The definition of a near miss is also a problem. I am quite happy to share a thermal with several (many ?) others, providing I can see them. We are very close (within 50-100 metres).
Others are not happy to be within 2-3k of another aircraft in ANY airspace - as Graeme can attest to following a radio "discussion" with a commercial pilot recently - and believe that having actually seen another aircraft (at the same level), there was a near miss. I usually define this as meaning that I (or the other pilot) had to take immediate unplanned avoiding action on seeing each other. The 1st definition would have 100's a day. The 2nd would have very few in a year. -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Graeme Cant Sent: Wednesday, 22 February 2006 17:37 To: aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net Subject: RE: [Aus-soaring] RE: Near misses >From: Mike Cleaver <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >This is quite simply a consignment of ancient testicles (i.e. a load of >old bollocks). If Graeme thinks he poses such a threat to other >traffic, what is he going to do about it? Nothing, Mike. It doesn't faze me. I've assessed the risks and I live happily with them. I don't believe I pose a higher risk than other glider pilots. I believe that the stats show that ALL glider pilots are at greater risk of a near miss than other forms of aviation. I take my own personal steps to minimise the risks. That's what life's about. One of the things on this group I get tired of is the large component whose personality seems to demand that all risk be regulated away. Now back to your description of my comment - you're certainly correct - at the moment. Your point about the current CASA hierarchy is a good one but you miss my meaning. "IF more near misses are reported" was my opening comment. I didn't discuss an increase in actual near misses - just an increase in reported near misses (which Geoff Kidd seems to see as a good thing). More and more, CASA airspace policy is driven by politics. The publicity barrage by the regional airline pilots over NAS 2c is a good example. Rationality had been carefully cultivated for years but it was trodden on and trashed by a few weeks publicity. Millions of dollars of educational material was thrown out and the whole policy re-negotiated. IF there is an increase in REPORTED glider near misses, what weapon do you think the regional airline pilots will seize next time their tranquillity is threatened? In the ensuing publicity battle for the hearts and minds of politicians, what makes you think glider pilots - sport aviation generally - will win? The US paradigm has made us believe that the natural order of things is that airspace is free and open to all unless declared otherwise. The East European system - in fact much of Western Europe too - is that all airspace is forbidden unless specifically declared open. If gliding is seen to have a horrifying rate of near misses, I think it entirely likely that all our supporters in CASA won't be able to stop us being restricted from mixing freely with other users. Let's have this conversation again in ten years time. Cheers, Graeme. CASA is well aware of the >relative risks that sport & recreational aviation poses and legislates >to minimise the risks to ground-based "innocent bystanders" and to >other airspace users. Now, as always since the GFA was formed, there >are a number (at least 7) of active glider pilots in significant jobs >in CASA to be able to accurately assess and represent the realities to senior management. > >Provided gliders use the same procedures in Class A, C and D airspace >as other traffic, and behave responsibly in Class G and Class E in VMC, >there is no problem and no unacceptable risk. > >The efforts of glider pilots to develop devices such as Flarm, and to >enable it to interact with ADS-B, shows how responsible they are. >(Incidentally, the first 4 ADS-B ground stations will commence >operation around mid-year (THIS year!) with the RPT fleet to be >equipped by around >mid-2007 and GA likely to follow by the end of 2009. Provision of ADS-B >transmitters for General Aviation is a commercial decision for >Airservices, based on safety cost analyses yet to be completed. > >Anybody who flies in a way that poses a threat to other traffic, please >identify yourself here and then get re-trained! > >We have no shortage of airline pilots and Air Traffic Controllers >flying gliders to know what goes on and to present the professional >knowledge to the gliding community. (Still, New Zealand has out-done us >with a glider pilot - Max Stevens - retiring recently from the position >of Deputy Director of Civil Aviation). > >Wombat > > >_______________________________________________ >Aus-soaring mailing list >Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net >To check or change subscription details, visit: >http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring _______________________________________________ Aus-soaring mailing list Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net To check or change subscription details, visit: http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring _______________________________________________ Aus-soaring mailing list Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net To check or change subscription details, visit: http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring
