Unhelpful controllers at Birmingham?
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: LTCC
Posts: 34
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
GroundBound
I'm in agreement with my ATCO colleagues over the subject of VFR access to Class D airspace.
We are required to provide a safe, orderly and expeditious service to the IFR movements into our airfields and the reason that the controlled airspace has been established is to protect the airfield arrival and departure routes. There are occasions when VFR transits are possible but sometimes you need to 'control' them by specifying a route or altitude but this is not to provide separation but to build in some traffic avoidance. This is one of the requirements for IFR traffic inside Class D airspace. On other occasions VFR transits will get through the controlled airspace with no restrictions and on other occasions, generally due to workload, they can't be accommodated.
I can't speak for Birmingham because I'm not valid there but I can say that at Luton and Stansted we will generally do our best to offer an alternative route through controlled airspace if the requested route is not available but this is subject to workload. It is also worth mentioning that there are often VFR activities operating under a letter of agreement already going on inside Class D airspace which already impact on the way in which IFR traffic is handled.
Our regulator ATSSD accepts that there will be occasions when access to controlled airspace is not available. They have also recently issued an ATSIN specifically about Class D airspace to remind VFR pilots that they won't be separated from other traffic inside Class D airspace. You are right to say that sometimes there is confusion about classes of airspace but it seems to me that Class D airspace can work well and can be accessed by VFR traffic but not always on demand.
I'm in agreement with my ATCO colleagues over the subject of VFR access to Class D airspace.
We are required to provide a safe, orderly and expeditious service to the IFR movements into our airfields and the reason that the controlled airspace has been established is to protect the airfield arrival and departure routes. There are occasions when VFR transits are possible but sometimes you need to 'control' them by specifying a route or altitude but this is not to provide separation but to build in some traffic avoidance. This is one of the requirements for IFR traffic inside Class D airspace. On other occasions VFR transits will get through the controlled airspace with no restrictions and on other occasions, generally due to workload, they can't be accommodated.
I can't speak for Birmingham because I'm not valid there but I can say that at Luton and Stansted we will generally do our best to offer an alternative route through controlled airspace if the requested route is not available but this is subject to workload. It is also worth mentioning that there are often VFR activities operating under a letter of agreement already going on inside Class D airspace which already impact on the way in which IFR traffic is handled.
Our regulator ATSSD accepts that there will be occasions when access to controlled airspace is not available. They have also recently issued an ATSIN specifically about Class D airspace to remind VFR pilots that they won't be separated from other traffic inside Class D airspace. You are right to say that sometimes there is confusion about classes of airspace but it seems to me that Class D airspace can work well and can be accessed by VFR traffic but not always on demand.
Looks like between them, GroundBound and TC_LTN have hit the nail on the head. The blame for UK ATC's flouting of ICAO standards as regards separation in class D airspace can be laid squarely at the feet of CAA ATS Standards and not individual ATCOs. 
(Actually I don't think it's an unreasonable interpretation, but it is different to the interpretation of the standards to be used in class D by many other states.)
BTW MATS Pt 1 is available online.
(Actually I don't think it's an unreasonable interpretation, but it is different to the interpretation of the standards to be used in class D by many other states.)
BTW MATS Pt 1 is available online.
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Belgium
Posts: 265
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks for that Bookworm - I think you've got the point entirely 
. I am not trying to knock UK ATCOs (having been one myself in the distant past ), nor suggesting that they don't provide a good service to VFR transits in class D.
Looking from a GA pilot perspective, I find class D airspace rather puzzling, since, on the one hand it doesn't provide ATC separation of VFR (from anything), but on the other hand requires a clearance to enter (for what, then?). Class C seems much more logical, as ATC separation is provided between IFR/VFR and a clearance to enter therfore has a real purpose.
I shall be flying in Irish airspace next week, and there the zones are class C, although I would have thought, from the traffic levels (apologies if wrong, here
), that class D is more appropriate, whereas the much more complex and busy airspace around Brum is class D when class C seems to be required - where's the logic to it?
This particular thread, and the Brum web site, seemed to indicate that the airspace is actually handled like class C (for well explained reasons ), but it always bugs me 
(as I am involved in making various sorts of rules) when rules are established, but not followed. If there are good reasons for not following the rules, then the rules need to be reviewed and updated if necessary.
Rant over
. I am not trying to knock UK ATCOs (having been one myself in the distant past ), nor suggesting that they don't provide a good service to VFR transits in class D. Looking from a GA pilot perspective, I find class D airspace rather puzzling, since, on the one hand it doesn't provide ATC separation of VFR (from anything), but on the other hand requires a clearance to enter (for what, then?). Class C seems much more logical, as ATC separation is provided between IFR/VFR and a clearance to enter therfore has a real purpose.
I shall be flying in Irish airspace next week, and there the zones are class C, although I would have thought, from the traffic levels (apologies if wrong, here
), that class D is more appropriate, whereas the much more complex and busy airspace around Brum is class D when class C seems to be required - where's the logic to it?This particular thread, and the Brum web site, seemed to indicate that the airspace is actually handled like class C (for well explained reasons
), but it always bugs me (as I am involved in making various sorts of rules) when rules are established, but not followed. If there are good reasons for not following the rules, then the rules need to be reviewed and updated if necessary.Rant over
Guest
Posts: n/a
The biggest potential problem for me with VFR transits through Class D is when the routeing request goes near the final approach at an altitude that will conflict with IFR traffic.
Sure I only need to pass traffic info and leave it at that. But if the IFR flight then asks for avoiding instructions I can't afford (at Gatwick) the subsequent disruption to the approach sequence.
So the VFR traffic will always be controlled to an extent that will not disrupt the IFR traffic. This may mean a slightly altered routeing or a level restriction, but it rarely means no access at all.
In the Utopia Airport Control Zone I'm sure they apply the rules strictly as written, but over here in the real world it's just not quite as black and white.
WF.
Sure I only need to pass traffic info and leave it at that. But if the IFR flight then asks for avoiding instructions I can't afford (at Gatwick) the subsequent disruption to the approach sequence.
So the VFR traffic will always be controlled to an extent that will not disrupt the IFR traffic. This may mean a slightly altered routeing or a level restriction, but it rarely means no access at all.
In the Utopia Airport Control Zone I'm sure they apply the rules strictly as written, but over here in the real world it's just not quite as black and white.
WF.
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: united kingdom
Posts: 355
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Two points from the perspective of a GA pilot who regularly transits class D CTA/CTRs:
1. If the CAS areas were class C, controllers would have to provide full separation standards between VFR and IFR. This would disallow instructions of the type '...traffic is a 737 on 4m final to runway xx, report traffic in sight and route to pass behind....' Such instructions to VFR traffic seem perfectly safe, require minimum of controller input, and (I suggest) allow more traffic to be handled than if providing a Class C separation service.
2. Under a VMC RIS in class G, traffic information is passed, but the other aircraft is often not seen by the pilot. It's aften really hard to spot other aeroplanes, especially looking down, against the backdrop of the ground. Applying this to class D, it's comforting to know that we're not only getting traffic information, but there is a degree of separation in the ATC planning (and postive separation is available for the asking -- although not popular at very short notice, i suspect).
Therefore my view on Class D in the UK is 'it ain't broke, so it don't need fixing.' Have there been any dangerous VFR/IFR conflictions in class D recently (other than flights without clearance)?
AA.
1. If the CAS areas were class C, controllers would have to provide full separation standards between VFR and IFR. This would disallow instructions of the type '...traffic is a 737 on 4m final to runway xx, report traffic in sight and route to pass behind....' Such instructions to VFR traffic seem perfectly safe, require minimum of controller input, and (I suggest) allow more traffic to be handled than if providing a Class C separation service.
2. Under a VMC RIS in class G, traffic information is passed, but the other aircraft is often not seen by the pilot. It's aften really hard to spot other aeroplanes, especially looking down, against the backdrop of the ground. Applying this to class D, it's comforting to know that we're not only getting traffic information, but there is a degree of separation in the ATC planning (and postive separation is available for the asking -- although not popular at very short notice, i suspect).
Therefore my view on Class D in the UK is 'it ain't broke, so it don't need fixing.' Have there been any dangerous VFR/IFR conflictions in class D recently (other than flights without clearance)?
AA.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Having worked both with C and D CTR's (Formerly in Sweden and now Norway)
I have to say that I feel quite comfortable to just pass traffic info to IFR about VFR, and vice versa when in D airspace. As pointed out, class C prohibits instructions like "cleared to transit CTR east of field, traffic one c-130 on 5 miles final rwy 28, report traffic in sight, and cross final behind"
A method I use a lot.
The only time I seperate IFR from VFR is when seperating is less laborious then traffic info. If this becomes the main modus operandi, pilots get complacent, and never look over the glareshield when flying IFR in D. Even if they get traffic info, they might expect us to keep the VFR traffic well clear, and get pi**** when they suddenly find themselfs in formation with a F-16 or what have you. "Where did he come from?" Well probably from your 3 a'clock, like I told you 2 minutes ago.......
Well, I shold shut up, VFR is 70% of the movements where I work........
I have to say that I feel quite comfortable to just pass traffic info to IFR about VFR, and vice versa when in D airspace. As pointed out, class C prohibits instructions like "cleared to transit CTR east of field, traffic one c-130 on 5 miles final rwy 28, report traffic in sight, and cross final behind"
A method I use a lot.
The only time I seperate IFR from VFR is when seperating is less laborious then traffic info. If this becomes the main modus operandi, pilots get complacent, and never look over the glareshield when flying IFR in D. Even if they get traffic info, they might expect us to keep the VFR traffic well clear, and get pi**** when they suddenly find themselfs in formation with a F-16 or what have you. "Where did he come from?" Well probably from your 3 a'clock, like I told you 2 minutes ago.......
Well, I shold shut up, VFR is 70% of the movements where I work........
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: London
Posts: 39
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From the first post; the controller was wrong for saying what he said, but what he said was absolutely correct!
A CTR is set up to provide added protection to ac in the critical stages of flight ie, take-off and landing. In the interests of flight safety CTR transits should be kept to a minimum and only be used if there is no acceptable alternative. A balance between safety and expidition......
Expedition.......
A CTR is set up to provide added protection to ac in the critical stages of flight ie, take-off and landing. In the interests of flight safety CTR transits should be kept to a minimum and only be used if there is no acceptable alternative. A balance between safety and expidition......
Expedition.......
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Belgium
Posts: 265
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Contact_Tower
That sounds like a perfectly sensible and appropriate clearance for Class D. It identifies the traffic, allows the VFR pilot to find it and make his own separation and makes it clear in what way.
Perhaps this is what was meant by other controllers who have contributed, although it didn't seem to come across to me that way
"cleared to transit CTR east of field, traffic one c-130 on 5 miles final rwy 28, report traffic in sight, and cross final behind"
Perhaps this is what was meant by other controllers who have contributed, although it didn't seem to come across to me that way
- we went in for a bit of 'controlled VFR' and kept them out of the way, either by radar or vertically.
- I will restrict the level of VFR transits or offer a reroute to enable my IFR traffic to continue 'head down' in the cockpit
- So the VFR traffic will always be controlled to an extent that will not disrupt the IFR traffic.
- route 1nm east/west of the overhead AT 2000ft QFE (copied from the "Thanks to Brize" thread)
- I will restrict the level of VFR transits or offer a reroute to enable my IFR traffic to continue 'head down' in the cockpit
- So the VFR traffic will always be controlled to an extent that will not disrupt the IFR traffic.
- route 1nm east/west of the overhead AT 2000ft QFE (copied from the "Thanks to Brize" thread)
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 359
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My tuppence worth
Again quoting the MATS Part 1
Basically reinforcing 'duty of care' and helping to foster 'over control' or our 'manic desire to keep aeroplanes apart' (as groundbound put it)
CAP493
Chapter 5 section 1.1.5
Basically reinforcing 'duty of care' and helping to foster 'over control' or our 'manic desire to keep aeroplanes apart' (as groundbound put it)
CAP493
Chapter 5 section 1.1.5
Regardless of the type of airspace, or the air traffic service being provided, nothing shall prevent a controller from taking action he considers appropriate if he believes a risk of collision exists.
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: London
Posts: 22
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think the best controllers are Manchester (EGCC), they are so laid back, proffesional, calm under pressure and very helpful even if they have had a bad day.
They are helpful to light a/c pilots, and a pleasure to talk to. They do the ATC Proffesion Proud.
It makes ALL the difference when you have good Controllers, on behalf of all pilots just to let you know it is appreciated, without mentioning names a few ATC centres can learn a lot from EGCC.
They are helpful to light a/c pilots, and a pleasure to talk to. They do the ATC Proffesion Proud.
It makes ALL the difference when you have good Controllers, on behalf of all pilots just to let you know it is appreciated, without mentioning names a few ATC centres can learn a lot from EGCC.
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 76
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
EGCC, the best? Well they can afford to be 'laid back' etc with 2 runways, less traffic than LL, KK and probably SS now, cheaper beer, nice countryside around, cheaper housing and costs of living, better quality of life, no M25 etc. I might have less grey hair and more of it if I'd been posted up there! Post them down south and see if the attitude remains the same!
aceatco, retired
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: one airshow or another
Posts: 1,431
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
- we went in for a bit of 'controlled VFR' and kept them out of the way, either by radar or vertically.
GroundBound, I don't know what environment you have operated in but round here it can get very busy. Even contact_tower, whose methodology you like, admits that it is 70% VFR. In this neck of the woods, it isn't. I think my colleagues and I have got the point across to you that we operate Class D in a way we think discharges our Duty of Care and sustains our licence and pension.
I know in an ideal world you are right, but this is the real world. And before you ask, someone somewhere has decided we do not have Class C airspace in the UK. So we don't.
Give it up.
VA
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 1,294
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Vintage ATCO
you are spot on in your comments, those of us who work class D airspace have found through experience exactly what we can and cannot do.
A litle bit of controlled VFR is not the end of the world and i'm quite sure most GA pilots would prefer that than be re-routed around the zone. I always ask an aircraft if they can accept a climb or descent or can accept a vector away from the traffic if necessary. I will endeavour to get them the routing and level they require however sometimes I have no choice but to give them a slight deviation .
We all make mistakes and sometimes after I have said something to a pilot I regret it but as I have posted previously we are after all only human and perhaps it was just the one thing that pushed the ATCO over the edge that day ,but as an apology was given to post in a magazine was unworthy of the pilot.
you are spot on in your comments, those of us who work class D airspace have found through experience exactly what we can and cannot do.
A litle bit of controlled VFR is not the end of the world and i'm quite sure most GA pilots would prefer that than be re-routed around the zone. I always ask an aircraft if they can accept a climb or descent or can accept a vector away from the traffic if necessary. I will endeavour to get them the routing and level they require however sometimes I have no choice but to give them a slight deviation .
We all make mistakes and sometimes after I have said something to a pilot I regret it but as I have posted previously we are after all only human and perhaps it was just the one thing that pushed the ATCO over the edge that day ,but as an apology was given to post in a magazine was unworthy of the pilot.
I think it's one thing to talk about the theory of this, and another to witness the practice.
I just got back from a daytrip from Cambridge to Alderney and, as ever, was highly impressed by the level of help (and routings, some of which might make the front page of the Daily Mail if I said any more) that the controllers at Essex, Thames, Heathrow and Farnborough managed to give me. And what's more, it's always like that...
Thank you guys and gals. The folks that complain about lack of VFR access to controlled airspace must be talking about a different planet.
I just got back from a daytrip from Cambridge to Alderney and, as ever, was highly impressed by the level of help (and routings, some of which might make the front page of the Daily Mail if I said any more) that the controllers at Essex, Thames, Heathrow and Farnborough managed to give me. And what's more, it's always like that...
Thank you guys and gals. The folks that complain about lack of VFR access to controlled airspace must be talking about a different planet.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Hampshire UK
Age: 70
Posts: 557
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi Bookworm,
Were you flying a PA30 today? If so I was the Thames Radar Controller who cleared you via London Bridge. We can be more flexible with routeings in the Specified Area if you are a twin. Also twins are faster (meaning transits are quicker), and the pilots (generally) are more competent. Therefore on balance a clearance is more likely. You may be interested to know that a DC6 was given a similar routeing to yourself into Biggin Hill shortly afterwards.
Were you flying a PA30 today? If so I was the Thames Radar Controller who cleared you via London Bridge. We can be more flexible with routeings in the Specified Area if you are a twin. Also twins are faster (meaning transits are quicker), and the pilots (generally) are more competent. Therefore on balance a clearance is more likely. You may be interested to know that a DC6 was given a similar routeing to yourself into Biggin Hill shortly afterwards.
