Mode S responses - Midland Gliding Club

Report
Mode S responses
Essential reading
• Consultation document ‘Executive
Summary’ or ‘In Focus’ leaflet
• Regulatory Impact Assessment Summaries
- especially for Policy Option 3
http://www.caa.co.uk/default.aspx?catid=1698&paget
ype=90&pageid=9307
• BGA article in S & G April/May issue
• Advice on BGA website
http://www.gliding.co.uk/bgainfo/airspace/modes2008
.htm
Response Document
• On CAA website
• Shorter than last consultation
• 9 questions of real significance to glider
pilots + 3 relevant to power pilots
• Clubs and individuals need to respond
• Make sure it’s your own views as much as
possible
• Closing date 31 May
Response Document
Questions
What would be the impact of maintaining
the current status quo on your main
activity?
Points to consider:
• Review pros and cons sections of RIAs
• No cost changes
• Gliding would continue to operate freely in
uncontrolled airspace
• Gliders would have some access to
controlled airspace on current terms e.g. LoA
Option 3: Include gliders in the SSR
transponder carriage regulations
i.e.
• Mandatory carriage of Mode S in
controlled airspace – e.g. Riles zone;
Birmingham control zone; Brize zone
• Mandatory carriage of Mode S above
FL100
• Mandatory carriage of Mode S in TMZs
Option 3: Include gliders in the SSR
transponder carriage regulations Questions
• What other advantages and
disadvantages could arise if gliders were
brought within the SSR transponder
carriage regulations ?
Points to consider:
• Review pros and cons sections of RIAs
• Gliders unable to fly above FL100
• No access to Class D on current terms
• MAYBE – access to Class D with Mode S
Option 3: Include gliders in the SSR
transponder carriage regulations Questions
• Has the cost impact of Option 3 been
accurately estimated?
RIA estimated costs may be understated –
what impact would these have on your
operations? What about ongoing costs?
• What would be the impact of Option 3 on
small businesses?
e.g. cost – training – aircraft out of service –
Part M – proportion of annual costs - member
retention – inability to use wave above FL100
- would your club survive?
Option 1: Mandate the carriage and
operation of Mode S transponders on all
aircraft operating within controlled
airspace of classification A to E
• What other advantages and
disadvantages could there be under
Option 1 if all aircraft operating within
controlled airspace used SSR ?
Points to consider:
• Similar to Option 3 plus this will affect tugs &
motorgliders anyway
Option 1: Mandate the carriage and
operation of Mode S transponders on all
aircraft operating within controlled
airspace of classification A to E
• Has the cost impact of Option 1 been accurately
estimated?
RIA estimated costs may be understated – what
impact would these have on your operations?
What about ongoing costs?
• What would be the impact of Option 1 on small
businesses?
e.g cost – training – aircraft out of service – Part
M – proportion of annual costs - member
retention - would your club survive?
Option 2: Implement a formal process to
support applications for ‘Transponder
Mandatory Zones’ (TMZ) outside of
controlled airspace.
• What other issues should be taken into
account within a mechanism to process
and consider applications for TMZs?
Is the consultation adequate? What is the
justification? Do we have any idea what the
process would be? Is it sufficiently
transparent and accountable? Who might a
TMZ affect other than local operators?
Option 2: Implement a formal process to
support applications for ‘Transponder
Mandatory Zones’ (TMZ) outside of
controlled airspace.
• What could be the cost to businesses and
GA representative associations of
participating in a process for considering
the establishment of a TMZ?
What is involved in responding to a
consultation? What are the costs (monetary
and volunteer time)? What income earning
opportunities are lost in the meantime?
Option 4: Mandate the carriage and operation
of Mode S transponders on all powered
aircraft conducting international flights.
Would the cost impact of Option 4 fall within the
estimates for Option 1?
Has the number of UK aircraft affected by
Option 4 been accurately estimated?
What other issues should be taken into account
by the CAA when considering whether or not
to continue to notify a ‘Difference’ with the
ICAO Annex 6 international obligations?
Other comments
An opportunity to say what you really think
 Don’t be trapped by the CAA’s
Consultation agenda
 Ask questions
 Challenge the assumptions
 Don’t accept at face value what is
written in the Consultation
 Refute unjustified or unsupported
statements
Comments –
Suggestions and ideas
•
•
•
•
Safety case (what is the level of risk?)
Statistical evidence
Airprox evidence
Lack of joined-up-thinking by government
– DCMS wanting sport to thrive but other
Departments damaging airsports
• Is continued CAT growth environmentally
acceptable?
• Technical problems for gliders
And finally
Watch BGA website for BGA guidance
Clubs and individuals need to respond
Respond before 31 May
Your replies count!
Thank you for coming

similar documents