Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Ground & Other Ops Forums > ATC Issues
Reload this Page >

Airliners mixing it with gliders and puddle-jumpers?

Wikiposts
Search
ATC Issues A place where pilots may enter the 'lions den' that is Air Traffic Control in complete safety and find out the answers to all those obscure topics which you always wanted to know the answer to but were afraid to ask.

Airliners mixing it with gliders and puddle-jumpers?

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 25th Apr 2010, 06:19
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: England
Age: 70
Posts: 21
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Airliners mixing it with gliders and puddle-jumpers?

I've just been reading an old, closed, thread "LTN arrivals" and wonder about some of the arrivals which seem to have started flying at lower alts over Cambridgeshire, below the controlled airspace with base 5,500ft msl.

I noticed a twin-jet flying southwest over Gransden Lodge when I was flying near there in Nov 09. It was at 4,000ft (level with me) and overhead an active glider site. A few days later I was on the ground at that airfield and a similar flight occurred. Recently [I was on the ground in my garden and] noticed something similar and complained to Luton, who told me that it was an Easyjet positioning flight. It was 10 Apr and I reckon LTN were on 08 that day.

This increase in activity bothers me because it is over where I live, but more to the point it seems less than sensible for airliners to be mixing it with gliders who are all but invisible to the eye and radar. Why are they not above 5,500ft and in the controlled airspace?

Last edited by BugOutWest; 25th Apr 2010 at 14:35.
BugOutWest is offline  
Old 25th Apr 2010, 06:40
  #2 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: UK
Age: 45
Posts: 84
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
complained to Luton
Why? surely they have the same right as you in be in Class G airspace.

Why are they not above 5,500ft and in the controlled airspace?
The jet could have been on it's way back from an air test to the north or out of Cambridge. The a/c can't simply join controlled airspace at any level due to other traffic that may already be there.

It may have been more expeditious for the jet to join Luton at 4A so as not to get in the mix of Essex traffic.

The default clearance for aircraft coming out of Cambridge that want to join controlled airspace to the south is to fly towards Barkway at 2.4A and contact Essex Radar. Essex will then when able give that aircraft further climb and routing in instructions when it's safe to do so.
Vortex Issues is offline  
Old 25th Apr 2010, 07:06
  #3 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Dubai and Sunderland
Posts: 818
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Just look at the likes of Newcastle 40% of the IFR inbounds route through class G airspace mixing it with fast jets not so fast jets, gliders, light aircraft, micro lights, hang gliders etc etc. With only one linking airway from the South West what else can they do!
10 DME ARC is offline  
Old 25th Apr 2010, 08:08
  #4 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: England
Age: 70
Posts: 21
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Class G Airspace and rights

Why? surely they have the same right as you in be in Class G airspace.
I don't dispute that; I complained about an airliner going over my house at 4,000ft, not about the one in the same Class G airspace as me.

Quote:
Why are they not above 5,500ft and in the controlled airspace?
The jet could have been on it's way back from an air test to the north or out of Cambridge. The a/c can't simply join controlled airspace at any level due to other traffic that may already be there.
I don't think you can have read my post: it was an Easyjet positioning flight that flew over my house. That doesn't sound like an air test.

It may have been more expeditious for the jet to join Luton at 4A so as not to get in the mix of Essex traffic.

The default clearance for aircraft coming out of Cambridge that want to join controlled airspace to the south is to fly towards Barkway at 2.4A and contact Essex Radar. Essex will then when able give that aircraft further climb and routing in instructions when it's safe to do so.
Thanks for the explanation, anyway.

This monitoring on my part came as a result of the flawed and aborted NATS consultation last year (or was it the year before). The argument was started among non-aviation types in the area about the base of the holds for STN and LTN, whereas my assertion has always been that the base altitude is immaterial: the aircraft will drop out of any stack when it can and make its way towards the approach at whatever altitude the captain decides with ATC. It's the general practice that we, the public, need to consider, not the holds and their altitudes.
BugOutWest is offline  
Old 25th Apr 2010, 08:10
  #5 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: England
Age: 70
Posts: 21
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
GAT, gliders and airliners in Class G airspace

Just look at the likes of Newcastle 40% of the IFR inbounds route through class G airspace mixing it with fast jets not so fast jets, gliders, light aircraft, micro lights, hang gliders etc etc. With only one linking airway from the South West what else can they do!
Thanks for that information. But my question is, is it sensible or good airmanship to mix it with light aircraft and gliders? How is separation from gliders maintained?
BugOutWest is offline  
Old 25th Apr 2010, 08:34
  #6 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: UK
Age: 45
Posts: 84
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I don't think you can have read my post: it was an Easyjet positioning flight that flew over my house. That doesn't sound like an air test.
positioning from where? in which area do you live?

the aircraft will drop out of any stack when it can and make its way towards the approach at whatever altitude the captain decides with ATC.
The captain does not decide what level they leave the stack at. The approach controller manages the stacks, gives vectors from the stacks and descends the aircraft. Normally the aircraft will leave the stack at min stack level, FL70 or 80 normally (depending on the QNH)

flawed and aborted NATS consultation
The changes they wanted to make would have decreased the noise heard for many people, kept the aircraft higher for longer and decreased the area in which the aircraft were flying. It would have also given a separate stack for Luton inbounds and therefore keeping them higher for longer instead of being restricted to 5A flying E to W over Duxford/Fowlmere/Royston area which happens now.

How is separation from gliders maintained?
You don't, it non-controlled airspace

Last edited by Vortex Issues; 25th Apr 2010 at 08:42. Reason: extras
Vortex Issues is offline  
Old 25th Apr 2010, 08:41
  #7 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Berkshire, UK
Age: 79
Posts: 8,268
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
<<the aircraft will drop out of any stack when it can and make its way towards the approach at whatever altitude the captain decides with ATC. >>

The writer of this gem is, apparently, a QFI. I am surprised at his lack of knowledge.
HEATHROW DIRECTOR is offline  
Old 25th Apr 2010, 08:58
  #8 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 1,915
Received 4 Likes on 2 Posts
The irony of an ex-mil FJ pilot complaining about noise and seemingly also unaware of the "see and avoid" principle in Class G airspace is not lost on me!
spekesoftly is offline  
Old 25th Apr 2010, 10:29
  #9 (permalink)  

 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 796
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
This increase in activity bothers me because it is over where I live, <snip>
BugOutWest, for someone who has if your profile is to be believed spent their life in aviation, a lot of it at my expense as I'm a tax payer, I find this to be NIMBYism at its worst.

When you were blatting about yourself making lots of noise in FJs, did you ever spare a thought for the folk you were making noise over? A modern airliner must be much quieter than a 1980s vintage mil jet.
Roffa is offline  
Old 25th Apr 2010, 11:03
  #10 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: England
Age: 70
Posts: 21
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Holds etc ...

<<the aircraft will drop out of any stack when it can and make its way towards the approach at whatever altitude the captain decides with ATC. >>

The writer of this gem is, apparently, a QFI. I am surprised at his lack of knowledge.
Well, I suppose that's why I'm airing my ideas here. I don't know much about controlled airspace, except when I have been forced to use it -- very rarely. That's what the RVCs are for.

And how the rules are laid out and how operators operate are sometimes subtly different.

For instance, I know that I may fly at 2,000ft over an ATZ, or 3,000ft over a MATZ, but to do so without talking to ATC would be poor airmanship and perhaps more than a little dangerous.

So, my point is, that it's just as risky and lacking in airmanship for a large aircraft to fly over a glider site at or just above the top of the launch envelope without knowing where the gliders are flying.
BugOutWest is offline  
Old 25th Apr 2010, 11:11
  #11 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: UK
Age: 45
Posts: 84
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
that it's just as risky and lacking in airmanship for a large aircraft to fly over a glider site at or just above the top of the launch envelope without knowing where the gliders are flying.
How do you know the pilots hadn't briefed themselves on their route and knew what they were overflying. Was the Easyjet in contact with ATC? Did ATC pass this local information to the pilot?

It sounds like you are presuming that this Easyjet a/c was bumbling around class G on it's way to Luton, and not talking to anyone.
Vortex Issues is offline  
Old 25th Apr 2010, 11:19
  #12 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: England
Age: 70
Posts: 21
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
FJ and past noise

The irony of an ex-mil FJ pilot complaining about noise and seemingly also unaware of the "see and avoid" principle in Class G airspace is not lost on me!
I'm not immune to a bit of irony, but the tables are most definitely turned, now, spekesoftly :-) (haven't got the hang of putting the emoticons in the text). There are far fewer FJ mates around now, and they practise more at medium level. And yes, I have had the odd airprox when my lookout was poor (in my younger days), but that was just me and my nav (sometimes) and a puddle-jumper. I'm concerned at the proximity of a large, relatively unmanoeuvrable ac to small, almost invisible gliders.

BugOutWest, for someone who has if your profile is to be believed spent their life in aviation, a lot of it at my expense as I'm a tax payer, I find this to be NIMBYism at its worst.

When you were blatting about yourself making lots of noise in FJs, did you ever spare a thought for the folk you were making noise over? A modern airliner must be much quieter than a 1980s vintage mil jet.
Of course a FJ is noisier, especially one of the ones I flew (it was limited to 450kts at 250ft over land as a result). Of course I spared thoughts for those underneath me, but it was my job and I avoided built-up areas at low level. And in those days, the sound of freedom was enough justification ...

But I live nowhere near an airport, military or civilian so noise from an increasing intensity of airline traffic is of course a concern, especially when I don't believe in allowing the UK to become more of a hub for the rest of Europe.

But that's not my argument: I am an aviator, and as such I believe that the practice of mixing airliners with small GAT or gliders (which, as I said, are nearly invisible) is more risky than necessary. My complaints about noise are minor (a twin-jet at 4,300ft is pretty quiet -- not as noisy as the aerobatter nearby, for instance).
BugOutWest is offline  
Old 25th Apr 2010, 11:30
  #13 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: England
Age: 70
Posts: 21
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Stacks and NATS consultation

Quote:
the aircraft will drop out of any stack when it can and make its way towards the approach at whatever altitude the captain decides with ATC.
The captain does not decide what level they leave the stack at. The approach controller manages the stacks, gives vectors from the stacks and descends the aircraft. Normally the aircraft will leave the stack at min stack level, FL70 or 80 normally (depending on the QNH)
That is information that I didn't have, that the min level is the min leaving altitude/FL; thanks Vortex issues.

And your points about the NATS consultation makes me believe that NATS should have had you on their PR team, explaining what and how would happen with the new holds for Luton and Stansted. The noise envelope graphics they used were obscure to a great proportion of Joe Public and some of the assumptions/facts that they used were incorrect.

But, we shall see how it goes next time.

It would be good to meet some of you chaps over a beer to discuss it, but this information has been most useful, thanks.
BugOutWest is offline  
Old 25th Apr 2010, 11:49
  #14 (permalink)  

 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 796
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
BugOutWest,

It would be good to meet some of you chaps over a beer to discuss it, but this information has been most useful, thanks.
All the control for the traffic you're talking about is done down at Swanwick.

With your QFI hat on get in touch with the folk down there and bring yourself and some of your studes down for a visit, you'd be very welcome I'm sure.
Roffa is offline  
Old 25th Apr 2010, 11:58
  #15 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: England
Age: 70
Posts: 21
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Good plan!

All the control for the traffic you're talking about is done down at Swanwick.

With your QFI hat on get in touch with the folk down there and bring yourself and some of your studes down for a visit, you'd be very welcome I'm sure.
Excellent idea, Roffa. Thanks
BugOutWest is offline  
Old 25th Apr 2010, 12:43
  #16 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: England
Posts: 473
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Bug out west a fj QFI? My a**e (arse).
Grabbers is offline  
Old 25th Apr 2010, 14:16
  #17 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: South East
Age: 56
Posts: 614
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The writer of this gem is, apparently, a QFI. I am surprised at his lack of knowledge.
I'm not!
Barnaby the Bear is offline  
Old 25th Apr 2010, 17:17
  #18 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Dubai and Sunderland
Posts: 818
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Gliders - Radar - In my 28 years of experience a primary radar will show gliders up very well!
10 DME ARC is offline  
Old 25th Apr 2010, 17:38
  #19 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: England
Age: 70
Posts: 21
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Primary returns?

Gliders - Radar - In my 28 years of experience a primary radar will show gliders up very well!
OK, now I feel a prat (ignoring BtB and Grabbers). So a controller will be able to deconflict gliders from other aircraft under normal circumstances?

I must admit that I thought that plastic structures would do a good job of transparency to radar waves.
BugOutWest is offline  
Old 25th Apr 2010, 18:13
  #20 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: UK
Age: 45
Posts: 84
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
So a controller will be able to deconflict gliders from other aircraft under normal circumstances?
You would be hard pressed to find a controller giving a Deconfliction service in an area of high activity. They may at best get a Traffic Service and told where there the gliders are ie.

"Big Jet 123, area of high intensity gliding in your 12 o'clock, 5 miles, keep a good look out"
Vortex Issues is offline  


Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.