First one looks like a genuine error.
Looking at his 2nd infringement, his planning was not really clever. You cannot go between Booker ATZ and the LTMA if you fly in the SW quadrant of the ATZ. and planning to be just outside that quadrant and dive just at the right time is foolish.
3rd one, he had planned Lee on Solent as a turnpoint. So not an in-flight error. Planning error or, in this case, plain not knowing the rules. (we can then argue if it is failing in initial training, recurring training or personal knowledge refreshing)
I like his videos but some show a lack of preparation like the one whre he flies in Belgium and Netherlands on his way to Norway.
Learnt gliding 10 years ago and ATZ were in the syllabus.
I’d argue even the first one was a planning mistake. If one looks at the track immediately before the infringement, the plan has obviously been to follow exactly the boundary of the airspace – although there has been room to the north-west to stay away by a margin. Clear result of a “I don’t take airspaces seriously” mindset – at least obviously not as seriously as granite. Nobody would plan to fly along a granite wall in IMC by GPS only with just a planned distance of 50m …
Peter wrote:
The ATZ business is very recent too. I was never taught in the PPL (2000-2001) about ATZs having any relevance
Might well be – when I did my PPL they did not even teach us GPS (as it hasn’t been around for aviation use back then). Still I learned it and now use it decently proficient.
A red Circle with a thick dotted line around it on the map might cause the pilot to consider that it is something relevant – and if this very pilot doesn’t positively know that this big red circle is not relevant to his specific flight he better checks before.
Well sure this guy is a really bad advert for GA (I have not watched his other videos) but to praise the gasco “course” is just bizzare. And as I said he misses the other points by a mile.
The 5000ft add-on practically ensures that anyone just-infringing the EGKK CTA / LTMA will “conflict” with an Easyjet, sending the whole “system” into a mandatory panic. I ran Foreflight on an EJ flight a couple of weeks ago and captured the altitudes on the way out of the LTMA, and coming back in. The 5000ft add-on is a wonderful MOR generator, and gasco “charity” coffer filler 
When I told about this 5000ft add-on to an Easyjet captain, he just laughed; he could not believe the stupidity of it.
Sure one could argue everything is a planning error. And indeed, nowadays, I do UK flights mostly programmed at a single level, autopilot-flown. My two busts were both the result of talking to passengers, so when I filled in the NATS+CAA forms, in the field on what will I do to stop it happening again, I put I won’t be flying with passengers and if I do I won’t be talking to them! Of course I got gasco for that – you have the wrong RAF attitude, young man! Well, the single-level all-autopilot method is fine, too, and at say 4200ft, to clear the LTMA, you are also above nearly all non-transponding traffic (of which there is a lot these days, thanks to the CAA policy). But no sightseeing, which is another thing I said. Also I stopped pilot mentoring; that’s really dangerous now (school instructors now mostly turn off the transponder).
Id argue that the pilot (any pilot) should in the first place be able to plan to cross the airspace as opposed to skirting it, and in the second instance if deciding to go around airspace, the pilot should be able to talk to the controller of said airspace, be known traffic and hence not be a problem if he were to inadvertently cross the imaginary line. For some reason there is a desire in certain countries to segregate and cause confrontation between airspace users and ATC rather than to accommodate and engage with all airspace users and ATC.
Regards, SD..
Peter wrote:
but to praise the gasco “course” is just bizzare.
Maybe that attitude is why he got ‘retraining’ rather than provisional suspension after his third infringement? I understood that most infringements after a Gasco course are provisional suspension. So maybe his attitude was strategically useful to himself rather than his true feelings?
Yes; he got a warning letter. When I did mine, most got the online exam on the 1st offence (which the majority failed; it was rigged to fail – see the thread on that) and then if you failed that you got gasco right away.
As a result of EuroGA airing this topic over the past 2-3 years, many are now getting warning letters. When I did mine, few got those. Also almost nobody is getting the online exam, after that was exposed as a fraud primarily intended to stuff gasco coffers.
At gasco, a show of hands showed almost the whole room being 1st time offenders – at great displeasure to the ex mil chap in charge, but it was his colleague who asked for the show of hands To give you a taste of that ex mil guy, he told a joke during lunch (which was supervised by each “instructor” sitting at a table, to make sure the discussion was fully on-message): a guy goes into a restaurant and says he wants gluten-free, and asks what they recommend; answer: get a taxi. Might have been funny 50 years ago.
I understood that most infringements after a Gasco course are provisional suspension
That is what the sham of CAP1404 says, but a) this is denied by everybody running this system and b) the published stats suggest that is the case. I reckon they are reserving the “suspension next step after gasco” for people who did something bigger, or people they really don’t like But they need to be careful with actual suspensions because they really p1ss off the client and I know of some where the client engaged a barrister…
In the poster’s defence I thought it was helpful in a. presenting his personal case studies in a friendly and transparent way b. highlighting that the PPL course probably needs updating to ensure it meets the complexity of UK airspace.
The IR is quite structured in ensuring candidates understand planning a diversion OCAS, and it also relies on radio navigation. Perhaps the PPL needs some more radio nav cross country but then this is likely to increase the burden of the PPL, and there are plenty of pilots who operate competently OCAS with just compass, mark 1 eyeball and clock.
The qualifying PPL cross country tends to be quite pre cooked with only a couple of routes that have been road tested by the ATO, so not sure how deep into planning the typical PPL goes.
This isn’t just a UK scenario, in the USA I don’t believe flying through a TFR is treated that leniently. I can’t remember the checkride FAA REG, but you are potentially having to revalidated all licences and ratings after a suspension.
It isn’t clear why UK airspace is not ‘joined up’, perhaps an over zealous (and somewhat un British ideological fetish) policy of privatisation (both governing parties taking this concept to unrealistic levels), but blaming the CAA is heavy handed. The problems of poor airspace design are political, not because of the regulator. A GASCO course in some ways is not a bad muddly British solution, and no, I don’t think anyone in GASCO is becoming personally rich out of administering them.
RobertL18C wrote:
It isn’t clear why UK airspace is not ‘joined up’, perhaps an over zealous (and somewhat un British ideological fetish) policy of privatisation (both governing parties taking this concept to unrealistic levels)
@RobertL18C, especially, being an IT guy and knowing that the systems can cross-connect, so even if privatised they could communicate.
RobertL18C wrote:
, but blaming the CAA is heavy handed. The problems of poor airspace design are political, not because of the regulator. A GASCO course in some ways is not a bad muddly British solution, and no, I don’t think anyone in GASCO is becoming personally rich out of administering them.
I think it comes from the DfT and the CAA here is just doing what it is told, as CAA is not really making major policy decisions – that is in the hands of the Department for Transport.
My observations:
All three of his infringements are a combination of planning and airborne issues. He plans a ‘tight’ routing and if you’re going to do that then you’d better be sharp about flying it… and he demonstrably isn’t sharp about flying it. The last one may be a bit different – I don’t know if he planned to be low enough to penetrate the ATZ – but him not knowing you can’t just blunder through an ATZ is not ok.
He comes across to me as one of those people whose brain (and mouth, in the videos) is always going at a million miles an hour and doesn’t give themselves the time to notice and appreciate important stuff. He’s evidently just not paying enough attention (while airborne) to where he is and where there that might become a problem. He obviously flies quite a lot so the usual low currency = low proficiency thing doesn’t apply, which makes it really quite concerning.
3 hours of navigation training isn’t going to fix this. He knows how to navigate (it isn’t with a stopwatch and compass – giving him training in dead-reckoning is laughable) and he knows about controlled airspace (and ATZs, now). The problem is that he just isn’t giving the matter the attention it requires because his brain is 500 steps ahead (rather than the necessary 5).
The contrition, praising the CAA for their reasonableness and praising the GASCO course is a very obvious PR exercise, as is all the stuff about “I never knew how serious it was!” Unless there are massive extenuating circumstances he’ll probably lose his licence next time it happens, so he needs to make it really clear that he has exactly the attitude the CAA want to see.
RobertL18C wrote:
and there are plenty of pilots who operate competently OCAS with just compass, mark 1 eyeball and clock.
I really doubt that is true I would impressed if anyone of these guys fly Elstree to Lognes today with Mode-S? (not Lindbergh era)
The majority, just fly in familiar local area, nearby places they know by heart, easy weather & familiar airspace (or low, non-TXP), it’s bloody easy to eyeball navigation in J3 Cub with Michelin map at 500ft agl in familiar nearby place or Glider 300km XC in Scotland on familiar task, I doubt it’s feasible on trip to say Belgium in some wood & fabric single seater, I figure out that getting lost with 2h fuel endurance means death
