Scottish TMA

[Buzz-Lightyear]

Ladies and Gentlemen, some constructive dialogue on the Scottish TMA please. Anybody else feel going north then across Scotland ex EDI a bit silly. It must be the least crowded part of UK airspace, yet it seems the most onerous. Perhaps I'm wrong - not trying to upset anybody but I think a reasonable debate could enhance both ATC and Pilot perception.

[North of the Border]

Basically there are two sectors, one for inbounds(Talla) and one for outbounds (Galloway). Neither are quiet. The SIDs were designed to keep the non jets and jets on separate routes and hopefully give jet traffic unrestricted climb, traffic permitting. Once jets have gained some height we can normally cut the corner through the inbound sector towards Deancross, inbounds to LANAK permitting. The SIDs and STARs also had to be designed with no extra airspace available. You have to bear in mind that the routes from Edinburgh take you towards Glasgow to keep aircraft north and away from the LANAK hold. Scottish controllers also have to position traffic for London controllers. London TMA overflights, traffic landing at Gatwick, Farnborough clutch airfields and Solent CTA arrivals have to be positioned to the west of other traffic. This means if you are a Gatwick flight departing Edinburgh and arriving at Deancross at the same time as a Heathrow flight from Glasgow and a Stansted flight from Prestwick we can be involved with a lot of vectoring to get you strung across a narrow airway on parallel headings at the same level. Military pilots are regular visitors to the FIR east of the Scottish TMA using the Spadeadam and Otterburn Danger Areas and this means we are unable to get more airspace to the east and there are also Danger Areas to the west of A1/UA1 that restricts any more airspace to the west. Hope this helps

NOTB

[DB6]

It is a bit of a pain that there's that much controlled airspace right across the country (just like the Manchester TMA) but in reality you just head for Cumbernauld and beetle through between Glasgow and Edinburgh. Scottish Info on 119.875 are always very helpful but if you stay below 2500 feet you don't even have to talk to them if you don't want to. Or if you're going up the East coast just head for North Berwick and hop across the Forth to Fife and on up from there to the best flying country in Britain.

[AyrTC]

At first I thought DB6 had lost the plot/thread.However on re reading Buzz's question I realised I was only assuming he was talking about SID's.If he was questioning the instrument departure then see NOTB's reply.
On the other hand if he was going down DB6's train of thought well see NOTB's reply :)

AyrTC

[BuzzLightyear]

An imposter!!!

Star Command will come down heavily on you when they find you!!



------------------
To infinity and beyond

[passepartout]

Buzz,please believe us ,we find the situation a real pain as well.Sids that depart on the same route,Arrivals and departures roueting to the same fix,Holds that conflict and in particular (can I just point out DB6) class E airspace. Yes you are quite witin your rights to transit the area without speaking to us...But a) we would be able to give you a better service ( utilising radar as opposed to just position reports RAS/RIS instead of FIS ,dont panic its still free,at the moment!) and b) we are obliged by law to maintain 5 miles or 5000 feet from any unknown traffic...kinda tough when you are at 10 miles having to maintain 7000 feet!
Also cabin announcements ( yes ATCers travel as well) such as "If ATC help us out today we will get a right turn out",do not help,its not gonna happen on a weekday, might be fine at the moment but give us 3 months when we are privatised and we'll be sueing for comments like that!
Despite the tone of my reply, Buzz, I do agree with you. Something needs sorting out very quickly. PF + PH are growing too quickly to be sticking to the rules of yesteryear...We need airway and airport infrastructure to help us out yesterday...In the meantime we have to muddle along and do the best by the rules that exist today.

[PPRuNe Pop]

I am putting this in the ATC forum where the experts can have an input.

It's an interesting enough subject to do that.

PPRuNe Pop
Moderator
[email protected]

[This message has been edited by PPRuNe Pop (edited 24 March 2001).]

[screaming_vectors]

Passepartout - 5nm and 5000ft? Have you read the MATS recently? Try 5nm and 3000ft for a RAS.

[The Fat Controller]

Buzz:-
Have a look at the STARS for PH/PF, and the TWEED hold at PH. If you turned right off 06 at PH you would have to cross the hold for Edinburgh, the L602 and B4 arrivals for all the TMA. Going left is the only option for jet deps via DCS.
However, if you would really like to sit at 6000 feet for 35 miles after turning right (a la Heathrow) we can oblige.
Apologies for the slightly sarcastic comments, but I thought this thread would never rear it's ugly head.
If you would like to come and have a look at how we do it, I'm sure a visit can be arranged.

------------------
FATCO

[10W]

Buzz_Lightyear

As in most things in life, there is no gain without a little pain.

Back in the old days (pre 1994-ish ??), the TMA was run more akin to that which you describe. Which meant that the conflicts described by the other contributors were a regular part of life, resulting in uneconomical flight profiles, increased ATC co-ordination tasks (hence workload), widely varying aircraft types on the same routes, more delays, etc, etc. The capacity of the whole TMA in those days was in the order of 38 aircraft an hour.

Now by smoothing out a lot of the bottle necks, for example removing the need for jets to sit on the runway for 10 minutes whilst following a Shorts 360 on the same SID, and providing some degree of separation between departure and arrival routes, the capacity leapt up to something in the order of 72 an hour.

Given the choice of an extra 10 to 15 track miles on a route and a more or less unrestricted climb profile with almost no delays or long delays AND disjointed profiles with long periods of level offs, those in the airlines who make these types of decisions gave their full support to the change to the current system.

That's not to say it can't still be tweaked (RNAV and more airspace would be key enablers for this), but to go back to the old system just to save a few track miles would go down in airline bean counter and performance offices like a lead balloon.

As was mentioned, come see it for yourself. The 'big picture' can sometimes be an eye opener !! ;)


screaming_vectors

Remember however that we are talking about a TMA, i.e. Controlled Airspace. RAS cannot be given within CAS. The services which may be provided in varying airspace types are in the MATS ;)

I would however argue that the avoidance criteria being debated are not necessarily required. In respect of VFR flights within Class E, all the IFR traffic has to be given is traffic information, as far as practicable. Where the traffic is 'unknown', then in addition to the traffic information, avoiding action or advice on traffic avoidance should also be given. However there is no defined separation standard to be achieved. Unless of course the unit MATS Part 2 is more proscriptive.

------------------
10 West
UK ATC'er
[email protected]