National CAA policies around Europe on busting pilots who bust controlled airspace (and danger areas)

Timothy wrote:

Yeah, but not so irrelevant as not to be worth saying, eh?

If I stuck to saying things that were relevant then I would be mute!

Graham wrote:

I don’t think .762 (inches) is an actual calibre,

It’s pretty close to 12 bore funnily enough.

Well, a 12 bore wouldn’t make much of an impact on an aircraft passing at 1000’, so my point is definitely and unequivocally proved, right?

Peter wrote:

A 12 bore shotgun would not even reach a plane at 1000ft, surely?

You think? I hadn’t even thought of that,

Peter wrote:

Can anyone from mainland Europe offer input on what happens in their country?

So far, I have 3 encounters- first, my renter clipped a danger area. The ATC tried to remind him,but too late. Nothing happened, I got a letter describing the incident and that was it. The another two were related to my Mode-C acting up- it showed 300ft too high, so when exiting tallinn crt and reported “VAIDA outbound, 1200” they said me “max altitude 1200, radar shows 1500” . I replied that my altimeter and GPS are showing 1200 and that was all. Same thing happened when we approached EPBC , again transponder showed +300ft, they asked me to turn of mode-C and that, again, was all.

Timothy wrote:

Well, a 12 bore wouldn’t make much of an impact on an aircraft passing at 1000’, so my point is definitely and unequivocally proved, right?

Of course not. But a solid slug of about the same diameter as a 12 bore barrel propelled at the appropriate speed definitely would, and that is what .762 expressed as a calibre would be.

‘Bore’ as a barrel size is defined as the diameter of a sphere of lead weighing 1/X of a pound. So a sphere of lead weighing 1/12th of a pound fits down the barrel, which is why 20 bore is smaller and not larger.

Mostly irrelevant, but an interesting exercise in how the detail matters. Once one understands the detail, it is clear that the 1,200ft DA over Bisley is completely unnecessary. I doubt the CAA would be very interested in this sort of detail, i.e. what is actually being done at Bisley. What they prefer is a nice clear rule with a massive safety margin built in.

I am surprised that a 12 bore fired vertically will get a pellet that high. #7.5 shot are pretty small though, so the energy will be not far from zero for most of that travel. Certainly when shooting clays we fire them vertically (for an overhead clay) without a thought for where they might come down. Sometimes they land on the hangar roof at Enstone.

What is not stated is the powder loading assumed. Common 12 bore cartridges vary from 24g (a light loading for non-competitive clay shooting) to 32g or more for very high pheasants. The difference in recoil is considerable, and thus it must be the same for the range.

Fuji_Abound wrote:

Isnt there a particulalry lovely one about the billions (not millions) of pounds it costs the industry.

There was one mentioned earlier in this thread where I think it was reported that it was claimed by Gasco that the cost on the industry, of infringements, was £60 Million.

I have to admit that my first thought on reading it was to put that with the CAA’s claim that using a GPS prevented 80% of infringements, and wonder if that £60M should be used to buy 60,000 iPads, give them out free to pilots along with a two year subscription to a navigation app of their choice, and sit back and watch 80% of infringements instantly disappear!

Year two would only involve renewal fees, and iPads for newly qualified pilots The industry would be significantly ‘in profit’ in year two :)

Obviously it’s based on the figure being real, but it was probably made up.