PDA

View Full Version : Circling aircraft over Gatwick


WO
1st Sep 2002, 16:15
I have a question, but it isn't as dumb as the title suggests!

3 or 4 times in the last few months, i've noticed light singles (C152's and PA28's) doing circles a few thousand feet over Crawley (Just south of Gatwick)

Does anybody know what this is about? Although the zone around LGW is class D airspace, I can't imagine them allowing people to carry out what looks like basic PPL training manouvers so close to the airport. I have flown from Redhill and Shoreham, and have always gone out over Edenbridge or Eastbourne to do this kind of thing

Can anybody shine any light on this?

BTW, there's one out there now, 17:00, Sunday 1st

WO

carbheatcold
1st Sep 2002, 18:49
Having seen the very same a/c over my house this afternoon I guess he was just waiting to be cleared across LGW possibly routing back to Redhill.


carbheatcold

Warped Factor
1st Sep 2002, 21:37
Due to a restriction in the MATS Pt 2 VFR singles aren't allowed to transit the Gatwick ATZ, so unlikely to have been fixed wing VFR traffic waiting to cross the airfield. Don't shoot me for mentioning this particular rule please, I only apply them not make them.

More likely to have been some sort of survey flight or one of those operators that take photo's of houses then go door to door to try and flog them. These are not at all unusual.

WF.

carbheatcold
2nd Sep 2002, 02:33
WF

So what is the MATS Pt 2 VFR rule concerning singles over Gatwick? Does the same rule apply to heli's?

The Cessna today did not look like it was doing a photo shoot.

carbheatcold

poetpilot
2nd Sep 2002, 08:01
S'funny that, cos Sunday morning about 10 am there was a C172 doing orbits at about 1000 feet near Droylsden, a suburb in Manchester which happens to lie under the approach for 24 at Manchester..... I concluded, watching him, that he might have been doing a survey/photos, but who knows...... maybe We Are Being Watched !!!!!

Incidentally, a police Islander is being seen a lot more than the police chopper in the last few days over Manchester.... is he fully operational yet, or is he evaluating/ piloting (!!!) ?

Warped Factor
2nd Sep 2002, 13:43
carbheatcold,

[/QUOTE] So what is the MATS Pt 2 VFR rule concerning singles over Gatwick? Does the same rule apply to heli's?

The bit in the MATS 2 about EGKK zone transits says.....

SVFR/IFR Helicopter and All Fixed Wing Aircraft

These flights are to be kept under radar control at all times and routed either east or west of Gatwick ATZ as appropriate

---

VFR heli's via the airfield are not a problem subject to the prior approval of the air controller at the tower.

WF

FlyingForFun
2nd Sep 2002, 14:12
WF,

So singles are allowed through the CTR/CTA, just not through the ATZ? Sounds fair enough to me....

FFF
-----------

Warped Factor
2nd Sep 2002, 17:21
FFF,

So singles are allowed through the CTR/CTA, just not through the ATZ?

Affirm, subject the usual caveats you like to hear atco's trot out time and time again ;)

WF.

eyeinthesky
2nd Sep 2002, 18:26
Poetpilot:

I think the Police Islander is operational, and that there was a rush on to get it ready in time for the Commonwealth Games.

PhilD
3rd Sep 2002, 18:43
I don't understand the logic behind not allowing singles through the ATZ. Surely the safest way for an aircraft to transit over an airfield is directly overhead at 90 deg to the runway, especially for single runway airfields like Gatwick?

Squadgy
3rd Sep 2002, 19:03
Poetpilot,

That Cessna was probably one that operates out of your home airfield, does quite a few photo details in and around the area.

The new Police Islander (actually a Turbine Defender) is now fully operational, based at EGCC adjacent to NEA.

Keef
3rd Sep 2002, 19:03
PhilD

... until a 777 has to go around, and passes over the runway at 1500 feet, climbing.

PhilD
3rd Sep 2002, 19:58
Keef

So what is different in the US, where VFR traffic is almost always routed directly over the airfield?

BillieBob
3rd Sep 2002, 20:09
Quite right PhilD. Phoenix, Sky Harbor has a VFR route straight through the overhead and is at least twice as busy as sleepy little Gatwick.

Warped Factor
3rd Sep 2002, 21:04
BB,

Quite right PhilD. Phoenix, Sky Harbor has a VFR route straight through the overhead and is at least twice as busy as sleepy little Gatwick.

I suppose our regulators must have a different view on what may or may not be acceptable.

Whatever, I suppose if it's done in the USA it must be the best way and we're daft not to slavishly follow the same procedures they do. But then to date, to the best of my knowledge, we've not suffered the pain of a mid-air between a light single and an airliner whilst both were operating inside controlled airspace in the vicinity of an airfield.

WF.

slim_slag
3rd Sep 2002, 23:14
wf

Whatever, I suppose if it's done in the USA it must be the best way and we're daft not to slavishly follow the same procedures they do.

The way I'd look at it, is that if it's possible in one country, it's possible in another.

But then to date, to the best of my knowledge, we've not suffered the pain of a mid-air between a light single and an airliner whilst both were operating inside controlled airspace in the vicinity of an airfield.

Ah, San Diego perhaps? That was a total balls up, lessons were learned, and procedures changed. It's not the same system anymore, things have changed.

San Diego now has class E "tunnels" through the Class B, no clearance required as it's Class E. Works well. LAX has a special flight rules "tunnel" thorough the class B. No clearance required as it's SFRA. Works well. PHX has VFR transition corridors through the class B, clearance required, I've never been refused, works well.

There have been a few near misses recently in UK "positive" controlled airspace. Only a matter of time before something collides, and the UK will be unable to continue with it's justly proud claim. The problem in the UK is that ATC is totally under-resourced and so cannot handle small aircraft doing something as simple as transiting a class D control zone. By the sounds of it, the systems regularly cannot handle the jet traffic it is supposed to.

In the US, GA is considered an asset and to have equal rights to use the National Airspace. Resources are therefore allocated and available to allow small transponder equipped planes to be safely separated from jets in far busier airspace than you find in the UK. Maybe that is the best way? cheers

Warped Factor
4th Sep 2002, 20:14
slim,

In the US, GA is considered an asset and to have equal rights to use the National Airspace. Resources are therefore allocated and available to allow small transponder equipped planes to be safely separated from jets in far busier airspace than you find in the UK. Maybe that is the best way? cheers

For a Brit I have a fair amount of experience of US ATC courtesy of friends that work in ATC over there and there is much in the system I admire, but also some parts and procedures I do not.

In passing might I suggest then that you join in the fight with NATCA to stop your truly national ATC system going down the path that we've taken ours here. If the privatisers get their way you may find your "best way" very quickly becomes a distant memory.

WF.

slim_slag
4th Sep 2002, 21:25
For a Brit I have a fair amount of experience of US ATC courtesy of friends that work in ATC over there and there is much in the system I admire,but also some parts and procedures I do not.

Such as?

In passing might I suggest then that you join in the fight with NATCA to stop your truly national ATC system going down the path that we've taken ours here. If the privatisers get their way you may find your "best way" very quickly becomes a distant memory.

That's why I pay money to AOPA who pay money to legislators to look after the people with money. It's the American way:D :D

Warped Factor
4th Sep 2002, 22:16
slim,

Such as?

Time spent in ATC facilities or procedures?

WF.

slim_slag
5th Sep 2002, 06:00
WF

Time spent in ATC facilities or procedures?

Either or both. I am definitely interested in how you would improve procedures.

keef

... until a 777 has to go around, and passes over the runway at 1500 feet, climbing.

PHX has class B airspace, a clearance is required, and ATC is responsible for separation between VFR and IFR traffic. Why would there be a problem? If in VMC (and that is a given as the smaller plane would be flying under VFR) the 777 is responsible for separation too. The PHX VFR corridor runs over the approach end of the runways, about 2000 ft AGL. Your mythical 777 has no business being close to any light aircraft that has been cleared through that airspace, go around or not.

Basically, PHX approach knows what it is doing, as does the 777 captain. I'd rather be flying in the VFR corridor than below the class B where I am not talking to anybody, I don't have ATC providing a radar service, and I am mixing it with other VFR traffic flying 200 ft below the floor of the class B. I would hasten a guess that the 777 captain would also prefer the target on his TCAS to be talking to approach.

Final 3 Greens
5th Sep 2002, 09:42
Lets say that a 777 climbing out at 1500fpm (sounds a little sluggish to me) is doing 180kts.

That means by the time its climbed from 50 feet to 1500, its flown about 3 miles horizontally - probably nearly twice the runway length

So long as the light a/c is above 1500ft and routing at 90(ish) degrees to the runway, theres not likely to be a confliction.

Even at 3000fpm, which strikes me as being more likely, there is still plently of room - it would be a magnificent sight from the light a/c!

BRL
5th Sep 2002, 09:49
Ok, so what about this (Aero)plane over Gatwick then? :rolleyes:

Grim Reaper 14
5th Sep 2002, 10:57
Excuse me for stating the bleedin' obvious, but perhaps it just shouldn't have been there! Maybe the pilot was doing something he (or she) shouldn't and the old Bill would be very happy to hear any registration details you might have (not to mention HMC&E or the CAA!). ;)

Ace Rimmer
5th Sep 2002, 16:00
To return to track my vote goes for house photographers. We've had em round at Rimmer Towers trying to flogs us aerial views of the estate "that they got while working on a 'commission' for a neighbour" And we arent that far west of Creepy Crawley and still in the Gatwick CTR.
BTW I didn't buy one if I want one I'll strap Mrs R in the A/c with the SLR on auto focus PHD mode and get it meself.

FlyingForFun
5th Sep 2002, 16:04
My aunt has one of those aerial photos of her house.

Someone knocked on her door, showed her the photo and tried to sell it to her for £50. She told them where to go. They suggested that they might be able to reduce the price slightly. Eventually they agreed on £5! I guess once they've hired the aircraft and developed the photos, their expenses are already fixed. Now they just need to get back as much cash as they can. I'm not sure that £5 would cover the cost of getting the photo, but it's certainly better than nothing....

FFF
--------------

ModernDinosaur
5th Sep 2002, 19:07
Not quite the same as a PA-28 circling near Gatwick, but on the way home from work tonight (around 1553Z) I saw what appeared to be a tiny aircraft on final for 26L at Gatwick. It was slightly bigger than a Piper or Cessna, but not much, and appeared to be a low-wing tail-dragger. And before anyone suggests that I was confused by nearby Redhill, I wasn't - I had passed that a few minutes earlier on the M23 and I had watched "my" SuperCub on final there.

Has anyone got any idea what such a small aircraft was doing going into Gatwick today? And how much they were charged before they were allowed to leave again!

Cheers,

MD.

Warped Factor
9th Sep 2002, 14:41
slim,

Check your e-mail.

WF.

BRL
13th Sep 2002, 17:12
I have seen a single going into Gatwick on two seperate occasions in the last 6 months or so. They do go in there occasionally, maybe an air ambulance thing or something like that. :confused:

InFinRetirement
13th Sep 2002, 17:57
Unless I have missed something here. It is not unusual for aircraft to transit the Gatwick zone, say on the way from Biggin to Shoreham.

Gatwick ATC then might ask the aircraft to do a 360 over the threashold for a landing or taking off aircraft.

Muppit
13th Sep 2002, 18:10
The single engines jobs you see orbiting near LGW are photo/survey flights (Being called 'Survey32' or something similar kind of gives it away):D

We do quite often get single engined aircraft landing at LGW; slot minders, a/c spares delivery, and the exec Pilatus types too. Can't clame to have seen a Cessna though, as they do tend to be Pipers.

As for routing thro' the ATZ:
Above 2.5A, you're into TMA Class A airspace, (no VFR)
Standard missed approach is straight ahead to 3A. (Local noise restrictions pressure us into not deviating from standard ops.)

So if an aircraft is going over the top not above 2A, one goes around straight ahead to 3A, VFR pilot busy sightseeing (no offence, I've seen the heli boys slow to have a good look at the holding point) IFR can't turn off the NPR but does outclimb the crosser.....and the VFR crew get flipped in his vortex. Not a good day all round really.

:eek:

VFR tunnels may work at some units, but until its proven to be safe, noise friendly and VFR not hindering IFR traffic, then it'll be round the ATZ I'm afraidl:p

Warped Factor
13th Sep 2002, 21:27
asinclai,

NPR = Noise Preferential Route.

Do you ever notice aircraft drifting close when on base leg for Redhill's 01? The controllers at Redhill sometimes mention it when I am in the circuit, not to me of course but others.

As a Gatwick approach atco, very occasionaly I've phoned Redhill ATC and asked them to watch traffic in their circuit getting a bit too far to the south. But it is so rare as not to be a problem.

Just a reminder as mentioned earlier in this thread that there's an instruction in the Terminal Control MATS (Manual of Air Traffic Services) Pt 2 which effectively precludes fixed wing VFR transits via the Gatwick overhead. So whether the atco's involved think such transits are a good idea or not, they are unable to offer them anyway.

WF.

WO
14th Sep 2002, 05:13
There's a few things I think I should clarify about this question.

1) It isn't traffic landing at Redhill that i've seen, I live in Bewbush, which, for those of you who don't know the area, is on ther far south side of Crawley. So if it's landing traffic that I saw, the bloke must have called a 15 mile long final for 01!

2) These aircraft were definitely loitering over the area. I have seen a/c orbiting while they wait for permission to overfly LGW's zone, but these guys were there for at least 15 mins +

3) The paint scheme of the aircraft looked very similar to that of Redhill aviation, or possibly Southern flight at Shoreham. Does this jog anyone's memory?

4) They were definitely inside the CTR, not above it. I could make out the colour scheme without the use of bino's.

At the end of the day, this isn't a major issue, i'm just curious as to who it is!

WO

PhilD
14th Sep 2002, 12:44
Warped, Muppit

Thank's for the clarification, especially about VFR transits in the Gatwick MATS - as a PPL I wasn't even aware that this doc existed!

A further question - are Gatwick atcos under similar restriction if asked for an IFR transit? Assume that the requesting pilot is legal to fly IFR in Class D (i.e. holds an IMC or IR). If IFR transits are not specifically prohibited what would be the normal circumstances in which they are allowed, e.g. would you normally want an IFR flight plan filed prior to departure, or would an abbreviated FP in the air be enough?

Thanks

Phil

Muppit
14th Sep 2002, 17:23
Fixed wing transits very rarely happen, and they never orbit over or near the threshold waiting to cross.

The only fixed wing transits I've seen have been under the control of Gatwick Director and crossed close to the field during periods of light inbound traffic. Radar basically engineers the spacing so that the crosser passes to the east of 26 or west of 08 thresholds, so that we in the tower have a clean climb out and continue to launch departures unrestricted.

One other possibility is that you may have seen fixed wing inbounds to Valence field, basically on the other side of boundary fence, north of 08R threshold. They must approach from the north, be familiar with the site, have written permission, maintain visual contact with Gatwick’s traffic, and not balls it up! It doesn't happen that often, and for us in the tower its no real problem.

As for 'lost' Redhill traffic; twice I've been warned by Radar that there's one tracking a bit too far south and had to stop departures, and once, I've given avoiding action to a B744 because a micro light decided that the quickest way from Brighton to Redhill was up the M23!

....and yes, 2.5A is 2500ft QNH.

:p


I'll leave the bit about IFR transits to Warped!:D

InFinRetirement
14th Sep 2002, 17:57
Never Muppit! Never is wrong. While I accept it may not happen now, a 360 over the t/hold happened to me many times. Mind you it was about 10BC, but that is not the point. It did - but it may not be so now. There were also transits over the extended centre line at Edenbridge.

Just thought I would clear that up. I have also taken a formation of Turbs and Tigers over the t/hold of the active on the way to displays. Still, as I say, it was when Pontius was a pilot!

Maybe even one of the LGW controllers, a lot older than me, will confirm it. :D

Muppit
14th Sep 2002, 19:58
Fair enough InFinRet, I stand corrected :)

As you say it may have happened a while back, but as we were talking about recent overflights, current procedures (route around the ATZ) and traffic levels , I thought it was fair to say that it would never happen......well now anyway! ;)

pilotwolf
14th Sep 2002, 20:50
Hi Muppit.

Where or what is Valance field?

I know one of the local farmers allows rotary landing and provides 'exec' transport to people who can't or won't pay LGW extortionate (:D ) landing fees, but don't know of a strip around there...

Not doubting you just interested to know more...

WO
15th Sep 2002, 05:53
Valance field is ( if we're talking about the same place ), a private museum of old aircraft thats about 1/2mile north of the threshold of Rw08. I don't think that it's available for anyone to land at, as the approaches bring you straight across the threshold of 08. The guy just uses the strip to get new aircraft into the museum.

Just as an aside, if you get the chance when you're in the area, go and have a look, there's some great old a/c down there

You can find it in Pooleys, it's listed in the farm strips guide

WO

pilotwolf
15th Sep 2002, 10:23
Thanks WO.

Know it well drive past most days but not yet had the chance to go and look around.

Muppit
15th Sep 2002, 18:15
Yup, thats the field:)

In the 5 years I've been at Gatwick, I've seen it used about 4 times. I believe its use is very restricted and only through loads of red tape. The approach is flown from the north, over Povey Cross on a right base. Then turn short final and dip below the trees, out of sight of the tower.

Due to the politics involved, we treat the aircraft as an overflight and our only responsibility is to provide traffic information and a wind check. (I may be wrong, but I think it can only be used when we are on 26.):rolleyes:

Its quite a sight to see that close to LGW, and even stranger to see it dip below the tree line:D

Warped Factor
16th Sep 2002, 18:06
PhilD,

Just a bit of clarification re transitting Gatwick.

The restriction to fixed wing VFR transits only applies to the aerodrome traffic zone, the rest of the CTZ/CTA is fair game for transitting VFR (subject to the usual caveats atco's like to trot out about workload, other traffic etc).

As far as transitting the Class D IFR, well yes if you want you can request an IFR transit. Unless you really have to though I would always recommend requesting a VFR transit if conditions permit because there is much more flexibilty in terms of what separation (or lack of) needs to be applied by the atco.

For a transit, either VFR or IFR, all that is required by way of a flight plan is a call on the r/t a suitable distance from the Class D boundary.

WF.

pilotwolf
16th Sep 2002, 21:03
Firstly...

This isn't a whinge or US is better than UK post but general enquiry..

I haven't flown much in the UK, as PIC nor in controlled airspace in the UK so this is based on what I ve seen and heard, in part on PPRUNE.

In my couple of hundred (rotary) hours in the US I have never had or heard of anyone being refused transit of controlled airspace or ATZ. Including places like LAX.

Yet here it seems common place. Is this due to regs, understaffing in ATC or less trust of PPLs by UK ATCOs?

But have noticed that more refusals seem to be to fixed wing traffic...

Perhaps us rotary types are better, more accomodating, more helpful and generally better pilots!!!!

:D :D :D

PhilD
17th Sep 2002, 06:38
Warped

Thanks for the clarification.

Phil