EASA NPA 2016-09 (A)

[TCAS FAN]

Have just read the NPA within which it appears that EASA intend to mandate that AFISOs will no longer be able to issue instructions to aircraft/vehicles on the ground or determine the runway in use, the latter being "a prerogative of the pilots".

Have I read this correctly? If I have, hopefully the UK Association of FISOs, with the support of the CAA, can stop imposition of this in the UK. If not, what is the point of AFIS?

[Talkdownman]

Originally Posted by TCAS FAN

what is the point of AFIS?

Hi TCAS

The only reference I have ever found which actually specifies a requirement for AFIS is in The Air Navigation (General) Regulations 2006 at Section 3 Para 13:

Aeroplanes flying for the purpose of public transport of passengers— aerodrome facilities for approach to landing and landing.........apply to every aeroplane registered in the United Kingdom engaged on a flight for the purpose of public transport of passengers on a scheduled journey and to every aeroplane so registered whose maximum total weight authorised exceeds 5,700 kg engaged on a flight for such a purpose otherwise than on a scheduled journey........the following manning and equipment are prescribed in relation to aerodromes intended to be used for landing or as an alternate aerodrome by aircraft to which this regulation applies—air traffic control service or aerodrome flight information service

The above lends itself in particular to community and humanitarian flights at remote and less frequently served locations, such as H & I aerodromes. Presumably it is otherwise not required at all (unless mandated by SARG for different reasons...). I really do not understand why some aerodrome operators waste so much money on AFIS when it is not apparently necessary, when A/G can permit a much higher level of runway utilisation, and better command decision-making and discipline from pilots, particularly with respect to lookout and effective and minimal runway occupancy. Indeed, some of those aerodrome operators elect to downgrade to A/G when it suits them in order to cover AFISO shortfall (and publish warnings of such possible downgrading in the UK AIP), which begs the question why, in the absence of public transport, have it at all.

[TCAS FAN]

Talkdownman

Thanks, presumably the specification of ATC or AFIS relates to the ability to control aircraft/vehicles on the ground, thereby minimising the risk of a runway incursion. If EASA are successful in preventing FISOs controlling ground movement, presumably the UK regs will delete AFIS. If this happens I see no point in aerodrome operators going to the expense (ie having to secure ANSP Certification) of AFIS provision when A/G (or "UNICOM" as the NPA calls it) can probably do the job.

The disturbing (to me) issue is the NPA intent for pilots to determine the runway in use, lunatics taking over the asylum springs to mind!

[ATC Watcher]

The disturbing (to me) issue is the NPA intent for pilots to determine the runway in use, lunatics taking over the asylum springs to mind!

are you an AFIS agent ?

Because basic rule of the air in ICAO land : in uncontrolled airfields the pilot in command has the choice of the runway in use. Always has been . Is the UK different ?

And I would argue that even in a controlled airport , if the pilot request a specific runway, for any reason , you have to accommodate . It might have to wait , or delay other traffic, but refuse ? don't think you legally can. But I'm not 100% sure of that one.

[TCAS FAN]

ATC Watcher

No ATCO or AFISO would refuse a reasonable request to use other than the runway in use unless there were traffic or safety reasons why this could not be accommodated. I frequently received requests to do this due to the reciprocal runway having a better TORA/TODA which was required, even with a tailwind.

The UK permits an AFISO to give instructions to aircraft and vehicles up to the runway holding position. Take-offs and landings are then "at your discretion". This is a major safety contribution to counter the threat of runway incursions, especially at busy aerodromes.

The AFISO determines the runway in use based upon many factors, including the prevailing surface wind. These factors may include noise abatement considerations.

[ATC Watcher]

TCAS FAN : thanks . interesting , did not know this UK exemption. Although telling a pilot , " hold position vehicle on runway " or " Runway is not clear, vehicle on runway " ( as it is done in my part of the world ) will provide the same results. But I can see the safety benefits of your system .

Runway in use :
In the countries I fly in , the AFISO advise of the runway in use , but you can as a pilot decide on another one.
The aircrfat I own is very sensitive to tail wind on take off , ( degrades its climb performance a lot, and it is under powered) I very often , especially on hot days , advise that I will use a different QFU than the one given , this is not a request, it is me telling the AFISO I wants to use this QFU. and never got a problem. I might have to wait until the circuit is cleared, but I decide the QFU, not the AFISO.
Lastly , In many countries I fly in , the QFU is too often determined by noise abatement considerations, wind, temperature or slope of runway, etc. mater less than noise. If you fly a Citation , it is not an issue, but if you fly a vintage under powered aircraft it does matter a lot !