Farnborough Radar Vectoring Area

[CAT3C AUTOLAND]

I should probably know the answer to this, but will ask anyway.

I have noticed from the Farnborough plates that the radar vectoring area for the approach to intercept the LOC for R/W 24 creeps into the London CTR. When receiving a service from Farnborough, am I correct in thinking that you do not need a clearance to infridge the London CTR when given an intercept heading from Farnborough as they are communicating with Heathrow Special?

Would be interested to know, thanks.

[AlanM]

If you are working Farnborough and they put you on a base leg or establishing heading for 24 then you can rightly believe that you do not need a clearance form Heathrow.

That said, Farnborough shouldn't ordinarily put you in the LCTR.... and if they do by mistake they should co-ordinate.

[Talkdownman]

If Approach and LARS are 'bandboxed', as often seems to be the case, an interruption of vectoring by itinerant traffic can often result in a London CTR incursion. Often enough, in my view, to warrant delegation of airspace, eg WOD-OCK.

[chevvron]

Either OCK - WOD delegated to Farnborough remaining as class A airspace; ILS traffic will be IFR anyway; or reduce the size of the Heathrow CTR - it's only its present size as it was designed when there was a runway 05/23 useable at Heathrow; as this is no longer the case, there's no reason to keep it its present width and it could be re-configured in a similar fashion to the Gatwick and City CTR/CTA layout.
By the way, they're not RVA charts any more; the name was changed to Radar Minimum Altitude Charts about two years ago; now they're called ATC Surveillance Minimum Altitude Charts, but not all have had their name changed in the AIP

[anotherthing]

Chevvron

The Heathrow RMA is pretty much at the size it needs to be, it can't take much reduction, especially if you are talking about the Farnborough area when LL is on Easterlies

[AlanM]

To be fair, Chevvers did say the CTR!

And I also want to see the area south of the WOD-OCK track given to Class G. It serves little purpose really for Heathrow.

[Spitoon]

I have noticed from the Farnborough plates that the radar vectoring area for the approach to intercept the LOC for R/W 24 creeps into the London CTR. When receiving a service from Farnborough, am I correct in thinking that you do not need a clearance to infridge the London CTR when given an intercept heading from Farnborough as they are communicating with Heathrow Special?
The ATC Surveillance Minimum Altitude Charts are, as the name implies, all about safe levels at which aircraft can be vectored - for the benefit of both pilot and controller. Technically, they have nothing to do with whether the aircraft has been cleared to fly in any particular bit of airspace in the vicinity. Again, technically, it's the commander's responsibility to ensure that he/she has the appropriate clearance to fly in any piece of controlled airspace. Speaking for the UK - and I think I'm safe in making such a statement! - the controller vectoring the aircraft will co-ordinate the flight if it goes into anyone else's airspace. I'm not sure that it's written down explicitly - at least, I can't think where it's written down off the top of my head - but it's just the way it's done.

[CAT3C AUTOLAND]

Thanks guys.

I should have been clearer, with respect flying out of an airway. I was referring to aircraft that request radar vectored ILS's for training that are flying in un-controlled airspace.

Cheers.