Near collision at Brampton
Moderators: sky's the limit, sepia, Sulako, lilfssister, North Shore
Re: Near collision at Brampton
Everyone needs a 406 and a radio. Please put me out of work.
Re: Near collision at Brampton
In a separate thread, we read about a King Air crew who, faced with an electrical failure, elected to contact the Control Tower by cellphone. Perhaps on return from a cross-country with a com failure, the BFC student could have at the very least phoned the flying club or YYZ ATC to get altimeter, local wx, runway in use. Not that hard to dig up the phone numbers in the Flight Supplement. Heck, the number for the flying club is probably written on the rental sheet.
And yes, let’s put SAR_YQQ out of work.![Very Happy :D](./images/smilies/icon_biggrin.gif)
And yes, let’s put SAR_YQQ out of work.
![Very Happy :D](./images/smilies/icon_biggrin.gif)
Re: Near collision at Brampton
Ever tried calling someone on a cell phone in a piston single? Without a Bluetooth connection you can’t hear them, and they sure can’t hear you over the engine noise.yeah yeah wrote: ↑Wed Jan 01, 2020 7:51 am In a separate thread, we read about a King Air crew who, faced with an electrical failure, elected to contact the Control Tower by cellphone. Perhaps on return from a cross-country with a com failure, the BFC student could have at the very least phoned the flying club or YYZ ATC to get altimeter, local wx, runway in use. Not that hard to dig up the phone numbers in the Flight Supplement. Heck, the number for the flying club is probably written on the rental sheet.
And yes, let’s put SAR_YQQ out of work.![]()
Couple that with the hassle factor of looking up the phone number and or trying to dial, while flying, in the already uncertain situation of not being able to raise anyone on the radio, the student pilot is best advised to forget trying to use their cellphone in flight and concentrate on flying the plane properly.
If you’ve got the Bluetooth already linked, the number on speed dial and you’re experienced enough not to lose control while fiddling with the phone, give it a try, but if you’re too scared or incompetent to land without someone telling you the wind and altimeter setting at your VFR uncontrolled field (like YYZ Tower FFS???), you shouldn’t be setting out on a solo cross country.
I thought someone was going to berate the King Air crew for not having a handheld. You know, because shit happens and if you can afford to get a pilot licence, you can afford the right equipment.
DId you hear the one about the jurisprudence fetishist? He got off on a technicality.
Re: Near collision at Brampton
“Couple that with the hassle factor of looking up the phone number and or trying to dial, while flying, in the already uncertain situation of not being able to raise anyone on the radio”
Agreed. So much easier to deal with the opposite end landing and runway excursion
Agreed. So much easier to deal with the opposite end landing and runway excursion
- rookiepilot
- Rank 11
- Posts: 4413
- Joined: Sat Apr 01, 2017 3:50 pm
Re: Near collision at Brampton
Photofly,goldeneagle wrote: ↑Tue Dec 31, 2019 1:07 pm
I learned to fly on a NORDO airplane, operated out of an airport that had 3 runways, and perish the thought, nobody on a radio on the ground. No FSS, no tower, nobody to hold my hand at all. When I did my cross country, I went into a tower controlled airport, phone them in advance to let them know I was coming. They gave me the 'green light' to land. I parked in front of the tower, went inside for a coffee, then chatted for a bit with the folks in the FSS office, then went out and took off, again they gave me the green lights.
I quoted this and asserted it isn't a great approach to airmanship, at least at a place like Brampton on most days.
Using a radio at a super busy uncontrolled airport isn't having someone "hold your hand". Much as some pilots feel otherwise, not using one, doesn't make you more of a macho super pilot.
![Rolling Eyes :roll:](./images/smilies/icon_rolleyes.gif)
Nothing to do with electrical failure. You're defending the right, apparently, to go NORDO anyplace, anytime, well, because it's my "right".
I'm also curious where this is, and where --today aa this magical towered airport where you can fly in, park in front of the tower, and go up and have a coffee with the boys, before departing.
I'm genuinely curious where in Canada that exists today. Maybe I'll try that at YTZ next time.
Re: Near collision at Brampton
I'm defending everyone - you included - from calls for more rules and regulation. "That other guy is a terrible pilot. I don't like the way he flies! I demand the government makes rules to protect me from him!", you cry, with others. One day that other pilot will be you and someone will be trying to stop you from doing something you think you do in a safe a proper manner, but for some reason someone else now has a bee about trying to stop you. If you want to dress it up in the language of "my right", that's your call. It's not my choice of words. Nor is "anyplace, anytime". Once again if you want to put about things you'd like me to have written so you can argue against them, I can't stop you.rookiepilot wrote: ↑Wed Jan 01, 2020 12:15 pm
Nothing to do with electrical failure. You're defending the right, apparently, to go NORDO anyplace, anytime, well, because it's my "right".
I've visited FSS and towers all over Canada - as I'm sure you have. Usually you do park in front of the tower. YTZ tower is also amenable to tower visits on most days. GIve it a go - they're all quite lovely.I'm also curious where this is, and where --today aa this magical towered airport where you can fly in, park in front of the tower, and go up and have a coffee with the boys, before departing.
I'm genuinely curious where in Canada that exists today. Maybe I'll try that at YTZ next time.
DId you hear the one about the jurisprudence fetishist? He got off on a technicality.
Re: Near collision at Brampton
Do you really think a student who can't manage to tune the right frequency on the radio fixed to the panel in front of them and connected to the headphones they're wearing is actually capable of looking up a phone number to call the tower at Pearson on the phone to ask what runway is in use at an uncontrolled airport twenty five miles away?yeah yeah wrote: ↑Wed Jan 01, 2020 12:04 pm “Couple that with the hassle factor of looking up the phone number and or trying to dial, while flying, in the already uncertain situation of not being able to raise anyone on the radio”
Agreed. So much easier to deal with the opposite end landing and runway excursion
DId you hear the one about the jurisprudence fetishist? He got off on a technicality.
- rookiepilot
- Rank 11
- Posts: 4413
- Joined: Sat Apr 01, 2017 3:50 pm
Re: Near collision at Brampton
Not more regulation.....simply better airmanship...possibly known as simple courtesy that enhances safety....
Re: Near collision at Brampton
I fly NORDO on a regular basis, and there is no way I'd even consider going into Brampton that way.
"Carelessness and overconfidence are more dangerous than deliberately accepted risk." -Wilbur Wright
Re: Near collision at Brampton
If flying in Brampton is like driving in Brampton....
![Image](https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn%3AANd9GcQvc6MmwkzCkmwcFOM9oc9a6-7B1Up69y7BgqCwfiAH0g0D0cBT)
Let’s Go Brandon
Re: Near collision at Brampton
It seems to me that both sides of the NORDO argument are arguing about different situations. You seem to be answering different questions:
1) Is operating NORDO in Brampton a good idea?
Given the amount of traffic, probably not.
2) Does this mean operating NORDO should be prohibited everywhere in Canada?
No, not at all.
3) Is the NORDO discussion relevant to this incident?
I'd say it is. The student might have had a radio on board, but he was unable to operate it, and was operating as if he was NORDO. The FI in the the plane on the take off roll did not see the student airplane in a timely fashion. If the student plane was operating NORDO, the FI wouldn't have heard the plane on the radio either. I think this is a valid example of 1): NORDO in Brampton is not always a good idea.
1) Is operating NORDO in Brampton a good idea?
Given the amount of traffic, probably not.
2) Does this mean operating NORDO should be prohibited everywhere in Canada?
No, not at all.
3) Is the NORDO discussion relevant to this incident?
I'd say it is. The student might have had a radio on board, but he was unable to operate it, and was operating as if he was NORDO. The FI in the the plane on the take off roll did not see the student airplane in a timely fashion. If the student plane was operating NORDO, the FI wouldn't have heard the plane on the radio either. I think this is a valid example of 1): NORDO in Brampton is not always a good idea.
As an AvCanada discussion grows longer:
-the probability of 'entitlement' being mentioned, approaches 1
-one will be accused of using bad airmanship
-the probability of 'entitlement' being mentioned, approaches 1
-one will be accused of using bad airmanship
Re: Near collision at Brampton
Happily for people who enjoy this thread, I don’t agree: operating NORDO means joining in with the traffic flow and making a safe circuit. This student didn’t have radio communications but didn’t use any procedure that NORDO traffic should. Calling what this student did “NORDO” unfairly associates landing the wrong way with all aircraft that fly without radios.
I don’t think it informs us as to whether NORDO at Brampton is a good or a bad idea: it does inform us that landing opposite to the direction of traffic already established in the circuit is a bad idea. But that isn’t “NORDO”, not is it surprising.
This is a lesson about training students better, not about NORDO.
I don’t think it informs us as to whether NORDO at Brampton is a good or a bad idea: it does inform us that landing opposite to the direction of traffic already established in the circuit is a bad idea. But that isn’t “NORDO”, not is it surprising.
This is a lesson about training students better, not about NORDO.
DId you hear the one about the jurisprudence fetishist? He got off on a technicality.
Re: Near collision at Brampton
Uh, I thought your job was to come rescue me after an engine failure puts me down in an inhospitable area. Are you saying that if I have a 406 and a radio, you won't come get me? Or that my engine won't fail if I have them?
-
- Rank (9)
- Posts: 1187
- Joined: Mon Jan 02, 2006 3:28 pm
Re: Near collision at Brampton
Actually, if you go back and read, you will notice the comment I was responding to was somebody suggesting, almost to the point of demanding, NORDO should be prohibited by regulation. My response had nothing to do with Brampton, and, in fact NORDO is irrelavent to the point of this particular incident as both airplanes were indeed equipped with radios. The incident came about because somebody had finger trouble with the radio, then ended up in the circuit going wrong way against traffic.rookiepilot wrote: ↑Tue Dec 31, 2019 7:50 pm
Yeah....where?
Let me get this straight, your're advocating this should be the practice at Brampton? That's the thread here -- about Brampton, one of the busiest uncontrolled airports in the country.
Have you been to Brampton on a sunny Saturday with the pattern jammed full of low time students?
I've seen guys like you in the pattern, who think they own the airport, who cut off slower planes on base, disregard the traffic pattern 6 other planes are following, neither place nor respond to any radio calls.
Clearly affirms the view degrees certainly don't translate into common sense.
As for the rant about me in the pattern, I have no idea where that drivel comes from.
The degree rant, ya, we see you typing that here quite regularly. I think most of us have learned to ignore it, just more rambling from somebody that either didn't bother, or more likely, didn't make the cut.
Re: Near collision at Brampton
Nope - not saying that. What I’m saying is for everyone to embrace technology to help eliminate the “Search” out of SAR.
Re: Near collision at Brampton
Why phone them? Call the ACC. They are working the airspace a couple hundred feet above circuit altitude. You’d be surprised how easy it is to get help.photofly wrote: ↑Wed Jan 01, 2020 12:43 pmDo you really think a student who can't manage to tune the right frequency on the radio fixed to the panel in front of them and connected to the headphones they're wearing is actually capable of looking up a phone number to call the tower at Pearson on the phone to ask what runway is in use at an uncontrolled airport twenty five miles away?yeah yeah wrote: ↑Wed Jan 01, 2020 12:04 pm “Couple that with the hassle factor of looking up the phone number and or trying to dial, while flying, in the already uncertain situation of not being able to raise anyone on the radio”
Agreed. So much easier to deal with the opposite end landing and runway excursion
Re: Near collision at Brampton
I’m sorry - I misunderstood your earlier post: when you suggested phoning YYZ ATC I thought you meant the tower (I wouldn’t have referred to the ACC as “YYZ”). There are lots of people that you could call, but I challenge any student pilot to look up the ACC phone number in the relevant publication, while flying. And frankly if a student has been trained to do that they are probably also prepared to land the right way without a radio.
Better, they should call Satellites West on the radio (119.3 isn’t it? I don’t fly that way often) or Satellites east (133.4) or Hamilton, or better yet London Radio on any number of frequencies including 126.7, or even try 121.5 and see who answers. Good preparation for a cross country would involve checking a student has those sorts of frequencies in memory or written on their flight log, just in case.
And no, I’m not at all surprised how easy it is to get help. The whole system is set up to provide it.
However, in this case I think the whole phone thing is a big red herring. the student may have thought they were doing the right thing and were managing well without the radio. They just did it wrong. Once again, this is not about NORDO.
Better, they should call Satellites West on the radio (119.3 isn’t it? I don’t fly that way often) or Satellites east (133.4) or Hamilton, or better yet London Radio on any number of frequencies including 126.7, or even try 121.5 and see who answers. Good preparation for a cross country would involve checking a student has those sorts of frequencies in memory or written on their flight log, just in case.
And no, I’m not at all surprised how easy it is to get help. The whole system is set up to provide it.
However, in this case I think the whole phone thing is a big red herring. the student may have thought they were doing the right thing and were managing well without the radio. They just did it wrong. Once again, this is not about NORDO.
DId you hear the one about the jurisprudence fetishist? He got off on a technicality.
-
- Top Poster
- Posts: 8132
- Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 12:25 pm
- Location: Winterfell...
Re: Near collision at Brampton
What good is a 406 if it is based on the same fail-deadly premise as the 121.5 ELT with the same G switch that doesn’t activate in a lot of cases?
Fail-safe like a satellite tracker is a lot better IMHO. It led rescuers right to a crash site in Kootenay National Park a few years ago.. where the pilot was unfortunately deceased but his dog was found and saved.
Geez did I say that....? Or just think it....?
-
- Rank 3
- Posts: 108
- Joined: Thu Dec 28, 2017 12:20 am
Re: Near collision at Brampton
Once there was a guy in his private 152 who was at my 6' o clock position that had me in sight in front of him. We were travelling in the same direction. He was telling me I don't know how to look out for traffic and I need to be careful.rookiepilot wrote: ↑Tue Dec 31, 2019 9:37 pm
The attitude is clear, and I've seen it myself in the pattern encountering the odd pilot:
"I'll do whatever I want, due to some superiority complex, and to heck with anyone else".
![Laughing :lol:](./images/smilies/icon_lol.gif)
-
- Rank 6
- Posts: 453
- Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2018 11:45 pm
Re: Near collision at Brampton
Maybe this should be one of the numerous ads on this forum, yeah they are that cheap. It even comes with a headset jack and a power cord to plug into one of those $75 Canadian Tire booster packs if plane doesn't have an electrical system. I can't even believe someone would even want to fly NORDO.
- Attachments
-
- Screenshot_20200102-112313.png (365.51 KiB) Viewed 1262 times