Ok chilli, so the money and resources aren't there for my first two thoughts. That's fine, but at least we have addressed the issue and it won't be an unanswered question.
How about Class e/f/g corridors? Works elsewhere.
Charts. I was referring to 1:250,000. If you look at the OnTrack charts they have removed a huge amount of unnecessary clutter, the problem is they are not legal for navigation. They are a definitely a vast improvement over the standard chart, and er, designed to help prevent zone infringements.
Controlled airspace can be designed with vfr pilots in mind. So, for instance, if there is a readily available surface feature (road/river/coastline) just outside the calculated boundaries of the protected airspace, extend the boundary to that feature. No reason any future airspace changes/grabs shouldn't use the same principle wrt navigation beacons, or GPS waypoints.
Found a good example. The southern boundary of the Heathrow surface area could so easily be defined using a radial off the BIG VOR, but it isn't. Why not? Why isn't the eastern arc of the surface area a DME arc off the london vor? TYou could use the M25 as the northern edge of part of the Gatwick 1500ft area. So easy to do, nobody thought VFR when doing airspace.
Last edited by slim_slag; 11th Oct 2005 at 12:33.