FBW,
Good point, well made!
119.875 and 7401 are the numbers.
Skydiver666,
The change from Class E to D was well-planned long before the airprox. The person in charge at Glasgow who was driving the change, moved jobs and airport and the change proposal lost a little momentum.
Unfortunately, it took an airprox to re-energise the change proposal, and that change was rushed and the opportunity to properly examine Glasgow's airspace needs was missed.
(The airprox was between a glider and the 757. Glider pilot was on Cumbernauld's frequency and had been on Glasgow's radar until shortly before the incident. As a Glasgow-based pilot flying two or three times a week from there, you will be aware that there are several places where the choice of frequency is not obvious, to say the least. The professionals on the airprox board reported that the glider pilot had right-of-way and that all parties had "fully discharged their responsibilities". So no "bogeys" or "poor airmanship". )
Board's report is here:
https://www.airproxboard.org.uk/uplo...%202011085.pdf
Lots of things have changed since then: some further changes to Glasgow's airspace over Whitelee Windfarm, the introduction of listening squawks, the annotation "area of intense microlight activity" near Strathaven, etc.
But reading the report, it does mention that Glasgow ATC strongly suspected there was an aircraft in the area, had re-routed CAT and warned them to lookout. The key, to me, re-reading it after all these years and changes, is that Glasgow ATC also contacted Scottish FIR to check if they were in communication with the aircraft.
So hence my first point here: 119.875 and 7401 are now the key numbers when near Glasgow this summer.
I fully agree with you that the Glasgow controllers are top-notch professionals. We are lucky to have them. And no-one was luckier that day than the occupants of that 757 that such a capable controller was on duty that day to use their training, experience and instinct.
The problem we are now seeing at Glasgow is due to a whole range of factors outside the control of Glasgow ATC. Much of it, I suspect caused by "head office".
And if the root cause is with "head office", there is a risk that similar traffic restrictions may be on their way to other ATC ops nationwide. This goes completely against the perceived wisdom that an Air Navigation Service Provider has an obligation to make its services widely available, not - as you suggest - as a "courtesy".