Class D VFR/IFR separation standards
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2011
Location: antrim
Age: 63
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Class D VFR/IFR separation standards
Quick query for ATCOs working in Class D, I was out flying recently with a colleague routeing from Newtownards through Belfast and up towards Portrush. Beautiful day, CAVOK with not much traffic around. We requested a zone transit from Belfast City which we got, we were passed traffic information on a A319 on a 4 mile final runway 22 and I heard the controller passing traffic information to the A319 about us, we were visual with the landing traffic and the controller simply let us continue across the zone - no fuss, no drama, we passed behind the A319 and once through the final approach we were transferred to Aldergrove and were told they had our details. At this stage we were tracking towards Glengormley hoping for a zone transit from Aldergrove to head towards Portrush.
On first contact with Aldergrove we were asked to pass full details and intentions, somewhat surprised we went through the spiel anyway and were then told there was traffic inbound for runway 25 and to remain outside the zone. This we duly did but within a short time we became visual with an Easyjet on our right hand side at least 1000ft above, we reported visual with this traffic to the controller hoping for a transit but were told that we weren`t separated from the Easyjet and a zone transit was not available. my colleague confirmed we were VFR and good visual but there was still no transit forthcoming.
We continued outside Aldergrove airspace, there were no further inbounds and nothing that I could see to prevent transit.
Do Aldergrove now separate VFR against IFR traffic? Why?
On first contact with Aldergrove we were asked to pass full details and intentions, somewhat surprised we went through the spiel anyway and were then told there was traffic inbound for runway 25 and to remain outside the zone. This we duly did but within a short time we became visual with an Easyjet on our right hand side at least 1000ft above, we reported visual with this traffic to the controller hoping for a transit but were told that we weren`t separated from the Easyjet and a zone transit was not available. my colleague confirmed we were VFR and good visual but there was still no transit forthcoming.
We continued outside Aldergrove airspace, there were no further inbounds and nothing that I could see to prevent transit.
Do Aldergrove now separate VFR against IFR traffic? Why?
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: On the wireless...
Posts: 1,901
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Over-controlling?
TCAS-event 'report-writing avoidance'?
ATCO doesn't understand Class D?
Jobsworth?
Give them a phone call and ask why they are not managing their airspace i.a.w. Class D procedures.
TCAS-event 'report-writing avoidance'?
ATCO doesn't understand Class D?
Jobsworth?
Give them a phone call and ask why they are not managing their airspace i.a.w. Class D procedures.
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: not the W.P.
Age: 70
Posts: 50
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Completely agree with talkdownman. Suggest you ring up EGAA and ask to speak to the SATCO as it would appear one of his controllers is not understanding of the rules within the airspace he is providing a 'service'
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: The foot of Mt. Belzoni.
Posts: 2,001
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
When the U.K. airspace re-classification occurred, (sometime in the 1990s I think), our CTR went from 'Rule21' to class D. There was no training, and little guidance from unit management, about handling VFR traffic. Certain procedures, originally designed to keep SVFR and IFR traffic apart, were kept in place as they also helped reducing 'non-standard' IFR routings, and therefore noise.
Is the integration of VFR/IFR traffic taught on the APP or APS course at CATC these days?
Is the integration of VFR/IFR traffic taught on the APP or APS course at CATC these days?
Last edited by ZOOKER; 25th Dec 2014 at 14:00.
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: UK
Age: 45
Posts: 84
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MATS Part 1 Section 1 Chapter 5
Control of VFR Flight
5.3 The minimum services provided to VFR flights in Class D airspace are
specified at Section 1, Chapter 2, paragraph 2. Separation standards
are not prescribed for application by ATC between VFR flights or
between VFR and IFR flights in Class D airspace. However, ATC has
a responsibility to prevent collisions between known flights and to
maintain a safe, orderly and expeditious flow of traffic. This objective i
s met by passing sufficient traffic information and instructions to assist pilots to
‘see and avoid’ each other as specified at Section 3, Chapter 1, paragraph 2.
5.4 Instructions issued to VFR flights in Class D airspace are mandatory.
These may comprise routeing instructions, visual holding instructions,
level restrictions, and information on collision hazards, in order to
establish a safe, orderly and expeditious flow of traffic and to provide for
the effective management of overall ATC workload.
5.5 Routeing instructions may be issued which will reduce or eliminate
points of conflict with other flights, such as final approach tracks and
circuit areas, with a consequent reduction in the workload associated
with passing extensive traffic information. VRPs may be established to
assist in the definition of frequently utilised routes and the avoidance
of instrument approach and departure tracks. Where controllers require
VFR aircraft to hold at a specific point pending further clearance, this is
to be explicitly stated to the pilot.
Control of VFR Flight
5.3 The minimum services provided to VFR flights in Class D airspace are
specified at Section 1, Chapter 2, paragraph 2. Separation standards
are not prescribed for application by ATC between VFR flights or
between VFR and IFR flights in Class D airspace. However, ATC has
a responsibility to prevent collisions between known flights and to
maintain a safe, orderly and expeditious flow of traffic. This objective i
s met by passing sufficient traffic information and instructions to assist pilots to
‘see and avoid’ each other as specified at Section 3, Chapter 1, paragraph 2.
5.4 Instructions issued to VFR flights in Class D airspace are mandatory.
These may comprise routeing instructions, visual holding instructions,
level restrictions, and information on collision hazards, in order to
establish a safe, orderly and expeditious flow of traffic and to provide for
the effective management of overall ATC workload.
5.5 Routeing instructions may be issued which will reduce or eliminate
points of conflict with other flights, such as final approach tracks and
circuit areas, with a consequent reduction in the workload associated
with passing extensive traffic information. VRPs may be established to
assist in the definition of frequently utilised routes and the avoidance
of instrument approach and departure tracks. Where controllers require
VFR aircraft to hold at a specific point pending further clearance, this is
to be explicitly stated to the pilot.
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2011
Location: antrim
Age: 63
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks for the response to date, I think the best bet is to try and speak to someone in Aldergrove over the next few days. I was talking to a controller at Belfast City and he was somewhat bemused but said he wasn`t in the least surprised by anything that Aldergrove do these days. I tried to get him to elaborate but he also said I should try and contact them myself.
The aircraft is full mode s/c equipped and it is working!
The aircraft is full mode s/c equipped and it is working!
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Hotel Gypsy
Posts: 2,821
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
City and Aldergrove have always (well certainly in the past decade or so) behaved differently. Personally, I think City have it right whilst Aldergrove tend to manage the sky like Class C. I does make one wonder whether the regulator is doing it's job properly; there's certainly a lack of standardisation.
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2011
Location: antrim
Age: 63
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Now I am really confused! I got speaking to a controller at Aldergrove and he has said that they are required to separate ALL traffic regardless of weather, types, performance etc. They will not allow for example a microlight in the same sector as an airbus unless they are separated - I`m not sure where their sectors are and I`m not sure if this is a NATS thing or a local unit thing. Either way it seems to be creating a lot of work for the controllers!
When I explained the scenario I experienced he simply said that even though we could see the big shiny jet we simply were not considered separated in his opinion and therefore wouldn`t get a transit. I asked what if the airbus had been a VFR PA28 and we could each see each other, he said we still wouldn`t be classed as separated.
I went back to the guy I spoke to at Belfast City and he said if he applied those rules then City couldn`t function as they simply don`t have the space to operate this way, he said they regularly have helicopter traffic operating over the city centre at 3000 feet with an outbound IFR also going to 3000 feet, traffic information is passed and that`s it.
What happens at other areas??
When I explained the scenario I experienced he simply said that even though we could see the big shiny jet we simply were not considered separated in his opinion and therefore wouldn`t get a transit. I asked what if the airbus had been a VFR PA28 and we could each see each other, he said we still wouldn`t be classed as separated.
I went back to the guy I spoke to at Belfast City and he said if he applied those rules then City couldn`t function as they simply don`t have the space to operate this way, he said they regularly have helicopter traffic operating over the city centre at 3000 feet with an outbound IFR also going to 3000 feet, traffic information is passed and that`s it.
What happens at other areas??
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: UK
Posts: 61
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
VFR / IFR separation standards in class D = pass traffic information.
So...
Confirm VFR?
Transit clearance issued.
VFR pilot reports visual.
See and avoid.
Happy days.
I'd be on the phone to the Manager ATC in the New Year to ask why EGAA controllers aren't operating class D airspace correctly (based on what has been posted by pan x 4)
So...
Confirm VFR?
Transit clearance issued.
VFR pilot reports visual.
See and avoid.
Happy days.
I'd be on the phone to the Manager ATC in the New Year to ask why EGAA controllers aren't operating class D airspace correctly (based on what has been posted by pan x 4)
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: EU
Posts: 497
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I wonder if this is specifically a lack of ATCO standardisation as opposed to unit standardisation.
I used to operate in and around Belfast (both airports) quite a lot and I am sure I remember being allowed to self separate with traffic in sight in Aldergrove CTR. I have also spoken to the guys and girls there before about a couple of issues and they have been very friendly.
I used to operate in and around Belfast (both airports) quite a lot and I am sure I remember being allowed to self separate with traffic in sight in Aldergrove CTR. I have also spoken to the guys and girls there before about a couple of issues and they have been very friendly.
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Between a rock and a hard place
Posts: 1,267
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Quick question,
In the UK do you need 'clearance' to enter Class D airspace VFR? My experience with D is from the US and as VFR traffic you only need to establish two-way com with ATC before you can enter. With that said, in certain extremely busy situations the controller have just told me to stay outside their airspace. No problem to comply in that case.
In the UK do you need 'clearance' to enter Class D airspace VFR? My experience with D is from the US and as VFR traffic you only need to establish two-way com with ATC before you can enter. With that said, in certain extremely busy situations the controller have just told me to stay outside their airspace. No problem to comply in that case.
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: UK
Age: 45
Posts: 84
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: The foot of Mt. Belzoni.
Posts: 2,001
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If I remember correctly, Class D replaced the U.K.'s 'Special Rules Airspace' and the mnemonic for that was 'COLO'........
CONTACT the relevant ATC Unit.
OBTAIN permission to enter the airspace,
LISTEN out on the appropriate ATC frequency.
OBEY instructions issued by ATC.
CONTACT the relevant ATC Unit.
OBTAIN permission to enter the airspace,
LISTEN out on the appropriate ATC frequency.
OBEY instructions issued by ATC.
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Between a rock and a hard place
Posts: 1,267
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes a clearance is required.
Airspace class - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Airspace class - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
COLO..
Sounds like a good mnemonic, regardless of airspace
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Sweden
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I work in class C space myself but I feel like you guys are in the wrong here.
Class D space doesn't mean that ATCOs should just give traffic information and hope for the best. A controllers responsibility regardless of airspace classification is to aviod collision and seperate traffic as long as neccesary. If **** hits the fan, 98% of the time the controller will be held responsible for the situation. So you can't really bash a controller for using the airspace wrong. You can always ask about the situation and have a constructive conversation about it, you should however in this situation (the way I've understood it) not call and bash him/her for using the airspace in a faulty manner.
Class D space doesn't mean that ATCOs should just give traffic information and hope for the best. A controllers responsibility regardless of airspace classification is to aviod collision and seperate traffic as long as neccesary. If **** hits the fan, 98% of the time the controller will be held responsible for the situation. So you can't really bash a controller for using the airspace wrong. You can always ask about the situation and have a constructive conversation about it, you should however in this situation (the way I've understood it) not call and bash him/her for using the airspace in a faulty manner.
Chro,
I think you are wrong. If it's a Class D zone, then the Class D rules should apply. The controller should not arbitrarily decide he is going to apply Class C rules.
I think you are wrong. If it's a Class D zone, then the Class D rules should apply. The controller should not arbitrarily decide he is going to apply Class C rules.
I have to agree that its wrong for an individual controller or unit to decide to apply their own rules in class "D". The rules for class "D" are clearly defined and one should be able to plan to use CAS subject to common sense and not at the mercy of an individual's whim. When the initial Airspace Change Proposal is submitted for class "D" the CAA would judge that the proposal should be accepted on the basis that VFR can reasonably expect to transit under class "D" rules. If the individual controller or unit decide to breach the rules under which the airspace is established the whole section of airspace should be withdrawn and the ATC unit should be forced to resubmit the whole ACP again, including the environmental considerations.
Personally I would write to the SATCO or manager to complain and ask for an explanation in writing and if the answer was unsatisfactory forward the correspondence to the CAA siting a breach of the ACP.
Many yeas ago there was a controller who stated that he would not let anyone other than commercial in HIS airspace ("D") regardless of number of engines or whether they had a transponder, even if there was no traffic and none expected. I understand that the CAA did explain the error of his ways to him.
There is nothing to stop individuals from writing to the CAA or the ATC unit and asking for them to investigate and have the tapes replayed. It might be that there was some traffic on another frequency that made the crossing too difficult. I seem to remember that if transit is refused the controller is supposed to give an estimate of how long it will be till they can give the clearance, was this done on this occasion?
bb
Personally I would write to the SATCO or manager to complain and ask for an explanation in writing and if the answer was unsatisfactory forward the correspondence to the CAA siting a breach of the ACP.
Many yeas ago there was a controller who stated that he would not let anyone other than commercial in HIS airspace ("D") regardless of number of engines or whether they had a transponder, even if there was no traffic and none expected. I understand that the CAA did explain the error of his ways to him.
There is nothing to stop individuals from writing to the CAA or the ATC unit and asking for them to investigate and have the tapes replayed. It might be that there was some traffic on another frequency that made the crossing too difficult. I seem to remember that if transit is refused the controller is supposed to give an estimate of how long it will be till they can give the clearance, was this done on this occasion?
bb