Downwind Left Hand 08 EGGW

[The Obvious Choice]

Just thought I'd let all you boys and girls that fly into Luton know, we have been told we are no longer allowed to vector IFR aircraft 'downwind left-hand' for 08. Even when Dunstable are closed!!

For traffic being routed via BKY and through the 'Luton Gate', this adds about 10-15 miles to your approach. All this extra distance flown at 5 or 4000 feet.

The reasons given are not that clear. When you do it they say the aircraft are vectored very close to the edge of controlled airspace - when aren't they in the TMA, especially 05 at EGSS, can't we do that now? As long as they don't go outside controlled airspace, whats the problem. Adds to your workload!! Only if you aren't that good at EGGW and if it does affect your workload, don't do it.

Is it safe? Yes. Does it save miles and money for the airlines? Yes. So ban it!! How clever.

[Euroc5175]

As I understand it....

.... the situation is that DAP (CAA) have stated that the Downwind Left Hand 08 procedure be withdrawn with immediate effect.

DAP state that they have evidence in the form of radar recordings that some of the aircraft being vectored downwind left for 08 have been exiting the bottom of controlled airspace.

As DAP are in the process of assessing an airspace extension to the west of Luton, it has been seen as best not to p1SS them off, and the 08 procedure has therefore been suspended.

Then again, I could be entirely mistaken ;)

Euroc

[055166k]

If you're talking to DAP why not ask them how almost 50,000 Air Transport Movements get into and out of Bristol every year; surrounded by military, para-jumpers, gliders...you name it! You could mention Exeter, Blackpool...the list is extensive. Departments in glass houses shouldn't.......something or other. To be serious for a moment....what is the evidence that the current practice is dangerous....and if it is dangerous what is being done to protect traffic into and out of places like Southampton where traffic is given a level of service appropriate to the class of airspace. if they want to land without flying in ever decreasing circles in the overhead of completely inadequate protected airspace?

[cossack]

The DAP is a dinosaur. Over 10 years ago we tried to have the category of airspace in the Scottish TMA increased from E to D. How much progress has been made on that issue I wonder?
Answer: F.A.
It seems that it gets a bee in its bonnet about something and goes all out to "fix" it, instead of listening to the requests of those that try to control aircraft within the airspace.
The military and the private pilots seem to have way more sway than is really appropriate in this day and age of regional airports handling 50,000+ IFR scheduled/charter flights pa.
If aircraft using Luton and Stansted are being squeezed into a space that is too small and may be leaving the confines of controlled airspace, then make that controlled airspace bigger and more appropriate to todays traffic types and loading.
I'm not saying restrict the GA, but provide the necessary protection and service level that IFR flights pay for and deserve.

[Slaphead]

Euroc5175

if you are correct with your understanding then you are privy to information which is denied to the operational staff. Among the stated reasons for the withdrawal of the procedure, and I look forward to seeing the revised RMA on my overhead display, is that the procedure operates close to the boundaries of CAS and requires a high workload. At no point is DAP or the airspace extension mentioned.

At Luton and Stansted we regularly operate close the boundaries of CAS; to get a 10 mile final during 08 LVPs at Luton and 05 LVPs at Stansted wouldn't be possible without going close to the boundaries of CAS. The base turn for DWL for 08 needs to be completed in a timely manner but that happens all the time at the airports within TC.

If it believed that aircraft have droped throught the base of CAS has the relevant LCC been advised or the TC LCC committee been asked to investigate? Shouldn't we look at the individuals concerned before we look at the procedure? Have the r/t tapes been reviewed to find out if the aircraft elected to leave CAS?

It is possible to take a/c DWL for 08 and remain within CAS, avoid the excessive amount of CAS delegated to Dunstable and still achieve the minimum range final stipulated by LLA. If the procedure is being withdrawn for reasons other than those stated then we should be told.

[Not Long Now]

If being close to the edge of controlled airspace is to be avoided, may I suggest that we immediately scrap all SIDs from all TMA airfields, which as far as I can see all end up 500' from the base of CA, before running into each other farther down the line. Now no departures, that would be safe!

[The Obvious Choice]

We have been told today that this issue is not up for discussion. The procedure is suspended, end of story. It also seems that the reasons given in our operations instruction are not the real reasons.

We seem to have become 'mushrooms' with respect to the reasons behind the suspension of downwind lefts for 08.

Please DONT discuss it any more!!! :D

[SonicTPA]

Think of us poor ******s who are completely outside controlled airspace, bouncing our IFR inbounds off gliders, military helicopters and hundreds of GA transits.

DAP have been petitioned several times, but they want the airport owner to pay for any investigation into controlled airspace. Doesn't sound like they are too concerned about safety does it?

SonicTPA

[Euroc5175]

Sounds like a nice little RNAV procedure is called for......!! :8

Ideal for coping with the demands of tight airspace limitations whilst incorporating CDAs to keep the environmentalists happy.

[The Obvious Choice]

We are quite capable of doing it ourselves, safely, orderly and expeditiously. What we don't need is to be told we can't do it for no good clear reasons. We seem to be treated like children on occasions.

Its true I act like a child most the time so I guess I shouldn't be surprised!!!!