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)

Standby – I find it interesting why some people get upset when searching questions are asked?

The reality is asking questions makes us better pilots. We ask, because when things appear not to add up we are inquisitve. There are often simple and straight forward answers. When this is the case, we are content.

When it isnt the case, it may be indicative there is an aspect we have all missed.

In this case, as indeed in most, it is only the data that can quantitatively reveal whether a particular effort to improve safety is working.

I agree it takes time for the evidence to become available, but if the data isnt collected from the off, then time has already been wasted.

Whether Peter is right, I dont know, but I support his position because by any reasonable analysis if hours flown are falling, unless something else is going on, it seems highly unlikely infringements would be rising.

We definitely can go on enjoying our flying. We can decide whether to leave how flying is organised and regulated to someone else (as many do), or we can decide to be part of that process. One reason we might get nvolved is that there are plenty of occasions in the past when leaving it to others has produced the wrong result.

In a strange way if the stats. are true, all the efforts to reduce infringements over very many years have been badly conceived, because the number of infringements has risen significantly, whilst the hours flown have fallen. If true, that would point to failed response, after failed response. In industry, that consequence would result in the directors or MD being sacked, and someone else brought in to get it right.

For the avoidance of any douubt, I dont believe for a moment that it is likely the analogy above is correct for the reasons Peter has given, and I think to publish stats that suggest the number of infringements is going up is far more dangerous than this debate, and far more likely to be exactly the material the Daily Mail would make good capital out of.

Ridiculing someone who asks difficult questions and challenges the official line, calling them a conspiracy theorist, that is the oldest trick in the book for trying to shut down a debate.

Not very subtle and usually indicative of someone, often not the smartest, from within or associated with the system who has a vested interest in seeing that debate quashed. Smarter operators would join the debate in a constructive fashion and use subtle nudges to advance their agenda.

It is related to the ‘oh look, a squirrel’ tactic.

EGLM & EGTN

Most pilots that fly anywhere other than their local area over the last 15 years have been using moving map GPS, starting with the first Garmin IIIs/GNS430 types. This last 3-5 years these moving map GPS have been increasingly replaced by much more capable tablet/app devices which not only show you airspace but all Notams, weather and vertical airspace profiles. Additionally, light GA activity has supposedly decreased steadily over the last 15 years.

So to my mind it is very improbable that the number of airspace busts in the last 3-5 years could have increased. That the number of reported busts is increasing so much means the just has to be something different happening with the reporting in the last 3-5 years. The reporting criteria just has to have changed for this to happen in the face of increasingly capable navigation tools.

So no, I dont think its a conspiracy. I think its just more data – and the data recorded is busts. “Massaging” is the wrong word.

Regards, SD..

@standby
It’s difficult to look at the graph Peter posted and not ask the question, “what’s going on with infringements if the numbers are up?” It seems pretty obvious something has changed and the discussion here is straightforwardly about that. The hypotheses might or might not be correct, but these aren’t conspiracy theories.

Either 1) airspace has become more complex, making infringements more likely; or 2) technology makes enforcement easier; or 3) a political decision has been made to pursue enforcement in cases that were ignored in the past; or 4) some combination of the above. His use of the phrase “massaging the data” was infelicitous perhaps, but the discussion is relevant to those of us who really fly anywhere.

Tököl LHTL

I agree that “massaging” carries the connotation of a deliberate act, but publishing stats which show a strong upward trend, while steadily enhancing the reporting process so it produces increasing numbers, and then introducing stronger punishments for infringing pilots while using the “upward trend” justification, is one of

  • disingenuous (pretty similar to “massaging”)
  • there is some process which is making pilots less and less careful (more mis-use of GPS, changing mission profiles, CAS becoming more complicated, etc)

I am sure the CAA is not ignorant as a pig. They have access to way more data than they publish. For example, at each CAA medical or (IIRC) license application, you disclose your hours to date, etc. They know GA flying hours are not rising.

And I don’t think there is more mis-use of GPS; it seems clear the mission profiles are the same old burger runs to the same old watering holes, and CAS has not significantly changed in many years.

So my money is on the first one

The Q is WHY. I think somebody is trying to look tough. You get this here and there in all big organisations; usually it is implemented by shafting the supply chain because shafting anyone else (customers or employees) is not so popular

I had to look up “infelicitous”

Administrator
Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom

5) another possibility is that as people drop out of GA, only the crappy pilots (that’s us) remain; we’re getting worse as we get older, so infringements are up! :)

Tököl LHTL

I suppose it is possible, but would it not imply that GPS has caused navigation to go downhill?

There is a more complicated scenario: GPS has improved lateral navigation but not made much difference to vertical navigation. I think this is obviously true. And the vastly improved detection and reporting of CAS busts is causing a lot more vertical busts getting picked up than say 10 years ago.

A supporting statistic for the above proposition is e.g. here where (March 2018 v. March 2019) the CTR busts remained at 15 while TMA busts rose dramatically from 8 to 25. I am sure those 25 were always there, every March for last 50 years or whatever, but it took CAIT, better reporting, disciplinary measures against ATCOs failing to report, the CAA going after everyone, rapidly growing use of Mode S, etc, to unearth them.

Administrator
Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom

Peter wrote:

There is a more complicated scenario: GPS has improved lateral navigation but not made much difference to vertical navigation. I think this is obviously true. And the vastly improved detection and reporting of CAS busts is causing a lot more vertical busts getting picked up than say 10 years ago.

Disagree with the first bit – Most Tablet/apps now have a vertical profile for planning and as you fly meaning that it is now much harder to screw up vertically than it was with the older moving map GPS.
Because of this I agree with you on the second bit – the reporting of such infringements must be on the increase.

Regards, SD..

Last Edited by skydriller at 11 Jul 15:51

Most Tablet/apps now have a vertical profile for planning and as you fly meaning that it is now much harder to screw up vertically than it was with the older moving map GPS.

Unless you are flying an unplanned route and relying on warnings from the tablet to keep you out of CAS. And the vast majority of these apps have no aircraft intercom connection (it’s not trivial to do).

Administrator
Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom

Or there are simply as many as before but now with ADSB and mode S all can be caught while before loads of them went unnoticed or could not be traced.

LSZH(work) LSZF (GA base), Switzerland
Sign in to add your message

Back to Top