Manchester VFR transits

[NorthSouth]

I am planning a trip which will take me through the Manchester area in the next couple of weeks and I wonder if any Manchester ATCOs could advise me about VFR transit options other than the Low Level Route. Ideally I'd like to transit overhead the Liverpool CTR at 2500 or 3000ft, heading north-south. Other pilots I've talked to suggest this is option is not normally available. I've looked at the EGCC SIDs and STARs and the only IFR traffic I can see that might go through that airspace is 06L arrivals from Wallasey, but I understand you don't descend those below 3500 until they're in your RVA.

Can you advise me of the likelihood of getting a transit as described, say entering at Kirkby and leaving at Chester?

[cossack]

What you need is a Liverpool ATCO!
You would probably have no trouble getting a VFR transit on the route you suggest but it would almost certainly be not above 1500 feet whilst in the Liverpool CTR (SFC-1500 feet). Use Liverpool Approach on 119.85 for entry clearance not any Manchester frequency.
If you really wanted to be higher you would probably be routed west of Wallasey or east of Manchester (Glossop).

Fly safely!

[NorthSouth]

Thanks Cossack. Yes, I know the Liverpool CTR transit option is available, but frankly I'm not too impressed with the idea of all that flying over built up areas in a single at 1500ft QNH which is why I wondered whether your airspace above that might be available. It's Class D to 3500ft, so surely it must be available for VFRs?

I've also considered the other two options. Keeping clear of the Liverpool CTR to the east means ducking under the Class A at below 2000ft several miles offshore, and the Glossop option is unattractive because of high ground and potential conflicts with military low levels in a very narrow corridor.

[cossack]

Yes the Manchester CTR is Class D and available to VFRs but there is no guarantee of getting through quickly. There are times of the day when it is just not practicable to get you through that's why the LLR was put there.
In practice, the LLR is the quickest option with no likelihood of being held because of Manchester traffic.
If Manchester is on the 24s, at 3500 feet transitting east of the airport you would fly through both downwind legs, 2 SID routes and final approach. On the 6s transitting west of the airport you would fly through both downwind legs, 3 SID routes and final approach.
VFR or not we still have a responsibility to keep you out of the way of IFRs without delaying them.
If I were you I'd use the LLR.

[NorthSouth]

Accept your point entirely about not delaying IFRs. I'd be proposing a transit at either 2500 or 3000 (not 3500), west of the Manchester CTR. Aren't the SIDs all in Class A at 4000 and above at that point? I wouldn't be flying through the RH downwind for 06 because I'm west of the CTR, and wouldn't the LH downwind and final approach be kept within the RVA? I'd be well to the west of that.

What are your busiest times of day?

[cossack]

You want to fly from Kirkby to Chester at 3000. You're in the Manchester CTA above the Liverpool CTR. To transit that airspace Liverpool would need to coordinate with Manchester West Sector. On its own, no problem.
When you fly through the Liverpool CTR, Liverpool now have the problem of integrating you into their traffic (less busy than Manchester admittedly) without Secondary radar. When you get to Chester you're very close to Hawarden also.

If you want to avoid overflying built up areas at 1500 feet, request join at Seaforth to fly down the Mersey and then out through Chester following the M53.
Or fly to the west of the Wirral below 2000 but talk to Liverpool.

[Fly Through]

I'm an ex-EGGP ATCO and normally the guys & girls there will try and squeeze you through some how. I also used to do alot of flying in the area so I know that there is no use you even trying to talk your way through EGCC airspace, they're way to busy, all day. As for EGGP, again subject traffic, a good routeing above 1500' could be Seaforth - Hawarden. It would depend on how busy both 'pool and hawarden are but it's the only possible option I can see.

You can only ask anyway.
Happy Flying

FT

[NorthSouth]

Thanks guys. I can see this is a big problem for EGCC so I wouldn't want to push things, but it all seems a bit odd. If I'm flying through Manchester airspace (Man CTA, above Liverpool's delegated section up to 2500) why would that require Liverpool co-ordinating with Manchester West? And since I'm not in the Liverpool CTR or any of Liverpool's airspace, why would they have to integrate me into their traffic? And if I'm at 3000ft why would proximity to Hawarden be a problem? I believe 3000's above all their IAPs.

Re Liverpool options, OK, if I don't like 1500 over BUAs I have to accept going for a swim if the donkey dies. But an up-the-Mersey routing surely causes more probs for Liverpool (straight through their final approach/departure) and Hawarden (straight through the IAPs for 23) than a N-S through the Liverpool overhead at, say, 2400ft, in airspace which is empty because everyone else has been warned off it ;-)

[No speed Restriction]

NorthSouth,

A transit at 2,500' would require Liverpool to coordinate that transit with Manchester, Any higher would mean talking directly to Manchester or talking to Liverpool( in error) and them asking for the transit. Have you considered the aircraft climbing out of liverpool to 4 thousand feet on the liverpool SID's and the fact that nearly every IFR inbound is descended to 3,500', idented to liverpool and then given to them? There is still a responsibility to separate these aircraft from VFR traffic, as you may appreciate this is likely to cause many problems and therefore most transits are at 1,500' or through the LLR.

Hope this helps

NsR ( Have fun thats what it's all about)

[squibbler]

NorthSouth, from an EGGP ATCO:

Your easiest option is a transit VFR Kirby to Chester VRP's at 2500'. It will involve little if any co-ordination with Manch.

Subject to traffic you'll get a routing through the overhead or maybe east/west of the threshold depending on the runway in use.

We'll pass your details to Hawarden but as they are an ATZ only, provided you give them a wide enough berth you needn't worry about any conflictions with their traffic. Most of their inbounds and outbounds are co-ordinated with us anyway and there aren't that many. The approach controller will keep you advised and decide whether he feels you need to give them a call or not.

Don't bother with Manchester they're just too busy, we'll sort you out no problem, just give us a call on 119.85 with 5 minutes to run to Kirby. The controller will probably try and clear you not above 1500 but specifically ask for "not above 2500' VFR" and you should be alright. The controller will however be slagging you to high heaven, off air of course, but don't worry.......we slag off everybody amongst ourselves (especially ****jet!!!!!!!)

Good luck :)

PS To all prospective transits: Integrating VFR and IFR in the Liverpool CTZ is an art form. Don't call Manchester they're too busy, give us a call and 90% of the time you'll get what you've asked for. Just don't make your first call at the zone boundary and expect a friendly reply, give us at least 5 minutes notice and you'll be alright, be prepared for possible re-routes or orbits en-route.
------------------
No, you can't have 09!

[This message has been edited by squibbler (edited 21 June 2001).]

[NorthSouth]

Squibbler:

What helpful chappies you Liverpool controllers are! Had a very nice off-list response from one of your colleagues too.

I'll be happy to give you something interesting to do ;) when I come down your way - probably on Monday 9 July. Look out for G-GT.

[EGCC4284]

Hello cossack

I often fly out of Barton transitting Liverpool zone from Burtonwood to Wallasey, speaking with Liverpool, then fly up the river Dee through Hawaraden's overhead, whilst speaking with Hawarden, then across to Ashcroft Farm before returning north up the low level route.

My questions to you are these. Whilst travelling up the low level route, and on 119.4, and realising you guys are busy, are we as well just keeping a listening watch rather than bothering you? And, if we sqwark 7000, does that cause you or anybody else any problems?

Would it be easier if Liverpool approach 119.85 were responsible for looking after the low level route, as some of their departing VFR traffic leave the zone at Whitegate?

------------------
A BIT EXTRA FOR MUM.

[Eric T Cartman]

@ EGCC 4284 "Would it be easier if Liverpool approach 119.85 were responsible for looking after the low level route, as some of their departing VFR traffic leave the zone at Whitegate?"

As an ex EGGP ATCO I would vote "most definately not !" It was hard enough getting BMA DC9's onto the ILS while Blackpool direct Great Ormes Head transits gave their life story instead of calling London FIR. If everything in the LLR called, well .....

Also , one of the main purposes of the LLR is to allow transit through the area without the need for an ATC clearance / radio etc.

In 'Indian Territory' it's all about "see & be seen", as the regulators frequently tell us !

------------------
Damn, I got old quick !

[Vfrpilotpb]

North/South, Hi

I have a dread of the LLC, everyone seems to fly down the middle, after a little chat with the local Pro pilots I now always transit through Eggp airspace, entering at Kirkby to Lima Papa Lima( Runcorn Bridge) and exit at Whitegates, the Liv ATC are spot on and hardly trouble you, the best thing however is that you are being watched all the way through and out, leave Man alone they really are V busy and despite what you think there are quite a lot of green bits in the area( keep out of the Safari park though). Have a good flight
My Regards
Peter R-B

[Spoonbill]

As an aside to the original post, this sort of question seems to be raised reasonably regularly for the Manchester/Liverpool transit area.
It occurs to me that the majority of the answers given are emminently sensible but equally, are not marked on any charts anywhere or not listed in the doc's. Or if they are, it's too complicated as not to be obvious to the not so experienced eye.
Would it be too complicated/expensive for the chart makers to put all the available options on the appropriate chart, even if it was necessary to produce a new idiots guide chart just for this area.
http://www.pprune.org/ubb/NonCGI/confused.gif

------------------
It wasn't me.

[dde0apb]

The jist of this thread is that Manchester is too busy to talk to anyone flying VFR. Is this because there are simply so many planes in that space, or is it because there are not enough controllers to fully utilise all the airspace?

[nemo]

Controller numbers are not an issue.
Being distracted from the primary ATC task is.

[cossack]

One of my colleagues put it very succinctly on another thread:
Squawk, don't talk, listen.
I think that sums it up pretty well.
Oh, and keep a very good lookout.

[Spoonbill]

Cossack - far be it from me to tell you what to do in your own back yard, but a pilot who squawks, listens and doesnt talk is a pain in the butt.
It happens regularly in my neck of the woods, and although we dont have the constraints of the Manchester airspace, non talking squawkers who transit the area and final approach just add to the work load.
On Sunday I had two examples of this, and after going through the nause of giving traffic information and finally avoiding action to an aircraft established on final approach, the non talker called, stating that he'd been listening all the time.
Very poor airmanship (IMHO).


------------------
It wasn't me.

[chiglet]

spoon,
The "Manchester Low Level Route" is [fairly] well promulgated. (Pooleys, The Airport Guide etc) so IF you follow the rules, [not above 1250' etc] then really all you need is a squawk. IF you are unsure or think that you're a bit "off" in your route, then listen out on 119.4 and when safe call Apc.
[Doing the "stats", we normally have 40-60 transits in summer. They are the ones who DO call. Heaven knows the number of none callers ;)
we aim to please, it keeps the cleaners happy

------------------
chiglet

[cossack]

spoonbill
As chiglet has said, the LLR was put there to allow VFR flight north-south between Liverpool and Manchester in an area of minimum disruption to IFR traffic, without the need for Radio communications. There are aircraft without radios who use the route as well as ones with.
We don't provide any radar service in the LLR and so you won't be allocated a squawk unless you are joing the Manchester zone when we are on the 6s.
If you've got a transponder use it, then if you do wander off course, there's a better chance of a quick ident and back on course.
If you do manage to get a word in on 119.4 all you're going to get is the QNH and a FIS ie no specific traffic info. So why call?

[dde0apb]

nemo said:

"Controller numbers are not an issue.
Being distracted from the primary ATC task is."

And I quite agree, but the question still remains; are there enough controllers to utilise fully all the available Class D airspace so that they can remain on task and not distracted, and make best use of all the available airspace? If there are enough controllers, then we are using the airspace as fully as we properly and safely can, and I don't want to be in there VFR if there's no more useable airspace.

On the other hand are we being denied VFR transits because there are not enough controllers to use all the available airspace. If VFR transits over LAX are possible, why not Manchester?

This can only become more of an issue as TAG seeks to cut costs, as surely it must to hit government set charging limits.

Bottom line is I would rather be higher than 1,250 when possible

[This message has been edited by dde0apb (edited 25 June 2001).]

[nemo]

I can assure you that the airspace is fully used by 3 Area radar controllers , 3 Approach controllers plus Woodford ATC.

Using 3 and 5 miles lateral radar separation and a safety altiude of 3500 feet, there ain't no room for VFR transits.
The Low Level Corridor may not be perfect but it's there at the request of General Aviation.

As for LAX , well ,we do things differently in this climate of ours.
Grab yourself a copy of the LAX Approach Plates and tell me how you'd like it when something goes around.
I have no idea what separation they use but it looks rather odd to my European eye and not the sort of thing our SRG would approve.

[This message has been edited by nemo (edited 25 June 2001).]

[dde0apb]

I am reassured by nemo's comments that the Manchester CTR is fully utilised. If it's genuinely full of medium / heavy traffic, then I don't want to be there too.

I know the LLR is there are GA's request, and it's a great deal better than nothing, althought not reassuring on a day when I'd rather be at FL50, but I guess I need an expensive CAA IR for that rather than my "dangerous" IMC rating.

I agree that the standards applied in the US are different from those in the UK, and ultimately they do have more mid-airs than we do. So maybe our system is working for us.

[Vfrpilotpb]

DDoPB, Hi ,

From past conversations with the man from the CAA at EGCC, if you want to go higher than the 1250 in the LLC, then you can ask(if you can get in to talk)EGCC app for permission, simple as that. One reason that I never now use the LLC is the restriction on Green bits for a Heli to glide to. The CAA man has explained that the LLC is a compromise, and unless you wish to put yourself possibly into a conflict it is the only route that you can use unless you use Man App or Liv App, in the last 6 months I have done the N/S journey possibly 25 times, after the first 5 I started to use the Liverpool zone transit much easier and relaxed and much safer than the LLC, as I have said earlier Liv App are very good, and like a lot of ATC's always maximum with the info, I would recomend any Pilot to try that route through from N/S or vice/versa.
If you are FW you also have many landing strips for any emergency, try it you have nothing to loose!
My Regards, Safe flying,, Safer landings!!