Jersey and G.A traffic or not.

[GBALU53]

Jersey making things difficult for General Aviation??:eek:.
Jersey could be going down the road of most NATS run airfields??
Not wanting light aircraft????
With a number of the management team on contract from you know where, with the new air traffic centre coming in to operation shortly by start of 2010 and no requirement for any assistants in this new building there is talk that Jersey will be PPR for all GENERAL AVIATION from any where:ugh:.
From what I picked up if no PPR requested you will not be accepted and will be turned away??? very unprofessional from a controllers point of view??
In these time is this the best way to go about things.
Light aircraft although they do not pay a big landing fee at the moment comapred to othe rairfields if people are staying a day or two they are putting money in to a number of areas around the Island. Like hiring a car,Hotel accomadation overnight, eating out at resteraunts to name a few.
The only way to go to Jersey is by air or sea so why try and put likght aircraft off from going to Jersey and could this effect the other Islands in the Channel Islands??

[NudgingSteel]

I've got to stop you right there. NATS is only an Air Traffic Service Provider. It's contracted in by the airport owner / operator to provide Air Traffic Services and that is what it does. What it does NOT do is decide who comes in and lands at any airport. Many airports these days do indeed seem to be quite anti-GA, whether it's pricing out flying clubs, charging excessive landing or handling fees, declaring 'curfew' hours to GA, or refusing to provide free landing fees for weather diversions.
[U]None of that is to do with the air traffic controllers![U]
Ultimately, if an airport says 'no light aircraft allowed' or 'you can only come in with PPR', well it's their airport and they can choose what to do. Please blame the correct people for that decision. Even if it were to be the case, having worked at several airports in my career I can tell you that I have never been involved in turning light a/c away or worrying about whatever handling fees they're going to get charged. All I do is ensure they can get in safely, separated from other traffic and delayed as little as possible. I don't really care how much you get ripped off by the airport company, and nor should I - that's between you and them.

The above applies to non-NATS units too, by the way.

[scooter boy]

GBALU53,
A GA flight to Jersey from the mainland needs a flight plan and SB clearance anyway so the PPR issue is completely irrelevant since filing a flightplan is tantamount to PPR.

Within the UK airspace Jersey and Guernsey remain undoubtedly the best value destinations for a PPL holder to visit in terms of "big airport" feel and services, cheap fuel (£1.01 no vat /L with AOPA discount earlier today) and long opening hours.

Nice people there too, no BS, very helpful and very professional on both islands.

My landing fee was £12.36 including tax (for a 1.5mt aircraft).
Show me another airfield in the UK with the same value?

I think you would be hard pressed to get that price from the average 800m of rutted grass we mistakenly describe as an airfield in this country. Even if you did you would be paying about £1.55/L for fuel and dodging parachutists, gliders, gyroplanes and microlights and other beardies who are allergic to transponders, hate TCAS and so embarrased by their awful RT they are terrified of using their scratchy radios.

Jersey gets my vote, rant over,

SB

[sandbagsteve]

'kinell! I sometimes grow a beard and fly a microlight - but I hope my RT ain't that bad!

[mad_jock]

Err isn't the new tower construction due some time soon.

Maybe and this is just a gut feeling.

The amount/access to parking might be reduced due to construction materials/equipment.

The real reason for PPR my ATCO friends inform me is so they have a strip already loaded up for when you arrive so they don't have to scribble like a swine. I also presume the new tower will more than likely be electronic strips which are an even bigger pain in the ring to create a strip while doing all the other good stuff keeping aircraft apart.

I would disagree that filing a flightplan is PPR. PPR is between you and the airfield operator nothing to do with euro control. They would be quite within thier rights to refuse you, flight plan filed, SB informed, immigration informed the works.

[welkyboy]

SB,
Unfortunately a flight plan is not tantamount to PPR, a phone call is required to enable the pilot to be breifed on the latest information and routings to be expected, as a number of visiting PPL's (UK especially) appear completely ignorant of the rules and regulations of flying into class A airspace.
What the Jersey authotities are trying to resolve is the mass arrival of light aircraft at the same time as commercial aircraft, the plan mooted is to apply some sort of slot time arrangement to give the ATCO's some breathing space. This has been suggested by the Ops staff at Jersey and not the ATCO's, I cannot see this working as it would involve inbounds to Alderney and Guernsey as well and the Guernsey authorities will not agree to Jersey controlling the rate of their traffic!!
Also a number of pilots assume wrongly that the Channel Islands are part of the EU and the customs regulations don't apply, unfortunately they do and you cannot fly to and from anywhere in the EU without clearing customs/immigratation and in the case of the UK Special Branch as well.

[welkyboy]

The new control tower is already constructed (it dominates the skyline for miles around!) and there is no problem with parking areas, it is mostly constructed off the apron area.

[Le Tirer]

NudgingSteel wrote
...having worked at several airports in my career I can tell you that I have never been involved in turning light a/c away or worrying about whatever handling fees they're going to get charged.

But it definitely does happen at some airports. ATC at Southampton have to get involved when an inbound GA has no PPR. This is normally a simple case of getting them to call the handling agents but it all takes time explaining that PPR is required and giving the handling frequency etc. Sometimes the agents allow them in on certain conditions (e.g ok if only staying a short time) but at other times they turn them away if for example there is no parking space. Once refused, ATC then get involved again either by finding out if Bournemouth will accept them (also PPR) or by suggesting other alternatives. As NudgingSteel says it is not an ATC decision and although they always strive to be as helpful as possible I'm sure they could do without this extra workload at busy times.

[DLT1939]

A little pedantic perhaps, but Jersey, Guernsey and Alderney are not in the UK. Nor even in UK airspace - they are in the Brest FIR.

[NudgingSteel]

A friend of mine who flies was recently involved in a protracted R/T discussion whilst attempting to divert to a big(gish) airport, lots of to-and-fro regarding PPR, contacting the handling agents etc. Now call me old fashioned but I have a real bug up my a55 about this, pardon the language. There aren't many airports where there isn't any room at all to leave a light a/c for a few hours, even if it's on a remote cargo apron. The safe place for a discussion about handling fees and arrangements is whilst safely on the ground, either before or after the flight, and not whilst simultaneously flying the a/c, looking out for other traffic, monitoring fuel and weather etc. Especially when there's a single pilot who then has to leave the ATC frequency to speak to handlers whilst holding near a potentially busy airport. Even when it's busy, there's usually enough time for an ATCO or ATSA to make a quick call to a handling company to advise them of an inbound; at least they can pass a message on if there's absolutely no way of getting in.
I try to remind my students that the big difference between VFR G/A and the airlines, is that the pilot of one is paying over £100/hour out of his own pocket, and the other is being paid to be there!

[chrisbl]

A GA flight to Jersey from the mainland needs a flight plan and SB clearance anyway so the PPR issue is completely irrelevant since filing a flightplan is tantamount to PPR.



I do despair when I read tosh like this. Filing a flight plan is an Air Traffic requirement not an airport operator requirement.

Someone is in need of remedial training if not an attitude readjustment.

[IO540]

The other thing to remember is that the airport may not get the flight plan till very late on the day.

Homebriefing.com transmits a VFR flight plan to the destination only some hours before EOBT, so if you "send" the FP 2 days ahead hoping it will act as "PPR" they will not get it. (Actually, they deal with VFR flight plans merely by transmitting them to the departure ARO ;) ).

AFPEx does the same flight plan retention, apparently, transmitting it only on the day of the flight.

When IFPS itself transmits IFR flight plans to the destination I don't know but I think it is similarly only a short time before EOBT. Anyway, they cannot pass it on before they themselves receive it from the filing agency.

There are a few airports who say openly that a flight plan acts as "PPR" but it is only a few. I recall Prague saying that. But that isn't really "PPR" because the flight plan is not acknowledged as "OK" by the destination. It is more like "PNR". I think quite a few "PNR" airports in France work this way.

There is no technical reason why an airport with say "4 hrs PNR for Customs" could not advise Customs when they get the FP say 6hrs beforehand, but most of them absolutely will not do that - and I very strongly suspect this is deliberate anal retention / job demarcation / union rules / empire building / all the usual nice stuff that goes on in "old economy" or State-owned enterprises :)

And some airports will turn you away - even from short final. I've been turned away in Italy (Padova).

Filing a flight plan is an Air Traffic requirement not an airport operator requirement.That's true but there is no denying that the FP ends up in the Tower for all to see ;) If the ATCO up there chooses to not advise the ops office downstairs (in PNR cases) that is just anally retarded job demarcation.

Actually the OPS office usually has a printer or a display showing the flight plans, so they would have to deliberately ignore the appearance of a flight plan, knowing the pilot did not file PNR/PPR. Would they do this so they can give him a bollocking or even enable ATC to refuse a landing clearance? No, of course not ;) ;) Nobody would do that would they?

It is trivial to set things up so an airport has integrated communications. A flight plan is filed (or a free text AFTN message is transmitted, using AFPEx) and everybody there gets a heads-up. Customs get advised and turn up if the incoming is non-EU etc. But few airports bother to do this.

[Jodelman]

AFPEx does the same flight plan retention, apparently, transmitting it only on the day of the flight.

AFPEx transmits the flight plan to the destination addresses immediately it's filed. It does not hold it until the day of flight. The software isn't that clever.

[mad_jock]

Nudgingsteel.

If they were on a divert anyway and as I presume there were no other options otherwise they would of taken them.

In my book thats worthy of a Pan call then if they tell you to contact handlers its "Pan G-xxxx negative due pilot workload" If you still don't get any joy upgrade to a Mayday and sort it out on the ground.

I suspect you would be doing the controller a favour, as soon as you declare they can tell the airport authorties to butt out and let them do their job.

[IO540]

AFPEx transmits the flight plan to the destination addresses immediately it's filed. It does not hold it until the day of flight. The software isn't that clever.

I was told by my local airport that they don't receive AFPEx filed flight plans until the day specified on the DOF/ parameter.

But now that you mention it, I will ask AFPEx to check this out.

Homebriefing.com have told me they delay VFR FPs as I described - this is not a bad thing as it avoids the most common source of lost VFR flight plans: the DOF/ parameter is not implemented anywhere other than a manual system by the receiving ATC (a nail in the wall, etc).

[Jodelman]

I am currently looking at the AFPEx terminal for a departure airfield where a flight plan has been filed at 10:15am on the 26th where the date of flight is shown in Item 18 as 090927. I think your local airport is confused.

[IO540]

Thank you for the confirmation.

Come to think of it - you must be right and I should have realised this. AFPEx is just an AFTN terminal. The flight plan is just another AFTN message. When you press SEND it gets sent to all addressees immediately.

No idea why I didn't spot this.

Homebriefing.com is different; their website is an interface into a hybrid human/database setup.

[Donalk]

Jersey gets my vote, rant over,


Agreed - have just returned from Jersey yesterday after an excellent extended weekend and found the folks at the aeroclub to be some of the nicest most efficient people I have ever encountered. It would be a shame if GA were curtailed, however the aeroclub seems to be a well established operation and I cant see them rolling over easily.

Incidentally, landing fees, 4 days parking and 40 litres of jet A1 came to a total of 48 pounds. For lots of good advice, booking hotels on my behalf, calling taxis and pleasant conversation - no charge.

[GBALU53]

A friend on the rock heard an interview on the radio this week from one of the management team, stating Jersey must encourage light aircraft.:ok:
If they stay over night they spend a lot of money on the island which is more than the yuppies that moore there gin palaces down in the mariners??
Could the problem on the rock be a number of things.
The ATCC Centre being run by contracted NATS the Ops department having a leader who is contracted as well and I understand NATS and light aircraft do not go well together.:ugh:
Should these two management departments speak to the commercial department and some of the down town departments and sing on the same hymn sheet.:ugh:
Commercial traffic to the Islands are well down compared to 20 years ago so light aircraft can help fill some of the gap at least the crews of the light aircraft will spend money not loke the blue rinse pregrade. :bored:
The Jersey management needs to work together not against each other.:ok:

[BEXIL160]

The ATCC Centre being run by contracted NATS Since when? :ugh:

As far as I know, the States run the Area function of Jersey ATC themselves (as well as all the rest of the ATC at Jersey).

Nothing to do with NATS then (.... wouldn't mind a few years on the island myself though :)...)

I understand NATS and light aircraft do not go well together. Don't agree, and I'd be interested on what you base this. As has already been stated NATS is just another ANSP, contracted to various airfield owners and the UK government.

Light aircraft (infringers) and BIG aeroplanes don't go particularly well together, and this is a problem for NATS, GA and the travelling great unwashed.

BEX

[GBALU53]

Two members of NATS are on contract to the States Of Jersey
They were brought in to get the Jersey Zone certified to be an ANSP.
The new air traffic control centre is being kitted out by NATS so there is a big presences by NATS at the moment on the Island.
How many NATS run airfields have an operation like the Channel Islands, up to 70 or 80 inter island movements per week day, not many have an aero club as well as a large light aircraft presence of about 50 plus aircraft.
How many NATS run airfields have at least 25 percent of there daily traffic being light aircraft?

[BEXIL160]

Two members of NATS are on contract to the States Of Jersey

Wonder who they are then? Certainly not running the place ATC wise.

They were brought in to get the Jersey Zone certified to be an ANSP. Certified by who? Don't know anyone who would certify "Jersey Zone" as that's either a piece of airspace or a callsign.

And why would Jersey ATC need any further "certification" anyway? All the ATCOs will have valid licences, but they always have had. Can't see the States bidding for ANSP contracts anywhere else

I didn't know that NATS were doing all the engineering stuff, but again that doesn't mean they're running the place either. (NATS did quite a lot at Ronaldsway but aren't running that)

According to the Jersey Airport Web site
integrated air traffic management system will help meet the demands for increased airspace capacity at Jersey Airport and Northrop Grumman Park Air Systems has been awarded the contract to supply, deliver and install its NOVA 9000 Radar processing and Flight Planning System into the new tower.
The company will also supply a full integrated electronic flight strip system, which will be the primary operational air traffic control tool for approach and tower control. It is planned that each air traffic control work station will be equipped with NOVA 9000 radar and electronic flight plan displays

No mention of NATS.


NATS isn't running Jersey Airport. (but I'm sure it could;))

BEX