Glenforsa Radio
 

Safety Com was introduced specificly for Airfields like Glenforsa where pilots are perfectly capable of arriving and departing safely, without being 'controlled'.


GF

Are we slipping into a personality driven discussion again? Personally I have dealt with DH when he has been fantastic and, at other times, I can only wish I had the opportunity to start on the nectar as early as him. Regardless, Glenforsa is not a difficult strip. Any of the info we require is not likely to change by the minute. Are there sheep, is it waterlogged, has the grass been cut, can I have PPR? That is about as much as we need to know. After that, safetycom, unmanned A/G or, God forbid, no R/T is fine. Let's not create a storm in this particular teacup.

An point of interest regarding safety comm can be read here

http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/1615/safetycom_review.pdf

Use of SAFETYCOM: Ground Stations
21. There is no ground station associated with SAFETYCOM and no ground stations have been licensed to operate on the frequency. Use of 135.475 MHz is restricted to transmissions from aircraft. However, the phraseology in a small number of transmissions recorded on the frequency, e.g. use of words such as ‘clear’, suggested either incorrect phraseology or the presence of a ground station on the frequency. Pilots must avoid using the word ‘clear’ on SAFETYCOM, as other pilots may understand this, incorrectly, as a clearance.

Sorry Lurking but I cant agree with you as there is a wind direction (from over the hill possibly N.W.) which makes the strip almost unusable!!! I have seen the 2 wind socks pointing towards each other so some form of updated ground information is a real life saver!

What, like two windsocks? :) Maybe someone should put a third at the midpoint (Didn't the hotel used to have a small one just next to where Brendan parked his Cub?) I'm not trying to being flippant, I too have had an interesting time with wacky winds at Glenforsa. But, unless the chap on the ground is Brendan and you get the sound of silence as he sucks his teeth confirming that the windsock aren't lying..............

Glenforsa Topics
 

When the wind is from the South there is a rotor effect caused by the trees and buildings as you would expect.

Depending on the wind strength, the effect can range from 'Hmm interesting' to 'character building' but as a based pilot operating a Cub from Glenforsa, I have rarely found it 'unusable'.

I would strongly advise that visiting pilots obtain local information from someone who has actually flown an aircraft, thereby avoiding lurid tales of 'The Wind of Death' and 'Flocks of Killer Geese' etc that may cause pilots to disregard relevant information that may be of some use to them.

Paul Keegan at Oban is one source I would recommend.

I couldn't agree more, as long as you can be confident of the quality of said information.

GF

After all is said and done Glenforsa is one of my favourite strips! It cant be beaten for views and tranquility and the hospitality! Well worth a visit comes HIGHLY recommended!

I wholeheartedly agree, Glenforsa is at the very top of my favourite airstrip list. With proper planning and sound preparation, the whole area should be a "must do" for any PPL. :ok:

I have just flown the Wife to Mull for our anniversary weekend. Two people, overnight bags and lots of fuel. 625 nm, at an average ground speed of 125.2kn (from start of t/o run to end of landing run). Total fuel used 75.5l (15.1 lph) (26l was avgas, rest mogas). The longest leg was from Oban to the strip in Staffordshire, 2:15 B on to B off.

We both really enjoyed it and it did not cost a fortune. I highly recommend the Glenforsa Hotel and both airfields (Mull and Oban). Thanks to all.

Rod1

Censored Postings
 

While in agreement that pointless and/or false and slanderous postings should be removed from these threads, those containing information that could effect the safety of airfield users should be considered more carefully before deletion.

IMHO

WW

Works both ways. If the information in some posts is safety critical then surely the poster should post only that information nothing else.

Glenforsa Optics
 

Clearly, the deleted post contained some 'safety critical' information.

i.e. a 'critical component' of the airfield is prone to malfunction and likely to produce erroneous and contradictory information that could prove hazardous to airfield users.

So how do you decide what parts of the post should be considered pertinant and what parts just plain nasty?

WW

CWW, why don't you take you discussion off line with a mod rather than try to create additional mischief here?

Glenforsa Optics
 

It was a genuine enquiry as to how the moderators decide what should or should not be considered suitable for inclusion.

I'm pretty sure I'm not the only one interested in the subject, but I am prepared to be corrected.

WW

I have to agree that CWW is making a very important point. I can appreciate the sensitivity of the issue, but found the allegation, if true, to be extremely alarming and worrying. I have personally come to grief before now as a result of erroneous and contradictory information of exactly this type from just such a "critical component" on an airfield.

I'm trying to sit on the fence here, but if someone made such allegations about you on an open forum, how would you feel? If there is a problem, has anyone formally approached ABC to voice their concerns? If not, the discussion doesn't deserve space on this forum.

This is a hard one to answer. Those who actually seen the post will know what I mean.

For those who did not see it, then a serious allegation was made about an individual on these forums.

At this moment in time I can't go into too much detail, (for legal reasons) but I believe I have done the right thing here in this circumstance.

CWW, The law decides how I edit/delete posts. As someone else has mentioned, please feel free to PM me (as my email is down) and we can discuss this further if you like.

Now, can we get this thread back on track about all things Glenforsa please.....?

Glenforsa Optics
 

Yes they have, but then again, many persons voiced their concerns to ABC regarding Peter Jackson.

One pilot, alarmed by the confusion caused by the recent radio fiasco at Glenforsa, was told by the 'Airfield Manager' that he would be banned from Glenforsa if he made a complaint.

Unless you have actually experienced the sheer arrogance of this shower, you will probably find it difficult to comprehend.

WW

Radio at Glenforsa what radio
 

I totally agree cww. Confused and a little apprehensive on the take off roll am i going to meet a c130 on the climb out not god at all but DH seemed to think this was fine. Asked DH what time the Herc's were due answer was not sure they phoned on mobile couldn't hear them properly possible 6ish asked the frequency they would be on he said 120.80 and everybody else on safety. I thought great its 1755 now and am heading home. :eek::eek: this could be interesting god was with me that day never seen them but i tell u my eyes were scanning like a man possessed my passenger got the just of all this and i could tell he was very apprehensive and he had every rite to be. A bloody shambles. is this normal practice? I don't think.:hmm::hmm:

Well that shall due for an opening post

happy landings

I did see the posts.

And to be honest as with many complaints in aviation alot of people like moaning but nobody will bite the bullet and report them to the correct people.

You have 2 options MOR about your concerns but unfortunately there are no recordings and proving anything will be difficult. And your name will be known

Or phone crime stoppers and report that someone is operating in an aviation enviroment with your concern.

Anything else is slander

Made known
 

Mad jock yes your rite we do like to complain and never really follow it up but i can assure you this has been followed up and made known to the correct people. And i am not trying to slander anybody before we go down that road. I have a valid point as being that pilot on the receiving end of this Crap its not nice.

Have you MOR'd the incident?
Have you written to ABC stating your concerns, copy to the CAA?

yes
 

As i said it was followed up in the proper manner we shall see if anything transpires:ok:
cf

Thanks Connel I wasn't accusing you of slander just making the point.

But as you possibly know the CAA really lacks teeth north of the border due to the legal system. So if you think there are issues your best contacting the police. If the local bobby is anything like the rest on the West coasts Hamish MacBeths words will be said in a fairly forth right manner with no discussion and the problem will not happen again.

CF
DH is not a controller, he is an airfield manager. At least he gave you a heads up on the situation with the C130s.
Glenforsa is in the open FIR like most of Scotland. VFR rules are see and avoid.
DO

DO

I agree. Do you get info on the times and routes of low flying jets when departing Mull, Oban, or indeed Tiree, Wick, Benbecula and a host of other airfields with no radar? No you don't. Are they a bigger threat than Hercs? You bet. Max 2 pairs of eyes looking for you, maybe only one, cf at least 3 in a Herc. Hercs are massive - you'll see them as well as them seeing you. And they fly at half the speed of the jets.

Keep your eyes peeled and your fingers crossed :)

NS

Glenforsa Optics
 

No, you don't.

You also don't get told when the 'airport manager' has invited some hercs to fly through the circuit while not announcing their intentions on the airport frequency!

WW

As there seems some confusion regarding the Mull freq. 120.800 I got my ops department to check the info from the CAA......It appears that 120.800 was asigned to Mull some months back but it will now be up to the local authority to promulgate the information as how and when they intend to use it........hope that may clear up a little confusion!!! :ok:

I haven't been to Glenforsa since the Oban development saga started, but the world doesn't change that much the problem is people and their attitudes.

As has been said several times both fields are PPR for briefing and that will be by airfield management to tell you what the local rules are and make sure that the fields are basically serviceable if they allow you in. That's how it was when I last went.

The only radio is A/G and safetycom, therefore if you have PPR all other decisions on landing take off and aircraft safety are down to the pilot. It's up to said pilot to decide what advice (if any) he will consider.

For what it's worth last time I was there I called at Oban for fuel and was royally served by paul and Co. At Glenforsa I landed between two windsocks pointing at other and the airfield manager "loaned" me a car which I used for touring and the hospitality at the Hotel could not have been bettered anywhere IMHO. When it was time to go home I took off into 700 ft cloud base climbed along the sound using GPS until I was at MSA and then turned on course home and called Scottish Info (jolly nice chaps) none of this was in any way dodgy as far as I was concerned and I'd happily go again tomorrow if my aeroplane was serviceable:bored:

Were you able to get a decent RAIM check before departure ??

That frightens me to death :sad:

You aren't the only one horrified by this NOD.

Seriously, you think this isn't dodgy? Could you let me know what you think is, as I obviously need to adjust my "this terrifies the cr*p out of me" meter installed in my brain.

OK then, I will take the bait and await the flak.. We all accept that a climb or descent on conventional radio navaids/ILS etc is the apparently "safe" norm. So for the pilot with IFR approved installed GPS unit on board and perhaps a couple of back up portables, are these any more unreliable than the conventional aids? or perhaps even more reliable, more intuitive, and more easily programmable for this type of ad hoc operation? or do we just accept that regardless of qualifications , experience, equipment or expediency we do not fly in a 700 foot overcast?

Edited to say that pursuing this subject will result in serious thread drift which is not appropriate for such an important thread topic!

...........so, why don't you start a new one!!!! :)

You have no radar protection, you are not at a recognised flight level for your heading, and you are IMC within 1000ft of the ground. Nothing to stop blogs coming the other way in the decent doing the same thing. If you were single engine you would have had about 20 seconds before you hit something if the engine had stopped. Depends on your personal risk threshold, but it would not have worked for me.

Rod1

Doing an approved instrument approach or departure from Islay, how high before you can get a radar service? Genuine question.

A long way up, but you have the benefit of an approved SID using tried and tested machinery and procedures. A totally different proposition from making something up on the fly in an SEP machine.

Glenforsa Fly In
 

This is Glenforsa this morning on the occasion of the 42nd annual fly in.
http://i169.photobucket.com/albums/u...g?t=1211623245And This is the view from the Glenforsa Hotel webcam taken at the same time.
http://i169.photobucket.com/albums/u...g?t=1211623491

You have to ask the question, why would Argyll & Bute Council want to foster the impression that the airfield is unused?

GF

Both pictures evoke considerable nostalgia:ok:

The webcam one would hook me if I wasn't hooked already :-)