Jump to content
Steve J

Airprox reports

Recommended Posts

Steve J

Three airprox reports involving model gliders have issued.

1) A conflict between a light aircraft and a glider over Coventry and District Model Aero Club during a competition -

http://www.airproxboard.org.uk/uploadedFiles/Content/Standard_content/Airprox_report_files/2016/New_assessed_reports/Airprox Report 2016106.pdf

2) A conflict between a model glider and a paraglider at Treak Cliff in Derbyshire -

http://www.airproxboard.org.uk/uploadedFiles/Content/Standard_content/Airprox_report_files/2016/New_assessed_reports/Airprox Report 2016100.pdf

3) A conflict between a model glider and a Chinook near RAF Benson -

http://www.airproxboard.org.uk/uploadedFiles/Content/Standard_content/Airprox_report_files/2016/New_assessed_reports/Airprox Report 2016113.pdf

Steve

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Jef Ott

Reading through these with great interest, can anyone explain what is meant by "VFR in VMC"?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Reggie Perrin

Visual Flight Rules in Visual Meteorological Conditions

VMC is basically clear of cloud and in sight of the surface with a visibility of 5km or greater.

 

Reg

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Steve J

The Castleton airprox doesn't say what the glider was, but, based on the size and weight given, I'm guessing that it was a HobbyKing Ridge Ryder.

Steve

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Jef Ott
1 hour ago, Steve J said:

a HobbyKing Ridge Ryder

Took me a while to find that bit. To enlighten (no pun intended) those not familiar with the model that Steve J quotes...

"1 The Model Aircraft involved has the following specifications: Wingspan: 913mm Length: 500mm Weight: 175g (w/o battery)"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Jef Ott

It does indeed look very worrying... 5 model aircraft and 22 drones in the last 3 months.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Steve J

Be aware that the airprox board use drone as a catchall term, i.e. drone in that spreadsheet does not necessarily mean multirotor.

It looks like around a third of this year's airproxes will involve unmanned aircraft, hence 400ft Britain and the relaunching of the CAA's dronecode.

Steve

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
EssexBOF

The latest one involving an Airbus 320 near the Shard, seems to me to be somewhat tongue in cheek if we believe the piiot's report, that he saw a drone 65 feet from his wing tip, the drone was 50 cm in size at a height of 5000 ft. His airspeed was not quoted but assuming it was approx 200mph, cannot believe he would have seen such a small object, from what was stated.

Also why was the difference in using cm and ft, to give the size and distance

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Steve J

An airprox involving model gliders at Ipswich Radio Control Model Club Manor Lane flying site.

http://www.airproxboard.org.uk/uploadedFiles/Content/Standard_content/Airprox_report_files/2017/New_assessed_reports/Airprox Report 2017233.pdf

Quote

Recognising that the model flying club had been at that site for quite a number of years, the Board thought that it would be advantageous for there to be more dialogue between the two units, with a proactive approach to make sure a similar incident didn’t happen again.

Steve

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
martynk

I have flown at an airfield where model fliers share with full size aircraft

They have a very simple and elegant process to prevent conflicts.

The model club has purchased a High Intensity Orange LED flat panel beacon which is active when their are model aircraft in the air. This flashes and is very visible to full size aircraft wishing to land. The full size makes a high pass (1000ft+ or so) to indicate he wants to land. The models are grounded, the beacon is turned off indicating it is safe to land.

It works really well

Martyn

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Steve J

@martynk Interesting, but not really relevant to airprox 2017233. IRCMC's field is 3km from the end of Crowfield Airfield's runway and more or less in a line with it.

Steve

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
martynk

Steve,

Maybe not. However, I still think its a very valid method of signalling to aircraft on approach that there is model activity. Reading the airprox report it appears that model and full size were sharing very close airspace and anything to help should be considered. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Steve J

I'll give you three alternatives, one from the report and two that I think will become options in the near future.

Quote

the provision of an airband radio receiver tuned to the Crowfield frequency would also assist in providing earlier situational awareness of aircraft movements

2) Aeromodellers could use an app (Drone Assist) to tell an automated low level air traffic system (UTM, U-Space) when and where they are flying and this information could be uplinked to aircraft on 978 MHz (TIS-B).

3) UAVs flown over 400ft will be required to be electronically conspicuous and aircraft and airports will be equipped to detect them. 

Steve

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
martynk

A local club uses an airband receiver to monitor for local air traffic (shared airspace  - private airfield). The problem is that it needs at least two people present, one to monitor and spot and the pilot.

It would be interesting to see how quickly your other options materialise

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Steve J
On 3/2/2018 at 16:07, martynk said:

It would be interesting to see how quickly your other options materialise

Unmanned traffic management in the UK moved a step closer with today's announcement from NATS and Altitude Angel.

https://www.altitudeangel.com/blog/nats-enters-strategic-partnership-with-altitude-angel/

Quote

This partnership lays the foundation for a future whereby access to lower level airspace could increasingly be granted digitally. It links knowledge of an operator’s aircraft, qualifications and mission, pioneering a new form of airspace management suited to the changing use of our skies.

Steve

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
martynk

Thanks Steve

I guess that the use of this technology - suitably packaged - could remove the requirement for altitude limited model flying. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Steve J
22 hours ago, martynk said:

I guess that the use of this technology - suitably packaged - could remove the requirement for altitude limited model flying. 

The FAA UAS ID ARC report (there are no EASA or SESAR equivalents that I am aware of, although I am sure that they are coming) suggests having UAVs operating over 400ft equipped with UTM interfaces (and ADS-B for UAVs operating over 2500ft).

 5a9e5dbf127db_FAAID.jpg.a064cfc8ba8aa312eefd875cc1cfd6ab.jpg

Steve

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.