Primarily for general aviation discussion, but other aviation topics are also welcome.
#1837796
Irv Lee wrote:@skydriller and @Full Metal Jackass who other than pilots who use them without reading tbe small print think that UK ATC will call before an infringement happens?


Not sure what you are saying here, but Im under no illusions that a listening squawk gives you less than a basic service, so therefore nothing, hence I just cant see the point of it, though Im aware others like the idea.

Irv Lee wrote:I also remember some loud complaints by "ego-hurt" pilots when Farnborough used to proactively warn them they would infringe if they didn't descend/turn very soon!


This is daft if pilots really think this way. The last time I was in the UK I was indeed asked by Farnborough if I was aware of airspace, and no, I wasnt annoyed but happy someone was looking out for me even though I run SD. No different to the last time I was on a French FIS in class G and was asked if I could possibly decend 500ft (as there was commercial traffic on approach) and was happy to comply, its a two way street.

Regards, SD..
johnm liked this
#1837800
skydriller wrote:
Irv Lee wrote:@skydriller and @Full Metal Jackass who other than pilots who use them without reading tbe small print think that UK ATC will call before an infringement happens?


Not sure what you are saying here,
Regards, SD..

They are there for atc to solve an infringement within seconds after atc alerted to it, with the hope of avoiding stopping arrivals/departures - once the infringer is known traffic after a quick conversation, problem gone. If the squawks happen to do anything else at sometime for someone, that is a bonus, but it isn't the scheme, and the problem is of course that pilots do not realise they got a bonus and probably won't happen next time. (Which is actually the root cause of how we ended up with Basic, Traffic, etc, but that is a different topic and different story)
Dave W, johnm liked this
#1838146
Irv Lee wrote:@skydriller and @Full Metal Jackass who other than pilots who use them without reading tbe small print think that UK ATC will call before an infringement happens? Obviously, a call might happen from time to time, obviously it would be good if there were enough controllers to have it happen all the time, but until we have enough or even some "AI" controllers, it won't be standard. It isn't part of the current deal in the UK and never has been
I also remember some loud complaints by "ego-hurt" pilots when Farnborough used to proactively warn them they would infringe if they didn't descend/turn very soon!


Firstly, I don't believe in UK ATC being proactive - I know that. I also know that in UK, ATC services are significantly different than anywhere else, the question is - why is that so? Is it because the Germans are pumping more cash into their FIS regime? I expect so. If so, where is the money coming from?

Let's assume that it's coming from CAT - doesn't a proactive warning to a potential infringer mean that (e.g.) departures aren't delayed, that CAT on approach aren't sent around? Wouldn't those costs associated with the delays / go around be justified by the provision of full FIS services such as Germany has?

When flying in Germany, I'm always taking to Langen - there, I've often heard them calling aircraft, warning about airspace thus avoiding infringements. In UK, what's the point of talking to London Info? If I want any sort of service other than the "chocolate tea pot" basic service, I need to go to a LARS unit which might or might not be active, might not have any service availability - "basic service due to operator workload" is probably the most used phrase I've heard.

When I combine this with the way Germany is handling airspace availability, it just shows how everything could be, if only the airspace was managed better. But then, if infringements stopped, what would Gasco do? :?
skydriller liked this