Anyone with an EASA-non-UK license that has been required to attend the infringement course that denied to do so?
What was the outcome?
I’m not interested in speculation but rather in an actual occurrence.
The UK inform the relavent NAA and its up to them to take action as they feel appropriate
Will they provide evidence of the radar track and ATC audio to the NAA?
I’m interested in an actual occurrence since I think any half-decent NAA would not suspend a license, much more so if the aircraft had earlier been cleared to destination on an IFR clearance and that clearance was not amended along the way.
It may be different if that licence holder is based in the UK or based abroad.
Will they provide evidence of the radar track and ATC audio to the NAA?
They don’t even provide that to the alleged infringer let alone anyone else.
And I’m not joking either.
flybymike wrote:
The problem is that in the UK, failing to “volunteer“ information on an infringement, results in licence suspension and prosecution at the leisure and whim of the CAA, or the alternative of the Gasco course if you do volunteer the information.
No, that’s not what I meant. Peter said he thought he made a momentary infringement, so unprompted, he called ATC to apologise. That’s volunteering information. He wasn’t asked to do anything, but decided to volunteer information – and was punished for it. It’s likely he would have heard nothing of it hadn’t he brought attention to his momentary bust.
If you get a letter that you infringed, and write a factual account of what you did, that’s merely precisely answering the question that was asked.
Did your initial PPL instructor not teach you the first lesson when dealing with authorities: “never volunteer information”?
This was UK, 2001, so, no.
It may be different if that licence holder is based in the UK or based abroad.
I refer you to this famous post by a CAA/NATS (he worked in both at various times) senior official, now working for an avionics company promoting uncertified ADS-B products.
In reality if you live outside the UK it is indeed referred to your NAA. It is all they can do.
If Dimme can get input from a real “victim” I will be amazed. Almost nobody talks about it. I wrote up gasco and wrote up the process and get constant “conspiracy” branding from CAA/NATS staff and other assorted apologists on UK chat sites 
They don’t even provide that to the alleged infringer let alone anyone else.
NATS do send you your radar track but you don’t get audio unless you go to a court and plead NG, which needs solid steel balls, a good lawyer, and somebody else to fly your plane because your license will have been suspended at the start of your “non co-operation phase” which was the only way to get to a court on your own initiative in the first place!
It’s likely he would have heard nothing of it hadn’t he brought attention to his momentary bust.
That’s my view too, since they told me they had no busts that day, went away and checked and said again they had no busts that day. But obviously the call got logged, somebody investigated, and I got (a) sentenced to gasco and (b) another bust, no matter how minor, before June 2021, will suspend my license, pending some “retraining” process which is not documented but which, knowing from multiple sources how the “team” works , will be designed for maximum “p1ss me off” effect, given that I struggle to work out what “retraining” might work.
I’m aware of at least one pilot who requested a radar screenshot and audio tape. Neither was forthcoming.NATS do send you your radar track but you don’t get audio unless you go to a court and plead NG,
However, from what you say, policy appears to have now changed at least regarding radar track.
I’m aware of at least one pilot who requested a radar screenshot and audio tape. Neither was forthcoming.
What happened to him?
Why doesn’t he go public? This “system” carries on only because most victims keep their mouth shut, in fear of retribution. Well, on the UK forums, they get beaten up by the resident CAA/NATS staff…
PM sent.
