niknak:
The only way a long term plan would work is biting the bullet and contracting out to NATS 1) contracting out to NATS = buying a radar feed from existing NATS radars which is then used by controllers at TK to provide a service, and 2) contracting out to NATS = employing NATS Services Ltd as your ATS provider, as is done at Heathrow/Gatwick/Bristol etc. This could extend to paying NATS to buy your radar for you (although I'm not sure I'd go that far.......) Number 1 wouldn't allow you to do SRAs into Oxford because the radars are too far away. It might also mean you couldn't apply 3nm separations. Then again, given the traffic situation at Oxford, chances are you couldn't ever provide a Deconfliction Service anyway. NS |
Controlled Airspace is for sensible pilots and controllers but the clockwork mice brigade have a very strong lobby.... I have no reservations with the establishment of controlled airspace to increase the safety of all aircraft. This means it should be available for transits and isn't Class A. Nearest NERL radars Debden and Clee Hill An approach function from Swanwick would involve Band 5 controllers doing a job normally done by Band 1 or 2 controllers - far too expensive. chances are you couldn't ever provide a Deconfliction Service anyway |
<<Yet Stapleford, North Weald, Elstree and Panshangar has no radar approaches.>>
They don't have licenced ATC facilities and are largely used by light aircraft. Oxford has biz jets as well as a very busy flying training facility. |
|
sh650.... Not altogether sure what you are getting at?
|
Originally Posted by niknak
There is some justification for providing a joint approach radar service for Oxford/Cranfield by one unit, but where is the funding for this going to come from?
|
Given that Cranfield and Oxford are over 30nm apart I'm not sure how a joint radar service could function given that the best place for an airfield radar is on the airfield. The cost of remoting the information to one or both (if the head was centrally sited) could be prohibitive. Take a look at the elevation profile between the two airfields too. The highest point is about 12 miles southwest of Cranfield which would provide reasonable cover, but probably not below a couple of hundred feet at either airfield.
|
Oxford and Cranfield being about 30nm apart; Cranfield Radar used the old RAE Bedford Marconi S232 (50cm radar) for 2nm SRAs and that's 11.5 nm away from Cranfield. A modern radar would probably be 10cm, and if sited high enough should be able to provide 2nm SRAs at both airfields.
|
Is it possible to put band 1 or 2 controllers at Swanwick? Or do the employees just don't mix? |
Cranfield are apparently looking at installing their own radar within the next couple of years. They have objected to the siting of a new windfarm for that reason. As for the windfarms, the technology now exists to eliminate the windfarms as unknown interference and become P.E.'s on the screen, it's expensive and helps if you have controlled airspace, but a number of airports (and, I believe the MOD), have done deals with windfarm operators to provide the equipment in exchange for dropping the objections. A joint venture between Oxford and Cranfield to contract approach services out to NATS is probably the most commercially viable option. If nothing else, in time, it eventually leads to only needing ADI ATCOs at each airport as the APP function would be done entirely by NATS. |
Course if the perfectly serviceable AR15 at Luton could be used..................
|
qsyenroute:
I think "over and out" has just summed up why any suggestion of giving a radar service contract to NATS would not be in the best interests of EGTK There is, I have been told by one LF controller (so second hand knowledge, not sure of the veracity), spare consoles available at Farnborough, if NATS were willing to pay people to provide a service, and subject to suitable radar feeds. However as LF struggle, due to lack of manpower, to fully man LARS the chances of NATS doing that are low. (Bearing in mind LF LARS was opened with much ceremony and back slapping and talk of major safety benefits were trumpeted, yet now the manpower isn't provided... typical headline grabbing, move on to next bit of glory IMHO). NikNak Lets get some facts straight shall we? The owners of Oxford cannot justify the costs of an approach radar service by installing their own radar, based upon present commercial income at the airport Oxford needs to spend the money up-front in order to get the movements it requires. To do it the other way round would be reckless and I can tell you now that no LTMA controller is in favour of it. Not because it makes life harder for us, but because that area is a known hazard as it stands with the movements already there. The CAA needs to take a long hard look at the policy of allowing airfields outside CAS to operate commercial passenger flights, particularly if those airports are near busy airspace... |
There are indeed two 'spare' consoles at Farnborough which were originally installed for and funded by the air show operators, so it would need their permission to use them.
As regards manpower, two retired ex NATS controllers both with experience of class G operations offered their services but were offered contracts with conditions which weren't acceptable. I don't think NATS HR Dept really understand what a complex job LARS can be, and expect inexperienced ab initio controllers to operate it thus keeping the cost down. I honestly dont know how many (if any) have tried and failed to gain a certificate of competency since I left. |
Originally Posted by chevvron
As regards manpower, two retired ex NATS controllers both with experience of class G operations offered their services but were offered contracts with conditions which weren't acceptable. I don't think NATS HR Dept really understand what a complex job LARS can be, and expect inexperienced ab initio controllers to operate it thus keeping the cost down.
|
If they had offered you pies instead of dosh Malcie, I'm sure you would have jumped at the job!!!???
Have a very Happy New Year Matie.................. Jez |
All times are GMT. The time now is 09:27. |
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.