An anonymous forum to allow you to share those moments in flying that caused you concern. You can post without registering a username, registered users can log out to post
User avatar
By Adam
#598180
I went down to Blackbushe yesterday I was about 5 miles to the east of DTY on a mag track of 179 at FL55 why do I them meet some dumbased bastard on a reciprocal heading and about 50 feet higher.

On the way back approx 20 mile further north with a FIS from East Mids at FL45 I get a call G-MS unknown traffic in your 12 o'clock 2 miles no height I reply traffic copied looking reply from East Mids very faint no transponder and 20 secs later I pass some other (or maybe the same) dumbased bastard on a reciprocal heading and about 150 feet higher.

The queston is why are people still flying around with no transponders and at the wrong levels - do they have a death wish? Or is it just me!
User avatar
By eltonioni
#598181
Climbing / decending / training / aeros?
User avatar
By 10W
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#598209
Were the other aircraft IFR or VFR ??
User avatar
By Timothy
#598214
I think that we can assume that, if Adam saw them, they, at least, might have been VFR, even if Adam was IFR, which sort of moves them from dumbassed to, um, perfectly legal and sensible.
User avatar
By Dominic
#598218
Perfectly legal yes, but sensible? Even VFR, is it not sensible to use the Quadrantal rules? Getting as high as possible is safer than mixing it with everyone else at 2000ft but, if you are going to high, is it not sensible to use the Quadrantal rule?
User avatar
By Dominic
#598223
I know it applies to IFR, however is it not recommended that when cruising above the transition altitude that VFR pilots adopt the Quadrantal Rule?
User avatar
By Timothy
#598226
Yes, it is recommended, but I have just given a whole load of reasons why it can be a bad idea.

Reading CAA output is a bit like reading Leviticus - it is worth picking the best bits and being cynical about the rest.

Remember, the CAA are the ones who consider NDB approaches safer than GPS ones, and say that putting in a 530 is a major mod but putting on new wing-tip fuel tanks is a minor mod.

If they can be that crass, where does it end?

Most people in the CAA (with some notable exceptions) come from military and airline backgrounds and are utterly clueless about GA.
User avatar
By Adam
#598241
I was flying VFR and straight and level the others were also straight and level and as I was at an appropiate FL had I been IFR (which I wasn't) then if the other pilots were IFR then they had cocked up. The Wx was CAVOK I expect the cloud base such as it was would have been FL100+ i.e plenty of vertical room!

My point is if you are flying VFR why not at least have a thought to the levels other traffic might be at if they were flying IFR. I also put it to you that it is good airmanship if VFR to avoid the level at which you are likely to meet an IFR ship head on and that it is also good airmanship to squark mode C or even to squark mode A rather than turn the damn thing off. I suspect the reason it was turned off was that he had just slid down the side of East Mids airspace it is quiet tight between it and Langar!
User avatar
By Irv Lee
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#598255
Why do people throw litter out of cars? - why do pilots not do safe things like fly appropriate flight levels? Perhaps it's the way they were brought up.

Any (UK) students around who have ever flown the quadrantal rule on a student navex? One or two out in the further reaches, I suppose. The newly qualified ones I meet down South normally regard it just as something theoretical they had to learn for a ground exam or two but have no idea why they had to learn it as they have never used it in training.

Perhaps EASA will sort us all out, and make things even more dangerous for us - if they (say) enforce the French semicircular system, separate IFR from VFR by 500', ban IFR without an instrument rating, you'll have even more traffic flying below 3000' as people would would have been higher won't be able to maintain an appropriate flight level and VFR cloud separation in our cloudy skies.
User avatar
By Gertie
#598269
[quote='Irv Lee']Any (UK) students around who have ever flown the quadrantal rule on a student navex?[/quote]
I never did. Don't think the cloud was ever high enough - it was, as it is for most students, a good day when the lesson wasn't cancelled altogether.
User avatar
By Timothy
#598288
I think that quadrantrals flown VFR might be a little like the GATSo debate. They might end up focussing so much on the "appropriate" flight level that they forget to fly at the appropriate flight level.

Quadrantals are for IFR and they are pretty much useless for that. We would be much better flying at intermediate heights, like 6723', rather than put everyone in the same plane anyway.
User avatar
By NickC
#598299
Flyin'Dutch' wrote:Weather and airspace rarely conducive to fly quadrantals under VFR.

But when they are (as they appear to be in this case), surely it's good airmanship to do so? With only 50 hours in my logbook maybe I'm being too ideological here, but it seems the sensible thing to do if conditions allow, to reduce the chance of a collision. Similarly, I can't see why anyone wouldn't squawk mode C if so equipped either.
Last edited by NickC on Mon May 05, 2008 7:43 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
By Timothy
#598303
WHY??

Collisions happen to aircraft going in similar directions just as much as those in opposite directions and all the quadrantal is doing is making such a collision more likely by focussing aircraft into a narrow height band.