Peter wrote:
Of course the radar videos are always presented at Gasco (and every NATS seminar) where everybody just groans…
Perfect description, made me chuckle.
I saw this whilst browing the flying mags whilst waiting at a flight school and thought it was semi relevant to the discussions.
[ image upload fixed ]
My guess would be that those who were let off were ex RAF, or serving military 
Most of those driving the new CAA policy are ex RAF and the two principals are ex RAF ATC.
Peter wrote:
In the Gasco day I did (I wrote up the notes here) most claimed they used GPS.
I still struggle to see how GPS will solve anything, whatever it is that shall be solved here (in detail). Radio and transponder is a much better tool in this respect. The brain can only absorb and deal with (in a correct manner) a certain amount of information at any given time no matter what. Planning gives the brain time to store and process information over a longer period of time up front, giving the brain a fighting chance to react correctly to “distractions”.
It’s rather stupid not using a moving map GPS when flying, considering it is so readily available and easy to use. But relying only on the GPS is equally stupid. Terrain and airspaces are static information that can be processed and stored up front instead of doing it on the fly.
Indeed; GPS is not the issue here.
It is usually a factor in the really major busts (somebody flying overhead a major airport and maybe same on the way back; to do those you really need to use dead reckoning ). These are fortunately rare.
Most people who end up in the UK punishment pipeline are ones who used Mode S (so were easily identified), used GPS (so the infringement was minor), and made some brief cockup. In the past you got told off by ATC, and an apology dealt with it. That option has been removed by the current “team” at the CAA, along with some other changes e.g. it is a disciplinary offence for an ATCO to not report it (which is really serious re his/her employment). Other factors we have done to death e.g. the UK’s 3000ft/5000ft add-on delivers a steady stream of “loss of separation” events.
What drives the current mad policy is a mystery, not least because nobody else in Europe does anything like it.
I wrote to Grant Shapps MP (the Minister form Transport) re these issues. He is no doubt busy as hell, with Thomas Cook bankrupcy, etc, and passed the letter to the head of GA at the DfT who replied.
The reply is the expected CAA / Gasco line, so at least this DfT chap is behind them on this.
He did confirm some points I made earlier and which some here didn’t believe e.g. “you note correctly that this results in fewer warning letters being sent in the winter months, when a higher proportion of the infringements result in the pilot being required to attend [Gasco] … seasonal variations in the numbers of infringements result in different levels of prioritisation being required at different times of the year”.
He does believe that infringements are rising, so that misunderstanding needs to be addressed, because they can’t be rising against the background of declining activity overall.
because they can’t be rising against the background of declining activity overall.
Run that logic past me?
hmmm, no
So, all that can said has been said? So why keep resurrecting the thread?
Plenty of times you have been told why reported infringements are on the rise, yet you just churn out the mantra that they can’t be rising. Why do you bother?
Timothy – sorry, I have missed the plenty of times told – why are they on the rise, the number of pilots infringing?
