Menu Sign In Contact FAQ
Banner
Welcome to our forums

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

He said most of his pilots have absolutely no clue what airspace class they are in.

Of course; that’s how “classical IFR” works

It’s also hard to keep a lookout. Have a go in an airliner sim and you can see … very little around you.

I must admit that the Land Rover and the sand dunes had me baffled…..

Maybe it is a subliminal message, visible only to those selected 20/month who had the privilege of attending the course?

The written words are definitely total bollox though and I cannot understand how this got through. And how this “charity” is spending money on this kind of garbage.

Administrator
Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom

flybymike wrote:

I must admit that the Land Rover and the sand dunes had me baffled…..

The link on the GASCo web to the Infringement section appears to have disappeared or is not working.

Does anyone know their CAA policies on access to ATC voice tapes, if there is an alleged infringement?

I have heard some interesting bits about the UK. Apparently, upon receipt of an MOR, and a request to the ATC unit, the tape of the incident is quarantined, but only the CAA can get access. You cannot. So the entire “CAA-internal judicial process” is done with them having the tape but you not having it. Anyway you have no right to be heard, anyway.

The only way you can get access is if you take it to a court case. Obviously this is a high risk strategy because once it comes to a court you could get a huge bill unless found not guilty.

It’s a good reason to record all ATC calls, but there is no easy way to do it without recording all cockpit audio. We have been there before. It is easy but not exactly a “friendly” thing to be doing when you have passengers. Even if they consent (they usually will) nobody really likes it, not least because you can’t discuss various topics.

Administrator
Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom

I have heard some interesting bits about the UK. Apparently, upon receipt of an MOR, and a request to the ATC unit, the tape of the incident is quarantined, but only the CAA can get access. You cannot. So the entire “CAA-internal judicial process” is done with them having the tape but you not having it. Anyway you have no right to be heard, anyway.

A frequent poster on Flyer, (ex controller and current instructor) had to take the online course after an alleged infringement when talking to an ATC unit and using a discrete squawk given by that ATC unit. At no point was he advised of any infringement by ATC or of any MOR report, and was completely unaware of any infringement until advised by the CAA several weeks after the flight in question. He requested further details of the infringement and sight of radar screen shots and a copy of the relevant tape extract. None of these were provided and he was advised that the infringement would remain on his record for possible future licensing action.

Egnm, United Kingdom

flybymike wrote:

None of these were provided and he was advised

On my infringement, the NATS email was fairly detailed:

The email from the CAA a couple days later didn’t contain many details (other than date / time / airspace / registration), but I didn’t request for more because
1) the NATS email was pretty clear
2) I knew very well what had happened.

Last Edited by Noe at 22 Aug 13:10

If the CAA dont provide fully details I find it very hard to understand how this could remotely be considered an educational excercise?

Even with speeding you get a nice photo! (I am lead to believe).

Fuji_Abound wrote:

Even with speeding you get a nice photo! (I am lead to believe).

You mean you can get away from CAS busts by saying you were flying over the Moon?



Last Edited by Ibra at 22 Aug 13:49
Paris/Essex, France/UK, United Kingdom

Even with speeding you get a nice photo!

Only if you don’t accept the speeding awareness course or Fixed Penalty Notice, and choose to go through the CJS, so the system is analogous.

(sorry about all the edits, mods changed my post incorrectly)

Last Edited by Timothy at 22 Aug 14:24
EGKB Biggin Hill

Except that the latter costs about 10x to 100x more in the aviation case…

I have hotlinked your acronyms, to help the thousands of readers who won’t know them, and the 2nd one doesn’t even (readily) google to anything. It would help if you did that

I wonder if in other countries an infringer has an opportunity to present his side of the story and any mitigating circumstances. Of course, if the matter is dealt with in a civilised manner (e.g. a phone call) which seems to be the case everywhere except the UK, then you can do exactly that!

Administrator
Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom

I wonder when offered the GASCo course the automatic response should be that I cant determine whether or not it is warranted without all the evidence to support or the opportunity to set out mitigating factors?

I would be surprised if the CAA took this as a refusal, and the automatic response was that the only alternative is for the matter to proceed to Court? I also cant imagine the Court would be especially impressed once the course had been offered, if the offendee wasnt reasonably provided with the information in order for him to determine whether or not he had been “fairly” processed?

Doubtless Timothy will have a view?

Sign in to add your message

Back to Top