Glasgow Class E

[NorthSouth]

Anyone know what's happened to last year's proposal to change Glasgow's eastern CTA from Class E to Class D? Seems to have gone very quiet since the amended proposal was issued about 18 months ago
NS

[xrayalpha]

Perhaps the main driver of it has moved to another job?

Or that the main reason was the rapid growth (!) in traffic at Glasgow?

Or that wind farm stuff is taking up all the time of many people in aviation in Scotland as a higher priority?

[NorthSouth]

Irrespective of growth/no growth at Glasgow it does seem a bit peculiar that the main approach routes into this airport routinely have IFR traffic descending in IMC when you could quite easily have VFR traffic which might not be showing on radar cruising along entirely legitimately at one foot below the cloudbase, not speaking to anyone. Seems spectacularly senseless to me but hey what do I know I'm only a pilot.
NS

[soaringhigh650]

Seems spectacularly senseless to me but hey what do I know I'm only a pilot.

Class E is used almost 'E'verywhere in the US outside the busy terminal areas.

The greatest advantage is to be able to freely go anywhere without clearance when VMC. When the weather turns bad, use your IR - talk to ATC, get out your IFR sectional, file an airborne flight plan and get separated from everyone else. The guys who don't have an IR will be on the ground by now.

We have separate IFR and VFR cruising levels to address the problem you describe.

The guys flying IFR are always talking to ATC, so they will be asked to turn if there is a conflict with VFR stuff. The guys flying VFR are encouraged to get 'Flight Following' so you become known.

To prevent turning too much under IFR due to unknown traffic, there is also Class A over 18,000ft...

[Captain Smithy]

Seems spectacularly senseless to me but hey what do I know I'm only a pilot.

Come on NorthSouth, you should know better. We pilots are always right at the bottom of the chain with these things!

What happened to the TMZ near Whitelee? I recall it was being trialled a while back but I thought it may have been a more perminant policy. Last time I was through to Prestwick Gleska' Radar didn't seem particularly interested in me. Fair enough though it was a quiet day with not much about.

Smithy

[NorthSouth]

sh650:Class E is used almost 'E'verywhere in the US outside the busy terminal areasIndeed. Which is why I'm surprised that the proposal to turn the Glasgow CTA - just such a "busy terminal area" from Class E to Class D seems to have disappeared into the ether.

It's also worth reminding ourselves what the UK air traffic rules say controllers must do when they see unidentified radar contacts in the vicinity of the IFR traffic they're controlling in Class E airspace:

Pass traffic information unless the controller’s primary function of sequencing and separating IFR flights is likely to be compromised.So if it's really busy and you're controlling a string of arrivals you don't even bother telling the pilot about the unidentified return in your 12 o'clock

If a pilot requests avoiding action it shall be provided to the extent determined by the controller.So even if it looks like there's a conflict, you wait for the pilot to request avoiding action

Give avoiding action if radar derived or other information indicates that an aircraft is lost or has experienced a radio failure.How would you tell that from a primary-only contact which doesn't have to be speaking to anyone?

On top of that I'd wager that if you asked professional pilots inbound to Glasgow what class of airspace they flew through and what the rules were for it, half of them would be amazed to hear it could have unknown non-radio non-transponding VFR traffic in it, flying just below the cloudbase in vis as low as 1500 metres.

NS

[soaringhigh650]

So if it's really busy and you're controlling a string of arrivals you don't even bother telling the pilot about the unidentified return in your 12 o'clock

Yeah, but when you've gotten to that point, the controller must prioritize. This is where IFR<-->IFR separation is the priority.

It is hoped the guy flying VFR would have seen and avoided the other traffic by this point which reduces that risk.

Even VFR Flight Following can be terminated when the controller is too busy handling IFR traffic.

So even if it looks like there's a conflict, you wait for the pilot to request avoiding action

Nah. The finer detail is in the text -it doesn't read 'If and ONLY if' a pilot requests avoiding action. :)

How would you tell that from a primary-only contact which doesn't have to be speaking to anyone?

Just vector the guys you know who are talking to you around the guys who aren't.

On top of that I'd wager that if you asked professional pilots inbound to Glasgow what class of airspace they flew through and what the rules were for it, half of them would be amazed to hear it could have unknown non-radio non-transponding VFR traffic in it, flying just below the cloudbase in vis as low as 1500 metres.

It's ain't uncommon to have non-tradio non-transponding traffic in the same environment, but what is weird is to allow flight just below the cloudbase in vis as low as 1500m.

Class E in the US dictates VFR must always be satisfied if you're not IFR (or SVFR) - therefore there is a rule to maintain 500 feet below, and 1000 feet above cloud. If you can't maintain VFR, just talk to ATC.

So if Glasgow is reclassifying E to D, it sounds like the zone is getting busier.

[dont overfil]

Hi NS
Surely there is no need for IFR traffic to use or fly over the class E corridor unless they choose to cut the corner. After all Glasgows runway is 05/23. The existing class D goes out to at least 10 miles in all directions.
DO.

[NorthSouth]

The standard arrival route for 80% of Glasgow's inbound traffic when using r/w 23 goes from the Lanark area towards the final approach. Most of this is in Class E airspace.
NS

[dont overfil]

Hi NS
I've just had a look at the STARS and it would seem that the route after LANAK is at the controllers discretion. The route that is currently used results in one less heading change and will be slightly more direct than keeping the traffic in class D.
From a totally selfish point of view (sorry xrayalpha) I would have no problem with the corridor being class D or TMZ except that it is sometimes difficult to get a word in. Now if Scottish Info could give a clearance....
DO.

[NorthSouth]

DO:it would seem that the route after LANAK is at the controllers discretionCorrect, and most aircraft are vectored towards final before they get to LANAK. Even if they weren't, they'd be descending into the Class E after LANAK.
NS

[xrayalpha]

Dont Overfill,

No need to apologise.

I am not against the reclassification of some of the Class E - wouldn't dream of flying above 3,000ft in there without speaking to Glasgow.

But at 2,000-2,500ft I often can't speak to Glasgow!

The main concern, I believe, is that the neat solution - just change the letter on the chart - was not the best solution.

After some chat, we did reach some compromises - especially the area over Whitelees, where millions have been spent so ATC can't see anything in that airspace below a certain height (to remove the windfarm clutter).

But there were other sticking points.

[bad bear]

The rumour is that Glasgow is going to introduce Continuous Descent Aproaches and this will result in CAT spending less time in the class "E".

looking at Watch Air Traffic - LIVE! (http://www.flightradar24.com/) and BAA Glasgow: Flight arrivals at Glasgow Airport | Live Glasgow Airport arrivals (http://www.glasgowairport.com/portal/page/Glasgow%5EGeneral%5EFlight+information%5ELive+flight+arrival s//)

it appears that Glasgow is quiet and droping at 10% PA as opposed to the prediction of massive growth at the time of the ACP
bb