C8/2010L Airspace Infringement: Incident in Helsinki Terminal Control Area on 23 August 2010

An incident occurred between the final approach paths of runways 22L and 22R of Helsinki-Vantaa airport on 23 August 2010 at 14:47. A Cessna 172M light aircraft, registration OH-CTL, started a climb without ATC clearance from 1300 ft (ca. 400 m), penetrating Helsinki Terminal Control Area (TMA). The Cessna was enroute from Helsinki-Malmi airport to Hyvinkää aerodrome. Simultaneously, an Airbus A320 jetliner was approaching RWY 22L at 2000 ft (ca. 600 m). The minimum horizontal separation between said aircraft was approximately 1.2 NM (2.2. km) and the minimum vertical separation was 200 ft (ca. 60 m). The flight crew of the jetliner saw the light aircraft on their TCAS display, but the system did not issue a Traffic Advisory (TA) or a Resolution Advisory (RA). The jetliner's co-pilot made visual contact with a single-engine aircraft below them, flying away. On its return leg from Hyvinkää the light aircraft again strayed into Helsinki TMA and a little later it flew at 1000 ft (ca. 300 m) into the Helsinki Noise Abatement Area, where flying below 2000 ft (ca. 600 M) should be avoided.

Airspace infringements caused by aircraft flying under visual flight rules (VFR) have markedly increased in recent years. The investigation commission extended its scope regarding airspace infringements in Finland as a whole and studied EUROCONTROL's extensive General Aviation Airspace Infringement Survey. The reports stated that most airspace infringements were caused by VFR pilots with limited flying experience or insufficient flying currency. For the most part, airspace infringements take place in Control Zones or Terminal Control Areas. As regards Finland, most airspace infringements occurred in Helsinki TMA.

The cause of the incident was that, while enroute, the VFR pilot inadvertently and without air traffic clearance or radio contact climbed into Helsinki Terminal Control Area, thus generating the incident vis-à-vis the jetliner that was approaching Helsinki-Vantaa airport. Contributing factors included the pilot's lack of familiarity with airspace structures and flight procedures as well as inadequate flying currency. Prior to the flight the pilot failed to thoroughly study the aircraft's new performance data; neither did the pilot methodically plan the flight. Helsinki-Vantaa approach control is unable to adequately monitor VFR traffic flying inside Helsinki TMA or outside controlled airspace in its vicinity.

The investigation commission recommends that, insofar as knowledge of air traffic services, airspace structure, flight procedures and radiotelephony skills are concerned, the Finnish Transport Safety Agency checks the content of training curricula. The Finnish Transport Safety Agency should ensure that the Finnish Aeronautical Association review the content of sport aviation training syllabi in powered flying.

The investigation commission also recommends that, as airspace structures are being reviewed, the Finnish Transport Safety Agency, together with Finavia Corporation, proactively aim to achieve such solutions that would prevent airspace infringements and minimise their consequent risks in the Helsinki Terminal Control Area and in its immediate surroundings. Finavia Corporation should also include FIS training in the curricula of air traffic controllers' refresher training. Finally, the Finnish Transport Safety Agency together with Finavia Corporation and the Military Aviation Authority, should also evaluate the need to develop the flight information service in the surroundings of Helsinki and other busy Terminal Control Areas, and during military aviation exercises.