Results 1 to 9 of 9

Thread: Airprox..

  1. #1
    Co-Pilot Thedude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Location
    Meden Vale
    Posts
    316
    Thanks
    55
    Thanked 16 Times in 14 Posts
    http://www.missinglinkcables.co.uk Audio Consultants & Quality Hi Fi Equipment Sherwood Forest Nottingham


  2. #2
    Captain Sean McDonald's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Uk
    Posts
    1,516
    Blog Entries
    2
    Thanks
    133
    Thanked 68 Times in 63 Posts
    I've been in touch with the low flying unit re activity near me. They weren't interested


  3. #3
    Co-Pilot Thedude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Location
    Meden Vale
    Posts
    316
    Thanks
    55
    Thanked 16 Times in 14 Posts
    thats a shame it was suggested on the report that this was the best action..
    http://www.missinglinkcables.co.uk Audio Consultants & Quality Hi Fi Equipment Sherwood Forest Nottingham


  4. #4
    Co-Pilot Thedude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Location
    Meden Vale
    Posts
    316
    Thanks
    55
    Thanked 16 Times in 14 Posts
    Hi Russ i have talked to coningsby and barkston heath.. i also took up the BMAA offer of RAF invitation and contacted coningsby re Lincolnshire safety meetings but have received no reply... We are now on the map but still get a lost of military traffic including king air's through our space v low
    http://www.missinglinkcables.co.uk Audio Consultants & Quality Hi Fi Equipment Sherwood Forest Nottingham


  5. #5
    Captain MadamBreakneck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Essex UK
    Posts
    1,984
    Thanks
    159
    Thanked 270 Times in 210 Posts
    Bump - a different one. Microlight involved. Pilot Aware involved. Sort-of helped due AG operator awake.

    https://www.airproxboard.org.uk/uplo...%202019220.pdf

    Interested me because I spent a good few years giving microlight instruction at this airfield.



    Back to just bimbling in the TST.

    No longer instructing - just pontificating..
    and now a Tai Chi instructor


  6. #6
    Trainee Pilot _Red_'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2019
    Location
    Monmouthshire
    Posts
    47
    Thanks
    9
    Thanked 8 Times in 8 Posts
    Purposefully planning to cross the overhead of an active training airfield at 1500ft without talking to them seems an odd plan to me

  7. The Following User Says Thank You to _Red_ For This Useful Post:

    Randombloke (15-02-20)


  8. #7
    Captain Randombloke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Western Europe
    Posts
    1,175
    Thanks
    388
    Thanked 219 Times in 172 Posts
    The jaundiced view of a free flyer would be that there is way too much controlled airspace at low level, despite modern CAT performance in climb, both aircraft had transponders, but they are not much use without a traffic service, and that although it's a busy airfield, it's Class G airspace. One lot of airspace forces someone into another one.

    Whilst it would have been a good idea to talk to the airfield if passing overhead at 1,500ft, its not as though the pilot wasn't using the radio, a listening squawk demonstrates that. Unfortunately, a non radar unit.

    Transponders will only show up on PilotAware as targets with a location if the transponder is mode S + extender squitter, which makes it full ADS-B, or if there are PilotAware ground stations close enough to facilitate an accurate location via MLAT. Thankfully there was an ADS-B trial on. Again, unfortunately, despite seeing the opportunity to allow uncertified GPS into the EC pool, and the trial supporting that, SIL=0 still means screened out.

    Airspace is often overly complicated and out of proportion to the need for it, and did anyone mention Farnborough? We could ask if Stapleford justifies an ATZ with Class D (if indeed it is Class D, swift look at SkyDemon doesn't say...) and North Weald remains in G with no ATZ, is that balanced and proportional?

    As a non transponder aircraft, that area is a PITA to navigate and it could be argued that the complexity of airspace makes for choke points a plenty and the easy mistake of infringement.

    And even the AGO being helpful was not spared sore böllöcks in the Airprox investigation.

    Also:

    "Electronic Warning System Operation and Compliance were assessed as ineffective because although the Quik’s PilotAware detected the C150, the pilot seemingly did not assimilate the
    information at the time."

    The board doesn't understand what a bearingless target is on PilotAware. There is no location information to assimilate. "There's an aircraft somewhere. Where? No indication." By the same criteria, the transponders are chocolate teapots. They NEVER give any direct information. Why is the PAW blamed for the lack of Electronic Warning?

    So, who was the good guy? Oh, the investigators....

    YMMV.
    Steve U.
    PG, HG & microlights
    "Weekend bimbler, day to day car driver & genuinely undeserving Southern oik who has never done anything of any worth"

  9. The Following User Says Thank You to Randombloke For This Useful Post:

    Arielarts (16-02-20)


  10. #8
    Captain MadamBreakneck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Essex UK
    Posts
    1,984
    Thanks
    159
    Thanked 270 Times in 210 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Randombloke View Post
    ... We could ask if Stapleford justifies an ATZ with Class D (if indeed it is Class D, swift look at SkyDemon doesn't say...) and North Weald remains in G with no ATZ, is that balanced and proportional?
    My recollection, reinforced by the AIP, is that Stapleford is a licensed aerodrome with an A/G service and class G airspace.



    Back to just bimbling in the TST.

    No longer instructing - just pontificating..
    and now a Tai Chi instructor

  11. The Following User Says Thank You to MadamBreakneck For This Useful Post:

    Randombloke (16-02-20)


  12. #9
    Trainee Pilot _Red_'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2019
    Location
    Monmouthshire
    Posts
    47
    Thanks
    9
    Thanked 8 Times in 8 Posts
    IIRC, all ATZs adopt the classification of the immediately surrounding airspace


Similar Threads

  1. just filed my first Airprox
    By Thedude in forum Microlight Discussion
    Replies: 21
    Last Post: 25-09-16, 11:27 AM
  2. My airprox
    By nigel in forum Microlight Discussion
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 04-03-16, 01:57 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •