Help a US Controller Understand RAS...
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Montréal, Canada
Posts: 75
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Riiiiiiight! I still don't get it!
Explain to me, please, what flying IFR outside CAS in VMC only means. If you're restricted to VMC why not simply continue VFR? There's something I'm missing...
Is it that when you're IFR, even though you'll stay in VMC, ATC provides you with IFR separation standards? Kinda like our Controlled VFR (CVFR) in Canada, above 12,500?
Help me.......
Felix
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the Dog house
Posts: 162
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BW
1966 A good year for the POMS; England won the world cup 4-1 Jeff Hurst scored a hat trick!!
Always good to debate the rules and give others a pointer as to where to look if they have access to the docs... and keep reading , thinking and asking questions of their trade of course!
Must admit Im typing from memory as I dont have any hard copies to hand - so always happy to stand corrected .
But Ive dug out a 2005 version of Annex 2 and Appendix 3 lists the VFR / IFR alt tables under discussion. It appears to start at 1000' for IFR though, not 3000? Doesnt matter either way.
Havnet got Doc 4444 but would be interested in knowing where an electronic copy may be available from.
DogGone
1966 A good year for the POMS; England won the world cup 4-1 Jeff Hurst scored a hat trick!!
Always good to debate the rules and give others a pointer as to where to look if they have access to the docs... and keep reading , thinking and asking questions of their trade of course!
Must admit Im typing from memory as I dont have any hard copies to hand - so always happy to stand corrected .
But Ive dug out a 2005 version of Annex 2 and Appendix 3 lists the VFR / IFR alt tables under discussion. It appears to start at 1000' for IFR though, not 3000? Doesnt matter either way.
Havnet got Doc 4444 but would be interested in knowing where an electronic copy may be available from.
DogGone
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: England
Posts: 108
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Say Again
A RAS is the only way pilots in Class G airspace can be given info necessary to resolve any confliction (avoiding action).
Pilots request a RAS, the controller doesn't necessarily know if the pilot is not IMC rated because the service is always provided as if the flight is an IFR flight.
If the controller gives the pilot an instruction (service is advisory but advice is given in the form of an instruction) that requires flight in IMC, the pilot is responsible for saying he can't take the manoeuvre. The service is then downgrade to a RIS and only traffic info is passed from then on in. Or, put another way, the pilot is thrown to the dogs.
In essence, it's the only way a flight being conducted in VMC in Class F and G airspace can be given instructions to resolve a confliction.
The Greebs
A RAS is the only way pilots in Class G airspace can be given info necessary to resolve any confliction (avoiding action).
Pilots request a RAS, the controller doesn't necessarily know if the pilot is not IMC rated because the service is always provided as if the flight is an IFR flight.
If the controller gives the pilot an instruction (service is advisory but advice is given in the form of an instruction) that requires flight in IMC, the pilot is responsible for saying he can't take the manoeuvre. The service is then downgrade to a RIS and only traffic info is passed from then on in. Or, put another way, the pilot is thrown to the dogs.
In essence, it's the only way a flight being conducted in VMC in Class F and G airspace can be given instructions to resolve a confliction.
The Greebs
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: California USA
Posts: 719
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Got to admit, this is turning out to be much more interesting than I could have guessed! Thanks again to everyone.
BurglarsDog...
Look here for 4444 et al...
http://dcaa.slv.dk
000/icaodocs/
Scott...
Isn't everyone?
Dave
BurglarsDog...
Look here for 4444 et al...
http://dcaa.slv.dk
000/icaodocs/Scott...
Isn't everyone?
Dave
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: By the Sea-side
Posts: 282
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
One simple word - NIGHT.
In the US you can [or could] fly VFR at night. Not over here - you need to fly IFR outside of CAS. You only need a night-rating to do it, so no IMC rating or qualification is necessary. Hence IFR is mandatory outside of IMC conditions. We do Special VFR in CAS, which will only confuse you, so I won't go there.
Outside CAS over here means a large proportion of our airspace, unlike y'all, where it means on top of the Rockies.
In the US you can [or could] fly VFR at night. Not over here - you need to fly IFR outside of CAS. You only need a night-rating to do it, so no IMC rating or qualification is necessary. Hence IFR is mandatory outside of IMC conditions. We do Special VFR in CAS, which will only confuse you, so I won't go there.
Outside CAS over here means a large proportion of our airspace, unlike y'all, where it means on top of the Rockies.
BD
I'm married to a football-loving Hun so my keyboard is wired to give me a nasty electric shock if I type the digits 196 -oooowwww! 
Glad you mentioned it though.
That's correct. 5.3.1 requires IFR flights outside controlled airspace to adhere to these levels "unless otherwise specified by the appropriate ATS authority for flight below 3000 amsl". The UK puts no restrictions on IFR levels below 3000 ft (except min alt) but other states do.
1966 A good year for the POMS; England won the world cup 4-1 Jeff Hurst scored a hat trick!!
Glad you mentioned it though.
But Ive dug out a 2005 version of Annex 2 and Appendix 3 lists the VFR / IFR alt tables under discussion. It appears to start at 1000' for IFR though, not 3000? Doesnt matter either way.
That's correct. 5.3.1 requires IFR flights outside controlled airspace to adhere to these levels "unless otherwise specified by the appropriate ATS authority for flight below 3000 amsl". The UK puts no restrictions on IFR levels below 3000 ft (except min alt) but other states do.
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the Dog house
Posts: 162
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
AV8Boy
Thanks for the ref. Will have a peep.
Always keen to get my mits on some free DOCs -even if they are written by some French Dude living in Canada under the direction of ICAO!!
Bearing in mind the new English Language requirements, surely someone with English as their first language will rewrite the Docs sometime soon?? Mon Dieu even fancy that job myself sometimes!!
Bookworm- Greatest British Superhero was not David Beckham but World Cup Willy - and that has nothing to do with brewers droop!!
All - I suppose a solid unbiased thread like this does a lot to highlight the different International interpretations of ICAO based Documentation. I for one have had more than one lively discussion on console regarding interpretation of a particular rule on a particular day in a particular situation. Certainly ads nothing to the ATC safety case! And Ive always thought that if ATC can be confused by the rules, then what of the aircrew? Hate to be an International pilot flying longhaul for example. Take off in Oz and get one fairly anal (though generally safe) interpretion , fly to NZ and get another , jump the pond to yet another culture, and finally land in Blighty with yet another slant on things - of course different crew.
I think we as ATC assume that what we do is how others also do it - after all our countries adopt ICAO's SARPS etc dont they?
But there are many differences - as this RAS thread has highlighted ( Not an ICAO based procedure though - Stand to be corrected by BW).
Maybe the new common European license may go someway to standardising some ATC related "things"!
DogGone
Thanks for the ref. Will have a peep.
Always keen to get my mits on some free DOCs -even if they are written by some French Dude living in Canada under the direction of ICAO!!
Bearing in mind the new English Language requirements, surely someone with English as their first language will rewrite the Docs sometime soon?? Mon Dieu even fancy that job myself sometimes!!
Bookworm- Greatest British Superhero was not David Beckham but World Cup Willy - and that has nothing to do with brewers droop!!
All - I suppose a solid unbiased thread like this does a lot to highlight the different International interpretations of ICAO based Documentation. I for one have had more than one lively discussion on console regarding interpretation of a particular rule on a particular day in a particular situation. Certainly ads nothing to the ATC safety case! And Ive always thought that if ATC can be confused by the rules, then what of the aircrew? Hate to be an International pilot flying longhaul for example. Take off in Oz and get one fairly anal (though generally safe) interpretion , fly to NZ and get another , jump the pond to yet another culture, and finally land in Blighty with yet another slant on things - of course different crew.
I think we as ATC assume that what we do is how others also do it - after all our countries adopt ICAO's SARPS etc dont they?
But there are many differences - as this RAS thread has highlighted ( Not an ICAO based procedure though - Stand to be corrected by BW).
Maybe the new common European license may go someway to standardising some ATC related "things"!
DogGone
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the Dog house
Posts: 162
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Greebson
I think not!
The only way you can get any reliable, first hand info about conficting traffic OCTA, is to look out the fricken window.
I seem to remember the phrases: Lookout attitude instuments from my early jet days ! Always remember a Lightning pass about ???' below during a series of spins over Holme on Spalding Moor. It was close but we didnt collide so the big sky theory obviously worked!! In UK this is de rigeur and par for the course. Lookout the window and see and avoid is the big sky theory of class G in Uk. ATC provisioned RAS or RIS is an add on luxury - and who pays for this ?? . Infact a luxury most of the rest of the world doesnt offer; due to cost, lack of radar coverage, training , controllers etc etc.
Ive watched in horror as acft have manoeuvred in restricted airpsace and get extremely closei n Oz; but operating on quite freq . One day ....Big sky wont feature!!!
For mil or tactical ops, or ops within busy environments, RAS and RIS are very effective ways of separating traffic outside CAS. But you ned bums on seats in ATC and the prerequisite "reactive" skill sets.
DogGone
I think not!
The only way you can get any reliable, first hand info about conficting traffic OCTA, is to look out the fricken window.
I seem to remember the phrases: Lookout attitude instuments from my early jet days ! Always remember a Lightning pass about ???' below during a series of spins over Holme on Spalding Moor. It was close but we didnt collide so the big sky theory obviously worked!! In UK this is de rigeur and par for the course. Lookout the window and see and avoid is the big sky theory of class G in Uk. ATC provisioned RAS or RIS is an add on luxury - and who pays for this ?? . Infact a luxury most of the rest of the world doesnt offer; due to cost, lack of radar coverage, training , controllers etc etc.
Ive watched in horror as acft have manoeuvred in restricted airpsace and get extremely closei n Oz; but operating on quite freq . One day ....Big sky wont feature!!!
For mil or tactical ops, or ops within busy environments, RAS and RIS are very effective ways of separating traffic outside CAS. But you ned bums on seats in ATC and the prerequisite "reactive" skill sets.
DogGone
The Analog Kid
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Brecon Beacons National Park
Age: 57
Posts: 239
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As does an Instrument Rating in the UK. But just to re-iterate, no rating is required to fly IFR outside CAS if one is remaining VMC.
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: St Austell
Age: 67
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ifr/vfr
Sorry mate, but I find the easiest way for an american or an Oz to understand is that UK people want things without paying for it. Business men are mighty and rather than pay for IFR training they get the CAA to approve a service that they have not paid for ie; fly VFR but talk to a radar unit, get a RAS, that way you don't need to look 360 degrees, just get someone else to do it for you. I dont like to slag our own but its all about the lazy selfish Brit. I hope that helps
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Montréal, Canada
Posts: 75
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks
I think I'm starting to get it...
So, if I do understand, a pilot on an RAS is separated from other IFR aircraft by 3 or 5 miles depending on the class of airspace, receiving IFR separation even though he's bound to VMC?
An RIS however, is simply like what we call flight following?
Thanks for all the replies!
SAO
So, if I do understand, a pilot on an RAS is separated from other IFR aircraft by 3 or 5 miles depending on the class of airspace, receiving IFR separation even though he's bound to VMC?
An RIS however, is simply like what we call flight following?
Thanks for all the replies!
SAO
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Surrey
Posts: 1,217
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A couple of points to remember about Class G UK flying
Separated from all traffic because the controller doesn't know who is IFR or VFR at any given moment.
No requirement at all for anyone to be VMC
Broadly yes - but only available OCAS
- ATC has no way of knowing during the day if a flight is IFR or VFR (unless the pilot tells him)
- IFR or VFR for the pilot is a 'state of mind' if the weather is VMC. With a few special exceptions, VFR recommended practice and IFR are the same in class G.
- The are no controller observable differences between an aircraft operating IFR or VFR in IMC conditions (obviously you can not legally be VFR in IMC).
- There is only one operational limit that being IMC places on the pilot over the visual flight rules and that is - to be 1000 feet above the highest obstace within 5 miles.
So, if I do understand, a pilot on an RAS is separated from other IFR aircraft by 3 or 5 miles depending on the class of airspace, receiving IFR separation even though he's bound to VMC?
No requirement at all for anyone to be VMC
An RIS however, is simply like what we call flight following?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: California USA
Posts: 719
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Separated from all traffic because the controller doesn't know who is IFR or VFR at any given moment.
I'm glad I always say, "Live and learn." Interesting old world, eh?
Dave
Edited to say, I'm glad that this, my 600th post, was good-natured!
Guest
Posts: n/a
Think of RAS like flight following with the addition of collision avoidance advice. ATC will separate all traffic participating in the RAS but non-participating traffic will be called and an advisory avoiding action given. There is no guarantee that ATC will achieve standard separation against non-participating traffic (5nm or vertical). Whether you take that advice is entirely up to you. If you choose not to, then you accept all responsibility for avoiding that particular aircraft (normal rules of the air still apply).
An aircraft under a RAS is not bound to be VMC - he can be either VMC or IMC. The driver here is that the conditions of your pilot's licence dictate whether you can fly IMC. If you cannot, you are only allowed to take a RAS if you can maintain VMC. The only important bit of UK IFR in this scenario is that you must be terrain safe to fly IFR; therefore the only link between IFR and RAS is that you must be IFR (ie terrain safe) to accept/give a RAS.
Confused? It actually works quite well although there are bits that are broken. As someone has hinted, there is a review going on and some wag has thought up a more complex set of draft rules. Personally, I would just love to go IFR or VFR - if you are IFR ATC would provide separation, if VFR they would provide 'flight following'. The arguing seems to be over the level of service required (or to be more precise, the amount of detail provided and controller reponsibilities) under the 'flight following' model.
An aircraft under a RAS is not bound to be VMC - he can be either VMC or IMC. The driver here is that the conditions of your pilot's licence dictate whether you can fly IMC. If you cannot, you are only allowed to take a RAS if you can maintain VMC. The only important bit of UK IFR in this scenario is that you must be terrain safe to fly IFR; therefore the only link between IFR and RAS is that you must be IFR (ie terrain safe) to accept/give a RAS.
Confused? It actually works quite well although there are bits that are broken. As someone has hinted, there is a review going on and some wag has thought up a more complex set of draft rules. Personally, I would just love to go IFR or VFR - if you are IFR ATC would provide separation, if VFR they would provide 'flight following'. The arguing seems to be over the level of service required (or to be more precise, the amount of detail provided and controller reponsibilities) under the 'flight following' model.
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: wherever I lay my headset
Posts: 538
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
LonMil, I'm guessing you're an experienced military controller, used to working in both regulated and unregulated airspace? When you say
I wonder how you'd provide separation in Class G when mixing it with VFR traffic? All pilots are responsible for avoiding collisions, but the VFR pilot can apply normal ROA rules and does not have to maintain standard separation (he could theoretically adopt lose formation is so wished?), and is under no obligation to speak to anyone on RT. An interesting theory, but a simplication that surely would fall down in practice?
I would just love to go IFR or VFR - if you are IFR ATC would provide separation, if VFR they would provide 'flight following'
Guest
Posts: n/a
I agree that Class G would be a dog's dinner but if we actually looked at some other ICAO airspace classifications? E sort of works. Either that or shoot off down the Eurocontrol route of intended and unknown. Obviously that is going to drag us into the Mode S argument; something better discussed on the GA forum. 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the Dog house
Posts: 162
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think it worth remembering here that RAS and RIS has evolved to suit one need of one particlar customer; Tactical Freedom of the military . And in particular the operational requirements of fast moving aircraft flying in the lower airspace and mixing it with the increasing number of light aircraft. Generally Mil V Civil RPT is not a problem unless the civil are off route or on an advisory route, (sep only from participating traffic = other civil IFR) as they stay inside class c/d and the fast jets stay outside.
Or, and as in the case of the Area control units or Autonomous control units, who have the authority to control within CAS taking 5 miles or 5000 sep under a Radar Control service, Mil acft must do exactly as directed by ATC and ATC must achieve standard uncoordinated ICAO sep or an agreed lesser margin subject to verbal co-ordination of the civilian controller working the other traffic inside CAS.
Bearing in mind the status quo in the UK; i.e. limited airspace, high traffic densities, cross section of aircrew experience, and yet full radar coverage, the system for improving safety OCTA (class G) is a good one. Regardless of being IFR or VFR or having 2000hrs and doing 420 knots or 40 hours and doing 90 kts, you can get a radar service (free I think) and be just about guaranteed not to hit anyone else. OK, standard separation may not be achieved at all times, but then again any VFR aircarft can pass within a few hundred metres of you when your sighted by him/her anyway. A miss is after , all as good as a mile!
For anyone visiting the Uk its worth a visit to one of the busier Mil units just to see the sytem at work. Of course the civs also provide RAS and RIS OCTA when required, but I think their focus is more on the management of their stripboard and participating units inside their " controlled airspace". OCTA is after all In*ian territory and you need a little bit of co*boy in you to operate safely out there. Controlling is very reactive and wnen busy you need to bugger strip writing,get scanning, work out a resolution and keep talking!! "Avoiding action turn hard left heading.etc etc .... traffic....was etc etc With mulitiple aircraft on freq within 40 nms, travelling all different directions at up to 420kts plus, it can take some doing!! Time isnt always on your side.
DogGone
Or, and as in the case of the Area control units or Autonomous control units, who have the authority to control within CAS taking 5 miles or 5000 sep under a Radar Control service, Mil acft must do exactly as directed by ATC and ATC must achieve standard uncoordinated ICAO sep or an agreed lesser margin subject to verbal co-ordination of the civilian controller working the other traffic inside CAS.
Bearing in mind the status quo in the UK; i.e. limited airspace, high traffic densities, cross section of aircrew experience, and yet full radar coverage, the system for improving safety OCTA (class G) is a good one. Regardless of being IFR or VFR or having 2000hrs and doing 420 knots or 40 hours and doing 90 kts, you can get a radar service (free I think) and be just about guaranteed not to hit anyone else. OK, standard separation may not be achieved at all times, but then again any VFR aircarft can pass within a few hundred metres of you when your sighted by him/her anyway. A miss is after , all as good as a mile!
For anyone visiting the Uk its worth a visit to one of the busier Mil units just to see the sytem at work. Of course the civs also provide RAS and RIS OCTA when required, but I think their focus is more on the management of their stripboard and participating units inside their " controlled airspace". OCTA is after all In*ian territory and you need a little bit of co*boy in you to operate safely out there. Controlling is very reactive and wnen busy you need to bugger strip writing,get scanning, work out a resolution and keep talking!! "Avoiding action turn hard left heading.etc etc .... traffic....was etc etc With mulitiple aircraft on freq within 40 nms, travelling all different directions at up to 420kts plus, it can take some doing!! Time isnt always on your side.
DogGone