PDA

View Full Version : Switzerland / UK - VFR


The Hat
24th Apr 2007, 15:15
Has anyone flown VFR from Switzerland to the UK recently. I've been told that it can be a nightmare getting transit clearances in French airspace and that it would probably be easier to route via Germany / Lux & Belgium??

IO540
24th Apr 2007, 15:21
That sounds like an urban myth. Nobody is easier on transits (Class D) than France. The problem is that France is covered in military airspace and UK-style low level flying (say below 2000ft) gets tricky over there, in many places, so the way to fly is on the Class E routes which are shown on the 1:1M SIA chart. Most of these are at FL065 and above.

The Hat
24th Apr 2007, 15:25
Thanks, that was just the sort of answer that I was looking for. I did not think that it could be that difficult. As you say.... probably just another old wives tale!

FullyFlapped
25th Apr 2007, 08:36
I've done it twice fairly recently : I concur with IO540, it was a doddle. I wasn't refused a transit anywhere.

I think you undoubtedly get a better response if you fly flight levels (remembering the rules are different over there) and sound like you know what you're up to : although to be honest that's probably just the same anywhere.

Have fun !

FF :ok:

david viewing
25th Apr 2007, 09:43
Came back from Mulhouse last week VFR (PA28) 4.7 Hr to Wellesbourne 5000' all the way. No problem with any transit anywhere but occasionally confusing as to which station to call and when given a new frequency, understanding the name of the station.
According to French aviators the secret is to study the companion booklet which details frequencies all the restricted airspace. If you don't have this I suggest ordering it direct from SIA (http://www.sia.aviation-civile.gouv.fr/asp/frameset_uk.asp?m=9) which comes with the charts in a useful pack.
If in doubt you can call Lille information which apparently can be heard anywhere along that route and are very helpful.
Generally French ATC appear very accomodating with UK aviators asking "if they are cleared" etc. but sound a little perplexed as to why we are so preoccupied with the business of en route VFR clearances.

Another_CFI
25th Apr 2007, 10:51
I flew to/from Friedrickshafen last weekend VFR with absolutely no problems crossing France. The route was to LYD then BNE-CMB-MMD-STR-EGNY, which meant I was in French airspace all of the way from the UK/France FIR boundary to just after Strasbourg. Only thing to remember is that when flying VFR above 3000ft the appropriate Flight Level is based upon the IFR semi-circular level plus 500ft. So on my trip out FL55 was appropriate and on the way back it was FL45.

172driver
26th Apr 2007, 07:46
so the way to fly is on the Class E routes which are shown on the 1:1M SIA chart. Most of these are at FL065 and above.

IO, are these available online ?

Three Yellows
26th Apr 2007, 08:00
172driver

This is what you need.

http://www.sia.aviation-civile.gouv.fr/asp/frameset_uk.asp?m=9

It contains loads of useful info and the charts.


This is the pack you need... The April 2007 VFR Folder + VFR guide

172driver
26th Apr 2007, 11:55
Thanks, I know, unfortunately not enough time to get it, hence my query. Will have to make do with the Jepps....

IO540
26th Apr 2007, 13:46
Watch out the "Swiss ICAO" charts. They are lethal. They have elevations marked in both feet and metres. The sector safety altitudes are in feet, spot elevations are in feet, and other elevations are in metres - if I recall correctly from 2004.

Nowadays I wouldn't bother with local charts, and use Jepp 1:500k ones for the lot.

Except UK (CAA charts are way superior) and France (1:1M SIA charts are arguably the only thing that counts as "official" there, and are accurate).

Jepp charts contain a fair few errors though. I don't know the best solution to this, except to always fly as high as possible and try to get a radar service. They tend to have navaids that are long gone, and occassionally airspace which got changed is wrongly depicted.

The good thing about flying the French FL065+ routes is that they take you clear of military airspace and the nuclear power station TRAs. They make route planning a cinch.

The downside of flying "high" is that if you are VMC on top (nobody flies VFR in IMC do they ;) unless in a 2000kg+ twin) and end up overhead the destination above a solid overcast, then you will end up a right pratt. I am sure the locals know solutions to this but it pays to be very sure of the weather. The standard UK solution to this (scud running) is not particular clever either and kills plenty of VFR pilots; it's also difficult in France (esp. on weekdays) due to the extensive military airspace low down.

Mariner9
26th Apr 2007, 14:13
IMHO, the french military airways seem intimidating, but in practise they are a doddle to transit. The operational hours in many of them are very limited, even if they are not transit is easily arranged with a quick radio call to the operating authority, all contacts (and operational hours) listed in the SIA VFR pack mentioned above.

That said, airways are even easier, provided cloudbase allows.

Basil Smallpiece
26th Apr 2007, 18:13
IO540 - absolute rubbish.

If I look at the latest aeronautical chart, ICAO Switzerland, 1:500 000 35th edition 2007 March 15, everything but EVERYTHING is in feet.

You are probably confusing the 1;300 000 'Segelflug' (gliding) chart with the above. Glider pilots in Switzerland fly in metres.

skydriller
26th Apr 2007, 18:29
unfortunately not enough time to get it

Not a problem.....All the info in the French VFR/1:1000000 pack is actually on the SIA website, you need to go to http://www.sia.aviation-civile.gouv.fr/aip/enligne/PDF_AIPparSSection/AIP%20FRANCE/ENR/5/0705_ENR%205.1.pdf

Just scan down the .pdf file to the Restricted area (marked on the Jepp or IGN Carte or whatever) you need to cross, just as you would look it up in the VFR guide.

Regards, SD..

172driver
26th Apr 2007, 19:27
skydriller, you're a star :ok: :D :D !!

IO540
26th Apr 2007, 19:40
Basil Smallpiece - absolute rubbish.

I did say this was 2004. They obviously changed it since. I remember it damn well. I also know of others who reported this.

The explanation I was given is that it is a military map so is in metres, and the GA altitudes are a secondary thing... gosh how useful.