Zone infringement today
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Lestah
Posts: 221
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Zone infringement today
at East Midlands this afternoon.
In the zone virtually on top of the field, then out, then back in again. Flights temporarily grounded, queuing up on the Alpha, one moved off the runway and us stuck on right base for fifteen odd minutes waiting.
And not a single word spoken from the person responsible. I hope they find them. They can have the fuel bills. This does GA no favours whatsoever.
Infringements can and do happen, but to keep stum over such a large field is totally unacceptable.
Rant over.
In the zone virtually on top of the field, then out, then back in again. Flights temporarily grounded, queuing up on the Alpha, one moved off the runway and us stuck on right base for fifteen odd minutes waiting.
And not a single word spoken from the person responsible. I hope they find them. They can have the fuel bills. This does GA no favours whatsoever.
Infringements can and do happen, but to keep stum over such a large field is totally unacceptable.
Rant over.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Lestah
Posts: 221
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Low wing apparently, possibly PA28 type or similar.
ATC concerns at one point that an approach might be being attempted, hence the removal of the one lined up ready to go. And not a word spoken. Scarey stuff.
I understand we may have been very close to them at one point in the holding turn, but never saw them. Bit uncomfortable to be honest.
Spoke with ATC after we landed. Seemed confident they could find them. Follow the screen blips till they dissapear then call the location was what they said.
Some guesses as to where it went. But not for sharing here. We shall see.
ATC concerns at one point that an approach might be being attempted, hence the removal of the one lined up ready to go. And not a word spoken. Scarey stuff.
I understand we may have been very close to them at one point in the holding turn, but never saw them. Bit uncomfortable to be honest.
Spoke with ATC after we landed. Seemed confident they could find them. Follow the screen blips till they dissapear then call the location was what they said.
Some guesses as to where it went. But not for sharing here. We shall see.
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Los Angeles, USA
Age: 52
Posts: 1,631
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I understand the annoyance having to hold on base, but this sounds like ATC were full of their own importance. They can't let you land, in I'm assuming VFR conditions (since you mention a base entry) because some PA28 is infringing on top of the zone? A visual one at that, since it has been determined it was a low wing. How exactly is this different than class G? You don't see them there either, at least here he's on a radar screen. And how exactly is holding you there safer than letting you land when they're visual with him? I don't get it. It seems like usual high vis west mania to me, but in a tower.
Not condoning his behaviour - it is unacceptable of course. Just curious why they treat it like there were 1000 infringing aircraft, rather than one known one.
Not condoning his behaviour - it is unacceptable of course. Just curious why they treat it like there were 1000 infringing aircraft, rather than one known one.
Last edited by AdamFrisch; 4th Aug 2013 at 22:36.
So hang on, unauthorised infringement with intentions unknown and you think it's a good idea to throw in a few airliners?!?!?!?
Depends upon the position of the infringer during those 15 mins presumably, and we don't know that.
Last edited by Mariner9; 5th Aug 2013 at 07:23.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Rapunzel's tower
Posts: 441
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
True
Nor do we know the rest of the traffic. My comment was for balance after a lambasting of ATC.
Without knowing the whole picture - which none of us know - I find it astonishing that some views are so polarised...
(OPs post was well-balanced)
Ps Shall try and use this 'quote' thingy more often in future!
this sounds like ATC were full of their own importance.
(OPs post was well-balanced)
Ps Shall try and use this 'quote' thingy more often in future!
Last edited by good egg; 5th Aug 2013 at 08:14. Reason: Clarification
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: USA
Posts: 563
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Another infringement. 
Okay, extremely annoying for everyone. Can't some pilots learn to call up over the radio?
Is this Class D?
Just treat the unknown traffic as IFR, separate known IFR using standard means and provide traffic updates to known VFR leaving them to self-separate.
Shouldn't need to hold for 15 minutes if inbound traffic was VFR.
Okay, extremely annoying for everyone. Can't some pilots learn to call up over the radio?Is this Class D?
Just treat the unknown traffic as IFR, separate known IFR using standard means and provide traffic updates to known VFR leaving them to self-separate.
Shouldn't need to hold for 15 minutes if inbound traffic was VFR.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Lestah
Posts: 221
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Some clarity.
This aircraft was inside the zone, not on top of the zone. This aircraft was flying erratically and mute and was seen low level close to the runway. There were at least 3 airliners ready to go, I lined up. Wake turbulence on departure could have got him/her.
Takes a brave sole in ATC to do anything other than freeze the frame. I would imagine they have well thought out procedures and adopt them to protect everyone including the bandit.
This aircraft was inside the zone, not on top of the zone. This aircraft was flying erratically and mute and was seen low level close to the runway. There were at least 3 airliners ready to go, I lined up. Wake turbulence on departure could have got him/her.
Takes a brave sole in ATC to do anything other than freeze the frame. I would imagine they have well thought out procedures and adopt them to protect everyone including the bandit.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Rapunzel's tower
Posts: 441
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just treat the unknown traffic as IFR, separate known IFR using standard means and provide traffic updates to known VFR leaving them to self-separate.
I'd suggest best course for ATC is to hold off the known traffic/clear runway (which appears to have been the case) whilst the infringer weaves about so that if the infringer gets close to one of the known aircraft then ATC are in a better position to resolve potential conflicts.
Once the infringer's intentions are known, e.g. RT contact is made/aircraft lands (emergency), or the aircraft leaves CAS - with extra ATC radar monitoring (if available) to check he/she isn't coming back - then it's time to start resuming normal service.
Infringers can cause a huge increase in ATCO workload because, quite simply, their intentions are unknown...inadvertent infringement? Emergency? Malicious?
Rest assured ATC would like to get back to normal operation ASAP too, but safety is always the primary concern.
I'm not surprised that a specific aircraft had to be held for 15mins, others may have held for less, others more.
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Sometimes north, sometimes south
Posts: 1,810
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes
on
1 Post
MATS Part 1 says
So IFR traffic has that option - but IFR pilots may not know that they can ask for that. Otherwise, a controller faced with an unknown aircraft inside Class D has to provide 5nm separation from it for all his IFR traffic. Given that EMA is only 5nm from the zone boundary in both north and south directions, that doesn't give a lot of options.
NS
when avoiding action is issued to an IFR aircraft under a Radar Control Service in Class D or E airspace, and the pilot reports that he has the unknown aircraft in sight and has positively stated that he will maintain his own separation from it, further controller action may then be limited to passing traffic information
NS
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Lestah
Posts: 221
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Spot on.
It was clear from listening, that due to lack of comms, intentions were unknown.
That was a great deal of surprise from us, when they re-appeared for the second time.
A lost solo student who panicked, a wanderer who got lost or a nutter with barking intentions.
And it is Class D. The cloud base was variable around 2000 feet over the airfield and we never saw him. I suspect, given the gloomy day, they got lost.....big time.
It was clear from listening, that due to lack of comms, intentions were unknown.
That was a great deal of surprise from us, when they re-appeared for the second time.
A lost solo student who panicked, a wanderer who got lost or a nutter with barking intentions.
And it is Class D. The cloud base was variable around 2000 feet over the airfield and we never saw him. I suspect, given the gloomy day, they got lost.....big time.
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: USA
Posts: 563
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How can you provide separation when there is no way of knowing what the infringer is doing??
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 2,118
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I just hope they find the idiot, there is rarely a valid excuse for busting controlled airspace in my book.
Why infringe deliberately?
If all mistakes were to be prosecuted, we would all be in the nick.
Quote:
How can you provide separation when there is no way of knowing what the infringer is doing??
In the same way ATC fields works in uncontrolled or Class E airspace where there may be multiple unknown contacts that may fly straight across standard approach paths without talking to anyone.
How can you provide separation when there is no way of knowing what the infringer is doing??
In the same way ATC fields works in uncontrolled or Class E airspace where there may be multiple unknown contacts that may fly straight across standard approach paths without talking to anyone.
2 s
Guest
Posts: n/a
soaringhigh (and possibly one or two others),
Apply here for training...
Apply now | NATS
With your obvious knowledge and expertise they might fast track you through.
Apply here for training...
Apply now | NATS
With your obvious knowledge and expertise they might fast track you through.
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: In a hole somewhere
Age: 47
Posts: 378
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I just hope they find the idiot, there is rarely a valid excuse for busting controlled airspace in my book.
Why infringe deliberately?
If all mistakes were to be prosecuted, we would all be in the nick.
I have never seen US airport operations shut down as a result of an aircraft in the Class D not having established communication with the tower, and it certainly does occur at many airports on a regular (i.e. several times daily) basis. What I have believe would happen is that communicating traffic would be advised of the non-communicating traffic so the pilot in command could decide what to do. The pilot in command is given that title for a reason.
Obviously high performance aircraft including airliners fly though non-radio VFR traffic regularly (in Class E airspace) so mixing traffic in that manner is not intrinsically an issue
Obviously high performance aircraft including airliners fly though non-radio VFR traffic regularly (in Class E airspace) so mixing traffic in that manner is not intrinsically an issue
Last edited by Silvaire1; 5th Aug 2013 at 17:28.