NO CDAs at GLA ?

[bad bear]

I note there is another attempted airspace grab at Glasgow but still no CDAs.

Why wont GLA trial CDAs formally ?

I might have missed it in the AIP 10 minutes ago but dont see any ref to CDA.

If Glasgow do the right thing and inpliment CDA, proper CDA (3 degrees) much of the proposed airspace might not be needed, so why no CDA... there must be a reason why Glasgow continue to reject this environmentally friendly and airspace economic profile... can anyone defend the continuing refusal ?

bb

[soaringhigh650]

Is it more Class A airspace?
If not, then what's the problem?

[Eric T Cartman]

@ BB
On this subject, do you know if a response to the LAA letter of 19/3/09, here:
http://www.lightaircraftassociation.co.uk/Consultation/LAA%20Glasgow%20final%20submission.pdf
is available for public consumption ?

[soaringhigh650]

The LAA have completely forgotten, or just couldn't care less, about the light aircraft IFR community, where the presence of controlled airspace is actually beneficial for separation and terrain avoidance. I wonder if they have also forgotten about high density daytime VFR operation, when the risk of collision is even greater.

While they have a good motive for ensuring access to airspace. I consider their report strongly biased to benefit the VFR/daytime-only flying community who want to fly everywhere they want, whenever they want, without making their intentions known to anyone else around them.

The report also incorrectly assumes that controlled airspace is and should be associated with public-transport flights. Therefore I consider it flawed.

On the flip side, I believe controlled airspace should also be sufficiently staffed so that you don't get a huge volume of empty airspace - and right outside the border half a dozen aircraft orbiting and wasting fuel, waiting to enter.

[The Fat Controller]

bad bear, take a look at the interaction between Glasgow arrivals and Edinburgh departures that head west before they turn southwest and then to TRN or DCS.

You will always be at 7000 feet at LANAK.

Glasgow approach may have some flexibility once below 6000 feet and that's about all you can ever expect with the Scottish TMA as it is right now.

[fisbangwollop]

I understand the proposal to change the Glasgow Class "E" to class "D" with a base of 2500ft was thrown out by the CAA, I believe now a base of 3000ft has been proposed .....Once introduced an SSR monitoring code will be introduced for aircraft routing below this airspace that does not require any form of ATC service from other units i.e. "Scottish Info" The monitoring code will be to reduce R/T loading of VFR traffic working Glasgow/Edinburgh as the introduction of EFPS is not really VFR traffic friendly....:rolleyes:

[babotika]

I thought the UK definition of a CDA was continuous descent below 6000ft anyway? If yes then GLA certainly does provide for them.

Do any major UK airports provide for continuous descent from cruise anyway?

S.

[bad bear]

babotika, thanks for posting, could you give details of how Glasgow controllers operate the CDAs? Heathrow are the best Ive experienced and from the equivalent of 6,000' they would give descent at around 18 nm from touch down give or take a bit for wind. Do Glasgow do the same? I dont see anything about CDA for Glasgow in the AIP. The guys and girls at Edinburgh have been doing CDAs for a while now and are extremely good at it.
If Glasgow did CDAs a lot of the airspace they are asking for would not be needed

bb

[babotika]

From my experience of flying there we got descent below FL70 passing LANAK, which if memory serves is about 28-30 miles, so with a gentle rate of descent there wouldn't be any need to level off.

Saying that I'm just a casual visitor, maybe locally based crews know better...

S.