Smiffy:
And why will non-Mode S be banned from Class D?
There's no such proposal in the revised Glasgow ACP and I'd be amazed if they proposed such a thing. You may have picked this up from fisbangwollop's comment:
Once introduced an SSR monitoring code will be introduced for aircraft routing below this airspace that does not require any form of ATC service from other units i.e. "Scottish Info"
which I take to mean a code you set when you're below the Glasgow and Edinburgh CTAs but don't want to talk to anyone. But if they wanted to make that mandatory they'd have to impose a Transponder Mandatory Zone which would require an ACP in itself, and would get every short shrift from all GA in central Scotland and beyond.
UK airspace policy is confusing, complicated, garbled, outdated and does not make any sense. What would be better for VFR and IFR traffic alike is a major restructuring and a look Westward over the pond to see how things can be better done with busy airspace and mixing VFR/IFR movements
I'm not sure the Yanks do airspace simplicity any better than us. Take Edinburgh. 10nm radius circle CTR - simple. Yes, Glasgow's more complex, but they are releasing chunks of CAS in this proposal. I'll tell you my LA story. Hired a Cessna 206 there once, with instructor, to go to San Diego. He said "have you planned a route?" I said yes and showed him my multiple doglegs designed to fly round the incredibly complex and bamboozling structure of CAS. He said "naaah, let's just go direct", and drew a straight line which passed right through the climb-out from LAX. The difference, of course, is in the way ATC there treats the issue of separating VFR and IFR traffic.
Then again, you can also see those differences between Edinburgh and Glasgow - maybe that's what you meant about looking west
NS