EUROCONTROL - General Aviation Survey 2007

[CrossPoint]

Dear Sir/Madam,

I would like to invite you to participate in the General Aviation
Survey 2007. There are many risks one can face as a pilot or passenger
in the busy European skies. One of those is mid-air collision. Many
factors may cause it. A major one is airspace infringement. The survey
is being carried out by our company COMPASS IS ® on behalf of
EUROCONTROL - the European Organisation for the Safety of Air
navigation. The survey objective is to improve the understanding of
the airspace infringement issue and identify effective prevention
strategies and means. This survey is part of the EUROCONTROL Airspace
Infringement Safety Improvement Initiative, which aims at developing
and implementing effective risk reduction measures across Europe.

The team of the General Aviation Pilots Survey considers your
expertise and experience in the subject extremely valuable and
important. It will be much helpful to the survey in particular, and
largely to the whole General Aviation community, if you share your
observations on the reasons and explanations of airspace infringements
- the way you regard them from your perspective in your own flying
environment. Your suggestions about possible safety measures and risk
mitigation will be of great value as well.

Your opinion is important! It will take you less than 20 minutes to
share your experience at http://www.cis.bg/. It's worth doing it. You
could safe many lives!

Your answers will be kept confidential and will be used solely in
support of the airspace infringement risk analysis and mitigation.
Collected information will not be provided to third parties in any
circumstances.

Yours faithfully,

Vladimir Grigorov

Project Manager
COMPASS IS ®

[Larry Dighera]

On Fri, 03 Aug 2007 03:42:58 -0700, CrossPoint
> wrote in
om>:

>The team of the General Aviation Pilots Survey considers your
>expertise and experience in the subject extremely valuable and
>important.

One of the required fields in the form is 'country.' Unfortunately,
'United States Of America' is not an option; Americans have to select
'other - north America.'

I don't know if it's a second-language aberration or what, but I got
the feeling from the lengthy questionnaire's focus that they were
fishing for GA pilots to disclose any hazards they may pose to airline
operations.

You can view my responses here:
http://www.cis.bg/ga/ga_results.aspx?ID=75565B

More info:
http://www.cis.bg/ga/default.aspx
COMPASS IS ® is a rapidly developing consultancy company focused
on providing up-to-date solutions for aviation industry, in
particular in the area of air traffic management, safety related
issues and airspace design. COMPASS IS ® is one of the most
established specialist aviation consultancy companies in the
Eastern Europe. Its team brings a wealth of industry-specific and
consultancy experience covering an extensive range of project
areas in the airport, airline and air traffic management sectors.

COMPASS IS ® is a new company, however the experience of the
experts working in it – they have been leading managers and
consultants in a number of international and local projects - are
a guarantee for a quick and successful finalisation of many key
projects.

[Andrew Sarangan]

I agree. Their choices to the questions tells us something. For
airspace infringements and deviations, the lowest choice they offer is
once in 20 flights. I have never flown in Europe, but that seems like
an awfully high rate of occurence. One in 3 is their worst case
choice, which seems almost unfathomable. I did not complete the survey
because it seems it is aimed at pilots who fly in Europe.





On Aug 3, 7:49 am, Larry Dighera > wrote:
> On Fri, 03 Aug 2007 03:42:58 -0700, CrossPoint
> > wrote in
> om>:
>
> >The team of the General Aviation Pilots Survey considers your
> >expertise and experience in the subject extremely valuable and
> >important.
>
> One of the required fields in the form is 'country.' Unfortunately,
> 'United States Of America' is not an option; Americans have to select
> 'other - north America.'
>
> I don't know if it's a second-language aberration or what, but I got
> the feeling from the lengthy questionnaire's focus that they were
> fishing for GA pilots to disclose any hazards they may pose to airline
> operations.
>
> You can view my responses here:http://www.cis.bg/ga/ga_results.aspx?ID=75565B
>
> More info:
> http://www.cis.bg/ga/default.aspx
> COMPASS IS ® is a rapidly developing consultancy company focused
> on providing up-to-date solutions for aviation industry, in
> particular in the area of air traffic management, safety related
> issues and airspace design. COMPASS IS ® is one of the most
> established specialist aviation consultancy companies in the
> Eastern Europe. Its team brings a wealth of industry-specific and
> consultancy experience covering an extensive range of project
> areas in the airport, airline and air traffic management sectors.
>
> COMPASS IS ® is a new company, however the experience of the
> experts working in it - they have been leading managers and
> consultants in a number of international and local projects - are
> a guarantee for a quick and successful finalisation of many key
> projects.

[Dan Luke[_2_]]

> EUROCONTROL

On a scale of 1-10, how trusting does that word make you feel?

--
Dan
T-182T at BFM

[Thomas Borchert]

Dan,

> On a scale of 1-10, how trusting does that word make you feel?
>

Not sure what you are getting at. Eurocontrol is the European ATC, if
you will. See http://www.eurocontrol.int/

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

[Thomas Borchert]

CrossPoint,

> There are many risks one can face as a pilot or passenger
> in the busy European skies.

There are? Care to provide numbers?

> One of those is mid-air collision.

It is? Care to provide numbers?

> Many
> factors may cause it. A major one is airspace infringement.

Is it? I can't think of a single mid-air collision ANYWHERE IN THE
WORLD caused by airspace infringement. Can you?

I'm not convinced you are legit and acting on behalf of Eurocontrol.

>bs detector going thru roof>

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

[Thomas Borchert]

CrossPoint,

Ok, so Eurocontrol links from their site directly to yours, so I assume
you're legit.

However, I have now tried doing the survey - and I have to say I am
aghast! In my job, I have to evaluate surveys on a regular basis. I
have never seen anything as badly designed as this one. "Give your best
guess how often <this and that> could/might lead to <this and that>"???
What kind of questions are those? What you are asking for is
preconception, prejudice and mythology. That's supposed to lead to
scientific results? Also, with my criticism regarding your
preconceptions in the introduction to the survey in my previous post in
mind, it is qite clear to me that you are operating on a basis where
your mind is made up already. You don't want to find reality, you want
to assure your assumptions.

And to think this is all paid for by my taxes and/or user fees!

BTW, I'd be really surprised if you ever got back to this forum after
dumping your OP. But I'd be very interested in your answers.

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

[CrossPoint]

On 3 Àâã, 17:13, Thomas Borchert > wrote:
> CrossPoint,
>
> > There are many risks one can face as a pilot or passenger
> > in the busy European skies.
>
> There are? Care to provide numbers?
>
> > One of those is mid-air collision.
>
> It is? Care to provide numbers?
>
> > Many
> > factors may cause it. A major one is airspace infringement.
>
> Is it? I can't think of a single mid-air collision ANYWHERE IN THE
> WORLD caused by airspace infringement. Can you?
>
> I'm not convinced you are legit and acting on behalf of Eurocontrol.
>
> >bs detector going thru roof>
>
> --
> Thomas Borchert (EDDH)


Dear All,

I will try to convince you that it is serious and important and to
answer some questions raised here.


First you may read more about the Airspace Infringement Initiative
here:
http://www.eurocontrol.int/safety/public/standard_page/infrigements.html

Second to check that everything is legit:
http://www.eurocontrol.int/safety/public/standard_page/GA_survey.html

The on-line questionnaire is part of General Aviation (GA) Survey 2007
project combining series of workshops with GA pilots taking place in
8-9 European countries, extensive consultations with ATM service
providers and Civil Aviation Authorities. I may say that this is just
a small part from the puzzle called Airspace Infringement (AI).

Finally it is not compulsory to participate but we still believe that
the individual pilots' opinion matters and this is why we do this on-
line questionnaire. We know that it might be subjective and therefore
we are going to analyse and integrate the results it very carefully
with the support of our sociology team.

I read some comments about the numbers of some questions. Well there
is an option Other where you may write whatever number you want based
on your professional experience.

As EUROCONTROL is European organisation therefore the main focus is on
European pilots but we will appreciate any other from USA or other
countries worldwide.

Vladimir Grigorov

[CrossPoint]

On 3 Àâã, 17:30, Thomas Borchert > wrote:
> CrossPoint,
>
> Ok, so Eurocontrol links from their site directly to yours, so I assume
> you're legit.
>
> However, I have now tried doing the survey - and I have to say I am
> aghast! In my job, I have to evaluate surveys on a regular basis. I
> have never seen anything as badly designed as this one. "Give your best
> guess how often <this and that> could/might lead to <this and that>"???
> What kind of questions are those? What you are asking for is
> preconception, prejudice and mythology. That's supposed to lead to
> scientific results? Also, with my criticism regarding your
> preconceptions in the introduction to the survey in my previous post in
> mind, it is qite clear to me that you are operating on a basis where
> your mind is made up already. You don't want to find reality, you want
> to assure your assumptions.
>
> And to think this is all paid for by my taxes and/or user fees!
>
> BTW, I'd be really surprised if you ever got back to this forum after
> dumping your OP. But I'd be very interested in your answers.
>
> --
> Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

Dear Thomas,

Thank you for you fair oppinion.

However I must say that the overall survey is developed based on the
requirements that we have and based on different analysis made by well
known institutions like NLR in additional to a lot of experience and
good practices accumulated from the European states.

Therefore it is a personal choise to fill or not the survey. Personaly
I will very greatful to receive as many as possible oppinions
therefore I posted my letter here.

Vladimir

[Larry Dighera]

On Fri, 03 Aug 2007 16:13:51 +0200, Thomas Borchert
> wrote in
>:

>CrossPoint,
>
>> There are many risks one can face as a pilot or passenger
>> in the busy European skies.
>
>There are? Care to provide numbers?
>
>> One of those is mid-air collision.
>
>It is? Care to provide numbers?
>
>> Many
>> factors may cause it. A major one is airspace infringement.
>
>Is it? I can't think of a single mid-air collision ANYWHERE IN THE
>WORLD caused by airspace infringement. Can you?

Here's a memorable MAC in which a USAF pilot entered Tampa Class B
airspace with ATC clearance resulting in fatally disintegrating a
Cessna 172 and it's ATP rated pilot:
http://www.ntsb.gov/NTSB/brief2.asp?ev_id=20001212X22313&ntsbno=MIA01FA028A&akey=1


Why don't you pose your questions directly to the operators of the
questionnaire web site?:

>I'm not convinced you are legit and acting on behalf of Eurocontrol.

That's because they aren't; they're just private advisors, the way I
understand it, from Bulgaria no less.

>>bs detector going thru roof>

Given:
IP Location - Texas - Dallas - Theplanet.com Internet Services
Inc

It does seem curious.


http://whois.domaintools.com/cis.bg
DOMAIN NAME: cis.bg
requested on: 31/05/2007 14:52:09.58416 EEST
activated on: 08/06/2007 15:27:38.848009 EEST
expires at: 31/05/2008 00:00:00 EEST
registration status: Registered

REGISTRANT:
COMPASS INNOVATIVE SOLUTIONS LTD
gr.SOFIA, 1142
BULGARIA

ADMINISTRATIVE CONTACT:
VLADIMIR GRIGOROV
vladimir_
COMPASS INNOVATIVE SOLUTIONS LTD
G.S.RAKOVSKI 193, VH.A, ET.3, AP.7
gr.SOFIA, 1142
BULGARIA
tel: +359887270947
fax:
NIC handle: VG18075

TECHNICAL CONTACT(S):

Vladimir Grigorov
vladimir_
Compass Innovative Solutions Ltd.
G.S.Rakovski 193, Vh.A, et.3
gr.SOFIA,
BULGARIA
tel: +359887270947
fax:
NIC handle: VG18558

NAME SERVER INFORMATION:
ns1.clientnshosting.net
ns2.clientnshosting.net

DNSSEC: Inactive

[Thomas Borchert]

CrossPoint,

Thanks for answering.

Could I kindly ask you again to back up the basic assumptions you make
about risk flying in Europe (you implicitly state it is higher than
elsewhere), about mid-airs (you implicitly state they are a high risk
compared to others in aviation) and about a causal correlation between
airspace infringement and mid-airs (you say the former is a "major
cause" of the latter)?

I think you are wrong on ALL those points. Can you prove them?

FWIW, the page at Eurocontrol's website about their infringement
initiative doesn't make that last connection at all. They simply see
infringements as a risk per se. They also grade infringements in a
scheme where about 40 percent are deemed a "significant" or higher
risk."Major" and "serious" incidents, however, are still very rare. I
couldn't find the Eurocontrol definitions of these classifications with
a quick search. Nowhere on that page are mid-airs even mentioned, only
"potential risks" and other rathervague descriptions.

To be clear, I think there might indeed be too many infringements.
Although, we're talking about slightly over 4 per day on average in all
of "the busy European skies" - hmm! I also agree they can be a risk.
However, to portrait them as "a major cause" for mid-airs is travesty -
especially in the light of the fact that a much more "major cause" of
mid-airs might at least partly be the group your employer belongs to.
I'm talking about controller error. While most mid-airs are probably
caused by pilot error, airspace infringement has nothing to do with it
- again, feel free to prove me wrong.

So please understand that the whole "infringement initiative" seems a
little dubious. If you say that "the overall survey is developed based
on the requirements that we have", after looking at it, I have to say I
find that easy to believe - in a very ironic way.

After all, what magic "solution" to this "problem" might an ATC
organisation like Eurocontrol possibly come up with? Could it be fewer
controlled and restricted airspace? Well, if you think so, I've got a
bridge to sell you...

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

[Thomas Borchert]

Larry,

> Here's a memorable MAC in which a USAF pilot entered Tampa Class B
> airspace with ATC clearance resulting in fatally disintegrating a
> Cessna 172 and it's ATP rated pilot:
>

Actually, from scanning the report quickly, while the F-16s did
infringe airspace, the collision itself seems to have happened outside
that airspace after the infringement. Did I read it incorrectly?

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

[Larry Dighera]

On Fri, 03 Aug 2007 17:30:14 +0200, Thomas Borchert
> wrote in
>:

>After all, what magic "solution" to this "problem" might an ATC
>organisation like Eurocontrol possibly come up with?

Converting all European airspace to Class A? :-(

[S Green]

"Thomas Borchert" > wrote in message
...
> CrossPoint,
>
> Thanks for answering.

>
> So please understand that the whole "infringement initiative" seems a
> little dubious. If you say that "the overall survey is developed based
> on the requirements that we have", after looking at it, I have to say I
> find that easy to believe - in a very ironic way.
>
> After all, what magic "solution" to this "problem" might an ATC
> organisation like Eurocontrol possibly come up with? Could it be fewer
> controlled and restricted airspace? Well, if you think so, I've got a
> bridge to sell you...

Airspace infringement might be a risk but the biggest risk is loss of
separation which is nearly always an issue with CAT and not GA.

What is an issue is the lack of consistency with airspace designations, an
example, widespread us of say class E in France and none in the UK. So
leaving French airspace you go from class E to either class G or class A
depending on altitude. In this case we are talking about 5500ft before
hitting class A.

[S Green]

Crosspoint,

The survey seems to be of the "when did you stop beating your wife type" in
that the questions originate from an incorrect premise. As such it is
difficult to complete in a way that gives meaningful results.

If your brief is to provide a set of results to fit an already predetermined
view, then it is clear from the questions about whatthat predetermined view
is.

For example, the best way to reduce the risk of airspace infringements would
to be make it possible for more European GA pilots to have instrument
ratings. A system which requires then to undertake a formal course of study
at an approved training organisation and do either the 8 written exams for
just the IR ($1000 just for the exam fees) or take all 14 for the ATPL (and
pick up the commercial licence too) means that pilot development is
restricted and that is the major danger.

Your study fails to address the underlying issues. Whether Eurocontrol want
more private pilots flying in their system of course is another matter.


SG

"CrossPoint" > wrote in message
oups.com...
On 3 Àâã, 17:30, Thomas Borchert > wrote:
> CrossPoint,
>
> Ok, so Eurocontrol links from their site directly to yours, so I assume
> you're legit.
>
> However, I have now tried doing the survey - and I have to say I am
> aghast! In my job, I have to evaluate surveys on a regular basis. I
> have never seen anything as badly designed as this one. "Give your best
> guess how often <this and that> could/might lead to <this and that>"???
> What kind of questions are those? What you are asking for is
> preconception, prejudice and mythology. That's supposed to lead to
> scientific results? Also, with my criticism regarding your
> preconceptions in the introduction to the survey in my previous post in
> mind, it is qite clear to me that you are operating on a basis where
> your mind is made up already. You don't want to find reality, you want
> to assure your assumptions.
>
> And to think this is all paid for by my taxes and/or user fees!
>
> BTW, I'd be really surprised if you ever got back to this forum after
> dumping your OP. But I'd be very interested in your answers.
>
> --
> Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

Dear Thomas,

Thank you for you fair oppinion.

However I must say that the overall survey is developed based on the
requirements that we have and based on different analysis made by well
known institutions like NLR in additional to a lot of experience and
good practices accumulated from the European states.

Therefore it is a personal choise to fill or not the survey. Personaly
I will very greatful to receive as many as possible oppinions
therefore I posted my letter here.

Vladimir

[Larry Dighera]

On Sat, 4 Aug 2007 09:00:05 +0100, "S Green"
> wrote in
>:

>Whether Eurocontrol want more private pilots flying
>in their system of course is another matter.

Isn't Eurocontrol a contractor for privatized air traffic control in
Europe? If so, it's not 'their system,' is it? They work for the
nations who 'own' the systems, right?

[Orval Fairbairn]

In article >,
"S Green" > wrote:

> Crosspoint,
>
> The survey seems to be of the "when did you stop beating your wife type" in
> that the questions originate from an incorrect premise. As such it is
> difficult to complete in a way that gives meaningful results.
>
> If your brief is to provide a set of results to fit an already predetermined
> view, then it is clear from the questions about whatthat predetermined view
> is.
>
> For example, the best way to reduce the risk of airspace infringements would
> to be make it possible for more European GA pilots to have instrument
> ratings. A system which requires then to undertake a formal course of study
> at an approved training organisation and do either the 8 written exams for
> just the IR ($1000 just for the exam fees) or take all 14 for the ATPL (and
> pick up the commercial licence too) means that pilot development is
> restricted and that is the major danger.
>
> Your study fails to address the underlying issues. Whether Eurocontrol want
> more private pilots flying in their system of course is another matter.
>
>
> SG
>
> "CrossPoint" > wrote in message
> oups.com...
> On 3 Àâã, 17:30, Thomas Borchert > wrote:
> > CrossPoint,
> >
> > Ok, so Eurocontrol links from their site directly to yours, so I assume
> > you're legit.
> >
> > However, I have now tried doing the survey - and I have to say I am
> > aghast! In my job, I have to evaluate surveys on a regular basis. I
> > have never seen anything as badly designed as this one. "Give your best
> > guess how often <this and that> could/might lead to <this and that>"???
> > What kind of questions are those? What you are asking for is
> > preconception, prejudice and mythology. That's supposed to lead to
> > scientific results? Also, with my criticism regarding your
> > preconceptions in the introduction to the survey in my previous post in
> > mind, it is qite clear to me that you are operating on a basis where
> > your mind is made up already. You don't want to find reality, you want
> > to assure your assumptions.
> >
> > And to think this is all paid for by my taxes and/or user fees!
> >
> > BTW, I'd be really surprised if you ever got back to this forum after
> > dumping your OP. But I'd be very interested in your answers.
> >
> > --
> > Thomas Borchert (EDDH)
>
> Dear Thomas,
>
> Thank you for you fair oppinion.
>
> However I must say that the overall survey is developed based on the
> requirements that we have and based on different analysis made by well
> known institutions like NLR in additional to a lot of experience and
> good practices accumulated from the European states.
>
> Therefore it is a personal choise to fill or not the survey. Personaly
> I will very greatful to receive as many as possible oppinions
> therefore I posted my letter here.
>
> Vladimir

I noted that "poor airspace design" is a prime cause of problems, in
multiple cases.

[Orval Fairbairn]

In article >,
Airbus > wrote:

> In article >,
> says...
> >
> >
> >Crosspoint,
> >
> >The survey seems to be of the "when did you stop beating your wife type" in
> >that the questions originate from an incorrect premise. As such it is
> >difficult to complete in a way that gives meaningful results.
> >
>
> I couldn't agree more. Your analogy is apt.
> I looked at the survey, started to reply (because I fly in Europe) but
> quickly
> felt I was being led into a trap, laid more by ineptitude than anything else.
>
> Well meaning pilots might reply by clicking the "minimum" proposed incident
> occurrence, however this is several orders of magnitude above the real risk,
> which means the compiled result will be a wild distorsion of the reality.
> This
> is a grotesque disservice to those who wish to participate in good faith.
>
> This survey is a meaningless contribution, and an insult to any who take
> aviation saftety seriously. Not only should it be boycotted, but Eurocontrol
> should be alerted and called to order on this issue of charlatanism and
> intellectual bankruptcy . . .
>
> I regret to use such harsh words, but this thing really stinks!

That is why "poor airspace design" should be mentioned as often as
possible. The "one size fits all," standard cookie cutter approach to
airspace design inhibits safety more than alleged "poor pilot training."

[Airbus]

In article >,
says...
>
>
>Crosspoint,
>
>The survey seems to be of the "when did you stop beating your wife type" in
>that the questions originate from an incorrect premise. As such it is
>difficult to complete in a way that gives meaningful results.
>

I couldn't agree more. Your analogy is apt.
I looked at the survey, started to reply (because I fly in Europe) but quickly
felt I was being led into a trap, laid more by ineptitude than anything else.

Well meaning pilots might reply by clicking the "minimum" proposed incident
occurrence, however this is several orders of magnitude above the real risk,
which means the compiled result will be a wild distorsion of the reality. This
is a grotesque disservice to those who wish to participate in good faith.

This survey is a meaningless contribution, and an insult to any who take
aviation saftety seriously. Not only should it be boycotted, but Eurocontrol
should be alerted and called to order on this issue of charlatanism and
intellectual bankruptcy . . .

I regret to use such harsh words, but this thing really stinks!