EGLF CAS proposal

[DaveReidUK]

Made the local news this evening.

https://www.consultation.tagfarnborough.com/

https://www.consultation.tagfarnborough.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/Farnborough_Prop_CAS_VFR_500K_40.pdf

[DaveReidUK]

Spirited opposition from the BGA:

Do you fly in the South East of England? Do you worry that GA airspace needs are ignored in the face of laughable claimed airport growth trajectories and other dodgy data? Or are you simply amazed that Farnborough continues to unnecessarily claim a huge volume of airspace whilst ignoring the very serious choke points and hazards to the majority other airspace users represented by their proposals?
https://www.facebook.com/BritishGlidingAssociation/posts/961495637330629

[Nimmer]

Counter argument; "Do you worry about 737's Gulfsteam 5's and many other business jets flying around at 250knots in very busy uncontrolled airspace.

Airspace around EGLF accident waiting to happen.

[HEATHROW DIRECTOR]

Agree 100% with you Nimmer. It frightens me to death watching it.

[Gonzo]

It may turn out that the GA pressure to minimise the dimensions of the proposed CAS makes it very difficult to facilitate transits of it to VFR aircraft when there are any inbounds around.

[EastofKoksy]

In my opinion EGLF's original airspace proposal was OTT. I assume that was so they could 'make concessions' to reduce it to what they actually need during the consultation process.


Airports seeking the protection of regulated airspace for their operations could also help themselves While they allow a minority of controllers to regard class D airspace as a GA exclusion zone opposition to it will only grow!


At the end of the day it comes back to the same old argument. Is our airspace primarily a resource for leisure or commercial use?

[chevvron]

Agree 100% with you Nimmer. It frightens me to death watching it.
Didn't frighten me and I provided Radar Advisory Service (remember that?) for 34 years (1974 - 2008) and PAR approaches to military fast jets and bizjets for 17 years (1984 - 2001) in it.
Innit?

[Buster the Bear]

Of course, the safest method would have been to obtain the required additional airspace first, then allow expansion of Farnborough.

[chevvron]

Of course, the safest method would have been to obtain the required additional airspace first, then allow expansion of Farnborough.
That was tried in about the mid 90s before TAGs proposals were finalised by their consultant Waleed Yousef; he was told very firmly no.

[ATCO Fred]

The old sausage of the beauty of Class G in that is free for everybody to use but some use it without being mindful of others.

Gets my goat and I see it every single day. . . . the little orange dash next to a VFR squawk (Mode S transponder) that tells me the aircraft is mode C equipped. . . . but not selected.

Now if you are going to transit the chevrons on the map and cross the ILS at or slightly below the FAF level but turn the Mode C off and deny everyone that safety critical info. . . .especially if you are scud running below a solid base. . . . then you are ruining it for everyone else and providing all the supporting evidence an ANSP needs for an ACP. A small minority, because they can, will ruin it for the majority. . . .but that's true in all forms of live.

[Easy Street]

some use it [Class G] without being mindful of others

I've commented in the Class E/TMZ thread about the UK's approach to CAS so I won't repeat myself at length here! But Fred's astute observation did make me wonder whether generational shifts in attitudes to authority, rights and responsibilities have chipped away at the underpinnings to the UK's Class G-based airspace model. Over my career as a military pilot I've seen a gradual decrease in regard for MATZs by other airspace users, particularly by types with lower regulatory and financial barriers to access (e.g. gliders and paramotors), and I'm sure controllers at Class G IFR airfields have had similar experiences. Of course the aircraft in question can. But can is not tempered by the implicit societal pressure of should to the extent it might have been a generation ago. Many other spheres of life have gone regulation-heavy in response to these generational shifts. That the airspace around EGLF has (so far) remained Class G could indicate that the aviation community is cut from a different cloth to wider society, but I do wonder for how long that difference will endure.