Thames/Heathrow - G-LIZZ: It weren't me, honest!

[Timothy]

It must be frustrating when you are refused a transit due to 1 pending IFR departure but that is an individual unit and controller problem.

I don't want to stray too far from the original problem here. I was not denied access due to "1 pending IFR departure"; I was denied access when there were no IFR departures for at least the next 2˝ hours because LC was closed.

I am sorry, but that gives the lie to all the comments about IATA, CAT, importance of flights, schedules, slot times, costs of MAs, danger to IFR flights and so on.

NATS stopped me going into pretty much empty airspace (according to what I could see on TCAS and visually there was one other aircraft in the zone.)

The problem was that the controller was controlling a lot of other things and had been instructed not to take pop-up traffic so as not to get overloaded.

So the rest of it, including the "who pays?" arguments are interesting but belong in another thread.

Though there is the one interesting question as to who should pay for Class D airspace when the airport is closed. In most countries the controller switches on an autoresponder to say that the zone is Class G and that he or she has gone home to a well-deserved cup of Horlicks.

But I do understand that the Security Services want a Known Environment over London even when LC is closed. Who should pay for that?

The obvious answer would be the Home Office, but I can't see why it should be LC, LC's users or GA VFR users.

[ShyTorque]

It's not just ourselves we have to protect, it's you guys too! We have a duty of care over you all. If we have several of you in the zone and, heaven forbid, two of you collide, it's highly likely that you can all kiss goodbye to flying over the city full stop. We have to be able to pass traffic information to you all, in order to assist you to see and avoid. Sometimes, we might have 5 (or more) of you in close proximity. That's 20 pieces of traffic information that need to be passed if we are doing it properly. That takes time, and unfortunately, we aren't only there just to do that.

Surely that is the sole reason for the existence of ATC!

Point is though, in cases where transit access is totally denied, as was here, pilots must route around and will most likely go by the shortest distance around the outside, in Class G. This results in the situation where aircraft will be following the same route in opposite directions and at very similar altitudes with no ATC input.

There are already a number of choke points in the London area, especially at that end of the CTR. Closing swathes of Class D creates less safety, not more.

[Una Due Tfc]

"Surely that is the sole reason for the existence of ATC!"

Indeed. But who pays for said ATC.

It's a simple fact that those who pay the bills (the airlines) get priority to the detriment of those who do not when things get busy.Someone has to pay the leccy bill for the radar....

[Timothy]

Defruiter,

As I understand it, Heathrow Radar 125.625 is normally split from Thames Radar 132.7, across two positions, but at the time in question the two positions were combined into one, because of staffing issues.

Is that different from your understanding?

[Timothy]

We are round in circles a bit here

As I understand it, the controller was instructed not to accept pop-up traffic because he was covering both positions. That is a staffing issue.

Whether Southend and Biggin IFR traffic on top of LL and LC VFR traffic justified that decision, I cannot say.

[Timothy]

I think that that is where the confusion lies.

I have been doing that flight on a very regular basis, on average every other Sunday, I would say, for ten to fifteen years and it has never been refused before.

That the controller was covering Thames because of shortages resulting from the SERA/LL Class D training is the reason I was given.

[ShyTorque]

"Surely that is the sole reason for the existence of ATC!"

Indeed. But who pays for said ATC.

I'd say we all pay, either directly or indirectly. But, as was pointed out earlier, the airlines demand the protection, in general GA doesn't

[Timothy]

It sounds like you probably do on a regular basis

See you 9am Sunday?

[Squawk 7500]

Just as an added thought for the GA guys:

When we have staffing issues, the initial course of action might be to regulate the known IFR traffic to prevent overload. This will probably involve applying flow control to issue slot times, MDIs/ADIs, NBTs etc. and can cause lengthy delays.

So when you pitch up at the zone boundary requesting a transit, and you're told to remain outside for 10 minutes, just think that the IFR traffic ahead of you could have been sat on the ground for an hour or two, full of passengers, taking their delay without complaint. I know it's easy to look at the snapshot of traffic you hear on the r/t, but take a moment to think about the big picture.

You can prevent all this frustration with a quick call to us before you depart. Let us know what you plan to do and we'll advise whether we can accomodate and any delays you might get. I guarantee we will always do our best to fit you in, and if we can't there will always be a good reason.

[ShyTorque]

Speak to you on the airwaves sometime

You often do speak to us (regular user for well over ten years) and I am the first to sing the praises of the service offered on 125.625. Sadly, the service offered elsewhere is sometimes not so accommodating, or, dare I say it, so competent.

[Timothy]

Ha ha!

Which loops straight back to the OP, in which I said:

Originally Posted by me

in my 45 years and thousands of hours of aviation all over the world, Thames/Heathrow Radar are the best and most accommodating unit I have dealt with.

Maybe we should lay Groundhog Day to rest there?!

[ShyTorque]

pitch up at the zone boundary requesting a transit, and you're told to remain outside for 10 minutes, just think that the IFR traffic ahead of you could have been sat on the ground for an hour or two, full of passengers, taking their delay without complaint. I know it's easy to look at the snapshot of traffic you hear on the r/t, but take

Squawk 7500, if landing in Class D, I always do, as per the mandatory requirement for the LHR CTR's inner area, which has been carried over from the recently changed Class A days ( I was doing this long before AIC Y049/2011 was published). However, the nature of the job means we cannot always do so ten miles in advance for a transit flight. But we never "pitch up at the zone boundary", we do try very hard to give the required notice; we try to be as helpful and expeditious as possible, knowing that this is mutually beneficial.

As for airline passengers being delayed on the ground, no doubt you are aware of the requirement for operations in the Heathrow CTR for VFR and SVFR traffic to have the "equivalent delay" applied, apparently so even if the GA movement has absolutely no effect on IFR traffic.

[ThamesOperations]

You may have be mislead into thinking that "Defruiter" is the controller involved, which I can assure you, he is NOT.

[GAPSTER]

....and like that,he's gone

[Capt Kremmen]

Squawk 7500


It's qiuite simple. GA traffic, avoid CAS like the plague.

[Timothy]

Nope. GA traffic, remember that CAS is there for you too. Don't be put off.

[Capt Kremmen]

They don't need you, they don't want you, you contribute nothing, you're an irrelevant nuisance !

[Timothy]

That is most unfair. Most controllers bend over backwards to be accommodating and helpful.

I would venture to suggest that some of the small number of negative comments on here, ostensibly from controllers, come from people who either have not controlled for some time or have never controlled. (Though I rush to add that the one person who has been identified as a retired controller, TDM, always gave exemplary service when he was in Thames.)

That is the nature of anonymous forums. I hate the Secret Seven names and the ability to rush out, stick your tongue out, then run back and hide behind mummy's skirts, especially when you are doing a Sandie Shaw imitation.

That is why I always fully identify myself, so that I have to stand by what I write and my credentials can be checked.

[Capt Kremmen]

Timothy.

Your first sentence. Yes, ATCO's CAN be helpful and accommodating to GA especially - some might say, only - when their workload is light. If that is the case then that is understandable.

Aviation is divided into two broad strands: Commercial and GA. Commercial aviation pays the mortgage and the school fees, puts bread on the table and provides a dividend for shareholders.

It provides scientific research, new aircraft designs, complex airport terminals, managerial skills at all levels and a level of technical ability that permeates the entire global industry. What the accumulative value of all this is, I can only guess; many billions.

And GA ? Well, for most, it is a pleasant hobby. A desirable recreational pursuit. And really, that is it. We can pad it out a bit by referring to the FTO's it supports. All the instructors and the maintenance engineers, the chaps that sit on the gang mowers forever cutting grass in the summer etc.

The bald and unpalatable fact is that there is no real need for GA, anymore than there is for sailing small sailboats. It is a desirable hobby but not, in the scheme of things very essential.

I can hear 'Disgusted' of Tunbridge Wells muttering into his pint, who is this Kremmen fellow, just who does he think he is, rubbishing our beloved pastime. NO I AM NOT. I'm attempting a little balance, using a bit of perspective. Emphasising if you like the gulf that exists between the reality that is commercial aviation and that which is a pleasant, un-necessary but wholly delighful GA.

GA contributes nothing of any consequence to Commercial aviation and that is why GA is seen as an irrelevance.

[ShyTorque]

Capt. K,

I think you need to revisit what the term GA encompasses. It's far more than private pilots on jollies!