Air Ground grey area!

[Binny]

As far as I was aware under normal circumstances air ground operators are not allowed to give instructions to air traffic, it being a lesser fuction than that of FISO. Current CAA regulation for my aerodrome has instructed that on several of the short runways we are to restrict circuit traffic to 4 a/c (however the method by which we do this has not been regulated). We are also in close vacinity to a military training aerodrome. Does any one have any ideas since we are a very busy aerodrome, with many inexperienced student pilots, and it seems riddiculous to 'instruct' a/c that they cannot join, or instruct them to hold outside the circuit. Having a/c buzzing about all over the show seems far more dangerous especially when they might be doing it so close to a MATZ, than it would be to have a lot of a/c in our circuit.

Any suggestions would be appreciated. Since we are currently in discussions Re the best method to achieve the CAA directive.

Cheers


:confused:

[Spitoon]

It's not really for the air/ground person to do this - it's the aerodrome authority's responsibility to manage traffic to safe levels at the aerodrome.

In practice the only way to do it is to make the aerodrome PPR and to operate a slot booking system.

And just for the record a FISO has little more authority when it comes to aircraft in the air.

[2 sheds]

Surely you also have to establish what is meant by "in the circuit" Does this imply "circuit-bashers" or does it include traffic joining?

As Spitoon says, this is not a function of the A/G operator, although it could be the same person who gives prior permission on behalf of the aerodrome operator and accepts (or otherwise) pilots booking-out for circuit training (but not on the RTF in his/her capacity as A/G operator).

2 sheds

[055166k]

Why not ask the Regulator how the regulation may be implimented. Query in exact detail the procedure to be followed and what is the enabling process. If you are ever held to account on this topic I suggest you get some "dry powder" stored. It may be that the Regulator can approve a form of words that could be transmitted to cover your scenario, and whilst it would convey the restriction it would fall short of actual control......just ask.

[Barnaby the Bear]

As previously mentioned, you didn't say whether or not a restriction was required on circuit bashing.
If this is the case, I would have thought that an entry in the AIP, and letters of agreement with local users would be the only way.
I am assuming this is a licenced airfield you are talking about.
Also for what its worth, making it strictly PPR as previously mentioned might help.
I think 05516k's suggestion is the most sensible.

:}

[DFC]

"G-ABCD, only four aircraft permitted in the circuit. Report your intentions"

or

"G-ABCD Message from the Aerodrome Authority. You are not authorised to do circuits. Report your intentions"

Both examples get the message across. None of them are instructions.

If the aircraft reports that they will continue to bash the circuit then;

"G-ABCD, message from the aerodrome authority. You are not permitted to land at this aerodrome. Report your intentions."

Regards,

DFC

[2 sheds]

Not very helpful, though? The whole idea is to facilitate aviation!

Surely better to regulate from the beginning with PPR. The ATS - whether A/G, AFIS or ATC - really does not need to get involved like that.

Why is the Head Man not geting this thrashed out with whoever in CAA made this stipulation?

2 s