UK Airspace closure
FARNBOROUGH RADAR CAN ONLY PROVIDE A BASIC SERVICE, ISSUE A VFR CLEARANCE AND CANNOT OBTAIN CLEARANCE TO ENTER CONTROLLED AIRSPACE.
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: On the wireless...
Posts: 1,901
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
NOTAM C1919 refers:
"DUE TO THE RESTRICTIONS APPLIED TO THE PROVISION OF RADAR SERVICES
CAUSED BY THE VOLCANIC DUST CLOUD PASSING OVER THE UK, FARNBOROUGH
RADAR CAN ONLY PROVIDE A BASIC SERVICE, ISSUE A VFR CLEARANCE AND
CANNOT OBTAIN CLEARANCE TO ENTER CONTROLLED AIRSPACE.
FROM: 15 APR 2010 13:10 TO: 15 APR 2010 21:00"
"DUE TO THE RESTRICTIONS APPLIED TO THE PROVISION OF RADAR SERVICES
CAUSED BY THE VOLCANIC DUST CLOUD PASSING OVER THE UK, FARNBOROUGH
RADAR CAN ONLY PROVIDE A BASIC SERVICE, ISSUE A VFR CLEARANCE AND
CANNOT OBTAIN CLEARANCE TO ENTER CONTROLLED AIRSPACE.
FROM: 15 APR 2010 13:10 TO: 15 APR 2010 21:00"
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Earth
Posts: 72
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
DUE TO THE RESTRICTIONS APPLIED TO THE PROVISION OF RADAR SERVICES CAUSED BY THE VOLCANIC DUST CLOUD PASSING OVER THE UK, FARNBOROUGH RADAR CAN ONLY PROVIDE A BASIC SERVICE, ISSUE A VFR CLEARANCE AND CANNOT OBTAIN CLEARANCE TO ENTER CONTROLLED AIRSPACE.
It might mean it can only issue a VFR (not IFR) clearance through Class D CTR/CTAs, and cannot provide an IFR clearance through the LTMA and surrounding Class A airways in the South East.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Berkshire, UK
Age: 79
Posts: 8,268
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think someone in NATS doesn't know what he's talking about! There were a few light aircraft and small biz jets flying over Berkshire yesterday afternoon so why the restriction on SVFR?
I heard radio interview with NATS Director of Safety yesterday evening. Never heard a worse performer, he was utterly useless and clueless as to how to present anything. I note from thes epages a certain wariness about the ability of NATs senior management among front line ATC staff but are all your managers like him because if they are I think we are safer as things are with nothing flying around at all.
A couple of examples
We are responsible for controlled airspace-well what does Joe Public know of controlled and un controlled airspace
In response to 'is there any chance of any flights tomorrow?' he said well we are responsible for controlled airpsace what companies and pilots choose to do in other airpsace is up to them. Yes. so BA are going to start flying 747s around at 5000 in VFR just because technically they are able too other than the fact that aren't all major airpots inside controlled airpsace anyway.
he answered no questions, had no eprsonality and was the eprfect example of the 'meets targets-misses the point' British management culture of today
oops rant over
A couple of examples
We are responsible for controlled airspace-well what does Joe Public know of controlled and un controlled airspace
In response to 'is there any chance of any flights tomorrow?' he said well we are responsible for controlled airpsace what companies and pilots choose to do in other airpsace is up to them. Yes. so BA are going to start flying 747s around at 5000 in VFR just because technically they are able too other than the fact that aren't all major airpots inside controlled airpsace anyway.
he answered no questions, had no eprsonality and was the eprfect example of the 'meets targets-misses the point' British management culture of today
oops rant over
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: On the wireless...
Posts: 1,901
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by HEATHROW DIRECTOR
There were a few light aircraft and small biz jets flying over Berkshire yesterday afternoon so why the restriction on SVFR?
Criteria shouldn't be based on flight rules. IFR can take place in VMC just as VFR does. nats have elected to withdraw service provision within controlled airspace. nats has also severely reduced service provision outside controlled airspace when, in fact, they would have greater capacity to provide ATSOCA rather than restrict it. It seems that nats are adopting a high moral stance which is now impinging upon civil liberties.
I suspect that GA will today see the light and realise that they can continue as normal regardless of nats and their Basic Service.......
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: UAE
Posts: 204
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Assuming the volcanic ash is a problem at FL300+, what is dangerous about flight at, say FL250? By all means adjust the levels but a buffer beneath the known levels of volcanic ash (and if 5,000 ft isn't enough, go for 10,000 ft!) would seem a much more proportionate response.
Transatlantic operators probably don't want to to bimble around at FL250 or below, and possibly can't anyway due to fuel burn, but domestic and European flights would be able to operate and you wouldn't be in the slightly ridiculous situation of a large section of the UK's economy grinding to a halt.
Ahh, but then NATS directors probably wouldn't be interviewed on TV and radio and wouldn't be able to bless us with their "wisdom"...
Transatlantic operators probably don't want to to bimble around at FL250 or below, and possibly can't anyway due to fuel burn, but domestic and European flights would be able to operate and you wouldn't be in the slightly ridiculous situation of a large section of the UK's economy grinding to a halt.
Ahh, but then NATS directors probably wouldn't be interviewed on TV and radio and wouldn't be able to bless us with their "wisdom"...
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Dorset
Posts: 150
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Brown Dogg
I see the guy had been through the standard NATS management course - starting every sentence with the word so. It does my bleeding head in.
Beady Eye
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 1,495
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Assuming the volcanic ash is a problem at FL300+, what is dangerous about flight at, say FL250? By all means adjust the levels but a buffer beneath the known levels of volcanic ash (and if 5,000 ft isn't enough, go for 10,000 ft!) would seem a much more proportionate response.
Ahh, but then NATS directors probably wouldn't be interviewed on TV and radio and wouldn't be able to bless us with their "wisdom"...
Call me a bluff old traditionalist if you wish but given the very well documented risks of the effects of volcanic ash on aircraft I personally don't want some aircraft owner ignoring everything and leaping into the sky with the possibility of their mangled wreckage landing on my head. I would assume the government has a similar view and are protecting the general public at large (plus the cost of clearing up the mess left behind).
BD
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: 24/7 Hardcore Heaven
Posts: 525
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Call me a bluff old traditionalist if you wish but given the very well documented risks of the effects of volcanic ash on aircraft I personally don't want some aircraft owner ignoring everything and leaping into the sky with the possibility of their mangled wreckage landing on my head. I would assume the government has a similar view and are protecting the general public at large (plus the cost of clearing up the mess left behind).
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Long White Cloud
Posts: 115
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks to the litigious nature of people in the USA that has spread to the rest of the world, it all boils down to ass covering The CAA along with NATS have been discussing with their legal department's as to what services (if any) that ANSP's can provide without leaving themselves open to legal problems in the event of any incidents. Also this being an un-precedented event means there is bound to be chaos and uncertainty amongst all parties involved, lets just hope it doesn't continue for another 12 months.
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: UAE
Posts: 204
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Of course ash is subject to gravity, though obviously affected somewhat more by air currents. If, as bradt says, the ash cloud is between FL200 and FL360, and as you've probably noticed by lack of a layer of ash blanketing the country it most likely is concentrated at those levels, and if it's safe for VFR traffic to bimble around outside CAS, then why is it impossible for commercial IFR flights to operate at lower levels???
To say that ash is "subject to gravity" (which it is) in isolation is to ignore whatever you once learned about water vapour on your met course back in the day! Water vapour, more commonly known to us as "cloud", is also subject to gravity. Does it come down? Yes, quite often in the UK. Is it capable of staying up or even rising? Yes it most certainly is! The ash cloud, rather than descending in one large blanket, is likely to dissipate as it gets further from its Icelandic source. Some of it will fall to the ground though in small enough concentrations to be unnoticeable, and some of it will likely stay in the atmosphere for years. Some of it will mix with water vapour and fall as rain or hail. What it is extremely unlikely to do below 20,000 feet or so, is be present in significant concentrations such as to endanger an aircraft.
To say that ash is "subject to gravity" (which it is) in isolation is to ignore whatever you once learned about water vapour on your met course back in the day! Water vapour, more commonly known to us as "cloud", is also subject to gravity. Does it come down? Yes, quite often in the UK. Is it capable of staying up or even rising? Yes it most certainly is! The ash cloud, rather than descending in one large blanket, is likely to dissipate as it gets further from its Icelandic source. Some of it will fall to the ground though in small enough concentrations to be unnoticeable, and some of it will likely stay in the atmosphere for years. Some of it will mix with water vapour and fall as rain or hail. What it is extremely unlikely to do below 20,000 feet or so, is be present in significant concentrations such as to endanger an aircraft.