Analysis of Airprox in UK Airspace: January to June 2006
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Sixteenth Report by the UK Airprox Board: ‘Analysis of Airprox in UK Airspace’ (January 2006 to June 2006) produced jointly for The Chairman, Civil Aviation Authority and the Chief of the Air Staff, Royal Air Force FOREWORD The primary purpose of this, the sixteenth Report from the UK Airprox Board (UKAB), is to promote air safety awareness and understanding of Airprox. “Book 16” covers the first six months of 2006 in detail, containing findings on the 79 Airprox which were reported as occurring within UK airspace in that period and which were fully investigated and as- sessed by the Airprox Board. The count of 79 incidents during the first six months of 2006 is 17 fewer than the aver- age of comparable figures in each of the previous five years. The Table below shows the details. The reader is invited to note that the figure of 79 is the lowest total in the dataset. Also at their lowest values are the figures for Risk A and Risk B occurrences in the first six months of 2006, at four and 21 respectively. These facts need to be kept in mind when reviewing other data, especially percentages, in this Report. Risk Category 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 A 16 7 6 8 1 4 B 2 27 29 0 26 21 C 57 56 49 66 5 54 D 5 2 1 5 0 0 Totals: 101 92 85 109 92 79 Although this Report is primarily concerned with aircraft operations across a wide spectrum of aerial activities, it is understandable that people generally are interested in the safety of commercial air transport (CAT). Of the four Risk Category A events in the first half of 2006, none involved a CAT aircraft. Of the 21 Risk Category B events, five involved at least one CAT aircraft. Whilst the number of Airprox in Risk Category B where at least one aircraft was military is in line with the five-year average, the corresponding number in Risk Category A is two compared with an average of six. Readers of “Book 14” may recall my reference to the three things which, without proper forethought, are of little use in safety terms to pilots. These are: fuel in the bowser; runway behind you and airspace above you. On the basis of experience at UKAB, I would add “transponder on standby” to the list. During 2007, UKAB will continue to communicate this message. Tribute is again paid to those who report their Airprox experiences honestly and openly. The Board and Secretariat respect people’s feelings, disidentifying reports and focussing on the available facts of an incident to arrive at fair, impartial conclusions on cause and risk. If the collective effort of reporters, investigators and the Board helps to make flying safer, then all involved will have felt their efforts worthwhile. Peter Hunt Director, UKAB 2 CONTENTS Introduction UK Airprox Board (UKAB) Composition 4 UKAB’s Role 4 Status of UKAB Reports 4 Risk Categories 4 Airprox Definition 5 The UKAB Data Set 5 Publication of Reports 5 Airprox Results for 2006 Half-Year Comparisons 2005 and 2006 6 Airspace in which conflictions took place 7 Commercial Air Transport (CAT) Section CAT Risk Results 7 CAT Causal Factors 8 General Aviation (GA) Section GA Risk Results 9 GA Causal Factors 9 Military Section Military Risk Results 10 Military Causal Factors 10 UKAB Safety Recommendations 11 List of Abbreviations 15 AIRPROX Reports 17 - 229 Index 21 INTRODUCTION UK AIRPROX BOARD (UKAB) COMPOSITION The UKAB is an independent organisation sponsored jointly by the CAA and the MOD to deal with all Airprox reported within UK airspace. The UKAB itself is comprised of two sections: a Board comprised of civilian and military Members the work of which is supported by the second section, a small Secretariat. The Board is chaired and the Secretariat is led by the Director UKAB who re- ports directly to the Chairman CAA and the Chief of the Air Staff, Royal Air Force. Board Members together form a team of hands-on practitioners with first-hand civil and military ‘know how’ on: · Air Traffic Area Control, Terminal Control and Airfield Control, military and civil; · Commercial Air Transport (CAT) flying, both fixed and rotary wing; · General Aviation (GA) flying, including gliders; and · Military flying, both fixed and rotary wing, by the RN, Army and the RAF. UKAB’s ROLE The UKAB undertakes the following tasks in promoting improved safety standards in the air: · Act as the start point for an investigation process into each incident, generally carried out by the Safety Regulation Group (SRG) of the CAA and/or Military HQs; · Determine what happened plus analysing the main causal factor(s); · Assess the risk levels involved; · Make Safety Recommendations where appropriate to reduce the risk of incident recurrence; and · Publish and distribute full reports, identifying lessons. STATUS OF UKAB REPORTS The sole objective of the UK Airprox Board is to assess reported Airprox in the interests of enhan- cing flight safety. It is not the purpose of the Board to apportion blame or liability. To encourage an open and honest reporting environment, names of companies and individuals are not published in UKAB’s reports. RISK CATEGORIES Risk level assessments are made on the basis of what actually took place and not on what may or may not have happened. There are four agreed categories as follows: A Risk of collision An actual risk of collision existed B Safety not assured The safety of the aircraft was compromised C No risk of collision No risk of collision existed D Risk not determined Insufficient information was available to determine the risk involved, or inconclusive or conflicting evidence precluded such determination. 4 AIRPROX DEFINITION An Airprox is a situation in which, in the opinion of a pilot or controller, the distance between aircraft as well as their relative positions and speed was such that the safety of the aircraft involved was or may have been compromised. THE UKAB DATA SET The UKAB Airprox database comprises a set of records each of which relates to a specific Airprox. As an investigation proceeds, from first report until the conclusion of the Board’s deliberations, fields within the appropriate record are completed by the UKAB Secretariat. Analysis of the set of records is then possible to produce information such as is published in this Report. Note: Prior to “Book 13”, certain Tables included figures for ‘Unknown’ aircraft. Subsequently, numbers of ‘Un- known’ aircraft are added to ‘Untraced’ aircraft and weather balloons to produce a new category, ‘Other’. All figures in the relevant Tables have been adjusted accordingly, including those for prior years. PUBLICATION OF REPORTS A key UKAB objective is to communicate effectively the lessons identified from Airprox events. Bi-annual ‘hardcopy’ Reports continue to be the primary means of communication, supported by presentations at flight safety meetings, cd-roms and the internet. The UKAB internet website is updated at least every month. The latest statistics are added, for example, as are details of the most recent set of Reports assessed by the Board. The UKAB website address is www.airproxboard.org.uk THIS REPORT On pages 6 to 10, this Report follows established practice by giving a broad overview on general trends and then examines in more detail some specific results for each of the three principal air- space user groups, Commercial Air Transport (CAT); General Aviation (GA) and Military. Some events, reported as Airprox and therefore assigned a reference number by the Secretariat, are subsequently withdrawn and are thus not subject to full investigation and assessment by the Board. Please note that only the reporter can withdraw an Airprox. 5 HALF-YEAR COMPARISONS 2005 AND 2006 A total of 79 Airprox were reported and opened for full investigation in the period 1 January to 30 June 2006. Tables 1 and 2 below give month-by-month data for the main three airspace user groups. The figures in the columns headed ‘Totals’ are shown in pie-chart format in Figures 1 and 2 from which it can be seen that the proportion of Airprox where civil aircraft met civil aircraft (Civ~Civ) is higher, year on year, with a commensurate drop in the category Civ~Mil. The figure for military encounters with other military aircraft (Mil~Mil) has dropped to 5% against 7% in 2005 whereas for Civ~Mil the proportion is down from 43% to 37%. Care needs to be taken when drawing conclusions because the corresponding total number of Airprox is down from 92 to 79, a fall of 14%. User Group Mix: January - June 2005 User Group Mix: January - June 2006 Other 4% Other % Civ~Mil 4% Civ~Mil 37% Civ~Civ Civ~Civ 46% 55% Mil~Mil Mil~Mil 7% 5% Figure 1 Figure 2 2005 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Totals 2006 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Totals Mil~Mil 2 0 1 1 0 2 6 Mil~Mil 1 1 1 0 0 1 4 Civ~Mil 8 6 7 8 5 6 40 Civ~Mil 7 7 2 7 29 Civ~Civ 2 2 10 8 10 10 42 Civ~Civ 7 4 2 11 6 14 44 Other 0 0 0 0 2 2 4 Other 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 Totals 12 8 18 17 17 20 92 Totals 11 12 10 1 9 24 79 Table 1 Table 2 The totals in Tables 1 and 2 can be broken out as in Tables and 4 below, these showing in more detail how the various user groups interacted during the first six months of 2006 (Table 4) with data for the same period in 2005 for comparison (Table 3).