Thanks for sharing this most tragic accident case, John.
Condolences to the family.
Reminds us that this danger can be lethal and that proper mitigations must be taken to control the risk.
Certain errors - we call them critical errors, won't be forgiven...
Join your community
Join a community to be part of the discussion.
Michel MASSON commented on Michel MASSON's topic in Rotorcraft
Nika Khvedelidze commented on a post in General Aviation
Dear members,
I would like to bring your attention to the sailplane commercial operations within member states of the EU. As Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2018/1976 (SAO) defines in Article 3 - Air operations (2), operators of
sailplanes shall engage in commercial operations only after having declared to the competent authority their capacity and means to discharge the responsibilities associated with the operation of the sailplane.
Furthermore, SAO.DEC.100 Declaration defines conditions for how to declare and what information shall be included in the declaration template (Appendix 1.)
Despite those requirements, I just want to precise, taking into account the member state's experience and practice, if there is any additional information, document, or manual requested by the member state to be prepared by the sailplane commercial operator.
Thank you!
Have a good day!
Dear Francesco, thank you for your time and such a detailed explanation!
I will take a look all the articles you have mentioned here.
Very kind regards,
Nika
Michel MASSON created a topic in Rotorcraft
diomiro certaldi commented on diomiro certaldi's topic in Air Operations
Thanks Marianna, you answer is very useful and detailed.
John Franklin created a topic in Air Operations
Nika Khvedelidze posted in General Aviation
Dear members,
I would like to bring your attention to the sailplane commercial operations within member states of the EU. As Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2018/1976 (SAO) defines in Article 3 - Air operations (2), operators of
sailplanes shall engage in commercial operations only after having declared to the competent authority their capacity and means to discharge the responsibilities associated with the operation of the sailplane.
Furthermore, SAO.DEC.100 Declaration defines conditions for how to declare and what information shall be included in the declaration template (Appendix 1.)
Despite those requirements, I just want to precise, taking into account the member state's experience and practice, if there is any additional information, document, or manual requested by the member state to be prepared by the sailplane commercial operator.
Thank you!
Have a good day!
Axel Wegener commented on Axel Wegener's topic in Air Operations
Understood so far. By reading the documents again it becomes more clear that CAT.POL.A.210 defines a margin of 35ft (min), whereas for NCC.POL.125 it is only given the 'adequate margin', so not to interpret as an 'add' to the 35ft (from CAT), but being the 'absolute' obstacle clearing distance. With that in mind, it should never and could never be Zero (0) ft!
Maybe the GM2 NCC.POL.125 should make that point more obvious.
diomiro certaldi created a topic in Air Operations
Benjamin Hari commented on a post in Air Operations
guidance SIGNS lateral spaces/borders
Hi,
could someone give his comments about guidance signs inside airport, airside?
I think that:
e.g. inside "Figure N-2G. No-entry sign", I have to understand that the 2 lateral spaces "H" are as "at least" and not as precise measures;
the same is for e.g. "Figure N-3. Sign dimensions" part A "H/2" as "at least" and part B "H" as "at least".
This interpretation is as per ICAO A.D.M part 4 (search for "at least"), para 12.2.6, "...The width is determined by the overall length of the inscription, to which must be added a border of at least 0.5 times the inscription height at either end of the sign.". The same info is always included in all the editions of UK CAP168.
A different interpretation could be that the manufacturer has to procude any single lenght of structures of the signs. In my opinion this interpretation is not technically feasable for the producer, mainly for lighted signs producer.
Specific regulatory reference: https://www.easa.europa.eu/en/document-library/easy-access-rules/online…
Thanks. Paolo Spunta, Italy
(Edit, 19/02/2024: added to my original post 4 figures, to better clarify)
Hi Paolo,
Your interpretation regarding the guidance signs inside airports, specifically concerning the lateral spaces or borders as mentioned in “Figure N-2G. No-entry sign” and “Figure N-3. Sign dimensions,” aligns well with regulatory standards for airport signage, particularly those set by the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) and outlined in their Aerodrome Design Manual (A.D.M) Part 4.
According to the ICAO A.D.M Part 4, paragraph 12.2.6, the width of the lateral spaces or borders around the inscription on the sign is indeed to be considered as “at least” the specified measure, rather than a fixed dimension.
This means that the additional space at either end of the sign (referred to as “H” in the figures you mentioned) should be no less than 0.5 times the height of the inscription. It ensures clarity and visibility of the signage, making it easier for airport operators and users to interpret the signs correctly.
This approach to specifying minimum dimensions rather than fixed sizes allows for flexibility in sign design and manufacturing. It acknowledges the practicalities of producing signs, especially lighted ones, where exact lengths can vary based on the length of the inscription and the need for visibility and legibility.
Such a flexibility is crucial for manufacturers, allowing them to produce signs that meet regulatory requirements without the constraint of adhering to a specific length for every sign, which would indeed be technically unfeasible and unnecessarily restrictive.
Moreover, this interpretation is consistent across various editions of the UK CAP168, which further validates its applicability and acceptance in aviation standards.
In summary, your understanding that the lateral space specifications serve as minimum requirements rather than exact measurements is correct and in line with international regulatory standards for airport signage. This approach provides necessary flexibility for manufacturers while ensuring the signs are effective and compliant with safety and visibility criteria.
Regards,
Benjamin
Josef Pavlicek commented on PIAU Denis's topic in General Aviation
Hi guys, how about use ATPL theoretical course as CPL theory requirement to teach PPL not only LAPL. There is no difference between PPL and LAPL except instrument time if I'm right.
Paolo Spunta posted in Air Operations
guidance SIGNS lateral spaces/borders
Hi,
could someone give his comments about guidance signs inside airport, airside?
I think that:
e.g. inside "Figure N-2G. No-entry sign", I have to understand that the 2 lateral spaces "H" are as "at least" and not as precise measures;
the same is for e.g. "Figure N-3. Sign dimensions" part A "H/2" as "at least" and part B "H" as "at least".
This interpretation is as per ICAO A.D.M part 4 (search for "at least"), para 12.2.6, "...The width is determined by the overall length of the inscription, to which must be added a border of at least 0.5 times the inscription height at either end of the sign.". The same info is always included in all the editions of UK CAP168.
A different interpretation could be that the manufacturer has to procude any single lenght of structures of the signs. In my opinion this interpretation is not technically feasable for the producer, mainly for lighted signs producer.
Specific regulatory reference: https://www.easa.europa.eu/en/document-library/easy-access-rules/online…
Thanks. Paolo Spunta, Italy
(Edit, 19/02/2024: added to my original post 4 figures, to better clarify)
Axel Wegener created a topic in Air Operations
Michel MASSON created a topic in Air Operations
Fabrice SEGURA commented on Federica Cescutti's topic in General Aviation
I've been refused my group 3 endorsment, where a large part of the practical experience was gained with my existing B1.2 licence (lots of tasks are common to the B1.2 and B2) because I was not "supervised", so I don't think FAA experience gained the same way would make it work. The point is, regulation and AMCs as they are written are almost impossible to meet, or, I'd rather think, made to protect the bosses of the avionic shops , so they, and only them, can have a licence, or the person they choose to grant one, for instance if they sell their business when they retire. And also, this helps to keep the wages of the employees low, as they can not go away and work on their own., and also helps them to control competition ...(no other shop can open, without a licenced person...). Keeping margins high, seems to be the priority, rather than safety, reason why lots of small flying clubs use aged avionics, and can not upgrade their planes with modern stuff.
Axel Wegener created a topic in Air Operations
John Franklin created a topic in Air Operations
Javier Bozzino commented on a post in General Aviation
Dear colleagues, I share with you, in case it is of your interest, this year's edition of the "Vuelta Aerea a España". You can find all the information on the website or by contacting me directly. It is a magnificent opportunity to get to know my country from the air and share the experience with local pilots.
Hi Stephen
Thanks for your comment. Now English version available just below the Spanish version
Javier Bozzino posted in General Aviation
Dear colleagues, I share with you, in case it is of your interest, this year's edition of the "Vuelta Aerea a España". You can find all the information on the website or by contacting me directly. It is a magnificent opportunity to get to know my country from the air and share the experience with local pilots.
Vasileios PAPAGEORGIOU commented on Vasileios PAPAGEORGIOU's topic in Cybersecurity
Hi Paolo, this is a very good idea and it is also something that we currently discuss internally. Apart from participating and raising awareness about initiatives like ECCSA, we are currently in the prepatory phase of a number of other activities that will take place in 2024 and info-sharing activities is a part of this agenda. More updates on the events planned for this year are expected within the next weeks so stay tuned in the community and the EASA website ;)
Vladimir FOLTIN commented on Michel MASSON's topic in General Aviation
This is a great piece of work from the UK on how human factors affect see and avoid, the main tool we rely on today to prevent collisions in the air in an uncontrolled environment. I look forward to input like this to help shape future solutions for pilots.