Cub wrote:
You are completely correct to mention a Just Culture and the whole premise of CAP 1404 is to deliver a constructive and proportionate response based around proper examination of causal factors and risk, whilst endeavouring to stop the necessity of applying the judicial system to these safety events and criminalising the perpetrators
I don’t know. Looking from the outside here, and I have never flown in the UK, the essence of the matter seems to me to be that the CAA/CAP or whatever has taken upon themselves to act as a judge in both a criminal case and a following civil case. Only the matter is potential risk rather than real criminal offence and real material damage. In the normal world you will be judged if real negligence or recklessness was proven in a criminal court, and in the question of damage, real damage, would be set in a civil court independently.
In “your” system, the question of proving recklessness or negligence is irrelevant. The question of real damage is also irrelevant. The only relevant thing is whether or not an infringement has been done (reported by ATC), and if so, what was the potential risk associated with that infringement. The poor pilot who has done the infringement has no saying in the matter. The question of negligence/recklessness is irrelevant and the question of damage is purely theoretical, a risk assessment by some analysts, but used as a measure of how severe the “punishment” shall be.
This is very, very far from a proper legal system. There is no resemblance at all. This is a modern form of a witch hunt, made possible because the normal judicial system is bypassed. It is also equally far away from Just Culture. In Just Culture the single only point is to find faults in the system. Then do what it takes to correct this system.
Surreal is my take on this.
On the topic of tracking down non Mode S contacts, this 2014 survey is pretty interesting.
Since it has been illegal for some years to install a fresh Mode C (except as a replacement for exactly the same already-installed model) any increase on the numbers in this survey will be Mode S installations.
I recall the infamous 2003 Red Arrows RAT bust, when four or five aircraft infringed the zone but the only one prosecuted was the hapless pilot who identified himself via his squawk.
The lessons which some pilots might have learnt from this are obvious.
At the time AOPA condemned the CAA for effectively shooting itself in the foot. They have not been so vociferous about the current state of affairs however, and some have suggested a possible reason for this.
I recall a more recent one where the only one(s) who got busted were those who didn’t turn off their transponders.
Provocative as this obviously is, the burden of proof in a criminal conviction is substantial. If there is no radio contact, poor low level radar coverage, combined with a lack of airfield logs, etc how can they find the pilot?
In the car sphere, it is easy – if you get the number plate. AIUI, the police merely has to ask the registered owner of the car. The person who he nominates as the driver at the time gets busted. If he refuses to co-operate, he gets busted. @Timothy will know the exact procedure. Does the same principle apply with aircraft?
Fenland_Flyer wrote:
a most interesting thread with no particular outcome
I disagree. The principal beneficial outcome is that people are talking about infringements. Nearly 1000 consecutive posts all containing the word “infringement”. Those of us working for years in trying to get pilots to think about infringements could not be happier than with the attention they are now getting.
Thank you all.
The next job is to get through to the thousands of pilots who rarely or never engage with any communication medium, official or unofficial.
a most interesting thread with no particular outcome
Yes.
Almost every “official” input on this thread has been the party line, which the officials know is the right thing for all of us.
Throw in the current lingo like “just culture” (which doesn’t exist for GA) and the picture of what is good for us all is complete 
The rest of the thread has been mostly trying to make sense of the nonsense which is used to prop it up – e.g. CAP1404 which despite having been written by a barrister is so ambiguous it is largely meaningless.
I think Timothy is correct. I think raising awareness is important both to enable pilots to be aware that the consequences are reasonably serious, and because the regulator and the representative organisations have done such an appalling job of keeping everyone properly informed of the process.
I also think Peter is correct. It is utterly depressing that there are a group of people that are so self satisfied with there own position that they have convinced themselves there is no other point of view.
Still, no change there. We appear blessed with elderly folk, who have little better to do with their time, than sit on committees of this sort, with a total unwillingness to engage with those people for whom they claim to be doing such good work. It is pervasive in parts of our society and very damaging, but difficult to change beause no one else wants to do it, and these organsiation are all but impossible to change, because they resit change at all cost, for obvious reasons.
Sadly, it will damage GA, which is why I believe it is so important that pressure is maintained, and I have no doubt there will be regular discussion and analysis of the data (such that it is) and on going scrutiny of the process.
I think there will be more F of I requests, and I think there will be a growing number of complaints to the MPs responsible, and to the upper echelons of the CAA.
How you could take the line that is taken with any conscience or integrity I find utterly shocking. As but one example, I simply could not address a room of intelligent people on the pretext of promoting safety in aviation, while actively suppressing any discussion of the events that lead them to be in that room in the first place, nor could I be part of any process with that end product. I accept that is me, but I do hope they take a moment to consider their own position.
PS nearly end of July and no June figures yet?
Peter – I think it might. If I can find time, I shall be writing to him in detail.
