Not only Japan, I understand IFR in Class G is not permitted in many countries.
In the UK, a lot (possibly even 'the majority') of IFR training is carried out in Class G especially by military aircraft.

Judging by the responses there doesn't appear to be many (if any) jurisdictions where IFR in Class G are provided a mandated DTI (directed traffic information) service.
Would it therefore be correct to say that the Class G Oz rules provide one of the highest Class G service levels currently in operation in the world ?

I've been looking at the concept for "directed traffic information", and correct me if I'm wrong, it's traffic information provided by the ATS unit handling the G airspace?

In that case, Greenland has class G below FL195, IFR is allowed but has to be on flightplan and in contact with the ATS unit, a Flight Information Centre, can be on VHF or HF outside VHF coverage. FIC will then provide traffic information between IFR flights according to set minima, less than 1000FT, 20 minutes crossing track, 20 minutes same track, 15 minutes opposite track etc.... it's a non surveillance airspace, though there is work on ADS-B satellite coverage. Pilots are ofcourse obligated to advise changes to flightpath, position reports etc. IFR flights are also required to file flight plans.

Only thing, there is no traffic information between IFR and VFR, simply because you can fly VFR without flightplan and radio contact with the unit. Though it will be given if known.

Thanks "jm", yes that Greenland set-up sounds similar to Oz Class G, but in Oz the upper level of G is A085 over the high population areas and F125 in the sparsely populated areas.
Also what may be a difference is that the Class G services are provided by ATC who also have other airspace Classes to manage and be responsible for within their volumes, is Greenland the same ?

No, Greenland has only the Flight Information Centre handling all traffic below FL195. Above FL195 traffic is handled by Reykjavík ACC from Iceland, and is ofcourse controlled.

There is always the option of setting up a flight information service "sector" in an area control centre, so one staffing is the ATCO's handling controlled airspace, and another is flight information service officers handling the class G.

Tks jm,

In Oz we disbanded the seperate Flight Service functions about 20 years ago and the Class G is now done by the ATC who also has the airspace above.

The handful of staff still linked to that previous function now run the 3rd party HF (International & Domestic) comms and a SARTIMEs system with no airspace responsibilities.

Am wondering if anybody knows of a country where the ATCs managing all or any of Classes A to E airspace also manage the underlying G airspace ?
Does this only happen in Oz ?

I wonder how many other countries work without planners/coordinator positions regularly.

Not to mention how many countries use the Air Traffic Specialist/Assistant roles to perform planner/coord type roles.

10JQKA (interesting username, like a vehicle plate with lots of interpretations...), what is the point of this thread? Are you simply seeking a few pieces of info as to how Class G is applied in different jurisdictions or is this all leading somewhere specific?

Relates to the pros and cons of some airspace classification change proposals doing the rounds currently in Oz as discussed on this thread on another forum.

https://www.pprune.org/pacific-gener...e-changes.html

Is anyone aware of an ICAO airspace specification which covers the rules applying to an "AFIS" (Aerodrome Flight Information Service) or an "SFIS" (Surveillance Aerodrome Flight Information Service) in G airspace ?

You might find something in the ATS Planning Manual, although I don't think it's been updated recently, and IIRC there was a Circular on AFIS although, again, I think the information is a touch dated.

There was work being done on an ICAO Manual of AFIS (that would include information on the use of surveillance) to replace Circular 211. Unfortunately, it's been stalled for a few years now. The UK CAA is also doing some work on the use of surveillance in AFIS, based on the use of cooperative sources.

What's your specific question(s)?