Yesterday, flying to do an ILS at Lydd EGMD, somebody in a Cessna (probably coming back from Le Touquet or some such) was flying right through the 3200ft platform. He actually earlier told Lydd ATC he was at 3500ft… Thanks to my £12k TCAS I did avoid him by doing a rapid climb (got a late warning as usual with 12 o’clock targets, due to a somewhat dodgy installation; 1-2nm) but as he passed under me it would have been very close; in the tens of metres at most.
The Q is how could this be taught? IFR is quite studiously avoided in PPL training, in case some pilots get the idea that it is useful 
This happens a lot. I have seen piston twins fly through Shoreham’s 2200ft platform…
Not sure what you can “teach” about it. Sure enough, during one’s PPL training, every student will be advised at least once to avoid doing it if at all possible. What else should possibly be done?
UK CAA charts are actually good in this regard, as they show the final approaches of any ILS. I think no other CAA’s chart does that.
boscomantico wrote:
Not sure what you can “teach” about it. Sure enough, during one’s PPL training, every student will be advised at least once to avoid doing it if at all possible. What else should possibly be done?
I was certainly not given such an advice during my PPL training. This is of course not surprising given the small number of IFR airfields in Hungary (and all of them has a Class F TIZ around them). However, when I did my US BFR in California the instructor specifically asked me about those Class E extensions on the sectional and when I told him that as a VFR pilot flying only in VMC they were not of any interest to me, he could not have been happier with my answer. I still can’t really see why should instrument approaches be of any concern to a VFR pilot? If it’s IMC, there should be no VFR flights there. If it’s VMC, the IFR pilot should be on lookout no matter if he is flying an instrument approach. Of course this is far from perfect, but I don’t see the difference between an instrument approach path vs any other airspace with somewhat higher traffic. It also helps a lot if the respective country has a system where pilots in the same general area talk on the same frequency.
JnsV wrote:
but I don’t see the difference between an instrument approach path vs any other airspace with somewhat higher traffic
You are right – they both should be avoided whenever practical. Legally nothing keeps you from orbiting (without talking to anybody) at a VRP for a controlled airport just outside the class D airspace. This is where all the VFR arrivals and departures meet at more or less the same altitude – not everything that is legal is good airmanship. Same for an instrument approach, particularly near the FAF.
I have also had someone fly through the approach in front of me. I was certainly taught not to do this during my PPL training. It’s basic airmanship, but perhaps that’s what is not being taught these days. On the other hand, I think some pilots are operating at 100% of their mental capacity just dealing with their own flying and don’t have the ability to think about anything else. I see the same thing with driving, only there is a lot more of it to observe – either thoughtlessness or task-saturation.
It should be covered as part of the TK aspects of the PPL. But they are frankly not fit for purpose.
From the practical point of view its difficult. They may not be located close to your home base.
Did Lydd “warn” him that there was instrument traffic on the approach?
Good airmanship should dictate you try to avoid the instrument approaches and the meaning of IAP ‘fleches’ on the charts should be covered in PPL training. However, if the IAPs are in Class G then it’s see and avoid by all parties, if someone is speaking to the relevant unit they have done better than a lot of others you see.
Playing a bit devils of devils advocate here, but Why should they have to move because someone wants (as opposed to needs – we are talking VFR here) to do a long approach?
They also won’t know platform attitudes etc. Creating 2 barriers of 10 nm each side of the airfield seems over the top.
It isn’t necessarily VFR. The aircraft flying the IAP is generally IFR (even practice approaches are likely to be in IMC at least at the platform) and, in the UK for sure, other traffic could fly around in IMC, non-radio even. What would make a great deal of sense is avoiding the platform altitude itself, even if you aren’t going to avoid the proximity of the airport. Lydd has a 14D DME arc (no idea why) and a level portion from 14D to 8.5D and then the glideslope starts. All this is at 3200ft.
Fuji – I got the impression Lydd probably did warn the said plane about somebody flying the procedure, but they still descended from 3500 to 3200ft (or maybe their altimeter was way off, on a FL or something).
Perhaps a smart thing would be to note the platform altitudes on the VFR chart. That is the time you are exposed for the longest time. Won’t happen of course, but worth discussing.
