RYANAIR pilots breaking 250kIAS limit OCAS
Guest
Posts: n/a
250kt or 550kt - who cares?
Once you are vectoring the aircraft you can either introduce speed control, moniter the speed using the SSR readout,(yes - we do have that facility fellas), and if they are naughty enough not to comply - send 'em to the back of the stack.
When the CAA introduced the 250kt speed limit, they forgot to commission the speed cameras to enforce it.
Sorry Avalon, I've got better things to do whilst controlling than to be a policeman, but I know where you live!
Once you are vectoring the aircraft you can either introduce speed control, moniter the speed using the SSR readout,(yes - we do have that facility fellas), and if they are naughty enough not to comply - send 'em to the back of the stack.
When the CAA introduced the 250kt speed limit, they forgot to commission the speed cameras to enforce it.
Sorry Avalon, I've got better things to do whilst controlling than to be a policeman, but I know where you live!
Guest
Posts: n/a
Streamline is quite right. Rushing around low down saves very little time and is a safety hazard. Particularly in the event of an unforseen problem, if mental capacity is being used to go as fast as possible, there is less available to deal with the problem.
Hurtling around just for fun is outrageous. Remember what you're being paid for - safety. Anything which compromises this is unacceptable.
Hurtling around just for fun is outrageous. Remember what you're being paid for - safety. Anything which compromises this is unacceptable.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Having spent a few years flying commercial 4-6 seaters at 120kts or so and then turboprops at 200kts and now 737's, it's been my experience that no matter how slow you are going, relying on the old eyeball alone is a factor of pure chance. The thing that makes the big difference and doesn't seem to happen that often in certain areas OTCA is everyone having a radio and being on the same frequency. If you are doing 330kts or 100kts and don't know where to look, then it's going to be hard to see!! There's nothing magical about 250kts. It's just a starting point.
Everyone should have an operating transponder and radio.
Everyone should have an operating transponder and radio.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Tug
Understand where you are coming from, but what about gliders, microlights and balloons? - they have a right to be there too and it is not practical for them to carry transponders.
I agree with your comments about the difficulty of "see and be seen" - what a shame the LARS service is contracting - RIS is very helpful.
Understand where you are coming from, but what about gliders, microlights and balloons? - they have a right to be there too and it is not practical for them to carry transponders.
I agree with your comments about the difficulty of "see and be seen" - what a shame the LARS service is contracting - RIS is very helpful.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Well, I think one has to look at it case by case.
My intuition tells me that if these small regioal fields would not be there, the 2.3 mil pax would take the train to a mayor to get their flight.
It may look silly but that's how it works.
If tomorrow you open a stand at your front door selling oranges, you will start to sell.
Claiming afterwards those clients cause problems to the traffic flow is a bit like the story of the egg and the chicken.
------------------
Smooth Trimmer
My intuition tells me that if these small regioal fields would not be there, the 2.3 mil pax would take the train to a mayor to get their flight.
It may look silly but that's how it works.
If tomorrow you open a stand at your front door selling oranges, you will start to sell.
Claiming afterwards those clients cause problems to the traffic flow is a bit like the story of the egg and the chicken.
------------------
Smooth Trimmer
Slow to 250 kts Mr. Sulu. We’re entering the bureaucrat sector.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Streamline, you really should understand a little more about the divisions of controlled airspace.
Can you tell me how you would fly from just about anywhere (pick an airport) to Newcastle?
One or two other posts here fill me with dismay at the level of understanding of the law, or airmanship and of the original post.
All I can assume is that the idiots posting these few posts are not aviation professionals, and are posting merely to wind people up.
[This message has been edited by HugMonster (edited 15 March 2001).]
Can you tell me how you would fly from just about anywhere (pick an airport) to Newcastle?
One or two other posts here fill me with dismay at the level of understanding of the law, or airmanship and of the original post.
All I can assume is that the idiots posting these few posts are not aviation professionals, and are posting merely to wind people up.
[This message has been edited by HugMonster (edited 15 March 2001).]
Guest
Posts: n/a
Streamline,
I see you're from Belgium - I can only comment on the UK situation, but there are several large airports here that take traffic inbound from Class G airspace (uncontrolled). Often the a/c would require a huge re-route to remain inside controlled airspace. At the moment they take a direct track under a RIS or RAS - isn't this what pilots want, to save lots of miles? (comments welcome from pilots)
Also, to any high-speed pilots out there, check if your approach takes you into Class E airspace. Technically it's controlled airspace but VFR doesn't require a clearance to enter, nor are they under any obligation to contact the relevant ATC unit, hence it's Mk1 eyeball time. This often involves military fast metal, and having recently seen a pair of fast moving, non-transponding jets suddenly appear in the region of an airliner I was controlling, believe me, slower is better!!!! And no squawk means no TCAS either.....
I see you're from Belgium - I can only comment on the UK situation, but there are several large airports here that take traffic inbound from Class G airspace (uncontrolled). Often the a/c would require a huge re-route to remain inside controlled airspace. At the moment they take a direct track under a RIS or RAS - isn't this what pilots want, to save lots of miles? (comments welcome from pilots)
Also, to any high-speed pilots out there, check if your approach takes you into Class E airspace. Technically it's controlled airspace but VFR doesn't require a clearance to enter, nor are they under any obligation to contact the relevant ATC unit, hence it's Mk1 eyeball time. This often involves military fast metal, and having recently seen a pair of fast moving, non-transponding jets suddenly appear in the region of an airliner I was controlling, believe me, slower is better!!!! And no squawk means no TCAS either.....
Guest
Posts: n/a
HugMonster
I think I do exactly know what this airspace division means, I have got 17 years + in the business.
My only comment is that any substantial airport should have a CONTROLLED airspace.
If a substantial amount of passengers have to relay for their lives on visual separation only then that’s a disgrace to the system and I am surprised it happens in the UK.
I do not fly into Newcastle I admit, but if you claim that 2.3 mil pax go trough uncontrolled airspace, then the UK must be considered as an underdeveloped country as far as ATC is concerned.
And YES I request short cuts as much as I can but if they take me out of controlled airspace then I refuse.
To put you completely in the picture, I have had a near mid-flight collision IN controlled airspace because the controller screwed up.
When two aircraft head on, each at 800 Km/hr that is relative speed of 1600 this means that at 3.6 seconds before impact they are still 1600 m apart, impossible to see unless at night in clear skies.
At 250 kts IAS that would still be 300 kts TAS at fL100 or roughly 1200 km /hr relative, still impossible to see when head on.
At 210 Kts at Fl 50 you would sill be about 1000m at 3.6 seconds
Thank you very much, by the time you realise this, 2 seconds have elapsed.
Satisfied with this reality ?
[This message has been edited by Streamline (edited 15 March 2001).]
[This message has been edited by Streamline (edited 15 March 2001).]
I think I do exactly know what this airspace division means, I have got 17 years + in the business.
My only comment is that any substantial airport should have a CONTROLLED airspace.
If a substantial amount of passengers have to relay for their lives on visual separation only then that’s a disgrace to the system and I am surprised it happens in the UK.
I do not fly into Newcastle I admit, but if you claim that 2.3 mil pax go trough uncontrolled airspace, then the UK must be considered as an underdeveloped country as far as ATC is concerned.
And YES I request short cuts as much as I can but if they take me out of controlled airspace then I refuse.
To put you completely in the picture, I have had a near mid-flight collision IN controlled airspace because the controller screwed up.
When two aircraft head on, each at 800 Km/hr that is relative speed of 1600 this means that at 3.6 seconds before impact they are still 1600 m apart, impossible to see unless at night in clear skies.
At 250 kts IAS that would still be 300 kts TAS at fL100 or roughly 1200 km /hr relative, still impossible to see when head on.
At 210 Kts at Fl 50 you would sill be about 1000m at 3.6 seconds
Thank you very much, by the time you realise this, 2 seconds have elapsed.
Satisfied with this reality ?
[This message has been edited by Streamline (edited 15 March 2001).]
[This message has been edited by Streamline (edited 15 March 2001).]
Guest
Posts: n/a
RYR aren't the only offenders - I'm regularly asked by KLM F100s if high speed is OK as they come scudding in from AMS in Class G. Invariably I've got no traffic to affect and on some occasions it might even help me (or sometimes totally screw the sequence 
), so don't have a problem with you doing it, but there's this thing called the ANO...
I'm certain most ATCOs would love more CAS, particularly on routes which are regularly flown by civil aircraft in Class G. It's safer for our licences as well as your lives. ADN-SAB,NEW,OTR and NWI is relatively busy (minimum of 50 flights per day off the top of my head), but we don't stand a chance as the North Sea is the military's playground and they won't give any of it away. That said I bet if we did establish an ADN-NEW they'd still be requests for direct OTR, NWI, PELOM outside CAS.
Unfortunately this is another grey-ish area where nobody really gets what they want. Which leads me nicely into braking action on slush and wet snow...
), so don't have a problem with you doing it, but there's this thing called the ANO...I'm certain most ATCOs would love more CAS, particularly on routes which are regularly flown by civil aircraft in Class G. It's safer for our licences as well as your lives. ADN-SAB,NEW,OTR and NWI is relatively busy (minimum of 50 flights per day off the top of my head), but we don't stand a chance as the North Sea is the military's playground and they won't give any of it away. That said I bet if we did establish an ADN-NEW they'd still be requests for direct OTR, NWI, PELOM outside CAS.
Unfortunately this is another grey-ish area where nobody really gets what they want. Which leads me nicely into braking action on slush and wet snow...
Guest
Posts: n/a
You guys aren't listening to each other!!!
In CAS ATC can control your speed or authorise you to exceed 250 kts below FL100.
Outside CAS the AIP dictates that 250 kts is the maximum below FL 100 for the see and avoid principles already outlined.
Like all laws, if you want to break it, it's up to you, but don't ask ATC to clear you to do so. I regularly get people inbound to EGNX at night direct from COA to EME asking if there is any speed control. The answer is always: "Speed at your discretion in the open FIR". Getting caught, by the way, does not mean what someone has termed 'policing ATCOs'. It means running into some poor devil who's out there minding his business and doesn't get the chance to see you coming at 330 kts and you aren't looking out either (Why would you be? If speed limits mean nothing to you, why should looking out for other traffic?).
If you want any convincing, read the AAIB report on the airmiss north of bournemouth a few years back between a 737 going like a rocket and an Aztec doing G/H in the FIR.
------------------
"Take-off is optional, Landing is mandatory"
In CAS ATC can control your speed or authorise you to exceed 250 kts below FL100.
Outside CAS the AIP dictates that 250 kts is the maximum below FL 100 for the see and avoid principles already outlined.
Like all laws, if you want to break it, it's up to you, but don't ask ATC to clear you to do so. I regularly get people inbound to EGNX at night direct from COA to EME asking if there is any speed control. The answer is always: "Speed at your discretion in the open FIR". Getting caught, by the way, does not mean what someone has termed 'policing ATCOs'. It means running into some poor devil who's out there minding his business and doesn't get the chance to see you coming at 330 kts and you aren't looking out either (Why would you be? If speed limits mean nothing to you, why should looking out for other traffic?).
If you want any convincing, read the AAIB report on the airmiss north of bournemouth a few years back between a 737 going like a rocket and an Aztec doing G/H in the FIR.
------------------
"Take-off is optional, Landing is mandatory"
Guest
Posts: n/a
eyeinthesky
As a UK PPL holder I fully support your view. Perhaps your perspective is made all the more telling by the realisation that it is quite legal for PPL/IMC holders to operate under VFR in Class G down to 1800M visibility.
My estimations suggest that 250kts means covering approximately 1600 metres every 15 seconds - not much space/time to see and avoid in a claggy sky.
Streamline makes the point that operating airliners in UCAS is dangerous, however Hugmonster replies pragmaticlly that it is inevitable in some parts of UK airspace - both make valid points which all pilots operating in UK class G airspace would do well to consider.
This issue is not about preventing risk per se (i.e. ban aircraft), it is about sensible risk mitigation within a real/existing environment.
I hope that Hugmonster (whose advice a few years ago helped me to understand the need for a profesional approach to flying) is correct in his assertion that there are wind up merchants operating on this thread; for the saner views expressed, may I thank the aviation professionals living up to their name.
As a UK PPL, let me say again that I respect the integrity of CAS (no penetrations without clearance in 200hrs+) and generally do everything to stay away from heavy metal, as our a/c types do not mix well - e.g. San Diego 727/172 midair. Everyone is entitled to fly in UCAS, but please lets be sensible about it.
We must all remember that we have the choice as to whether we fly or not, but people on the ground under the subsequent wreckage do not.
Surely following the law and sticking to 250kts is not too much to ask for?
I do not normally post on this forum, as it is aimed at the professional pilot, but I hope that you will indulge my interest in this particular thread, as I might be the light a/c coming the other way.
As a UK PPL holder I fully support your view. Perhaps your perspective is made all the more telling by the realisation that it is quite legal for PPL/IMC holders to operate under VFR in Class G down to 1800M visibility.
My estimations suggest that 250kts means covering approximately 1600 metres every 15 seconds - not much space/time to see and avoid in a claggy sky.
Streamline makes the point that operating airliners in UCAS is dangerous, however Hugmonster replies pragmaticlly that it is inevitable in some parts of UK airspace - both make valid points which all pilots operating in UK class G airspace would do well to consider.
This issue is not about preventing risk per se (i.e. ban aircraft), it is about sensible risk mitigation within a real/existing environment.
I hope that Hugmonster (whose advice a few years ago helped me to understand the need for a profesional approach to flying) is correct in his assertion that there are wind up merchants operating on this thread; for the saner views expressed, may I thank the aviation professionals living up to their name.
As a UK PPL, let me say again that I respect the integrity of CAS (no penetrations without clearance in 200hrs+) and generally do everything to stay away from heavy metal, as our a/c types do not mix well - e.g. San Diego 727/172 midair. Everyone is entitled to fly in UCAS, but please lets be sensible about it.
We must all remember that we have the choice as to whether we fly or not, but people on the ground under the subsequent wreckage do not.
Surely following the law and sticking to 250kts is not too much to ask for?
I do not normally post on this forum, as it is aimed at the professional pilot, but I hope that you will indulge my interest in this particular thread, as I might be the light a/c coming the other way.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Just listen to yourselves!
1. There is no speed control in Class A, B or C below FL100 (Unless on a STAR etc)
2. Controllers can, and do, file MORs.
3. The CAA appear to ignore MORs
The 250 knots is not a CAA imposition, but ICAO Rules and applies ONLY when outside Classes A, B, or C airspace.
1. There is no speed control in Class A, B or C below FL100 (Unless on a STAR etc)
2. Controllers can, and do, file MORs.
3. The CAA appear to ignore MORs
The 250 knots is not a CAA imposition, but ICAO Rules and applies ONLY when outside Classes A, B, or C airspace.
Guest
Posts: n/a
In my personal opinion 250 kts is pushing it as far as See And Avoid goes - in some recent flights in an Aztec over southern England we had three near misses (two involved helicopters). Even with three pairs of eyes in the cockpit we saw the oncoming traffic too late to take action, and this was at 140 kts. Pure chance every time. At 250 kts in a two-man cockpit during climb or descent with heads down configuring for landing or further climb etc., I do not believe See And Avoid is a valid concept in collision avoidance. Have you ever actually been in a situation in a jet where traffic was brought to their attention with a Mark 1 Eyeball AND in sufficient time to avoid a hazardous situation?
On the other hand: "Better to be a quarter of an hour late in this world than a quarter of a century early into the next."
On the other hand: "Better to be a quarter of an hour late in this world than a quarter of a century early into the next."
