ELOM:2023:015 | Long-range flight through CTR | North Holland

Decision in Aviation Case | 12-05-2023

PPS Decision

in the case against a captain of a hot air balloon, referred to below as the suspect.

Reason for the investigation

The investigation was prompted by a report made by an employee of the Lelystad Airport Authority on [date in year] 2023. According to the report, a hot air balloon bearing registration number [registration number] flew into the CTR of Lelystad airport from a southerly direction without there being radio contact with the balloon.

Suspected offence

Violation of Article 5.9(2) of the Aviation Act.

Facts and circumstances

In the opinion of the aviation prosecutor, the official report of the aviation police shows that the suspect passed through the Lelystad CTR on [date in the year] 2023 with his balloon with registration number [registration number] without clearance. The suspect acknowledged this and described its context at length in the statements he made.

The aviation prosecutor understood from these statements that this balloon flight was a special one for him because it was a long-distance flight ('longjump') that he wanted to make once in a lifetime. Contrary to what appears to be common practice, he made this flight with someone else for safety reasons. He also made detailed preparations for the flight. Nevertheless, at some point during the cruise, he briefly lost concentration because he received an important phone call. The suspect was in the area of [place] at that time, just before entering the CTR.

The suspect tried to call the tower, but was on the wrong frequency. After switching to the correct frequency, he contacted an air traffic controller. The investigation shows that 26 minutes elapsed between the first call on the wrong frequency and when two-way radio contact was established. At that time, the balloon had crossed the CTR boundary by 7 nautical miles (about 13 kilometres). It was flying at a speed of about 20 knots, which is fairly fast. The suspect described the contact with the controller as chaotic.

At that point, the air traffic controller had been trying to contact the suspect for about seven minutes, telling him to leave the CTR immediately. This message did not get through because the suspect was still on the wrong frequency. Another pilot then communicated that the suspect could not leave the CTR because it was a balloon. In the meantime, there was also contact between air traffic control and other traffic at and around the airport. This must have been a stressful situation for all involved and may explain the course of the communication. The suspect stated that he would normally have landed, but this was not possible because of the mills in the polder.

When contact was made with the suspect, the controller gave the instruction to ascend to 1,500 feet, which the suspect did. According to the air traffic controller, there was no danger to other air traffic.

Decision

Although the suspect did in fact commit an offence by entering the CTR with his balloon without clearance, in the opinion of the aviation prosecutor there is no call for punishment. This takes into account that he openly and honestly stated what happened and that he also claims to have learned lessons from the event. The aviation prosecutor also understands from the aviation police that the event also made an impression on the suspect.

The aviation prosecutor dismissed the case, with the explicit encouragement to share the lessons of this occurrence with other balloonists.