Swiss ATC survey

[Dozza2k]

got given a survey by skyguide in the turnaround in geneva the other day, filled it all out. In the comments bit, i put when climbing or transiting through swiss airpspace there are so many freq changes. Most notably when climbing out of Milan/Turin and going north over the alps.

Does anyone know why there is such a huge load of freq changes?
Both my self and the skipper agreed, and i am just curious.
d2k.

[Lon More]

I think you just about answered your own question.
Some of the busiest airspace in Europe; the sectors are layered on top of each other; you are climbing or descending and just going through a lot of them.

[Spitoon]

Similar thread not long ago - here (http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread.php?t=261582) - gives a bit more info.

[HB-UAE]

lon more said it exactly right. atc sectors are not only divided up "geographically" but also into different layers. therefore flying over the same exact geographical position but at a higher altitude can have you being on a different frequency. if you therefore climb through swiss airspace from e.g. italy, you will automatically be transfered from sector to sector.

however I find you are absolutely right, it is something that should be addressed and could possibly be solved in a better way. :D how,... i'm not quite sure myself, but then again, i'm luckily not the one that needs to be concerned about that ;)

regards

hb-uae

[Lon More]

The problem is capacity, you can divide the airspace vertically or horizontally, so you end up with a larger area but vertically thin, or a larger vertical section, but smaller in geographical area.
Both have advantages and disadvantages, but the vertical split is normally seen as a better choice - enough area to manoeuvre in - a third option is the "tunnels through the skies", known in UK as CCF ( Combined Control Function?), I believe, with a number of controllers sharing the same airspace but specific routing and level agreements made. OK until something out of the ordinary appears, like weather. It was displayed at Farnborough some 20 years ago, prompting a comment from an American colleague that CCF also stood for Colossal Cluster F***

[Spitoon]

But hang on, didn't the UK import the CCF concept from the US after they had tried to make it work.......

[chevvron]

Ahh the Beeker Plan. Whatever happened to Dave and Alan?

[Lon More]

Apart from the wish, "May your gods go with you" what relevance does Dave Alan have? :suspect:

[chevvron]

You must surely realise I'm referring to the two ATCOs who formulated the tunnels in the sky concept, not Dave ALLEN.
The Dave part was here briefly in the '80s; last seen at 1 Kemble Street.

[Guy D'ageradar]

Back to the subject at hand.....

I work on the lower sectors in Geneva but most of you outbound of Milan/Turin etc. who transit through my airspace don't even speak to me - Climb from Milan is usually to FL240 (upper limit of lower sectors) with transfer direct to sector above who comtinues climb - thus avoiding a freq. change.

Between our sectors, a lot of co-ordination is done electronically to avoid unnecessary changes - if you do end up changing every 4000ft or so, it is because all the sectors involved are busy and can't provide levels to their neighbours - just look at an airways chart to see the number of crossing tracks, most of which are extensively used by traffic arriving/departing Geneva/Milan/Turin/Lyon/Nice TMAs and thus in climb/descent. Then throw in a few thunderstorms / military activity / etc. If we can avoid a freq change we do, but it's often unavoidable.

See you tomorrow morning! :ok: