after you took off or reasonably could have been expected to check the Notams.

FD

According to Southern FM (so no guarantees!). The pilot was Dutch. They didn't say or not whether the aircraft was or not. And he's quoted as saying he was "having a bad day"!

The alleged offender (allegedly):

here

It has already been posted on the spotter's forum.

Guess his 'bad day' just keeps getting worse (allegedly of course).

Maybe there is a problem with pre-flight briefing in the UK which leads to these sorts of infringements?

We could use a "1800WXBRIEF" in the UK, where all weather, Notams and other pertinent info is collated, so with just one phone call, you know everything there is to know....Whether we pay for it or not.......And related to your route. There is nothing worse than downloading a million notmas which have no relevance to your flight, and if you filter them there is always the chance of missing one.

Will be interesting to see what happens.

FD

(Not me guv'ner honestly!)

FD,

Are you sure? Dutch, Cirrus, the evidence is stacking up...:)

TPK:ok:

TPK,

True.

And love the Reds. However would have been too close for comfort for me.

FD

Even us paragliders were notamed on this. Sadly, as pointed out above, it ain't the first time. Me and a mate were watching from Beachy head a couple of years back and we couldn't understand why the red arrows were circling behind the hill when no one was displaying at the show.

Then we saw a microlight bimble past much like the chap the other day. Tea & no biscuits followed by a front page article in the local paper, oh and a five grand fine. One imagines the tea was spilt in his lap after that one.

On the bright side, it was alright watching the military choppers whipping by my office window in formation on Thurs & Fri last week.

And here is the picture from the link

http://www.pbase.com/image/32633284.jpg

Cunningly labelled "Red10!"

It will be difficult (but perhaps if you have a good legal representative not impossible) to get exhonorated for transgressing the TRA.

The issue is though that if these infringements happen with a boring regularity it may be that the promulgation of the information needs to be reassessed.

The AIS system is a lot better than it used to be (or have we got used to its limitations) but the lack of a good and authoritive visual representation is certainly something which I would find difficult to defend.

As EA says it may be that a WXBRIEF service could help although it would have to be funded at the point of contact rather than at source, and I am sure that even in the US there are regular busts of regulated airspace.

FD

Anyone here read Dutch ?

No but Babelfish gave me this:-

"If you want the cirrus SR20 rent, if you have in are of an American equalisation or brevet, uitgecheckt are by Charles Jacobs, Theu Hendriks or Herman Hendriks and minimum 200 PIC (requirement insurance) has enough time, exists the possibility of renting the travelling box independently. You to this then is not it satisfies possible, with me as safetypilot, rent the cirrus. More information or an application for the password of the reservation wheel then a mail to Mart Buuron or bel 0031651246320 Also there regularly place is at the weekly toertochten on Wednesday and Thursday. Gladly in advance even contact. If you are loose on the travelling box can you availability verify in the agenda. Also you can book here your reservation. At modifications this also gladly direct process in the agenda. The agenda can reach you by means of clicks on agenda N146JJ My experiences at the ferryvlucht of this splendid travelling box can read you on Ferry Duluth - Seppe."

Sort of loses the meaning doesn't it :D

PS I like the phrase "renting the travelling box independently", though I do wonder what "If you are loose on the travelling box" means. :}

Yup, I do but that does not solve the issues relating to the alleged infringement.

FD

englishal, it looks as if that extract was translated back and forth several times on freetranslation.com :D Love the travelling box bit...