Hi. I've noticed a recurring misunderstanding in the comments and I wanted to add here, to try and fill in something that I thought was adequately explained in the video. Perhaps people are not watching the whole video. Reuben was not using his GPS device to determine his altitude - he was using his pressure altimeter of course. What is important to understand here is that the airspace bases on this track, gradually rise and Reuben mistakenly thought he'd cleared the area with the constraining class A controlled airspace base, when he had a few miles further to go - a glance of his SkyDemon virtual radar 'appeared' to confirm this. This is because his GPS altitude was under-reading, which showed the base of controlled airspace above him to several thousand feet above him, when it was only a few hundred. This visual misrepresentation confirmed his wrongful assumption about his postion, and he climbed.
Great video as always. Can you please show us the SD virtual radar from the SD log for this flight. The whole video is based on this 'almost 2000ft' GPS discrepancy but no evidence is provided for this. Thanks.
GPS itself rarely has a 2,000 foot error. So be interesting to look at the actual SD log - something else was off here. The altimeter reading being off by 2k seems like something that would be caught just as an unreasonable altitude, folks are flying pretty low - so being 2K lower just seems noticeable.
1500ft in error is not acceptable from Skyecho. That is a reason for not buying it. But as you say the aircraft altimeter and qnh is king no matter what is on the skydemon screen.
What a great insight into SkyDemon. It's a very powerful tool - but I had no idea of those limitations regarding altitude nor the coloured flags/triangles. Very, VERY helpful ! Thanks.
I have a skyecho but seldom use it because the GPS quality has been consistently unreliable no matter where I place it in the cabin. I have found the in-built GPS receiver in my ancient Samsung Tab A is far more reliable.
Very interesting video. I’ve done some experimenting today in my Arrow. Blue flag on the Demon. I’m guessing the FISO can read his pressure gauge so I’m on the local QNH. Demon under reads by 120’ in the climb topping out at 250’ under read at 5,000’. This assumes of course my altimeter is accurate.
Well quite, given all the instruments will be inaccurate and all have tolerances it is impossible for anyone, without a long measuring tape, to determine an accurate height.
I've only done a few hours in fixed wing, but I was impressed with Reuben taking responsibility, actively engaging with FAA to have a very productive call and learning from the experience. I wouldn't hesitate to get in a plane that Reuben is flying, based on listening to this account.
The problem with the magenta line is that it doesn’t tell you how valid the data or accurate its data is. The lines on the display remain the same size and colour no matter what the what the quality of the data. The sucker trap is that these things normally work.
I'm probably asking a novice's question, but doesn't the aircraft have an altimeter that can be cross referenced with the altitude being shown on the device?
Was accused by an angry Southampton controller and caa of busting Solent airspace, but proved I didn't. Turns out controllers radars show us as a bunch of numbers including the altitude our devices send them which occupy the size of a small town travelling across their screen and not a small dot. Always challenge their accusations.
WHAT!!!! I am a U.S. PPL holder (w/IFR) with 4,000 PIC hours over 57 years. I use GPS and ForeFlight on an iPad. Love it, but it's not certified. The aircraft I fly, there are several, have WAAS GPS. I would NEVER, I REPEAT NEVER, use my iPad GPS for altitude. The onboard WASS system yes, for LPV approaches. But it's certified for that. I have seen the iPad GPS even have transitory issues with lateral position. It's purely a backup. You have an altimeter on the panel right in front of your face. Use it as the sole source of altitude information unless you have reason to believe the pitot/static system has issues. I have busted KIND's Class C (definition may differ slightly by country) and had "the conversation" with local FAA office. No email, they just called. I was distracted and lost SA. Purely my fault, the altimeter was correct. Same result, FSDO kindly let me off the hook. In my opinion this incident shows a shocking lack of basic airmanship and systems knowledge. Rueben is lucky he did not have to take a mandatory checkride.
Remember fokes, unless the gps is installed by a certified installation company with antennas in exact locations on the plane it is not official navigation.
Another unprofessional observation is the unsafe inflight cockpit video conversation about the violation. Pilots who fly at a professional level practice a "sterile cockpit" under 10,000 ft (or at least a reasonable cruise altitude) and not while maneuvering while hand flying. Also, I din't observe the use of a checklist in any phase of flight.
I’m jumping on here to fully support and commend Ruben on appearing on here with his account of his infringement, taking complete responsibility for it, and trying to make awareness of this to other pilots out there. Bravo to him and continued safe flying to all!
UK airspace is particularly cluttered so I see how easy it is to infringe something. I’m glad the CAA was so positive about it. It seems Ruben is a very reasonable person who make a mistake any of us could easily make.
The old quote ‘Learn from others mistakes, you don’t have time to make them all yourself’ comes to mind when watching these episodes Jon. Thank you for using your platform to spread awareness to others, and for also giving Reuben the opportunity to share this story. I’m sure this will be invaluable content for all of us pilots, especially those who regularly use moving maps for navigation. I think we must all remember that the authorities are there for a reason and controlled airspace is there to protect all pilots, so it is good to see that the CAA have taken swift action to contact Reuben. Their unbiased and accommodating response is refreshing to see from an authority; this video illustrates that if a pilot unknowingly deviates from the rules they should just fess up. Ego has no place in the cockpit, and Reuben seems like a very humble pilot who made a simple mistake by not cross-checking his information sources. It’s generally pilots like him and yourself who will help in-still a strong safety culture in general aviation.
As a software engineer, and this kind of data is known to be inaccurate and can lead pilots into dangerous situaitons, I would just not display it and possibly not have a vertical position feature.
I also fly in this area and have often glanced at the virtual radar for confirmation. Greatly appreciate you sharing this story. Being more aware of Skydemon/Skyecho limitations doesn't stop them being amazing tools, but at least now we'll be reminded of this video when confirmation bias could exist! ❤
As someone learning to fly I'm starting to realise how complex airspace can be. Massive props to Rueben for being open on this video and to the CAA and well done to the CAA for focusing on the safety aspect and taking the minimal action. Stuff happens, it's our response that dictates how it comes from there
Well done the CAA? There was no loss of safety. There was the potential of minor inconvenience (there was none). That is a system operating correctly, deconflicting air traffic. For a whole host of reasons things don't always work correctly, human error or machine error. This we anticipate and mitigate. The CAA have no right to be snotty with an airspace user who has accidentally infringed, the risk comes with the territory. We, the people, need to not be cowed by the over zealous authority. What they demand is not reasonable.
@@gwynsea8162 _We, the people, need to not be cowed by the over zealous authority. What they demand is not reasonable._ The CAA demands pilot stay out of controlled airspace which is clearly possible because pilots do it every day. Who crapped on your chips?
@@gdwnet Once you've got a few more hours under your belt, you'll realise how silly this sounds. You'll also discover that the CAA is the only regulator in the world who takes this attitude. And yet we're no "safer" than anyone else.
@@matthewwilliams2128 Enlighten me now then please. Why say something like this but leave out the core content? Are you trying to act mysterious like there is a secret knowledge behind a locked door in a basement that few have the key to? Come on, if you have something to say, say it. Bloody hell.
Useful topic indeed but the obvious comment is to keep an eye on your aeroplane’s altimeter at all times and not rely on your tablet software. The altimeter should be part of your normal scan.
This is the takeaway point. If you are in touch with any LARS or ATC you should have the local QNH and therefore (assuming accuracy of your altimeter) your altitude will be bang on. I don't fly often in the complex south-east being Shobdon based and if I'm having fun over Worcester, Demon is alerting me to Birmingham which is great for an advanced warning. So, the moral of this most excellent video is use the aircraft altimeter and make sure you are at least 500' where possible below airspace.
The take away from this should don’t trust your digital equipment. Back it up with paper and analog instruments especially if flying so closely to controlled airspace. 🤦♂️
As a CFI watching this, I can’t believe he would watch his iPad over his actual instruments. iPad ForeFlight, etc and any other EFBs, are used for situational awareness only. I use my stratus only for traffic and meters. Use the actual instruments. Glad he learned his lesson without really getting hurt. But damn this annoyed me.
@@americantrailrider7031 I can understand it to some extent, UK airspace is so complex and crowded that an EFB can reduce pilot workload considerably (without the huge expense of a full glass cockpit installation) so it's easy to end up relying on it. Without them I can imagine many areas of the UK being near impossible for inexperienced (or even some experienced) pilots to fly in solo, it would just be too challenging.
Great video! As a glider pilot we rely on our moving map GPS all the time, often handheld devices, or built in. But I have to say I always refer to my glider's altimeter while flying for navigation. Also almost all of our devices use pressure for altitude, instead of, or as well as GPS altitude, and that's something the SkyEcho and other devices should provide too.
The aircraft’s altimeter is the primary reference one, and the only one to be used for maintaining altitude. The aircraft’s lateral position was correctly shown for the whole flight so why rely on the Sky Demon indicated altitude !
Relying on them a little too much? Don't know what to say to that, it's probably true but on the other hand there's no way on earth I am going to gamble my licence away if I had to fly around SE England outside CAS without at least two (tablet and phone backup) moving maps with vertical airspace profile. The risk is just too high and the old school method of dead-reckoning your way around the country was not "designed" to work with today's airspace structure. If I had no moving map I would either fly IFR entirely within CAS or I simply would not take-off at all.
If you don't have good data, don't show it. Simple as that. Any data that is shown by an instrument or computer will be taken at face value by humans unless they have concrete and acute reasons to mistrust it. This goes double for safety-related information like here. Using data you know is unreliable for the vertical airspace display is irresponsible. You KNOW people will trust that display, no matter what you write into the fine print on page 7940 of your manual. That's why in major parts of the world, apps that measure and display health-related data are illegal unless they have been approved by the health authorities. In that field, slapping on a note about the data being unreliable doesn't work.
For what it’s worth, I have indeed seen that order of altitude error on my SkyDemon when using the iPad’s internal GPS, but never when using the SkyEcho, in which case the altitude is invariably at least as accurate as the baro altimeter (as judged on the ground with a known elevation). But this is all a very valuable heads-up that there is no guarantee. Very informative and useful video, not least the dialogs with SkyEcho and SkyDemon.
But why doesn't the skydemon include a barometric altimeter? I guess it only works in an unpressurised aircraft, but even bike GPS units use one for better accuracy when logging climbs. It seems strange that it's not used in a device like this.
If you use Pilotaware Rosetta as a GPS source I believe this has a barometer and I would hope that this would supply a more accurate height to Skydemon (but this is reading between lines!)
I don’t have altitude showing on my SkyD and after this I don’t plan to. I do have a look at the virtual radar regularly as it shows ‘what’s coming’ and what I’m under. I’ve never used it as an altitude or height reference though, again I won’t be changing that. Good video and thanks Ruben and Jon for a good video.
Altitude is shown in the top bar when flying in SD (along with Ground Speed, Distance Next etc). How have you removed Altitude from the top bar? This (and the Virtual Radar) is the only place that Altitude is shown when flying in SD. I don't think it can be 'not showing'? Just interested.
"6 airspace changes in 18 miles" - this is the problem, the airspace layout in the UK is an absolute joke. I don't know of anywhere else in the world that has as much class A (i.e. airspace you cannot even get a clearance through if you're not IFR) as low as the UK! If the CAA would adapt to a US based model almost all of these "infringements" would vanish. But instead, the bases get lower and the corridors get tighter.
The airspace in the UK is far from perfect, but I disagree that the US model would work here. The best way to avoid London airspace in my opinion is to properly plan your cruise levels and not make it up as you go along. The London airports are very close together and the corridors at the moment are very tight as you say, but certainly not impossible to navigate, and most aerodromes have very standardised routings to enter and leave. VFR traffic being mixed up in all of it where the TMA currently is would be a recipe for disaster in my opinion. The UK uses class D for AD CTRs and this reduces controller workload compared with blanketing an area with Class B. In addition, the US rule of being cleared to enter class D as soon as the controllers says your callsign would make it a lot harder, whereas the current Class A is realistic in the fact that no, if you are VFR you cannot transit Heathrow, don't call up Heathrow director and ask for it. Personally, I've had significantly more success getting transits and LARs from UK controllers compared to class B/C airports in the US. It all comes down the to the fact that *usually* large US airports are spaced quite far apart and light aircraft traffic has plenty of space to use (although Class A starts at 18,000 and covers the entire country, which is not the case in the UK [so ironically the US really does have more class A than the UK]) whereas in the UK, once you're in an aircraft the country gets very small very quickly, particularly in the London area. We don't have much space to work with, and it could definitely be done better, but I am very very thankful we do not have Class B airports in the same way the US does, we'd have no airspace left.
Don't worry, amazon will have surface up to all the controlled edge spaces so there will be nowhere you can fly in the next 5 years. Drone delivery corridors have already been applied for pretty much cutting GA off.
I’m be flown regularly in the London area for 20 years and I agree that airspace could and should be reviewed and simplified, this would improve safety for all. The airspace has devolved under grab what you can and never give it back. Some class D is in effect no go for VFR flights. Look at Southend, struggling to keep commercial operations alive and yet reluctant to share what they think is their airspace with GA ( I think it is everyone’s airspace that they have requested to control for their own commercial benefit). I know new classification is needed but each allocation should be review every 5 years to see if the safety need remains the same and should ensure all other users are being given access to the highest degree possible while maintaining safety. Controller workload is not a valid excuse, where a private business wants to manage areas of public airspace (which it all is) they should surrender control if they are not willing to staff their service adequately.
A really useful session. Hats off the Reuben for having the courage to admit his failing in public and to try and help others avoid the doing the same.
Thanks to Reuben for sharing this story so openly. Like many I use SkyDemon and Sky Echo. Both great products but this is a great example of us leaning on them to heavily. Great episode with lots of points to reflect on
Ruben is taking the right good airmanship approach by using the experience to learn and spread knowledge. I work in IT and indeed sometimes no data is better than unreliable data.
This was a really useful video for me: I'll admit I may have relied too much on my SkyEcho2 and SkyDemon during my hours-building. I think it would be helpful if they were able to show the extent of the inaccuracy on the virtual radar, maybe something analogous to error bars on a graph. I hadn't known about the coloured flags, so thanks for highlighting that!
I think that an estimated alt is of no value in uk flying particularly in te southern half of Britain where airspace is so restricted and changes so often. Probably ok over large land masses like the states and should not be included on the display because as you say pilots are tempted to accept the values shown to be accurate.
An honest mistake. Lessons learned. The system worked. I've flown in relatively complicated airspace (Vancouver, Toronto, San Francisco, Seattle), but nothing like around London. Yikes!
18:31 well done Ruben. I had the call to make when I was still a student regarding an airprox. Sky Demon actually was helpful proving I was on the ground. However I learned something from that incident and learned more about Sky Demon from this presentation.
I’ve once had my collar felt by the CAA after busting Luton’s airspace in that awkward corridor between there and Stanstead. In my defence I was dealing with an electrical failure at the time and when I realised and got back on track I got the good old “copy this phone number please” radio call. The CAA chap who interviewed me was really good about it all,got a written warning essentially but he was much the same as Reuben says,keen to make sure both I and others learn from it. UK airspace is the real problem here though,massively over complicated for GA pilots.
Agree it can be very complex for a low hours GA pilot - you were entirely legally allowed to be there (in the area below controlled airspace). Of course, there’s what’s legal and what’s safe or appropriate to experience levels!
As I non pilot I love videos like this, they make me so confident getting into the plane as a passenger because you guys really really do take safety seriously and openly and actively seek where you or the industry is going wrong. Proactive approaches are the only way of maintaining a safe industry and I hope this never changes.
My father was a test pilot Boscombe down in the 1970's ... I, however, became a designer. I do remember my father pointing out the poor ergonomics in a cockpit that can increase the pilot workload. Acoustic signals as well as visual one's are good to motivate the pilot look at a potentially building issue.
We’re all human and all make mistakes. If only we all admitted this, we would all learn a lot more as well as be able to honestly and openly admit our mistakes without fear of reprimand - in order to grow in our skills.
Thank you for highlighting the possible vertical errors in carry on gps units and the need for vigilant cross checking with the barometric values. Should we as airspace users demand a review of all uk airspace especially where airspace was used to protect old long closed and demolished cross wind runways and aerodromes…. Heathrow, Manchester, Liverpool, Edinburgh airspace all spring to mind.
To recite a line from the current theatre play I am working for as a lighting operator: "Everyone of us makes mistakes. Constantly. That's just who we are ..." And to add a commonplace to it: The worst we can do is not to acknoledge them, and not to be prepared to learn from them. We can do it, and we're actually good that. We've been doing that for milions of years, and that's why we are here - conquering the skies... Great, that everything has turned out the way it did for Reuben.
I fly parachutists and we use the Sky Echo/Sky Demon system to increase awareness and look for traffic whilst climbing, dropping and descending. Anecdotally, but relevant, I have been in the climb at 5000ft (about 6 mins into the climb) and the Skydemon Altitude still reads 500/1000ft. I find it to be innacurate about 1 in 20 flights. It's also worth noting that the number displayed is altitude, so at higher altitudes and on high pressure days when airspace changes from QNH altitude to flight level, even with an accurate reading it is possible to be infringing without the moving map warning you.
Ruben is a top bloke , put his hands up to his mistake which can happen to any of us . I feel the Uk air space is very complicated and that we are getting squeezed more and more .
If you can’t trust the data then you shouldn’t be using it at all. Too many private pilots flying around using tech modelled on certified commercial equipment they’ve seen the professionals use
With that little accuracy you might as well just do a coin flip to decide whether you are in the right place or not. Sounds like a useless tool to me. So what they are saying is "It's working correctly as long you don't use it in an aircraft" 😄 Or "50% of the time it works every time!"🤣
So basically... The iPad GPS would've probably been more reliable than what ever SkyEcho shows... Aviation certified vs multi billon dollar company's semiconductor coupled with software.
I think it’s worth highlighting that whether or not the final responsibility lies with the pilot, the manufacturers have a responsibility to usefully highlight data trust. Even to the point of not showing specific values if it can’t be reasonably trusted in congested areas. As a software developer that has worked on medical device software you always keep in mind how you will degrade gracefully when needed.
Really helpful Jon, thanks. Well done Ruben for explaining your story, I am glad the repercussions from the CAA were very light, this afterall is a very easy mistake to make, and thanks again for highlighting this 'gotcha'.
I'm not convinced by their (minimalist) argument against using the barometer to determine altitude. It can't be worse than GPS altitude which has never been great, but together they can work quite well.
Wow, altitude measurements from GPS aren't great but they're usually a lot better than that. That's about the level of error I'd expect from something erroneously reporting altitude on a 2D fix (which isn't based on measurements from enough satellites to measure altitude at all). Hopefully any company designing products for the aviation market would know better than to do that though; I think even the horizontal position measurements likely wouldn't be accurate enough to be presented to someone in a plane given that a 2D fix relies on assuming the height. Plus aviation GPS really ought to have proper reliability and integrity monitoring in general, though the mapping software provider's understanding sounds... iffy in that regard.
Just as a lay person who has read a lot of AAIB and (especially) RAIB reports, what is notably absent is any sort of serious engagement with the prevention of accidents by either equipment provider, especially the hardware provider. An element of how the hardware reports altitude, and to a lesser extent how the software handled some information, were causal factors in an airspace infringement that could have caused an accident. But the firms have just run out defensive lines from their lawyer and their PR team. Not at all engaged with the question of how they can remedy evident safety defects.
Useful video, great content. Always trust your (certified) instruments. I never trust Sky Echo/GPS for vertical guidance. Sure, it's a useful tool, backup, and rough check, but no way I'd navigate complex UK airspace solely with reference to Sky Echo/Sky demon.
Would have been interesting to hear during your flight what differences you saw on your own SD vs the GNS430 on your panel. He was in an Arrow yes? Can’t imagine he had nothing but an altimeter on the panel. I’m forever comparing my transponder height output with altimeter and gps.
From an outsider's point of view, this whole situation seems absurd. We have a powerful computer sitting one meter away from a dial showing accurate, reliable calibrated altitude information; and yet we're reduced to that computer using a much less reliable GPS receiver and instructing the nearby human to please please "always crosscheck the two". I realize there are tight and well-intentioned regulations that make hacking a digitizer on to critical instruments illegal; but if all the pilots are put in a situation where they are even *tempted* to rely on the less reliable altimeter, those well-intentioned regulations have failed, if not outright backfired. What am I missing?
Great video and very informative - I've just passed my skills test a couple of weeks ago and it just shows no matter how experienced you are, mistakes happen and you're always learning. Thanks for making this and well done to Reuben for holding his hands up and sorting it out with the CAA!
The video version of 'I learned about flying from that'! Very informative and well done to Ruben for owning the problem and moreover sharing his experience with others. The only way we as a community can get better is learning from each other's mistakes and experiences.
Hats off for Rueben being so frank and sharing. It can happen to all of us! Yes in hindsight it is easy to see what went wrong here and why but that wasn’t so obvious at the very moment. In professional flying we use a lot of cross checking from various sources. In this case comparing the altimeter info with the gps info would have been a red flag. When discovering such a discrepancy follow the most conservative path. Great video!!
The restrictive nature of airspace in the UK infuriates me as an instructor. It's another level of complexity that's just not needed. In America, controlled airspace is kept to a minimum, making flying far more accessible to anyone. Often, you can fly for hours without talking to a controller and just giving traffic positions. I understand that the UK is far smaller than the US. However, if the CAR removed all of this blasted red tape, the GA hobby would benefit massively as a result. Filling your area with airspace doesn't make flying any safer and forces pilots to rely on GPS equipment that can go wrong. But I'm sure the CAR wouldn't take this into account in any report regarding a airspace breach.
It's not just land size. US population density is 37 people/sq. km. In the UK it's 270 people/sq. km and inn the South-East of England (the area this video covers) it's 1260 people/sq km. So yes, it's heavily regulated and for a very good reason.
Unacceptable to not cross reference with the altimeter in the aircraft. SkyDemon should be used as an aid only, it shouldn’t be relied upon for altitude measurement.
@@gwynsea8162I’ve made plenty of errors. But this really is horrendous and is being played down by TFR. No one should be using SkyDemon to check their altitude, if they do… it should always be cross referenced with the more accurate instruments in the aircraft. Whilst I applaud the chap for being so open about it, we shouldn’t be playing this fundamental breach of airmanship down so much.
Great video Jon ! One query I’d be keen to understand, and this is not to detract from the message of the video, was why Farnborough couldn’t open the flight plan..?
@@TheFlyingReporterYes, that is likely and they are as much a factor in this infringement as any other. If they are going to demand swathes of airspace than they need to resource it properly. And why has London Info got no radar? It's absurd. And yet it is the pilot expected to make up for this slop..
I'm a SPL pilot from Germany with close to 1.700 hours under my belly. I flew in Africa, Russia, most of Europe and, of course, also in the UK. And, also, I've had my inadvertent class C (there is no class A in Germany) violation. No big deal though. Somebody from Flight Service calls you, you admit your shortcoming and pay (in my case 300 €). That's all. To demonize GPS because of that is silly. Wihtin a margin of 200 feet, GPS is totally acurate and will always keep you out of trouble. If you deviate more than that veritcally, it is most likely pilot error. In my case, nudging through clouds while NOT observing my GPS or altitude readings. GPS is not the problem though....just use proper hardware and double-check with your altimeter. This is inventing problems where there are simply none...
Great video as always and very informative. Can you show us the SD log for the flight in question which would show the virtual radar and the aircraft way below its actual altitude? Just as a matter of my own personal interest I have gone through dozens of my own SD logs going back to 2016 and found the logged altitude to be as expected. This concurs with my own experience of SD in flight using a 'cheap' Android tablet fitted into a kneepad with inbuilt GPS flying an Ikarus C42. Again, based on my own experience, I have found the inbuilt GPS connection on my kneepad tablet to be far more reliable that SkyEcho mounted on the Ikarus C42 screen, so I never use SkyEcho GPS. Much appreciated for the time/effort you put in for the benefit of the aviation community.
Having only got just under 100 hours I still fly looking at the dash and out the window. I have Sky demon on a knee board which is amazing but i only use it currently for planning and making sure I am on track. As my hours grow and my experience with Sky Demon improved i have been using it more and more but never yet have i used the altitude other than appreciate the warnings as I fly in controlled airspace mostly. I can see how over time it would be easy to use Sky Demon as your main source of data so I can see exactly how Ruben slipped up. Well done to you both for making this video as it will hopefully stop me from making the same mistake. BTW I use my knee board Ipad not linked to anything as the Sky Echo is linked to the hire planes own Ipad on the passenger side. In either the PA28 or C172 I have always had 100% accurate data when I check logs and or whilst in the air.
Atleast farnborough warned you about breaching. In my student x country for ppl i almost breached gatwick airspace from mistaking a town for another, so close to clipping the zone and farnborough had nothing to say!
if skydemon was showing you lower by 1500ft then you would have been receiving many warnings of obstacles? you would have also been shown close to the ground on the skydemon vertical radar.
If skydemon show it at all, it should be shown everywhere it can effect stuff, a good way (imo) would be the same way as error bars in a graph, a vertical line through the airplane icon showing the estimated error (top of the line is 50/100/etc above reported, bottom is below), with dotted ends to show "this might be more, or less, who knows, but this is what we think" so you can visually see the range of error and the (estimated) top/bottom values
It can only do good to be open about incidences like this and to share experiences of errors which lead to better air safety. Also to come on RU-vid to make others aware must be applauded. So many people hide their errors because of egos. This can only result in more accidents. The CAA must be congratulated for dealing with the matter professionally and not taking the matter further. Not coming down on a pilot like a ton of bricks for an error can only lead to better awareness, less stress and safer flying...
I can't imagine not using the altimeter in my airplane for actually determining my altitude. I completely ignore the attitude reporting from a portable GPS device.
