hugh flung_dung
8th Jul 2008, 22:10
http://www.qinetiq.com/home_salisbury_uav.Par.6492.File.pdf
I admit to not having had time to read much of this yet but it looks like bad news. I can feel the start of a letter to my MP coming on.
HFD
BossEyed
8th Jul 2008, 22:41
A link to the Consultation has appeared here before (http://www.pprune.org/forums/private-flying/331006-mod-unmanned-aircraft-airspace-change.html), (twice, in fact (http://www.pprune.org/forums/private-flying/331657-expansion-salisbury-plain-danger-area.html)) but with little reaction.
The extensions:
- Are activated by NOTAM
- Have a base at FL80 (and top out at either FL120 or max FL160)
- Are split into three (Roughly a Western, Eastern and Central portion), each of which can be individually activated.
- It is intended that only 2 of the 3 areas will be activated at a time.
- It is intended that a Danger Area Crossing Service will be offered. ("if approved by the Director of Airspace Policy"). Looks like Boscombe will control this.
It's also worth noting that the South-Easternmost of the existing group of Danger Areas, D126, can be activated by NOTAM under this proposal up to 9,000ft rather than the current 2,500ft.
It seems to me, in light of the above, that for most VFR GA there is likely to be limited impact because of the FL80 base.
It's not clear to me from the document how the new airspace ("Segregated Airspace" rather than "Danger Areas", as the Consultation has it) will be depicted on charts.