Gatwick transit below the TMA
Ohcirrej
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: This is the internet FFS.........
Posts: 2,921
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The O.C,
You KK guys are so easy to get along with, there is no way I could see you turning a zone transit down. And me with a KK validation......tee hee........let's not get carried away now!
Last day is 28 Feb..........not quite counting days yet. You looking rid of me?
You KK guys are so easy to get along with, there is no way I could see you turning a zone transit down. And me with a KK validation......tee hee........let's not get carried away now!
Last day is 28 Feb..........not quite counting days yet. You looking rid of me?
Last edited by Jerricho; 6th Dec 2003 at 21:56.
Thread Starter
As Kindly as LGW boys and girls are, are you sure it wasn't a Thames Controller scooping you up to 3000'!!!
Seriously, Thames Radar can give you up to 3000' if LCY and Biggin allows, but only if you can take a Class A IFR service (and have a serviceable Mode A & C of course!) - and only in the radar manouevring area East of BIG to DET and North towards LAM.
Seriously, Thames Radar can give you up to 3000' if LCY and Biggin allows, but only if you can take a Class A IFR service (and have a serviceable Mode A & C of course!) - and only in the radar manouevring area East of BIG to DET and North towards LAM.
Guest
Posts: n/a
bookworm,
If flying the twin then and unable to go up into the TMA I'd suggest just requesting a straight VFR transit if wx and time of day permit.
IFR transits of the CTA/Z, below the base of the TMA, will be potentially much more disruptive to the traffic in and out of Gatwick than will a VFR one.
The reason being that there's no available level for crossing the ILS or the departure side that will provide the required standard separation from other traffic established on the ILS or in the process of departing.
A gap in the approach sequence or a temporary stop to departures would be required, which is something that would be frowned upon from a number of quarters I suspect.
The sooner you get the IR added to the multi rating, the better
WF.
If flying the twin then and unable to go up into the TMA I'd suggest just requesting a straight VFR transit if wx and time of day permit.
IFR transits of the CTA/Z, below the base of the TMA, will be potentially much more disruptive to the traffic in and out of Gatwick than will a VFR one.
The reason being that there's no available level for crossing the ILS or the departure side that will provide the required standard separation from other traffic established on the ILS or in the process of departing.
A gap in the approach sequence or a temporary stop to departures would be required, which is something that would be frowned upon from a number of quarters I suspect.
The sooner you get the IR added to the multi rating, the better
WF.
Thread Starter
A gap in the approach sequence or a temporary stop to departures would be required, which is something that would be frowned upon from a number of quarters I suspect.
Thanks for the advice WF. I'll let you know how I get on if the trip goes ahead.
Cheers
Sub Judice Angel Lovegod
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: London
Posts: 2,456
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
But it might chop a whole 40 seconds off my flight time
But then I decided not to mention it, as I am the worst person in the world to raise that can of worms!
W
'just another atco'
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: LTC Swanwick
Age: 60
Posts: 154
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have asked DAP to investigate why MATS 2 makes the above stipulation, and I know that he is looking into it, though it has gone rather quiet!
Sub Judice Angel Lovegod
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: London
Posts: 2,456
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Current version stipulates fixed wing transits are to route east or west of the ATZ.
If LGW is busy, as it often is, the controller has every right to stop transitting traffic entering the ATZ, or the CTR if necessary.
If LGW is quiet, which happens from time to time, why should the controller be prevented from allowing a transit across the ATZ?
Incidentally, the wording of MATS 2 does make me wonder what would happen to an East/West transit, as it would only be allowed to transit East OR West of the ATZ, not both
Bookworm's route, which kicked this thread off, would ideally go straight through the LGW overhead. Why make him do a dogleg, if there is no traffic reason to do so?
Are there any other local bans from ATZs inside CTRs?
As I say, I wrote to DAP some months ago on this subject and, reasonably rapidly, got a reply from one of his staff which demonstrated a lack of understanding of the difference between an ATZ and a CTR - rather worrying in DAP's office - and offering some rather bland advice as to how to improve my navigation skills - a little patronising under the circumstances. Unfortunately the original is gently rusting somewhere in the Tay Estuary, otherwise I would share it with you all.
When I responded, shall we say, politely but firmly I was told that the matter would be reviewed and I later heard on the grapevine who was making that review (I daresay a member of this Forum, I can't imagine that he isn't.)
That must be six months ago (I believe at the very Epsom dinner mentioned earlier) and it's all gone rather quiet.
Well, the DAP and his staff may as well know that I haven't forgotten and I am still sitting by my screen gently drumming my fingers awaiting their reply
W
Official PPRuNe Chaplain
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Witnesham, Suffolk
Age: 80
Posts: 3,498
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I believe the offence is called lèse-majesté - thou shalt not ask awkward questions of higher authority, nor challenge its decisions. "I didn't get here to be bothered by whippersnappers like you."
When I were a lad, I was more than once cleared (VFR) straight overhead EGKK on a route from EGMC to EGJJ. That was a *long* time ago.
I was told more recently that "transits of the ATZ are no longer permitted" but not why. If it's for traffic reasons, no problem - I always reckoned with the probability of being refused due traffic - but this seems to be arbitrary use of authority.
Time for a chaser, WC?
When I were a lad, I was more than once cleared (VFR) straight overhead EGKK on a route from EGMC to EGJJ. That was a *long* time ago.
I was told more recently that "transits of the ATZ are no longer permitted" but not why. If it's for traffic reasons, no problem - I always reckoned with the probability of being refused due traffic - but this seems to be arbitrary use of authority.
Time for a chaser, WC?
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Surrey Hills
Posts: 1,478
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Some time ago I sat in Concorde
[company paying] at Washington and watched a Cessna 172 taxi by and take off; shortly after he lifted off he turned about 90º to starboard and we commenced our take off roll. Can't imagine that happening at LHR or GWK!
Aviate 1138
I still have a vision of the Cessna pilot anxiously glancing behind to make sure the pointy nose was not gaining on him!
[company paying] at Washington and watched a Cessna 172 taxi by and take off; shortly after he lifted off he turned about 90º to starboard and we commenced our take off roll. Can't imagine that happening at LHR or GWK!
Aviate 1138
I still have a vision of the Cessna pilot anxiously glancing behind to make sure the pointy nose was not gaining on him!
Sub Judice Angel Lovegod
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: London
Posts: 2,456
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Time for a chaser, WC?
Actually, one of the chaps or chapesses here will have details; I am fairly sure he was called Tim and that he was some kind of assistant to DAP...could someone PM contact details?
Otherwise I guess that I could contact our mutual friend who is said to be conducting the review, but I guess protocol forbids. Maybe he (he knows who he is) would like to contact me privately?
W
Moderator
Join Date: Jul 1997
Location: Europe
Posts: 3,228
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
WCollins
Can't see anyone of that name at first glance but have a flick through this and you might find someone who jogs the memory.
DAP Directorate Guide
Can't see anyone of that name at first glance but have a flick through this and you might find someone who jogs the memory.
DAP Directorate Guide
