tomjnx wrote:
Yeah right, let’s replace modern technology which allows you to include graphic content like HD webcams (which gives you a pretty good indication of actual weather) with that last century teletype technology called NOTAM
I am like @Silvaire, sometimes I only decide in flight that I want to land at a certain aerodrome. In that case, I do check the NOTAMs in the air with an app, which works sufficiently well even with narrow bandwidth. If I have to additionally consult a website or make a phone call, it can be done (and I have done that as well), but it is just significantly more hassle.
The same argument holds true before a flight. I have to and will check NOTAMs anyway, even if the destination airfield is PPR. So why not put the relevant information in there and get rid of the PPR? It just takes away some of the freedom of flight. And I admit to pressing on towards an approaching front once, while overflying a PPR airfield and thinking “I don’t want the hassle of landing there without PPR”. In that case it swayed my decision so I made the destination (the weather stayed OK), but it generally doesn’t go towards safety.
And I am pretty sure to have seen NOTAMs to the effect of “south part of RW xx U/S”.
How many of those web pages are phone friendly?
Too damn right!
Has anybody tried bigginbooking.com on an android phone, firefox? It seems to run a massive javascript object which kills the browser for about 5 seconds at a time.
Completely useless and obviously not tested on the major client devices.
The website allows only UK inbounds, which is fair enough because the others should be on a flight plan. Unless one diverts there…
Developed by an outfit calling itself “Tag Websites”.
Strange, the website appears as a nice mobile site on my iPhone 6 using Safari. Works well too, i just registered myself.
LeSving wrote:
The problem with a web page is that it is a web page, one of millions, but NOTAMs are all at one place.
And all those back country small airfields you seem to be so fond of publish all relevant information rigorously by NOTAM but have a rotten webpage?
Norway must be completely different to Switzerland then, because here, NOTAMs are published quite sparingly, but the webpages of the airfields I frequent are always up to date.
I checked a few, LSZK LSZT LSZI LSZP they seem to be fairly up to date (last update today) and quite usable but not perfect with a phone
Switzerland is a different culture altogether. You need to visit for 5 minutes to realise it 
The pilot training system is fairly obviously very different to start with.
The UK really struggles with many issues, many of them historical, many caused by historical deficiencies in PPL training, many caused by current deficiencies in PPL training…
Is everyone on this forum really that inflexible?
Rwy20 wrote:
If I have to additionally consult a website or make a phone call, it can be done (and I have done that as well), but it is just significantly more hassle.
If it’s a fine day and everyone’s in the air, then just call on the aerodrome frequency, and I’m pretty sure someone is on the frequency who can help you.
If it’s a crappy day and it has rained a lot before, then it might make sense to know more about the runway state, in which case I’d ask info (or delta, if on an IFR plan) to find out.
Look, if you require the service level of an international H24 airport from all airfields, the result will be less airfields, which cannot be in the interest of anyone here.
Peter wrote:
much better PPL training than Europe
I don’t think this is true, at least not in such a blanket allegation. Flight Training is massively influenced by the individuals involved, completely independent of provenance.
Flyer59 wrote:
many of the german fields are in fact “public airports” (Verkehrslandeplatz) and those never have PPR, only the very small private ones can have PPR, but most don’t, they just have opening hours.
That is not completely true, EDXE for instance is classified as a Verkehrslandeplatz, yet is PPR during winter time. This has been introduced because the runway has been very wet during that time of year and only part of the runway can be used. We have refurbished the runway a couple of years ago and the problem isn’t that bad anymore, but the PPR during winter times stick because the aero club doesn’t want to have the Flugleitung permanently active. Also, we are permanently PPR for microlights, because we are located within a military CTR (HX) and a R/T license is mandatory, but not always issued with a microlight license. The permission can be obtained via radio prior entering the CTR.
Peter wrote:
So, we are not discussing all of the ones here which support flights to/from outside Germany?
It might help to explain the classification of airfields / airports in germany. There is a (legal) distinction between:
Flyer59 wrote:
Within the opening hours the radio will be answered. At least i have never experienced something else.
I have often, but usually I don’t care. Even the local authority doesn’t imply the Flugleiter has an obligation to operate a radio. His main use (and the problem in getting rid of a Flugleiter in Germany) is to initiate emergency procedures in case of an accident.
Flyer59 wrote:
The Flugleiters are paid by the owner of the public airport, which many times is the town or a private company that runs the airport.
There are many airfields (Rheine, Borken, Osnabrück, Achmer, Melle, Varrelbusch Texas-Airport, Detmold, Weser-Wümme, Krefeld – just to name a few from the top of my head) that are operated by local aero clubs. Often, the Flugleiter isn’t paid but it is a duty and part of mandatory aero club work hours and done by almost all of the pilots. Sometimes the owner of the restaurant is Flugleiter on weekdays. I don’t know if it is a good system, because many old blokes seem to think they are some “controller light”…
AdamFrisch wrote:
Ask any CFI. Are you suggesting it’s an impossibility?
Actually, I think the student should not have been allowed to fly solo cross country if the weather is about to become 900ft/low vis. In our OMM, the minima given for a student cross country are stable 8km visibility and 2000ft GND at least. However, turning back should always be in the toolset of any solo student, aswell as diverting to an other airfield. (I don’t let anyone solo, unless we have been to at least one of our neighboring airfields, just in case). Get-There-Itis or overambitious expectations to the flight training is something, the instructor has to sense and address in a student.
Doesn’t work all the time, after all, we all are mere mortals.
AdamFrisch wrote:
because they deny him landing in bad wx at an alternate because he doesn’t have PPR and he doesn’t want to “mess it up” by declaring an emergency?
I (and many Flight Instructors I know) teach that the student is captain of his ship. Unless there is a very valid reason against it (ATC guiding him to an airfield without fog, for example), no one working in an airfield barn or in ATC can deny him a safe landing. If he decides he needs to land, he lands. The ATCO, after all, goes home after the shift. I like my students to go home, too, after a flight. No one has the power to deny anyone a necessary landing on bureaucratic grounds, emergency or not.
AdamFrisch wrote:
Even if it happens to one person, isn’t that one too many?
No, that argument is invalid. You can argue towards a complete ban on aviation whatsoever with this argument. It can and must not be taken seriously.
tomjnx wrote:
which allows you to include graphic content like HD webcams
Only, you don’t see if the runway is wet or soft on a webcam (unless it’s drowned).
tomjnx wrote:
Quite frankly, I find all of these options much worse than the current “please take a look at our website for latest information about runway state before flight, thank you” which is unfortunately called PPR.
There is an other option: The pilot is responsible for his actions, and that includes his landing. If he isn’t comfortable flying to a grass runway after a period of heavy rain, he can opt to call a local pilot, or fly to an airfield with a concrete runway. Just because there is no obligation to call ahead, doen’t mean that you weren’t allowed to call someone on the airfield.
tomjnx wrote:
Incidentally, would “north half of runway waterlogged, use south half” be approved?
How about communicating that on the radio? Or signaling it with white crosses, as they are internationally understood ground markings?
tomjnx wrote:
And how about “burial service from 14:00-14:30, please don’t overfly the local cemetary during that time”
Do you call every vicar before flying over his church? After all, there might be a wedding or funeral. How about driving along a church or cemetery on a motorbike? Everywhere is someone who might hear your engine. You want to ask them all for permission?
If it has rained a lot, and I intend flying to a grass runway, then I do call ahead. I have actually in the past cancelled flights like that, even to aerodromes without PPR. But I don’t need a PPR obligation for this, it is in my own interest. Actually, it’s the R in PPR that I don’t like because it implies a position of power for the one giving it, which may be abused. And it makes me somehow feel that the place doesn’t really want visitors, but they may tolerate me flying in if they like me.
I think there is a different understanding of what constitutes a “PPR” at the basis of a lot of the disagreement on this thread. In the case of Biggin, I fail to see any valid argument for requiring prior notice that I could accept.
If I have to additionally consult a website or make a phone call, it can be done (…) but it is just significantly more hassle.
Hm. Amid the many activitities and hassles of flight preparation, ONE phone call is not really significant to me. Consulting one web page still less, there’s so many to consult, for meteo and notams and what not.
Jan_Olieslagers wrote:
Hm. Amid the many activitities and hassles of flight preparation, ONE phone call is not really significant to me.
Don’t take my quotes out of context, please. I was writing about a situation where I am in the air. And don’t try to make my quotes fit your purpose by shortening them.
