CTAF in the UK
Things changed with HIAL then. When Islay was NATS, there was an ATCO with ADC and APR ratings who was also airport manager, and his relief was often a FISO in the shape of the resident tels guy.
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: nearby
Posts: 36
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CTAF in the UK
Hi Chevvron iys been changed for quite a few years. I too remember when it was that way. Prestwick supplied some of the relief controllers for these positions if my memory serves me correctly. Islay, Barra, Tiree, and Cambeltown are FISO only and have been for quite some time.
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Going deeper underground
Age: 55
Posts: 332
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Last time I was on exercise at Islay Airport (2001?), the tower was manned by a FISO and the firemen did everything else, so the change must have been a while ago.
The FISO on at the time was very helpful and a thoroughly nice chap. The firemen were tremendously hospitable, lending me their car for the afternoon and giving me a hearty supper of venison stew whilst I waited for the Herc to turn up after dark.
The FISO on at the time was very helpful and a thoroughly nice chap. The firemen were tremendously hospitable, lending me their car for the afternoon and giving me a hearty supper of venison stew whilst I waited for the Herc to turn up after dark.
Thread Starter
Eric T Cartman, thanks for the info. There must have been almost as many staff as passengers!
Do you know why the CAA at the time needed ATC when the VOR approach was being flown and if it was a system monitoring issue could that be done remotely with modern equipment, i.e. has technology ovetaken old rules.
bb
Do you know why the CAA at the time needed ATC when the VOR approach was being flown and if it was a system monitoring issue could that be done remotely with modern equipment, i.e. has technology ovetaken old rules.
bb
After gaining my ADC/GMC endorsement at Glasgow (1972) I was sent to Sumburgh for H & I experience. The complement there, right at the start of the oil boom, was ATCO Manager, 1 x tels engineer (who was supposed to be a FISO too), clerical assistant, 'several' firemen/baggage handlers and one MT Mechanic. The ATCO was assisted by ATCO cadets rotating through every 2 weeks for 4 weeks at a time. The relief ATCO Manager , who was there when I arrived, was supplied by Aberdeen.
This was well before radar and ILS were installed , but there was a choice of NDB or VOR approaches, and on more than one occasion, we had more than one aircraft inbound for an iap.
This was well before radar and ILS were installed , but there was a choice of NDB or VOR approaches, and on more than one occasion, we had more than one aircraft inbound for an iap.
I, admittedly a Yank who flies frequently to the UK, find all this blather about "must have ATC, no DIY ATC stuff amusing. Farnborough (EGLF), is outside CAS, for God's sake. You lot have various levels of service which are pretty unique to the UK, like the ATCSOCAS. Just join the rest of the world with CTAF. I was landing in Palau (PTRO, Heathrow Director) at night last week with two other FAR 121 carriers, all in uncontrolled airspace with "cruise clearances". We worked it out just fine. VMC didn't hurt.
GF
GF
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Berkshire, UK
Age: 79
Posts: 8,268
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
<<Farnborough (EGLF), is outside CAS, for God's sake. >>
And, for God's sake, Farnborough is a busy airfield and has a licenced ATC unit which includes very busy radar sectors. It's also very close to several other airfields and Class A airspace. If you think you would be safe flying in and out of Farnborough on a "DIY basis" then I think you need to spend an hour or two at Farnborough Radar one day. You might be surprised!
And, for God's sake, Farnborough is a busy airfield and has a licenced ATC unit which includes very busy radar sectors. It's also very close to several other airfields and Class A airspace. If you think you would be safe flying in and out of Farnborough on a "DIY basis" then I think you need to spend an hour or two at Farnborough Radar one day. You might be surprised!
More than just an ATCO
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Up someone's nose
Age: 75
Posts: 1,768
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It might suprise you that dumb as pilots are they can just about work out their own sequence.
Bren I got a couple of replies on the Bulgarian thread. They'll be checking them out soon before they know the Q codes,
Guest
Posts: n/a
bad bear, there are a number of issues that need to be considered. But first, don't underestimate the inertia associated with changing things - often for reasons that are valid for significant proportions of those affected.
Let's think about going to CTAF, or something similar, at an airport which caters for commercial passenger-carrying aircraft - what level of service, or of safety, are those passengers entitled to expect? What level of service do they tink they get today - it;'s an interesting topic which, to my knowledge, has never been properly investigated. In part, at least, this question almost certainly was what led to the legislation that requires ATC at an airport in the UK where an aircraft can carry out an instrument approach.
However, there often appears to be confusion between the concepts of an IAP and an ATC service. Although it may seem to be stating the bleedin' obvious but if a pilot needs to make an approach to an airport and can't do it visually, he needs an IAP - if he wants to be separated from other aircraft he needs ATC too. The idea of pilots sorting themselves out by talking to each other is not well established in the UK, particularly in the eyes of the CAA people who set the rules. Indeed, I think there is some evidence to suggest that it doesn't work very well - I recall at least one AIRPROX in Scotland where the FISO provided all of the correct information but the aeroplanes still came close to colliding.
Despite this, some 8 or 9 years ago the CAA proposed permitting IAPs to be conducted where a FIS was available but it met a lot of opposition and I imagine it was dropped because nothing further came of it.
But all may not be not lost. It is quite possible that EASA will sort this out - or at least attempt to achieve some consistency across Europe.
Let's think about going to CTAF, or something similar, at an airport which caters for commercial passenger-carrying aircraft - what level of service, or of safety, are those passengers entitled to expect? What level of service do they tink they get today - it;'s an interesting topic which, to my knowledge, has never been properly investigated. In part, at least, this question almost certainly was what led to the legislation that requires ATC at an airport in the UK where an aircraft can carry out an instrument approach.
However, there often appears to be confusion between the concepts of an IAP and an ATC service. Although it may seem to be stating the bleedin' obvious but if a pilot needs to make an approach to an airport and can't do it visually, he needs an IAP - if he wants to be separated from other aircraft he needs ATC too. The idea of pilots sorting themselves out by talking to each other is not well established in the UK, particularly in the eyes of the CAA people who set the rules. Indeed, I think there is some evidence to suggest that it doesn't work very well - I recall at least one AIRPROX in Scotland where the FISO provided all of the correct information but the aeroplanes still came close to colliding.
Despite this, some 8 or 9 years ago the CAA proposed permitting IAPs to be conducted where a FIS was available but it met a lot of opposition and I imagine it was dropped because nothing further came of it.
But all may not be not lost. It is quite possible that EASA will sort this out - or at least attempt to achieve some consistency across Europe.
HEATHROW DIRECTOR
First, no offence intended and I would very much like a visit to Farnborough ATC, if that is even possible in these times. They have been unfailingly pleasant and helpful, even when I've had some unusual requests.
Second, while it may have licensed ATC, is it not outside controlled airspace? Is it not possible to have uncontrolled traffic fly thru the airspace, completely within the "rules"?
Third, I have no desire to "DIY" my way thru London TMA, not yet reached that level of stupidity. Just pointing out that "uncontrolled" operations are not unheard of in the UK.
Fourth, the "old heads" in the AF would always remind us "young 'uns" that UK radar controllers were outstanding because, "after all, they invented the stuff".
GF
First, no offence intended and I would very much like a visit to Farnborough ATC, if that is even possible in these times. They have been unfailingly pleasant and helpful, even when I've had some unusual requests.
Second, while it may have licensed ATC, is it not outside controlled airspace? Is it not possible to have uncontrolled traffic fly thru the airspace, completely within the "rules"?
Third, I have no desire to "DIY" my way thru London TMA, not yet reached that level of stupidity. Just pointing out that "uncontrolled" operations are not unheard of in the UK.
Fourth, the "old heads" in the AF would always remind us "young 'uns" that UK radar controllers were outstanding because, "after all, they invented the stuff".
GF
Thread Starter
There are occasions where the option of having CTAF in the UK could be useful. I think it was last year when Durham Tees had a controller shortage and NOTAMed the airfield closed several times each day. The CAS of course lapses when the airfield is closed and no one can land. Any inbound planes would have to take up the hold in class "G" and wait (unless they could sit in the bottom level of P18). If there had been the option to down grade to CTAF the planes that arrived while the controller was on his break could have continued to land.
bb
bb
The Farnborough situation is not unique in the UK, there are many airfields both with and without radar with iaps in class G airspace.
In the Farnborough case, offering ATC services to transit traffic mitigates, to some extent, the lack of controlled airspace by creating a 'known traffic environment; most people who fly through the iap are on one or other of the Farnborough frequencies. If Farnborough did not have ATC of any kind, it would be a strictly VFR airfield as there are no holding or letdown aids associated with the iaps ie nothing to get you onto the ILS, (apart from comms. fail procedures which cannot be used without radar) and in any case with the proximity of class A airspace only 5 miles away, you couldn't have a purely 'pilot interpreted' letdown due to the necessary 'buffer' required.
I was the person responsible for getting Farnborough iaps approved so I like to think I know what I'm talking about.
In the Farnborough case, offering ATC services to transit traffic mitigates, to some extent, the lack of controlled airspace by creating a 'known traffic environment; most people who fly through the iap are on one or other of the Farnborough frequencies. If Farnborough did not have ATC of any kind, it would be a strictly VFR airfield as there are no holding or letdown aids associated with the iaps ie nothing to get you onto the ILS, (apart from comms. fail procedures which cannot be used without radar) and in any case with the proximity of class A airspace only 5 miles away, you couldn't have a purely 'pilot interpreted' letdown due to the necessary 'buffer' required.
I was the person responsible for getting Farnborough iaps approved so I like to think I know what I'm talking about.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: southampton,hampshire,england
Posts: 866
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
When Heathrow tower was evacuated the aircraft were allowed to land on their own, and then find their own stand. True or false?
Make absolutely sure you know what happened before spouting off personal opinion. [To save embarrassment]
Make absolutely sure you know what happened before spouting off personal opinion. [To save embarrassment]
Chevvron
I understand the "how" of Farnborough, that it is in uncontrolled airspace, joining clearances, types of service. I'd like to understand the "how" and the "why" of it. How can uncontrolled airspace exist with a licensed radar unit? Why has this come about and continues, considering it is 5 miles from Class A airspace? I flew out of MLD, on Galaxys for 18 years and understanding Class G was an annual check ride question after a couple of near hits there when USAF US-based pilots didn't understand what they agreed to on taking RIS.
Any info to explain this situation to US civil pilots who hav had no experience with UK ATC?
GF
I understand the "how" of Farnborough, that it is in uncontrolled airspace, joining clearances, types of service. I'd like to understand the "how" and the "why" of it. How can uncontrolled airspace exist with a licensed radar unit? Why has this come about and continues, considering it is 5 miles from Class A airspace? I flew out of MLD, on Galaxys for 18 years and understanding Class G was an annual check ride question after a couple of near hits there when USAF US-based pilots didn't understand what they agreed to on taking RIS.
Any info to explain this situation to US civil pilots who hav had no experience with UK ATC?
GF
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Euroland
Posts: 2,814
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In order fror CTAF to work, there would need to be quite drastic changes to the airspace structure and the operating practices of the ACCs.
Taking Doncaster as an example;
Replace the current controlled airspace with Class E and increase the VMC minima appropriately to proper ICAO minima.
Have the responsible ACC issue departure and approach clearances to aircraft and ensure separation of IFR vs IFR flights in the airspace.
Very much a 1 IFR flight at a time situation.
No radar service to arriving or departing flights until within ACC radar coverage.
Limited number of inbound or outbound routes and forget the idea of arriving or departing IFR into class G airspace.
Great Idea - bring it on!!!!
Taking Doncaster as an example;
Replace the current controlled airspace with Class E and increase the VMC minima appropriately to proper ICAO minima.
Have the responsible ACC issue departure and approach clearances to aircraft and ensure separation of IFR vs IFR flights in the airspace.
Very much a 1 IFR flight at a time situation.
No radar service to arriving or departing flights until within ACC radar coverage.
Limited number of inbound or outbound routes and forget the idea of arriving or departing IFR into class G airspace.
Great Idea - bring it on!!!!
Guest
Posts: n/a
Not an easy thing to explain. The UK, unlike just about every other State, has always allowed an air traffic control service to be provided outside CAS - in some ways it even encourages it. As a result, it has had to invent rules and procedures to deal with the anomalies that are created.
The usual reason or justification offered is that the UK is a relatively small place and the establishment of CAS limits mil and GA activity - it's certainly true that the mil and GA lobby are the traditional opponents of any extension to the CAS system (joined more recently by the green lobby).
Given the difficulty in establishing CAS where it is justified to provide the appropriate protection to commercial GAT, the prevalence of control services being provided outside controlled airspace (in many areas) has increased over time.
Although it doesn't help a great deal, you are not alone - there are a good many UK pilots (and a few controllers) who don't understand the implication of the rules and services that apply outside CAS!
The usual reason or justification offered is that the UK is a relatively small place and the establishment of CAS limits mil and GA activity - it's certainly true that the mil and GA lobby are the traditional opponents of any extension to the CAS system (joined more recently by the green lobby).
Given the difficulty in establishing CAS where it is justified to provide the appropriate protection to commercial GAT, the prevalence of control services being provided outside controlled airspace (in many areas) has increased over time.
Although it doesn't help a great deal, you are not alone - there are a good many UK pilots (and a few controllers) who don't understand the implication of the rules and services that apply outside CAS!
Last edited by Spitoon; 9th Jan 2011 at 18:13. Reason: spilling
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Berkshire, UK
Age: 79
Posts: 8,268
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
<<When Heathrow tower was evacuated the aircraft were allowed to land on their own, and then find their own stand.>>
Heathrow Tower was evacuated several times when I was there; in fact I took part in the very first one!! Nothing such as you suggest happened during any of them I find it incredibly difficult to believe that this could happen. I'll just say that if it did, then the crews of the aircraft were monstrously irresponsible..
Heathrow Tower was evacuated several times when I was there; in fact I took part in the very first one!! Nothing such as you suggest happened during any of them I find it incredibly difficult to believe that this could happen. I'll just say that if it did, then the crews of the aircraft were monstrously irresponsible..
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: HANTS
Posts: 193
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
...a recent situation Bren.055166k is not entirely correct in what he says but for the usual reasons the details should not be discussed openly I feel.However,@ 055166k I assume you are aware of the fallout from that particular episode?