NEW (Newcastle) VOR
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Here, there and everywhere
Posts: 152
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
NEW (Newcastle) VOR
Now that the NEW has been withdrawn, is there now a GPS waypoint in it's place also called NEW? If not, how come we are still getting IFPS approved flightplans routing via NEW? I received one last week routing north and the first point on the flightplan was NEW. I queried with my Radar controller (as I was in the Tower and received a clearance of "left turnout on track NEW"), and Radar wasn't too sure either. The clearance was subsequently amended to "Left turn on track NZ" (I think).
Anyone from Newcastle able to help on this one? I can't remember seeing anything in the AIP to clarify either way, and since then have just forgotten to look!
Cheers
-HD-
Anyone from Newcastle able to help on this one? I can't remember seeing anything in the AIP to clarify either way, and since then have just forgotten to look!
Cheers
-HD-
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Newcastle
Age: 40
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hello!
I'm not an ATCO at Newcastle - but am based there with my airline! A captain queried this a few weeks ago when NEW first went u/s, as the departure is based on the VORDME.
The reply from ATC was that although the VOR was being withdrawn, the DME portion would be staying in service throughout the building work and for the foreseeable future. The DME still has the ident NEW. I'm not sure how this relates to flight plans as i'm not sure you can FP a route to a DME station only, but I can't see why not!
I'm not an ATCO at Newcastle - but am based there with my airline! A captain queried this a few weeks ago when NEW first went u/s, as the departure is based on the VORDME.
The reply from ATC was that although the VOR was being withdrawn, the DME portion would be staying in service throughout the building work and for the foreseeable future. The DME still has the ident NEW. I'm not sure how this relates to flight plans as i'm not sure you can FP a route to a DME station only, but I can't see why not!
Moderator
Join Date: Jul 1997
Location: Europe
Posts: 3,228
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As I understand it, NEW still exists (for the moment) as the waypoint designator for the published ATS routes in the UK AIP. Since the routes which have it as a waypoint are RNP5 notified, aircraft must be equipped for BRNAV, and so able to fly to the waypoint without the VOR actually existing. For that reason, filing on one of these routes will comply with IFPS requirements. If it is a direct route being filed using NEW, then IFPS probably don't care.
Of course, the above is for aircraft operating on the ATS route structure. For aircraft departing, or flying below BRNAV airspace, and either not equipped or unable to get sufficient navigational input for a BRNAV operation, ATC should perhaps either ask the pilot if he is able to navigate to it first, or offer an alternative 'clearance' if this is appropriate. Ultimately though, the pilot should tell ATC if he is unable to accept the 'clearance' because of navigational limitations.
Newcastle Airport management don't seem interested in providing a replacement site for the VOR (which is owned and operated by NATS as an en route nav aid), since they claim that it is not essential to have a VOR/DME approach. Other procedures using the VOR were either going to be redrawn or redesigned.
You can read more in the NATS Consultative letter from January 2006.
Withdrawal of NEW VOR
Of course, the above is for aircraft operating on the ATS route structure. For aircraft departing, or flying below BRNAV airspace, and either not equipped or unable to get sufficient navigational input for a BRNAV operation, ATC should perhaps either ask the pilot if he is able to navigate to it first, or offer an alternative 'clearance' if this is appropriate. Ultimately though, the pilot should tell ATC if he is unable to accept the 'clearance' because of navigational limitations.
Newcastle Airport management don't seem interested in providing a replacement site for the VOR (which is owned and operated by NATS as an en route nav aid), since they claim that it is not essential to have a VOR/DME approach. Other procedures using the VOR were either going to be redrawn or redesigned.
You can read more in the NATS Consultative letter from January 2006.
Withdrawal of NEW VOR
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Wilmslow and North Yorks
Age: 53
Posts: 402
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Newcastle has however finally got the airspace they've been after for ages. And a new reporting called "UVAVU" i believe 
So, who got "IRANU" then?
(Apologies to those who have no knowledge of Vic and Bob's Shooting Stars
)
So, who got "IRANU" then?
(Apologies to those who have no knowledge of Vic and Bob's Shooting Stars
)
niknak
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 2,335
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
HD
I am employed by my client, to advise you that the initials HD are owned under copyright by a venerable gentleman who is also know by a similar name to the one you have purloined.
My client also advises that you have virtually copied his Pprune name, which is also copyrighted until 2035, (the same age as my client).
Desist from appearing under this guise on Pprune forthwith, or we'll send the boys round.
Now naff off.....
I am employed by my client, to advise you that the initials HD are owned under copyright by a venerable gentleman who is also know by a similar name to the one you have purloined.
My client also advises that you have virtually copied his Pprune name, which is also copyrighted until 2035, (the same age as my client).
Desist from appearing under this guise on Pprune forthwith, or we'll send the boys round.
Now naff off.....
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: London UK
Posts: 171
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
niknak,
My client has instructed me to politely inform you that he is well aware of your client's status and has no desire to 'purloin' his initials, hence the use of '-HD-' as being clearly separate and different from 'HD'. Furthermore, by your own admission, our respective clients names are 'similar', ergo not the same. Furthermore, my client has no wish to use, nor indeed has any knowledge of 'Pprune'. I demand you allow my client be allowed to enjoy his use of PPruNe without further let or hindrance.
Sticks and stones .....
My client has instructed me to politely inform you that he is well aware of your client's status and has no desire to 'purloin' his initials, hence the use of '-HD-' as being clearly separate and different from 'HD'. Furthermore, by your own admission, our respective clients names are 'similar', ergo not the same. Furthermore, my client has no wish to use, nor indeed has any knowledge of 'Pprune'. I demand you allow my client be allowed to enjoy his use of PPruNe without further let or hindrance.
Sticks and stones .....
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Here, there and everywhere
Posts: 152
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by niknak
HD
I am employed by my client, to advise you that the initials HD are owned under copyright by a venerable gentleman who is also know by a similar name to the one you have purloined.
My client also advises that you have virtually copied his Pprune name, which is also copyrighted until 2035, (the same age as my client).
Desist from appearing under this guise on Pprune forthwith, or we'll send the boys round.
Now naff off.....
I am employed by my client, to advise you that the initials HD are owned under copyright by a venerable gentleman who is also know by a similar name to the one you have purloined.
My client also advises that you have virtually copied his Pprune name, which is also copyrighted until 2035, (the same age as my client).
Desist from appearing under this guise on Pprune forthwith, or we'll send the boys round.
Now naff off.....
Thanks for providing a very valuable and appropriate response to my question!
Hippy,
Thank you for "acting" for me :-) perhaps Niknak should take his own advice?! ;-)
-HD- (Here to stay)
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Dubai and Sunderland
Posts: 818
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
For a/c below the BRNAV level the NT NDB has been notified as being the replacement.
The DME (NEW) is still there and should be used for departure clearances unless advised.
It looks like NATS are not interested in reinstating the VOR when work on the new VCR is complete!
The DME (NEW) is still there and should be used for departure clearances unless advised.
It looks like NATS are not interested in reinstating the VOR when work on the new VCR is complete!
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Teesside, UK
Age: 33
Posts: 1,100
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
HD, I'm presuming it's the Gold Air departure last week that you are talking about, I was wondering about the change in clearance from NEW to NZ as well 
mmeteesside
mmeteesside
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Here, there and everywhere
Posts: 152
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by 10 DME ARC
It looks like NATS are not interested in reinstating the VOR when work on the new VCR is complete!
Did I hear a rumour somewhere that this is because NATS are looking to phase out VORs completely over the next xx years?? I could be totally off the mark with that - if so, I have no idea why they would be quite willing (so it seems), to lose a VOR in the north of England when there are not too many north of Manchester as it is (compared to the south??)?
Mmeteesside,
Yes, I believe it was the Goldair departing to Scandanavia somewhere that filed out through NEW then airways from there...my query to Radar had them thinking about it, then just before the aircraft departed I received the amended NZ clearance.
-HD-
