We speak with David Woodward and Anthony Hatch, whose work with Local Airspace Infringement Teams, along with their pilot, FISO, ATCO, flight instructor and RT examiner experience, led them to want to start a conversation about Radio Telephony (RT).

More RT related information, including a Safety Sense leaflet on Radiotelephony is available from the CAA website, and the Airspace & Safety Initiative, which includes guidance on the importance of Radio Telephony as an element of pre-flight route planning.

Let us know what you would like to hear about next: gapodcast@caa.co.uk

This episode has been bookmarked into three sections:

Part 1 - Where do you want to fly? 00:11

• Location, location, location
• Pilot confidence and competence
• how nervousness of pushing the button is limiting where pilots fly

Part 2 - Why it’s good (and helpful) to talk 06:51

• Troubling a controller
• Understanding the what and the why
• Flying the magenta line

Part 3 - Pushing the button 16:08

• When to make your first call
• Planning, preparing and practicing
• Embracing mistakes

Welcome to the general aviation podcast from the UK Civil Aviation Authority

Welcome to this CAA General Aviation podcast special. My name is David Pratt from the communications team, and I'm joined by two members of two Local Airspace Infringement Teams. David Woodward joins in his capacity as a flight instructor, RT examiner and aerodrome FISO for six years, with added time in the control tower at Manchester, and Anthony Hatch, flying instructor, RT examiner and NATS ATCO, working in some of the busiest airports in the country in approach radar, aerodrome control and management. We're here to talk all things radio telephony, and to invite you to contact us with anything you'd like to hear covered in the future. Anthony, the idea for this podcast came from issues identified by some of the infringement incidents that you were looking at as part of your work with the Local Airspace Infringement Team.

That's correct. Yes, as a member of the LAIT team, we are, of course, always looking at why infringements are happening. And they typically revolve around navigation, planning, all that sort of thing and what we identified was a little bit more outside of the box, and that RT standards, right back from learning as a PPL student, and even through to current PPLs, and how they use the RT, both in their confidence of use of the RT and their competence in the use of the RT could actually be a contributing factor to airspace infringements. But I think we've decided it actually goes beyond that when we talked about the issues that surround the use of RT. And it's not just a airspace infringements, that could be an issue, it could be a lot wider ranging, which is what we wanted to investigate and talk about through these podcasts.

And meanwhile, in parallel, and in a different part of the country. David, that was echoed by your experiences.

Most definitely. Yeah. So I sit on the northwest Local Airspace Infringement Team. And it's quite often where we have a look at infringements, our incidents, and we do believe a contributing factor is RT. And as Anthony said, it's a lot of time down to PPL students and PPL holders confidence, as well as competence. And I think really one goes hand in hand with the other that once you get the confidence, you also get the competence as well. But I think a lot of it is due to a lack of practice, but also a lack of understanding. So really, that is something that we identified through the Local Airspace Infringement Team.

You obviously deal with a lot of new pilots between you, what are the kind of RT challenges that they're faced with?

From my own perspective, and I'm sure David will see similar results here, it depends a lot on where pilots are based. And a lot of it, of course, is driven by the instructors that they have, both with the patience that instructors have in allowing the students to use the RT at an early stage, and also having the, you know, the confidence in the instructor to hand it over to the student. But if you look at where flying is based out of you can have students training out of what would be the basic airfield with just air ground radio, who get very much used to broadcasting what they're doing but go anywhere near an air traffic control unit and are terrified by the amount of radio work that's needed. Vice versa, operating out of an air traffic control airfield, Cranfield being a classic example where a lot of training goes on, students there very used to pressing the button and talking on the RT. But as soon as they have to go to an uncontrolled airfield, either they expect too much to be done for them and the RT is completely wrong. And they get worried and terrified, because suddenly they're having to do all the work looking out the window sort themselves.

Yeah, definitely. I'd agree with that as well. And I think one of the challenges we have is when, as instructors were teaching people to fly, we often have our own preferred training areas, or areas which are almost areas we have to use because of other airspace restrictions. For example, I fly to Barton, we can't really go to the west because of Liverpool, we can't go south because of Manchester. And we can't necessarily go east because of Manchester either. So we tend to head towards the north and northwest. The only people you can talk to in that area on a weekday really is Walton. So what tends to happen is we can go through an entire syllabus of all the major exercises and the basic exercises as well, and every time we leave the airfield, we do the same thing over and over again. We'll change at certain points. We'll talk to Warton, we'll get a basic service and then on the way back in again, we will change back to Barton, request join and it's the same call. And you never really know whether the student is doing that because as they understand why they're doing it, or they're just repeating what they've heard you say previously. And if you were to move that familiar environment, remove that from them. Sometimes it can be a little bit overwhelming, particularly during the planning stages, for a pilot to find all the information that they need to be able to come to a decision that I need to talk to this person here, and then change to this person here, and request this type of service. Because maybe they don't fully understand that they're doing that because of airspace that's in the area, or there's a Lower Airspace Radar service available, or there isn't a Lower Airspace Radar available. So I think it's the understanding of the why not just the what, which causes a few issues.

So that sounds as though pilots are naturally restricting where they feel they can fly.

Absolutely, yeah. And I'll draw my own experience from my, when I first started learning to fly, I was taught well, I was taught all the RT procedures. But again, I believe it was just that ability to be able to use the radio and have the confidence to talk to people. For me, they'd be often times when I would be looking to fly, let's say, up to the Lake District, with my father, and I think great, I've planned the flight, I know exactly who I need to talk to, I know exactly what I need to do. And then I get up in the air and I just be a little bit apprehensive about it. And sometimes I may not conduct the entire flight that I wanted to do, and go and see the areas I wanted to, because I was a bit too nervous about pressing the button, I was a bit too nervous about talking to someone, I didn't want to inconvenience that controller. And then I actually sat back and thought actually, I spent all this money getting a pilot's licence and spending all this money hiring an aeroplane. And I'm flying in the same areas every single day, because that's what's familiar to me and comfortable. So I almost felt like it was a bit pointless at that point having a pilot's licence if I was just seeing the same views over and over again. So, I felt that I needed to push myself beyond those boundaries. And gets a little bit of help with the radio to be able to take full advantage of a pilot's licence

Anthony, picking up from a pilot feeling that they don't want to trouble a controller. My question is, from a controller's perspective, is there any reason for a pilot to be apprehensive about getting on the radio?

From the controllers perspective, I think times have changed. And I think in the past, there may have been controllers who come across quite curt or short on the radio. And I have heard, I remember listening to one transmission while I've sat in the aircraft waiting to depart. And I don't think it'd be fair for me to say the airfield I was flying out of at the time, and there was a trainee pilot on the radio, who couldn't quite get the words out very well. And the controller turned around and said, "Don't block my RT time up. Go away, think about what you need to be saying, and then come back to me". Now, as a controller, I think that wasn't really the sort of thing that we want to be displaying, as a supportive attitude, particularly towards a PPL and it's certainly the sort of thing that could put people off. From my own perspective, ATCOs that I work with are incredibly helpful, incredibly supportive. And what may worry some pilots is the strange phraseology, the new phraseology, which they're just not used to, particularly if they're looking at crossing controlled airspace, if they're looking at talking to an air traffic control unit, as opposed to their nice and friendly air ground radio operator where they may be discussing, you know, when they're coming back in who's going to be making the cups of tea, you know, and this is what you get, you know, you will get a lot more of a succinct professional standard from air traffic control, because if they are busy, they have to keep things down, short and sweet, and to the point. But there can be a lot of information that comes out which is necessary. You know, if you're looking at a crossing of controlled airspace, you may have clearance limits in there, you may have a route that you have to take, there maybe other aircraft in there, you've got to look out for which are going to be big, travelling fast, and the controller has responsibility for that. If it's VFR and IFR, yep, they don't have to separate them. But you've still got a duty of care. So it's down on the controller there to make sure that everything operating in the airspace is safe. And if they're busy, there are going to be instructions and rules that are going to be hammered out sometimes at quite a rate. And I think it's understanding and I've been able to pick that up and respond in the correct manner, which scares some more less experienced, or people who just don't do that sort of thing very often.

David, I was thinking from a pilot's perspective, are there any less than ideal practices that could be easily fixed?

Yes, definitely. I think one of the main ones is this not requesting service when flying outside controlled airspace close to airports. I go back to the story I mentioned earlier about flying with my father, when I first got my licence. And I didn't want to bother that controller. And I'm sure there are quite a lot of pilots who think the same way they think, I'm not really going anywhere near that airfield. I'm passing within five miles, let's say five or six miles. I'm not going to bother them. I'm not going to go through the ATZ, I'm not going to enter controlled airspace and therefore I won't call them. And going back to the story about Warton I mentioned, iI used to fly around not talking to them, and believe that I was doing them a favour by doing so. But, after doing a little bit more reading, a little bit more digging into things like a traffic service and a deconfliction service and what they are, I mean, first of all, I wasn't really interested in a deconfliction service because I don't fly IFR. So I was only bothered about a basic and a traffic service. And then when I read up on a deconfliction service, now actually me not wanting to bother the controller, and therefore not calling them, was actually causing them bother. Because a controller on an aircraft that they are not talking to. If an aircraft is on a deconfliction surface, the minimum required is five nautical miles laterally and 3000 feet vertically. So by me flying near Warton, just outside their MATZ let's say, they could have an aircraft that they're trying to vector on a deconfliction service for an approach into Warton. And suddenly, I'm a huge bubble flying through their approach, or near their approach. So therefore, they may have to take the aircraft over the top of me, almost onto a downwind leg to come back onto the approach. Whereas if I was actually talking to them, that space that I take up now is coordinated traffic reduces to three nautical miles laterally and 1000 feet vertically, which means they can actually drop that King Air or that Phenom business jet over the top me 1000 feet vertically separated, or sometimes 500 feet vertically, where they have regulatory approval for it. So, in my endeavours not to increase that controllers workload by not talking to them or not asking them for just a simple basic service, so they know what I'm doing, and therefore I'm classed as coordinated. I was actually causing more problems, but I didn't realise that. And I think it's that lack of the context behind things like I mentioned before, not just the what, but the why. Why am I asking, let's say, Cambridge for a basic service as I go past, or Oxford for a basic service as I go past? I'm not going through their ATZ, I'm passing six or seven miles away. But by doing that, I create extended vectors for an IFR, inbound, possibly on a deconfliction service. People don't know what I'm doing, so the controller may pass traffic information on me to an aircraft that's on a traffic service. But they don't know what my plan is, they don't know where I'm planning to route. Therefore, it increases the controller's workload, but also the workload of the pilot on the traffic service as well, because they're having to look for traffic that they don't necessarily know what it is, what it's doing, what it's going to do next, for example. So I think that's one of the issues or one of the main things that we see pilots doing that might not necessarily realise they're doing, but it could technically cause an issue.

Anthony, you're very close to these kinds of situations that cause increased workload. And what's been described is that you've not only got less space to play with, but you've also got to deal with an unknown quantity, when it could be a known quantity. Apart from suggesting that it's better to be on the radio than not, what do you think a pilot could look to change?

I think the days of GPS have been around for a while now. And pilots getting very used to using GPS. And what they're also getting very used to is travelling very, very close to edges of airspace, or ATZs. Because the magenta line tells them that they'll stay outside. Now, when I have a controller sat in front of a radar screen, and an aeroplane is pointing towards me, I can't see a magenta line on the radar display, which shows where the aircraft's going and where the pilots going to go. All I can see is an aircraft that's a, pointing directly at me, and also then flying very, very close parallel to the edge of airspace, when I'm trying to vector a large airliner, not very far away from it inside controlled airspace. And if I've got three miles between them with my airliner inside controlled airspace, and the return is just sitting outside, yes, I'm good. If that thing comes inside controlled airspace by some small margin, because of an error, suddenly, I'm going to need five miles and 5000 feet, or three miles 3000 feet, depending on where you operate, the London TMA can quite often use three miles and 3000 feet, but you've lost separation. And when you've sorted it out, bent aircraft out of the way, possibly had to give it extended vectors, more fuel burn delay people. I'm then out of the seat to be investigated, to make sure I've done nothing wrong. And I don't get back in the seat until it's been looked at and someone's had a chat with me. So, there's not only the concern about what's going on at the time operationally, it's also the effect afterwards. And it doesn't just finish it work because it goes home with you as well.

Yeah, that's something that I used to call baiting the shark tank. And that was often, there are some nice areas around Manchester, like Dovestone reservoir, for example, Glossop over the Pennines, and you'd have quite a few aircraft that would be heading down towards controlled airspace, tracking towards controlled airspace. And a controller sat in a seat like you say does not know what that pilot is going to do. And right at the last second, the aircraft will turn, because they're using the GPS, they know that they're not about to enter controlled airspace if they make the turn now. But at that point, the thought in the controller's mind of "that aircraft is about to enter", and the controller may even break an aircraft off an approach or give it a vector away from a base leg to turn it in the opposite direction or downwind leg, for example, because they believe that aircraft is about to enter controlled airspace, and they don't want a separation loss. And suddenly that aeroplane turns around right on the edge of controlled airspace, and flies away again. And it's something that I really drummed into my students that think about the person sat on the other side of the headset, that they don't know what you're doing. And they've got criteria to be working towards, they don't want to go home, like you mentioned there and sit there at home in the evening and think, did I do anything wrong? Am I in trouble? Am I going to lose my job over this, you know, if a loss of separation did occur, and we really got to think about just communicating that to a controller that you will be operating very closely to controlled airspace, you are going to remain outside and in your plan is to turn away before the edge of controlled airspace, it just gives a peace of mind to that control on the other side. And like I say, I really drawn that into my students of letting other people know what you're doing is an aid to safety.

There seems to be something about pilot's seeing their own individual flights in isolation from a more complex system. But in practical RT terms, my question is, when should the first call be made? When would that call allow a controller to manage traffic effectively and with much less stress?

Yeah, I go for something, and I don't know if Anthony you go along the same lines, but I go for what I call my 123 rule. And it runs in that order. Number one, your highest priority is if you're going to be flying within 10 miles of an aerodrome or its airspace. So that includes ATZs, controlled airspace, or underneath a CTA or a TMA, I always say talk to that unit. If you intend to operate in that area, you can use a frequency monitoring code if they have one. If they're a radar controller, and they have one for that area. But, it's good practice to talk to that unit. If you're beyond 10 miles from an aerodrome and its airspace. And like I mentioned, this includes ATZs as well, then be on a Lower Airspace Radar service. If there isn't one available, because it's out of the operating hours of the LARS or it is beyond the radius of the LARS, then there's always London are Scottish Information to talk to as well. So effectively if you're if you're giving yourself this bubble around the airspace, and you can extend that to 15 nautical miles if you want, but I tend to work towards 10 to 15 miles, that if you talk to that aerodrome in that area. And if everybody did the same thing, then everyone will be on the same frequency in that area to a degree, because I know that there are aerodromes where those radiuses would overlap. But that gives you plenty of time to call up, get a call in, let the controller know your intentions. And let them effectively come up with a plan if you do want to enter controlled airspace or you do want to fly through the ATZ. And I think that's even more relevant. I mean, we talk about controlled airspace here but I think it's extremely relevant around aerodromes that have ATZs, but do not have radar. So the approach control at some aerodromes is done without radar, it's done on a procedural service where Instrument Flight Rules aircraft, maybe flying an ILS or an NDB approach or a VOR approach outside controlled airspace without any surveillance cover, with no radar cover. And if you go on the AIP, and you download the instrument approach charts, which are publicly available, you will see there is a ring around with these instrument approach charts. And that ring that is normally around the outside is 10 nautical miles. And if you have a lot the majority of the approaches go up to the edge of that 10 nautical mile ring. And if we fly through there as pilots not talking to that unit, that unit could be clearing a fairly large business jet, let's think about Gloucester for example. They could clear a, or Blackpool, they could clear a Citation, or a Gulfstream or something like that to fly an instrument approach in IMC and break the IMC just below cloud at let's say 2000 feet, and someone could be flying there, not talking to you that unit because they believe that there's either nothing there, or they're not getting in the way of anything, or like I used to do, and I'll openly admit this, I don't want to bother them. Well, that's fine saying I don't want to bother them myself, because I'm flying past, but suddenly when a business jet pops out next to me, that could be a bit of an issue. And the controller didn't know I was there because I wasn't talking to them. So I think that really if you plan for if you're going to enter that 10 nautical mile ring, give them a call. I don't really think you can go wrong with that.

I agree 100% With what David says there is exactly the same process I use as well. I don't call it the 123 rule, but I do exactly the same. And a 10 mile works well. It works well when you think of rules and regs to do with use of Safety Comm or most of the smaller airfields with a FISO unit will have a 10 mile designated operational coverage on the radio. And I know a lot of the rules and regs similar to applying to a MATZ crossing, or to crossing controlled airspace state, you know call five minutes or 15 miles before whichever is the earlier, but in the sort of speeds that we're talking about here with light aircraft 10 miles equates to about a five minute travel time anyway. So the 10 miles works really well,

And is there is there ever an expectation from pilots that you've both spoken to that, they might make that call, they might kind of step up and make the attempt to talk to the relevant unit. But they may not hear back what you're expecting to hear back?

Yeah, that's right. So, in general, for an Air Traffic Service, when we're operating, when we were told, obviously use, avoid the use of excessive use of courtesies, and you know, please and, thank you, etc. If we have the time, well, you know, we'll have to say good morning. And thank you for the call as an aircraft passes by, because we really do appreciate when an aircraft flies past within 10 miles, and they call up for a Basic Service to let us know that they're there. Really appreciate it, because you can pass those details on to other aircraft operating in the area. I think the main thing is, it's just sticking to the standard phraseology, things like the initial call in the air, if you stick to the format of that, when the pilot calls up for a service, or a MATZ penetration in a basic service or a zone entry, when you hear the words "pass your message", the format should be the same every time. So if you can learn that format, and you can have that either written down ready, or in your mind ready and rehearse it at the planning stages of the flight, then you can't really go wrong. I think the biggest thing, I get people on my RT courses, sometimes who are qualified pilots, they flown for quite a few years. And they will openly admit, they don't have the confidence or the ability to operate the radio safely. So they want some refresher training, which is great. And they say, I don't like talking to ATC or FISOs. Because they asked me too many questions. And my response is always the same. They're probably asking you questions, because you haven't told them what they need to know. So what are they asking you and they say, well, they always asked me my position in relation to the VRP, or my altitude, or my departure point and destination, or my routing, these sorts of things. And these are all things that we should include on the initial call in the air. And the format never changes. And the first four things, in fact, I have them listed as seven things in total, but your aircraft callsign, your aircraft type, your departure point and your destination, they never change on a flight. So if you fly from the south coast of England to the north coast of Scotland, those first four things, you could do 20 initial calls in the air, and they remain the same every single time. The only variable bits are your current position, which you should always know where you are, your altitude, which will be on a dial in front of you, and your routing that's relevant to the person you're talking to, we should always know where we're going next. So when we break it down like that, actually, it becomes a lot more simple.

David, again, 100%. Behind that, if you look at a call to London information for a basic service, you look for a MATZ penetration, you look for controlled airspace crossing, the calls are pretty much identical. Because all you're doing is telling the agency on the ground, who you are, where you are, what you are what you want, you know, it's all the same information. I think what a lot of this comes down to it's not just about talking on the radio, it's all about preparation as well. And that preparation starts right back on the ground before we've even got anywhere near the aircraft. You know, it starts with looking at which agencies am I going to call what sorts of agencies are they? So what service can I expect? How am I expected to talk to them, I'll be talking to an air ground radio operator in a different way to have will be talking to the FISO, so and that will be different to how I talk to an air traffic controller. And services will be different that I can expect, I can't get a basic service from an air ground radio operator, I can from an FISO so I can from ATC is understanding that when you're looking at planning the flight yet, David, as you say, you should always know where you are. But how many times have we flown with students when it comes to the "I'm overhead... Oh, I don't know where I am". Plan it on your route. So right, I'm going to plan to do my RT call at this point here. In the early stages of training, little things like that, and then have that pen ready. Don't sit there without a pen, a kneeboard. Because if you've got that ready to write stuff down, you can read it straight off the kneeboard as soon as it's been read back to you, rather than trying to remember a whole long stream of instructions that are issued to you when you're trying to fly the plane, particularly when you're early on in the game, or even if you're not over experienced and you'll do the bare 12 hours a year. It's all about preparation and planning not just about talking.

Yeah, absolutely. And you know, we put lines on charts or, we should always put lines on charts, because even if we are using a GPS or a moving map that could fail so you always need your paper backup with the lines on, and a PLOG written down with your headings on, and your ground speed etc. But what I always have on mine as well is I will measure 10 miles away from the airport, as an mention before my 123 rule. So if I'm flying from, let's say Barton to Oban, I have 10 miles measured out from Barton. And on that I posted Red Cross with a number next to it. So it might be number two, because that's my second frequency. And on my kneeboard next number two, it says Warton radar 129, a decimal 530, MATZ penetration and traffic service. And I've planned that in my dining room table, I don't have to think in the aeroplane at the time, because I've done all my planning. And I know that I'm now 10 miles away from from an aerodrome, I'm going to go into a lower airspace radar service, I'm passing by Warton, and so I'm going to call them, because the 123 rule. And my plan and getting flying this route at the dining room table, before I go, then I've already flown it in my head, I know exactly what I'm going to do and exactly what I'm going to say. So in that sense, I don't really have to think about it too much. I just need to remind myself by looking at that number, what I planned that morning or the night before.

And in that way, it's becoming much more of a routine task, isn't it? Which brings me to ask both of you for one piece of advice for a new pilot or a pilot who doesn't feel confident to get on the radio in a certain environment. What would that one piece of advice be?

My main thing that I would say to pilots learning or, those that may be not 100% confident on the RT is, embrace mistakes, you're going to make them. Everybody makes them, I still make them now when I you know, when I'm flying an aeroplane or I'll stumble over something on the RT. And yes, I examine it. But when you're trying to fly an aeroplane at the same time is navigating and communicating. Sometimes you make a small mistake. Embrace it, because that's how you learn. Because, as I know now and Anthony will be able to say as well, as instructors, we see students making the same mistakes. When I say students, I mean different students making the same mistakes. And the only way that people learn from them is we point them out, we debrief them, we try again. So on the RT, when you press that button, if you forget to report your altitude, don't be afraid of it, because the controller or the FISO will ask you your altitude, and then you remember it next time and think oh, I remember that. So you don't have to ask me to come. So embrace the mistakes, be ready to make them. And in a way welcome them.

I want to talk to the students who are out there. At this stage, if you think about the flight training syllabus that we stick to everything is structured, we'll do this at this point this at this point this at this point in how to learn to fly an aircraft. We don't do that with our RT there's no structured training plan that is laid down with our RT. It's all pretty much down to the school, and a lot of the time to the individual instructor. So for the students that are out there, ask your instructors to get involved in the RT early on. Because the sooner you get involved in it, the sooner you'll build confidence, the sooner you'll start to understand what is needed. And it's just pressing that button and talking that can sometimes be quite scary and just doing it, doing it again and again. And again. Having that practice is what builds that confidence.

So embrace and welcome mistakes. And for those in training, ask your instructors to let you get involved in the RT early on. When we first planned this podcast, we saw the potential for a series where you could ask Anthony or David any RT questions that you'd like to hear talked through. The CIA has a regular general aviation podcast. So we may continue the RT discussion as part of future episodes. But what we'd like to ask you is to let us know what you'd like to hear covered next. It might be something to do with a specific environment, how to make calls for a particular route, or to understand more about what you can get from different types of service. David and Anthony.

I think one for me is sometimes pilots don't know where to find frequencies for things like ACTA that may exist or control areas etc. Sometimes up in Scotland, you see areas of Class E airspace, you know, how does that apply to us as pilots and what should we do with class E airspace? If we want to fly through a CTA, such as the Holyhead CTA, often on the charts, there isn't a frequency for that, where can you find the information? Who can you talk to? Who's delegated that airspace? So things like that, if anyone has any questions like that, then, you know, let us know. And we can we can show you how we would plan a certain flight. So if there's one you want to do, let's say you want to go from Blackpool to Cumbernauld, for example, we could say how we would find that flight and the key things we'd be looking for and the key documents we'd be looking into find information to help us plan and execute that flight well.

Absolutely. I think in that somebody said the other day in the chat that myself and David had that David had beforehand? How many people actually go and look at the AIP? It's, you know, it's understanding you look at your chart, how do I know where I get information from? Or well, it's got an ATZ around it is going to be the AIP. That is your primary source of information. So it's going through a route and how we get the information, superb. And I think what David said about understanding the differences between the various services as well is absolutely key to knowing how you interact and what you can ask for. So that that would be, you know, that's going to be really useful.

That just leaves me to thank David and Anthony for sharing their expertise and for the time they've put into this, and to thank you for listening. There's an awful lot to cover in this subject. And we've put some links in the podcast description to more information, the CAA's latest RT Safety Sense leaflet at caa.co.uk/safetysense, and the Airspace and Safety Initiative website at airspacesafety.com, where you'll find some great resources including guidance looking specifically at radio telephony as an element of effective pre-flight route planning. Let us know what you'd like covered next, or send us some feedback, email gapodcast@ca.co.uk and we look forward to hearing from you.

Thanks for listening. This is the CAA general aviation podcast