UK Airprox Board UK Airprox Board
  • Assessment Summary Sheet for UKAB Meeting on 10th April 2019

     

    Total Risk A Risk B Risk C Risk D Risk E
    19 3 3 9 0 4

     

    Airprox    

    Aircraft 1

    (Type)           

    Aircraft 2

    (Type)

    Airspace

    (Class)

    Cause ICAO Risk
    2018276

    PA28

    (Civ FW)

    Spitfire

    (Civ Comm)

    London FIR

    (G)

    The Spitfire pilot flew into conflict with the PA28. B
    2018283

    Apache

    (HQ JHC)

    C152

    (Civ FW)

    London FIR

    (G)

    A late sighting by both pilots. C
    2018290

    Tutor

    (RN)

    PA28

    (Civ FW)

    Yeovilton MATZ

    (G)

    A TAS sighting report. E
    2018293

    Apache

    (HQ JHC)

    PA28

    (Civ FW)

    London FIR

    (G)

    A late sighting by the Apache pilot. C
    2018300

    AW169

    (HEMS)

    Europa

    (Civ FW)

    London FIR

    (G)

    A conflict in Class G resolved by both pilots. E
    2018301

    PA31

    (Civ Comm)

    PA28

    (Civ FW)

    Sywell ATZ

    (G)

    A conflict in the visual circuit resolved by the PA31 pilot.

    Contributory: 1. Neither pilot assimilated the other’s intentions. 2. The FISO did not assimilate that the PA28 was departing downwind on the northerly departure.

    3. Incomplete Traffic Information from the FISO.

    B
    2018302

    Atlas

    (HQ Air Ops)

    PA28

    (Civ FW)

    London FIR

    (G)

    The Brize controller allowed the Atlas to continue into conflict with the PA28.

    Contributory: Late and incomplete Traffic Information from the Brize controller.

    C
    2018303

    Discus

    (Civ Gld)

    C525

    ( Civ FW)

    London FIR

    (G)

    Effectively a non-sighting by the Discus pilot and probably a non-sighting by the C525 pilot. C
    2018304

    Tutor

    (HQ Air Trg)

    AS350

    (Civ Helo)

    Benson ATZ

    (G)

    The AS350 pilot flew into an active and promulgated ATZ without permission.

    Contributory: The AS350 pilot misinterpreted the Farnborough controller’s call concerning Benson’s inactivity.

    C
    2018305

    AS350

    (Civ Comm)

    Gazelle

    (Civ Helo)

    London FIR

    (G)

    The Gazelle pilot flew close enough to the AS350 to cause its pilot concern. C
    2018306

    DHC6

    (CAT)

    F15

    (Foreign Mil)

    London FIR

    (G)

    A sighting report. E
    2018310

    EC155

    (Civ Helo)

    PA28

    (Civ FW)

    Southend CTR

    (D)

    The PA28 pilot turned into conflict with the EC155 on approach.

    Contributory: The PA28 pilot was distracted by radio issues.

    C
    2018312

    Cabri G2

    (Civ Helo)

    SR22

    (Civ FW)

    Leicester ATZ

    (G)

    The Cabri pilot transitioned into conflict with the SR22 on RW28.

    Contributory: 1. The Cabri pilot did not assimilate the SR22 pilot’s R/T calls for RW28. 2. The Cabri pilot did not positively clear his path across RW28 before starting to transition.

    Recommendation: The CAA develop guidance for aerodrome operators regarding complexity of operations versus the level of ATS provision.

    A
    2018313

    DA42

    (Civ FW)

    Beech C23 Sundowner

    (Civ FW)

    Bournemouth CTR

    (D)

    The Beech pilot did not integrate with the DA42 in the circuit.

    Contributory: 1. The Beech pilot did not report at Sandbanks VRP. 2. The Beech pilot was task focused on flying the aircraft. 3. The Beech transponder was unserviceable. 4. A lack of SA and coordination from the Bournemouth Radar controller.

    A
    2018314

    C172

    (Civ FW)

    R44

    (Civ Helo)

    MATZ

    (G)

    The Benson Zone controller was concerned by the proximity of the R44 to the C172. E
    2018315

    EC135

    (NPAS)

    S76

    (Civ Helo)

    London FIR

    (G)

    The S76 pilot flew into conflict with the EC135. C
    2018316

    PA28

    (Civ FW)

    EV97

    (Civ FW)

    Perth ATZ

    (G)

    A conflict in the visual circuit.

    Contributory: The PA28 instructor did not assimilate the EV97 pilot’s R/T calls concerning his low-level circuit.

    C
    2018319

    C172

    (Civ FW)

    Tornado

    (HQ Air Ops)

    Beverley Airfield

    (G)

    The Tornado crew flew into conflict with the C172 in the Beverley visual circuit.

    Contributory: The Tornado crew did not avoid the pattern of traffic at Beverley.

    Recommendation: The CAA investigate options for the cost-effective and straightforward means to afford additional protection of traffic operating in the immediate vicinity of busy minor aerodromes.

    B
    2018320

    Typhoon(2)

    (HQ Air Ops)

    Typhoon(1)

    (HQ Air Ops)

    Lossiemouth ATZ

    (G)

    Typhoon(2) pilot lost SA and flew into conflict with Typhoon(1).

    Contributory: 1. Typhoon(1) pilot flew a wider than normal circuit. 2. Typhoon(2) pilot lost sight of Typhoon(1) on the break. 3. When downwind, Typhoon(2) pilot misidentified Typhoon B as Typhoon(1). 4. The controller’s landing clearance to Typhoon(1) confirmed Typhoon(2) pilot’s incorrect mental model.

    A

  • Consolidated Drone/Balloon/Model/Unknown Object Report Sheet for UKAB Meeting on 10 April 2019

     Download below sheet as PDF


    Total Risk A Risk B Risk C Risk D Risk E
    7 2 2 2 1 0

     

    Airprox

    Number  

    Date

    Time (UTC)             

    Aircraft

    (Operator) 

    Object  

    Location

    Description

    Altitude            

    Airspace

    (Class)            

    Pilot/Controller Report

    Reported Separation

    Reported Risk

    Cause/Risk Statement

    ICAO

    Risk

    2019038

    26 Feb 19

    1335

    B777

    (CAT)

    Drone

    5136N 00010W

    Potters Bar

    6000ft

    London TMA

    (A)

    The B777 pilot reports departing Heathrow on a SID when both pilots saw a white, square-shaped object straight ahead and marginally lower. About ½sec later it passed underneath the left wing. There was insufficient time to take avoiding action; the incident was reported to ATC who warned the aircraft behind them.

     

    Reported Separation: 20ft V/0m H

    Reported Risk of Collision: High

    Cause: The drone was being flown above the maximum permitted height of 400ft and within controlled airspace such that it was endangering other aircraft at that location. The Board agreed that the incident was therefore best described as the drone was flown into conflict with the B777.

     

    Risk: The Board considered that the pilot’s overall account of the incident portrayed a situation where providence had played a major part in the incident and/or a definite risk of collision had existed.

    A
    2019039

    25 Feb 19

    1145

    EMB170

    (CAT)

    Drone

    5130N 00005W

    5nm W London City

    2000ft

    London/City CTR

    (D)

    The EMB170 pilot reports that at approximately 5nm final for RW09 and level at 2000ft, an object, believed to be a drone, was spotted.  The drone was about 200ft below and was initially spotted in the 1 o’clock position, 2-300m laterally, tracking in the opposite direction and was visible for 3-4 seconds until it passed out of sight down the right-hand side of the aircraft.  It was a dark colour, dark grey or blue.

     

    Reported Separation: 200ft V/2-300m H

    Reported Risk of Collision: Low

    Cause: The drone was being flown above the maximum permitted height of 400ft and in controlled airspace such that it was endangering other aircraft at that location. The Board agreed that the incident was therefore best described as the drone was flown into conflict with the EMB170.

     

    Risk: The Board considered that the pilot’s overall account of the incident portrayed a situation where although safety had been reduced, there had been no risk of collision.

    C
    2019040

    9 Mar 19

    0708

    B777

    (CAT)

    Drone

    5129N 00014W

    Earls Court

    2500ft

    London CTR

    (D)

    The B777 pilot reports fully established on the RW27R ILS at 7.5nm when the Captain (PM) observed a white drone pass below from southwest to northeast (left to right). First sighting was no more than a couple of seconds before it passed underneath. The incident was reported on Heathrow tower frequency.

     

    Reported Separation: 200ft V/0m H

    Reported Risk of Collision: Medium

    Cause: The drone was being flown above the maximum permitted height of 400ft and in controlled airspace such that it was endangering other aircraft at that location. The Board agreed that the incident was therefore best described as the drone was flown into conflict with the B777.

     

    Risk: The Board considered that the pilot’s overall account of the incident portrayed a situation where safety had been much reduced below the norm to the extent that safety had not been assured.

    B
    2019041

    28 Feb 19

    1400

    PA31

    (Civ Comm)

    Drone

    5057N 00120W

    Southampton

    6000ft

    London FIR

    (G)

    The PA31 pilot reports that he was on an Air Ambulance flight to Oxford, after passing Southampton at 6000ft, heading 330° towards KENET, he observed a possible drone.  It was below and on a reciprocal heading.  The object was the size of a football and light grey in colour, it wasn’t thought to be a balloon because of its stability.  It could have been stationary but was giving the impression of a reciprocal heading because of his forward track.

     

    Reported Separation: <1000ft V/0m H

    Reported Risk of Collision: None

    Cause: The drone was being flown above the maximum permitted height of 400ft such that it was endangering other aircraft at that location. The Board agreed that the incident was therefore best described as the drone was flown into conflict with the PA31.

     

    Risk: The Board considered that the pilot’s overall account of the incident portrayed a situation where although safety had been reduced, there had been no risk of collision.

    C
    2019042

    24 Feb 19

    1505

    B787

    (CAT)

    Drone

    5136N 00028W

    Harefield

    7000ft

    London TMA

    (A)

    The B787 pilot reports that a white drone passed on the right hand side, slightly below their level. The incident was reported to ATC and a police statement given on landing. The pilot noted that the aircraft behind them also reported a drone.

     

    Reported Separation: Not reported

    Reported Risk of Collision: Medium

    Cause: The drone was being flown above the maximum permitted height of 400ft and in controlled airspace such that it was endangering other aircraft at that location. The Board agreed that the incident was therefore best described as the drone was flown into conflict with the B787.

     

    Risk: The Board considered that the pilot’s overall account of the incident portrayed a situation where there was insufficient information to make a sound judgement of risk.

    D
    2019043

    17 Mar 19

    1338

    B787

    (CAT)

    Drone

    5127N 00025W

    Heathrow

    250ft

    London CTR

    (D)

    The B787 pilot reports that whilst on short finals to RW27L, at around 250ft, a drone was spotted on the right-hand side. It was around 2ft in diameter and white in colour.  He believed it had 4 rotors and was hovering over what appeared to be a car-park area.

     

    Reported Separation: Not reported

    Reported Risk of Collision: Low

    Cause: The drone was being flown within the lateral and vertical limits of an FRZ such that it was endangering other aircraft at that location. The Board agreed that the incident was therefore best described as the drone was flown into conflict with the B787.

     

    Risk: The Board considered that the pilot’s overall account of the incident portrayed a situation where safety had been much reduced below the norm to the extent that safety had not been assured.

    B
    2019046

    24 Mar 19

    1813

    EMB170

    (CAT)

    Drone

    5139N 00122E

    25nm E Southend

    FL090

    London TMA

    (A)

    The EMB170 pilot reports having just levelled off when the FO saw an object directly ahead of them. The Captain looked out and saw a dark object with red areas that passed above them at high speed, which the FO identified as a drone. The incident was reported to ATC.

     

    Reported Separation: 150ft V/0m H

    Reported Risk of Collision: Medium

    Cause: The drone was being flown above the maximum permitted height of 400ft and in controlled airspace such that it was endangering other aircraft at that location. The Board agreed that the incident was therefore best described as the drone was flown into conflict with the EMB170.

     

    Risk: The Board considered that the pilot’s overall account of the incident portrayed a situation where providence had played a major part in the incident and/or a definite risk of collision had existed.

    A