Doncaster LARS
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 83
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Doncaster LARS
Doncaster always seem willing to provide LARS but I notice they are not a published LARS unit.... Looking at the neighbouring units they seem likely candidates given that they're H24... Anyone have any thoughts on this?
Yes if it's outside their CTA/CTR. They only need to provide 'basic' outside; anything else is a bonus. Also don't forget their radar controllers are at Liverpool, don't know where their radar head is.
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: On the wireless...
Posts: 1,901
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So it's done out of the goodness of their hearts?
Doncaster doesn't seem to have enough CAT to justify its CAS so ATC probably has a lot of spare capacity to provide pseudo-LARS ATSOCA.
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: USA
Posts: 563
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
LARS IS A HUGE MESS.
You don't have to be a notified LARS unit to provide ATSOCAs. You have to apply and will only be nominated if there is funding available.
We have non-LARS radar units that want to talk to people outside their ATZ (Cambridge / Oxford)
We have non-LARS non-radar units that want to talk to people outside their ATZ (Lydd)
We have non-LARS radar units that are typically too busy to provide a service to people outside their CAS (Stansted / Manchester / London Control)
We have non-LARS non-radar units that are typically too busy to provide a service to people outside their ATZ (Shoreham)
We have LARS units that want to talk to people outside their ATZ (Southend)
We have LARS units that are happy to provide a service to people outside their CAS (Norwich)
We have LARS units that want to talk to people for far too many miles away from their ATZ (Farnborough)
To solve this problem, every unit that can provide radar services in lower airspace (regardless of whether it is inside or outside controlled airspace) should be called LARS.
How it is funded is completely irrelevant to the pilot and his LARS charts.
Last edited by soaringhigh650; 18th Oct 2013 at 13:42.
With the exception of the Farnborough LARS operation, LARS is provided by units with spare capacity from their existing resources.
This should explain all the points you attempt to make.
This should explain all the points you attempt to make.
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: LHR/EGLL
Age: 45
Posts: 4,392
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
We have LARS units that want to talk to people for far too many miles away from their ATZ (Farnborough)
In my experience it's the aircraft who are calling up/staying with Farnborough LARS outside their operational area.
How far do you think the Farnborough LARS sectors should stretch?
I assume you're aware that their sectors run from west of CPT, down to GWC, over to SFD, up to DET, northeast of BKY and then just south of WCO, and the reasons behind that coverage which have nothing to do with the EGLF ATZ.
Last edited by Gonzo; 18th Oct 2013 at 14:58.
Exactly. I couldn't be bothered to explain to SH650 yet again!
Suffice to say, in the various Farnborough sectors, the Heathrow 10cm, Debden 23cm and Pease Pottage 23cm all provide excellent low coverage for the Farnborough task.
Suffice to say, in the various Farnborough sectors, the Heathrow 10cm, Debden 23cm and Pease Pottage 23cm all provide excellent low coverage for the Farnborough task.
Last edited by chevvron; 18th Oct 2013 at 15:09.
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: USA
Posts: 563
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Really? In my experience it's the aircraft who are calling up/staying with Farnborough LARS outside their operational area. How far do you think the Farnborough LARS sectors should stretch?
Every other LARS unit operates some say 25-30nm radius from a point centered on their airport.
Farnborough goes so much wider - has 3 areas and covers a huge amount of airspace around the South East.
Really what Farnborough is doing should have been called London Approach and let VFR traffic go in and out of controlled airspace easily but of course they were not smart enough to figure that one out.
My point remains: The role of LARS is poorly understood and inconsistently applied by many.
Last edited by soaringhigh650; 18th Oct 2013 at 15:49.
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: LHR/EGLL
Age: 45
Posts: 4,392
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes. But you have mis-understood my point.
Really what Farnborough is doing should have been called London Approach and let VFR traffic go in and out of controlled airspace easily but of course they were not smart enough to figure that one out. 
The role of LARS is poorly understood.
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: On the wireless...
Posts: 1,901
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by soaringhigh650
We have non-LARS radar units that want to talk to people outside their ATZ (Cambridge / Oxford)
We have non-LARS non-radar units that want to talk to people outside their ATZ (Lydd)
We have non-LARS radar units that are typically too busy to provide a service to people outside their CAS (Stansted / Manchester / London Control)
We have non-LARS non-radar units that are typically too busy to provide a service to people outside their ATZ (Shoreham)
We have LARS units that want to talk to people outside their ATZ (Southend)
We have LARS units that are happy to provide a service to people outside their CAS (Norwich)
We have LARS units that want to talk to people for far too many miles away from their ATZ (Farnborough)
We have non-LARS non-radar units that want to talk to people outside their ATZ (Lydd)
We have non-LARS radar units that are typically too busy to provide a service to people outside their CAS (Stansted / Manchester / London Control)
We have non-LARS non-radar units that are typically too busy to provide a service to people outside their ATZ (Shoreham)
We have LARS units that want to talk to people outside their ATZ (Southend)
We have LARS units that are happy to provide a service to people outside their CAS (Norwich)
We have LARS units that want to talk to people for far too many miles away from their ATZ (Farnborough)
Clearly somebody somewhere needs to get a robust grip on the promulgation of the availability of radar services outside UK CAS. CAP774 so-called 'Duty of Care' has muddied the waters so much that ANSPs don't seem to know where they stand. Why on earth should CAS radar directors be expected to encumber their spare capacity such as it is by babysitting itinerant Class G traffic?
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: USA
Posts: 563
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Similarly pilots themselves persist in requesting Lower Airspace Radar Service from units which have no remit to provide it eg. Thames Radar and Solent Radar.
The Initial Calls seeking such non-available LARS are often poorly prepared radio transmissions which themselves compromise flight safety by interrupting precision radar sequencing.
(i.e. commercial route charges)
A more seamless service could be given, but who would pay for it?
So NATS ain't making enough money already in both approach and en-route departments?
I can tell you that the US taxpayer doesn't pay that amount for me to land my little Cub at JFK or transit over its airspace.
Last edited by soaringhigh650; 18th Oct 2013 at 17:06.
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: On the wireless...
Posts: 1,901
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by soaringhigh650
it's not clear who to talk to
Originally Posted by soaringhigh650
you clearly haven't separated the IFR from the VFR frequencies
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: LHR/EGLL
Age: 45
Posts: 4,392
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There is no distinction between commerical or non-commercial. Loosely speaking if you are IFR and over 2T or VFR and over 5.7T you are charged at the NERL unit rate, which is the second highest in the world.
If you want to dispute them, you have to go to the CAA who set the charges, not NATS.
Next time if I can afford to pay the £136.17 + 20% VAT minimum NSL "navigation fee" when I land at Stansted I might.
Someone ain't making enough money already in both approach and en-route departments?
Someone ain't making enough money already in both approach and en-route departments?
Anyway, I've lost track of what your point is here. Stansted is inside CAS. LARS services around the outside of the CTR is provided by Farnborough LARS (NATS Airspace - mostly), so that's what you're paying for with that charge.
Maybe you should set up your own ANSP and start tendering for contracts SH.
Last edited by Gonzo; 18th Oct 2013 at 17:12.
Avoid imitations
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
Posts: 14,576
Received 428 Likes
on
226 Posts
So you clearly haven't separated the IFR from the VFR frequencies then?
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hants
Posts: 2,295
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
saying that NATS charges are the second highest in the world really hacks me off and shows a complete ignorance on your part and many others.
NATS is not subsidised; unlike many other ANSPs.
I also really get hacked off when airlines complain that they are having to pay for our pension etc etc.
We are a service provider, our customer in the main, is the airline. They charge their customers for tickets which contribute to their pensions... so why do they bleat on about us doing so?
NATS is not subsidised; unlike many other ANSPs.
I also really get hacked off when airlines complain that they are having to pay for our pension etc etc.
We are a service provider, our customer in the main, is the airline. They charge their customers for tickets which contribute to their pensions... so why do they bleat on about us doing so?
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: T.C.
Age: 56
Posts: 275
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Soaring high, what do you want a free service???
I will happily offer a LARS service around Gatwick and Luton approach, and we can stop the Excellent farnborough LARS service. however we would need an extra controller position, so that needs to be paid for, now I would love to start requesting credit card details over the R/T prior to giving a service. Is that good idea???
One more thing SH, why was EGLF LARS introduced? Because idiots like you kept infringing CAS and causing chaos!!!!
I will happily offer a LARS service around Gatwick and Luton approach, and we can stop the Excellent farnborough LARS service. however we would need an extra controller position, so that needs to be paid for, now I would love to start requesting credit card details over the R/T prior to giving a service. Is that good idea???
One more thing SH, why was EGLF LARS introduced? Because idiots like you kept infringing CAS and causing chaos!!!!
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: CENSORED
Posts: 28
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This thread has totally lost direction, it's no longer in answer to the OP's question. It's a thread about Doncaster LARS, not mud throwing about SS/LF/NATS charges.
In answer to Cottom Approach, nice handle, it does seem strange that a unit such as Doncaster doesn't have LARS. Seeing as how they are H24 and are right slap, bang in the middle of area which many GA/Mil use to transit the country. Hopefully there might be a change ahead whenever the powers that be meet to discuss such issues!
In answer to Cottom Approach, nice handle
, it does seem strange that a unit such as Doncaster doesn't have LARS. Seeing as how they are H24 and are right slap, bang in the middle of area which many GA/Mil use to transit the country. Hopefully there might be a change ahead whenever the powers that be meet to discuss such issues!