Where best to practice ILS approaches - south UK?

[Avioactive]

Where can one go these days for low cost ILS approach practice in southern UK? Couple of runs in a Warrior + landing fee + coffee and bacon roll. I assume the likes of Biggin, Bournemouth, Cranfield, Cambridge, Coventry, Oxford etc. but not Farnborough say due to costs?

[Duchess_Driver]

Depends on where you're flying from.....

You can add Southend to your list of helpful instrument fields. If you're in Kent or SE England then there are some equally helpful ones on the other side of 'Le Manche'

Other option...if you can arrange it you could shoot an ILS at one of the military fields then pop in somewhere else for tea and stickies.

And you'd be suprised at some of the costs.

[BackPacker]

In the Netherlands, it seems to be the case that if you don't descend below 500 feet, you have technically not "landed" nor "gone around" so no landing fee due.

Even in a military CTR, you can descend on their ILS to 500 feet and then fly on without having to have PPR. Have to ask nicely though.

[Fuji Abound]

Lydd maybe one of the cheapest, and more interesting, albiet the FIAP is akin to a cross country. I think they will do you a package.

Calais is a bargain and it is only a few miles further.

Another alternative you have not mentioned is Manston which is fine although there is only a chocy machine at TG but you could walk around to the Spit museum for a short break. They use to do a good lunch there, but it is a few years since I have been to the museum.

[Cusco]

Southend's good and helpful though not cheap.

Cambridge is also pricey and IIRC you can't book an approach till 4pm the day before: you'll be competing with the CPL/IR training from Cranfield and others.

Don't forget Norwich tho' they're the priciest of the lot (or they were last time I went in last October.)

Cranfield : forget it.

You can keep costs down at all three by not landing and phoning in your credit card details when you get home.

It's the landing fee (+ or - fuel/ 'handling' -I've been picked up in a 36 seater bus before now at Norwich, with charges to match) that seriously hikes the cost.

Cusco

[cessnapete]

Calais or Cherbourg. Don't bother with UK, a rip off. Both French fields usually quiet and low charges. Good wine shop and food Cherbourg.

[whowhenwhy]

You could ask someone else near to Farnborough, you might get a good response...........:ok: Cheap too if you have the right paperwork;);)

[Mikehotel152]

What, Heathrow? :eek:

:E

[julian_storey]

These people Virtual Flight Centre (http://www.virtualflight.co.uk) have a pretty cool Cessna 152 simulator actually built into a Cessna 152.

You can do as many ILS approaches (and other approaches) as you like to almost any airport in the world with an ILS!

You can't log the time, but it's cheap and there are no approach or landing fees!

[Avioactive]

That's all helpful - but what are the numbers? Anyone got some comparative costs? I'm anticipating average costs for landing + ILS approach at around say £40 at a non-commercial airport and perhaps £60 at a commercial airport - does that sound about right?

[Fuji Abound]

You might well get 3 or 4 approaches at Calais for 16E - give them a call for cheap as chips approaches and top AT. Generally it would be worth your while calling around and asking if they do any packages. You could come back and let us know the results of your mini survey! :)

[mad_jock]

Personally I wouldn't bother practising ILS's

Go and do 3-4 NDB approaches then a final ILS and you will be pleasantly surprised that the ILS is such a complete none issue that you can't be bothered doing another one.

NDB/VOR approaches stretch your capacity in a good way. The physical polling the aircraft suffers usually from lack of capacity. Increases your capacity and magically your handling improves.

[Sciolistes]

I think Bournemouth is a great place for practice approaches because it is reasonably busy whilst still being amenable to practice approaches. I think you'll get solid practice at maintaining situational awareness, especially when vectored hither and thither. I agree with Mad Jock, practice is experience and experience is capacity. My experience also suggests that at a busy field you'll be vectored in tight more often than not and, even for an ILS, the workload can ramp up considerably and so the more experience in a busier environment the better.

[wsmempson]

Actually, Farnborough aren't very expensive and, if you also accept an SRA (which you'll get for free, as each controller needs to do a statutory number each year) your request will be looked on favourably!

Don't try to land there as they don't accept SEP, but go into White Waltham instead.:)

[Fuji Abound]

Personally I wouldn't bother practising ILS's

Go and do 3-4 NDB approaches then a final ILS and you will be pleasantly surprised that the ILS is such a complete none issue that you can't be bothered doing another one.

NDB/VOR approaches stretch your capacity in a good way. The physical polling the aircraft suffers usually from lack of capacity. Increases your capacity and magically your handling improves.

There spoke a true traditionalist.

However the tolerance on these is generous. Even badly flown adjusting the visual approach at 700 feet isnt too much of an issue.

When you really need it (or really get caught out) flying an ILS to 300 feet might be a life saver, but there is no margin for error. They might be easier to fly but if you need to operate to minima make damn sure you get it right and for that reason practising doing so to minima is very worthwhile.

[holyflyer]

Check with your local RAF airfield. When I was in need of a bit of practice with an instructor I rang the local airbase. They were delighted - they had two new trainee ATC officers and they would use it as a training exercise. Picked up at the edge of the zone with vectors for the ILS down to a touch & go, vectors back to the NDB for a twice round the hold then into the procedure, down to a touch & go, then vectors round for a Precision Approach talk down with a full stop. Could not have been more helpful and they were integrating me into their regular heavy traffic at the same time. No charge was made, and I just sent a nice thank you to the base.

[LateFinals]

I'd echo that the southend controllers are very helpful.

Don't forget Guernsey, who are also very helpful, and will also fit in NDB's approaches at Alderney if you wish.

Ellis

[Gertrude the Wombat]

Cambridge is also pricey and IIRC you can't book an approach till 4pm the day before: you'll be competing with the CPL/IR training from Cranfield and others.
Not tried during the week, but no problem with booking approaches at the weekend and never had a delay.

[Cusco]

Sciolistes wroteI think Bournemouth is a great place for practice approaches because it is reasonably busy whilst still being amenable to practice approaches.

Just be aware that a lot of WIP on ILS at Bournemouth and ILS currently NOTAMd withdrawn till end of Feb for CAT111 installation.

Cusco

[airborne_artist]

In which case try the RW bases, as they get little/no FW traffic - Benson and Odiham, perhaps? You might also try Yeovilton?

[007helicopter]

Southend a few weeks ago was appx £18 + vat per approach, plus an ILS appraoch and then to land was I think around £20, sorry I dont have the exact invoice to hand.

The French fields sound the best bet if you want to combine a lunch etc.

[mad_jock]

Your probably right Fuji.

As I get way to much practise at ILS's to minima (200') 5 in the last week with RVR's at 550-700m.

still reckon that a NDB/VOR approach has that additional workload which stretches your capacity. Well it stretches mine anyway. And just because the "tolerances" give you +-5 doesn't mean you have to accept it. It just like altitude if you think +- 100ft is OK you will always be crap. If you aim to be the width of the number you will be more than likely be +-50ft as a maximum. Same with an ILS more than quarter scale deflection gets the personal bollocking button pressed if I go outside it.

And if you are practising these approaches for life savers forget all this CAA bollocks about adding stuff on for IMC ratings, it ain't a legal requirement. Fly it down to the plate minimums, if the poo does hit the fan what you going to do waltz around the SE of England wasting fuel just to find a field that has the recommended minima for an IMC? Sod that.

Edited to add it might be worth phoning Newquey. They proberly have quite a bit of spare capacity, no doudt a heap of controllers to train. It could be a win win situation for both parties at the right time of day.

[Reluctant737]

Huh, you have to pay extra for an ILS approach GA?? I remember about five years ago I shot an ILS at Cambridge RWY 23 (called about 45 minutes ahead), went around from 50 feet and flew happily off, and that was that...? Since then the only ILSs I've ever done have been during flight training and in the good old 737!

In my books having to pay for an ILS anywhere is a rip off! What's next, having to pay to use VOR/RNAV/DME, NDBs, VDF, TACAN etc?

Cheers, Ad

[IO540]

In my books having to pay for an ILS anywhere is a rip off! What's next, having to pay to use VOR/RNAV/DME, NDBs, VDF, TACAN etc?

That's the case already. One gets charged for instrument approaches in many places, regardless of type.

[Barnaby the Bear]

In my books having to pay for an ILS anywhere is a rip off! What's next, having to pay to use VOR/RNAV/DME, NDBs, VDF, TACAN etc?


So the airports are not there to make money, and the upkeep of equipment and salaries of the ATCO's and engineers etc. is based on charitable donations?
Get into the real world. :ugh:

[Fuji Abound]

B the B

I think there maybe a slightly more subtle point.

In the UK nearly everywhere charges more for an IA than a visual approach. In France, for example, this is hardly ever the case. There is an obvious temptation to fly the IA for currency purposes but not declare, which is daft.

Does it cost the airport more when a pilot elects the IA, or do they charge because they can? Clealry the cost of an IA has to be met by someone, but should it be factored into the overall charges paid by all users or should only those using it pay? Are pilots tempted to elect a visual approach if they know they are going to pay a lot more for an IA?

[mad_jock]

Small technical point a visual approach is an instrument approach. If you go around off a visual approach they will expect you to comply with the published miss approach procedure. I think you mean VFR recovery.

The worst con is the NATS fields who charge a Navigation fee as well as all the rest if you land there. Aberdeen is an example. You can transit the zone and not pay a penny but as soon as you land there you get hit with a 35quid charge for just talking to them.

[Fuji Abound]

Small technical point a visual approach is an instrument approach.

You are of course correct. I was (badly) attempting to distinguish between an approach and a recovery which in GA terms perhaps is understood as an "arrival" - I am not sure how many GA pilots when they arrive in VFR think of themselves as "recovering" to the field?

On which point after becoming visual might you not request a visual circuit and if you were never in IMC on the IAP inform AT that it will be an IAP followed by a visual circuit. If they agree, you are home and dry.

[effortless]

What happened to the ILS proposal at Shoreham?

[Fuji Abound]

What happened to the ILS proposal at Shoreham?


Erinaceous calls in administrators - Investors Chronicle (http://www.investorschronicle.co.uk/Companies/ByEvent/Regulatory/Inbrief/article/20080414/657115fe-0a27-11dd-bf62-0015171400aa/Erinaceous-calls-in-administrators.jsp)

:}

[mad_jock]

No problem the visual approach technicality's can provided a hole heap of debate.

Last good one was. You are told that the runway in use is 24 and you are cleared for the procedure straight out bound for the ILS. With ten miles to go you pop out of the cloud and are in a position to accept the 06 end for a cheeky visual request it and it is approved. If the birdy blows a tyre clearing the runway which missed approach procedure do you use?

Anyway I have heard that newquay would be partial to a bit of training. The landing fee is 8 quid a ton and there is a hangerage available. Multiple approaches deals can be made involving crates of diet coke and biscuits for the tower.

PS I can manage an arrival off both instruement and VFR approaches ;)

[Gertrude the Wombat]

Clealry the cost of an IA has to be met by someone, but should it be factored into the overall charges paid by all users or should only those using it pay?
Good question. Suppose an aifield acquires, or upgrades, its instrument approaches, and puts up VFR charges to pay for it. What are the VFR pilots going to reckon to that then?

[whowhenwhy]

Oh well, holy flyer and airborne artist knew what I meant.Heathrow indeed

[IO540]

Re the "Shoreham ILS", I have no inside knowledge but AIUI the management had grandiose plans for expansion. A business proposal was prepared by an aviation consultant ( I read something about it at the time) under which planes like BA146s were going to be going in there.

Somebody forgot that you can get a flight from Gatwick, just up the road, for much less than it costs to park the car anywhere near Gatwick for a few days...

TBF there was a window of opportunity for Shoreham to "go commercial", about 20 to 25 years ago, but that was about it.

The only way Shoreham can go now is to abandon all silly grandiose plans and become a "centre of excellence for GA" which would perhaps see a runway turn from the present 20/02 (which limits the runway length absolutely) to something like 25/07 which could then be ~ 200m longer, have an ILS, and enable it to handle some low volume but highly lucrative bizjet traffic.

I suspect the ILS idea will be moot anyway once the GPS approach approvals become more commonplace in the user fleet. Currently, they won't even fix the DME.

I think Shoreham charges for approaches but not the first one i.e. the one you land from.

[rata2e]

MJ

You're flying manually, visually? Suggest a visual circuit to start with the best bet, other traffic would dictate to which end! SMA is safe option, but staying VMC appeals more. Also, come 12th March, won't all these standards be based upon service requested (at least outside CAS) rather than flight rules?

No more "cancel IFR" to jump the queue, "request basic service" might become the norm. Also maybe VFR flights to avoid route charges, but request procedural/deconfliction service?

[mad_jock]

Well actually the missed approach will be the same as for a circling approach. So you have to do the missed approach for the cleared instrument approach. ie GA followed by a turn onto the original missed approach. But in real life I think a request for a visual circuit to the other end would be the common sense choice. And yes it will be manually as was the rest of the flight, very few autopilots where fitted as an option on my type.

Your "contract" with the controller under IFR rules generally means you have to do what they ask you if you like it or not. And if you refuse you better know your Air law inside out. Even if you are FIS in class G IFR the simple fact you have elected to talk to them in the first place means you have agreed to conform to there wishes. eg "XXXX will accept you FL100". If you didn't any sort of air traffic service outside controlled airspace would not be possible. So if you are talking to an approach service it doesn't matter what service you ask for you still have to do as your told.

Also the separation rules are not getting changed only the services from ATS. VFR will still be VFR and everything that entails with separations depending on the airspace.

Apart from the name changes it will have very little effect on pilots in my opinion. It will have a huge effect on controllers forcing them in quite a few places to give a service when they really don't want to or have the capacity to. I suspect it will get revamped quite quickly when they find out that it will overload a significant number of sectors. I should imagine the first morning using it the tay sector will produce a small mountain of MOR forms.

Above 5700kg you get enroute charges even if you are VFR planned so there will be no advantage. Above 5700kg you legally have to file a flight plan and they charge you off that.

So "cancel IFR" will still have a place in the toolbox. It is of limited use in a radar environment but still holds significant advantages to both controllers and pilots in a procedural environment. Get a bunch of pilots who know the procedural rules and the right RT calls, and have the SOP's to take advantage of them. An old school procedural controller on a good wx day can shift way more traffic than a radar controller up to a certain traffic level.

[rata2e]

MJ

You might like to flick thru the new ATSOCAS again. 2 aircraft on a procedural service, regardless of flight rules, will be deconflicted (similar to current seperated). If you cancel IFR, you will still be deconflicted, the minima are service based, not flight rules. Equally, if IFR but get visual, you could change to a Basic Service, no longer receive deconfliction and aim for the field, similar to cancelling IFR at the moment. What your flight rules are will have no bearing upon the service given, it's the service you request that decides it.

[mad_jock]

H'mm I think a phone call to a tame ATCO is in order.

Thankfully I won't be anywhere near that sort of airspace until its all been sorted out.

[moona]

Sorry slightly off topic but i'm also interested in where to practise ILS approaches in SE UK. I passed my IMc rating a couple of months ago, all approaches at southend = £££'s ouch. So would really like to try approaches at different Ad's for a bit of variety and to stay current.

Was particularly interested int the quote: "You might well get 3 or 4 approaches at Calais for 16E ".

I know the imc rating is only valid for the Uk but is it feasable to use Calais for ILS practice under the hood in vmc with a safety pilot onboard. Would the Safety pilot then require an IR?

Ps. sorry for the thread drift.

[Fuji Abound]

Moona

You need an IR to operate IFR in France - you knew that anyway.

So far as I am aware the fact you are flying an approach says nothing about whether or not you are IFR or VFR, it is just a way of defining the route you will take and what you will do if you, or AT initiate a go around.

You are therefore quite entitled to fly the approach as long as you remain in VMC and declare VFR. In fact I am not sure whether or not you need to declare VFR but it would be as well to do so given that AT might get excited if you had to break off the approach because there was cloud in the way. Of course AT might not accept you VFR but I doubt that is very likely at Calais.

You cannot operate behind screens without a safety pilot. There has been some debate on here before about what constitutes a safety pilot - worth following the search option. There has also been some debate about the issues in my post before - once again for further reading try the search option.

[Avioactive]

Since starting this post, I have found numbers in the region of £12 - £35 for a light single for an ILS approach (excluding landing fees). Oxford's just reduced their approach fee from £25 to £15 if you are just popping in, but it's still £25 if you are training. Cambridge don't charge if its you first approach but will charge for the second. Coventy charge 50% of the landing fee for the ILS approach.

[whowhenwhy]

I'm still cheaper and still haven't had anyone take me up on the offer:ok: So to speak

[007helicopter]

I'm still cheaper and still haven't had anyone take me up on the offerhttp://static.pprune.org/images/smilies/thumbs.gif So to speak


www - what is the offer ???:confused:

[Scott Diamond]

I'm into believing that www is from Northolt, could be wrong... :E

[whowhenwhy]

I shudder at the thought:E