Is it me... or the UK ATC system?
 

I'm just wondering if any of you guys/gals who fly more frequently in the UK have any advice... Let's say IFR, piston engine aircraft, 10,000 feet, that type of operation.

Just to set the stage, I flew quite a bit of IFR in mainland Europe and the UK many moons ago (1990s) and nowadays I occasionally ferry airplanes, typically between the US and Europe.

No offense intended to the British (outside of their ATC I really love the place), but I have to say the UK ATC gives me more grief than anyone else between Pisco and Wroclaw. Here's how my latest trip went, but it's fairly representative of most of them:

1) Filed my IFR flightplan with EuroControl accepted route from Wick to Biggin Hill.

2) Flew about 80 miles of my planned route and then no part of it for the rest of the trip. (this is fairly similar in mainland Europe)

3) Every other controller asks me "what kind of service are you requesting?" How about the "I don't want to run into any other aircraft" service. I know we are all aware of limitations of ground based infrastructure and controlled airspace, but outside of those issues, these various service levels just seem pointless.

4) I got perhaps 8 to 12 different transponder codes between Wick and Biggin Hill. That's more codes than I got on the entire trip from Quebec City to Scotland!

5) At one point near NewCastle (don't land there after 8:00 pm) a controller tells me to squawk 7000 and go to the next frequency. Like an idiot I comply, only to be told by the next controller to maintain VFR clear of controlled airspace. Took a few minutes to sort out the idea that I was on an active IFR flight plan on an assigned route.

Just to set the stage some more: the weather was severe clear from Wick to about 60 miles north of London, at which point it went to solid IFR due to a weak stationary front over the English Channel.

6) I pick up the ATIS at Biggin Hill well in advance. Weather was ceiling 600 broken with reasonable visibility. The ATIS gave me runway in use but no approach information. The ATIS stated RY03 in use but the only approach that I could find was ILS21. It's not above me to screw up an approach plate or have overlooked something in the trip kit, but I planned for ILS21.

7) I requested vectors to ILS21 and the controller said he'd pass on the request. The next several controllers gave me headings to fly for traffic purposes, but still no confirmation as to the approach.

8) About 25 miles out or so a controller tells me "fly direct Lambourne". I said "I'm sorry I thought we were being radar vectored, can you give us the identifier for Lambourne". (I did try to get familiar with the area before the flight, but couldn't immediately place Lambourne).

His response: "NEGATIVE". And then he proceeds to rattle off nonstop instructions to a handful of other aircraft, no one able to get a word in edgewise.

Now I was getting a wee bit unhappy. It took me a moment to find Lambourne and punch it in the GPS.

9) This same controller now turns me over to Thames radar who finally confirms that I'll be vectored for ILS21. If he had given me anything else I would have been in trouble trying to change my approach setup at that late of a stage. By the way, the ILS gave me a 9 knot tailwind, but I'd rather take that than circling with a 600 ft ceiling any day.

10) The Thames radar controller (who was not busy) vectored me through the final approach course and then back. He cleared me for the approach on my second intercept FROM ABOVE THE GLIDESLOPE something like 4.5 miles out! He did almost immediately thereafter offer to take me back around and vector me for a proper intercept, but as I quickly got ground contact I just made a steep approach to about 500 feet and got stabilized for a reasonable landing.

Sorry to fuss and complain, and I'm not saying any of these issues by themselves would be a problem, but put it all together and I'd have to say the extra workload is a potential safety issue.

Finally, I understand the system's priority is airliners and they do a good job at that, but GA airplanes flying IFR are comparatively few and far between, so it's not that much of a system resource.

Sorry for venting, any suggestions for an easier cruise over the UK greatly appreciated!

Before any I give any response, what route and level did you file? Airplane type?

The airplane was a Seneca III, filed at F090 if I recall correctly. My filed (and initially cleared) route was via airways down to the vicinity of London and then a couple of navigation points, I don't have the exact details in front of me. After Aberdeen I was just given various points to navigate point-to-point.

Did you leave controlled airspace of your own volition? If you did......


If outside CAS this is EXACTLY what the controller MUST ask you.Have a look here.

Air Space Safety: ATSOCAS 917

Thats the only ILS there.

http://www.ead.eurocontrol.int/eadba...2010-12-16.pdf

Sorry but you have NO idea from listening to one frequency what is going on.


You didn't try too hard then.If I was flying into the London TMA I sure as heck would have a good working knowledge of VOR's to which I may be sent.

Seems like it's you :)

I can understand where the original poster is coming from.

Sometimes UK pilots have a tendency to think that their ATC system is best and should be a role-model for the rest of the world. I will say that generally speaking UK controllers are indeed very good. However, the UK system has lot's of differences to ICAO and I agree that it doesn't help to have country specific terms such as basic service, deconfliction service etc.

Imagine if we had to put of with those kind of national differences everywhere. Impossible. Same for expecting a foreign pilot to immediately recognise the name of a VOR and find it on the chart. I think the least ATC could do would be to offer the three letter code.

Also being on vectors when in the terminal area only to be told to go to a VOR (which may or may not be on the STAR you were expecting can be surprising.

Same thing for "remain outside controlled airspace" when on an IFR flightplan.

Again, Britisch ATC is generally world class but the procedures and phraseology differ considerably from ICAO standard and are nowhere near as intuitive and user-friendly as in the US.

Having said all that, flying into major airports is easy in the UK, it's those smaller places surrounded by uncontrolled airspace that I find a bit more unusual.

Incredible that this guy is let loose in Controlled Airspace!!

Agreed, H-D.

In fact, one of the significant aspects of his report is that it gives the impression he did not understand when he was, and was not, in controlled airspace, and what the ramifications were...

Yes, UK ATC has it's idiosyncrasies, but this is not surprising given the volume of traffic and density of aerodromes.

There is no excuse for failing to prepare for flight, and a pilot who doesn't prepare, and then posts a series of complaints such as those above, only succeeds in highlighting his own inadequacies...

I have no desire to get into a proving contest about flying credentials, but will reiterate I haven't encountered these issues in any other ATC system.

Also, I believe I asked for suggestions, please elaborate what you would have done differently.

HD, I find it even more incredible that Brits have the nerve to call such "service' Air Traffic control! It needs to be explained to you folks that you are down there because we are up here, not the other way around! Its interesting to note that when various UK airlines are in our airspace the contollers go to great pains to give the three leter idents of the VORs to them.Another thing you might like to consider is the incredible variations on spoken English that a non Brit is suposed to understand when flying from the North of Scotland to the South Coast of the UK, you might think you dont have bloody impossible accents, but belive me you really do, as for the multiple standard presure levels, we wont even go there.

Geez. Cut the guy some slack. What if you operated in a country where place names and pronunciation are not familiar? It's not as easy as you think. Perhaps you should step outside your little world and try it.

I operate mostly in the US and believe it or not I don't have all the VOR names and idents memorized. Corporate guys flying to an unfamiliar destinations often ask for 3 letter identifiers to clarify as controllers assume everyone knows their local nav aids by name. Sounds like the difference is that our ATC guys are happy to help.

Just flew KSJC-EGLF non-stop, 9.5 hours, and the only time ATC seemed out of the ordinary was about 4 miles from destination and this business about "...say type of services requested".

It's a unique procedure. There are many others around the world.

To "wiseguy":

I didn't leave controlled airspace on my own account, but on the other hand once the controllers near Aberdeen started to give me direct point-to-point navigation (as opposed to my original clearance via airways) I also didn't object. I understand that the service levels are regulatory requirements in the UK but it's still quircky, not something I've seen elsewhere.

I disagree. In a GPS equipped aircraft most of the points I was given to navigate to were not VORs but arbitrarty intersections. There are many around London. Lambourne was not on my original flightplan and if I recall correctly (I left the tripkits with my customer) it's also not a fix on the approach. To be given an arbitrary point to navigate to when you're that close to your destination instead of being told what approach to expect simply is not good practice.

I agree with your point about the Thames radar controller.

How about stayed with the original plan as filed...or planned comprehensively what you really wanted to do.

I thought about making some suggestions for the OP, but really, it's impossible to know where to start...

I'd 'cut some slack' over not knowing where Lambourne was, if it seemed that he had looked at the plates for Biggin and knew there was only one precision approach, or if he had read up on the services he might get OCAS, or if he had posted asking for some help without making a criticism of it.

Clunkdriver, have you any idea how long your slot delays would be into UK airports if the ATC service wasn't the very best? Have you any idea how many incidents occur in UK airspace specifically involving N registered business jets, whose crews have not briefed properly on the procedures?

And have you any idea how busy ATC positions like Thames can get? RTF loading is no indicator at all of workload. A controller might have fifteen aircraft on and be doing nothing, or have three on, and be shovelling like mad!

Again, I don't want to get into a contest. When a controller gives me a fix to navigate to that is not on my original flightplan, I'll accept it when possible. I don't see any need to be difficult about that.

But not knowing what approach to expect, getting a slew of transponder codes, being given an ILS intercept from above the glideslope, and so forth has nothing to do with my flight planning.

wwelvaert,

You couldn't post the route you filed here could you? It would help clarify.

Some of the other posts, such as HD's, aren't helpful.

Maybe my point was not well made:

I looked at the approach plates for Biggin Hill and by those I believed (correctly) that there was only an ILS approach to RY21. Once I picked up the ATIS which stated 600 foot ceilings and RY03 in use I began to second-guess myself. Maybe I overlooked something?

I can only speak for myself but with 600 ft ceilings and light (9kt) winds I find it unusual that they would state the runway in use was one without instrument approaches.

Roffa:

I don't have the complete filed route in front of me, but my initial clearance was:

"Cleared via W4D P18 maintain F090 squawk 5434."

wwelvaert

First of all, a big 'well done!' for having opted for the straight-in on RWY21 with a light tailwind instead of circling (at night?) with a 600ft cloudbase. There is some gently rising ground to the southwest, as I remember.

Second of all, I can understand why you were disappointed by the service you received that night.

I agree with 733 driver.

As a 'born and bred' UK pilot/instructor/examiner I used to think that the UK way of doing things was not only the best way, but the only way!

Then I started flying on worldwide routes and my eyes were opened. I am now still of the opinion that the UK controllers are, for the most part, equal to or better than any others. BUT, as already mentioned, it's the UK system that is hopelessly complicated and user-unfriendly.

It seems that the procedures are designed to serve the interests of the local ATC and not the intended user - the PILOT. I could probably list several examples but as I'm about to fall into bed, I'll start with one of my favourites:

1. Transition Altitude. Why does it have to differ from airport to airport? Why is it 3000ft outside CAS (unless you're beneath the LTMA of course when it's 6000ft!)

A few years ago, departing southbound from Oxford in a jet, the Trans Alt was 3000ft and the initial clearance was to join CAS north of Compton at FL50. Called London, only to be told to maintain 5000ft! Compton is just on the edge of the LTMA, so the London controller assumed a Trans Alt of 6000ft. (I understand the Trans Alt at EGTK is now 6000ft, so this particular hole in the cheese has been plugged.) After a rapid re-setting of the altimeters we adjusted by a few hundred feet and all was well, but what on earth did this achieve?

Any pilot who has flown a high-performance aircraft will tell you the dangers of a low Trans Alt. The CAA keep bleating on about level busts, yet blithely ignore the procedures such as BHX SIDs that invite just such a bust (Trans Alt 4000ft and initial SID stop-height of FL60). Try flying that at 3000fpm with a QNH of 983mb. Yes, that's mb, not hPa as adopted by everyone else outside N. America!

Here's another:

2. 'Turn onto 240 degrees, when established on the 27L localiser descend with the glidepath'. Why not 'cleared for the approach' as in every other country? Do pilots need reminding not to descend on the glidepath before being established on the localiser?

This terminology is, of course, an improvement over the old one: 'Flight 123, turn onto 240 degrees and establish on the localiser, 27L.'

'Flt 123, localiser established, 27L.'

'Roger Flt 123, descend with the glidepath'.

Ah yes, but what about that helicopter flying down the Thames? He may be in our way, so we can't be cleared for the approach just yet! In 39 years of flying, I can not recall ever NOT being cleared to descend on the glidepath. Where is the justification for these arcane procedures? Is our accident/incident record so much better in the UK than elsewhere?

The US system isn't perfect by any means, but I like the way that busy parts of the flight are generally kept simple for the pilot:

SID? Fly runway heading to 5000ft and expect vectors to filed fix.

G/A? Fly runway heading to 3000ft and expect vectors.

Keeps the workload where it belongs; on the ground!

In an ideal world, the US controllers would be trained in the UK and the UK controllers would all spend at least a year at ORD. And the UK airspace system and procedures would be designed with the pilots' needs uppermost.

Rant over; off to bed! (Standing by for some 'incoming' from Kerling-Approsh KG and HEATROW DIRECTOR!)

Hi wwelvaert,

I'm a UK based pilot and I wouldn't take issue with anything you've described. I think some of the contributers here are being slightly disingenuous when they suggest that you are in someway at fault.

This is fairly typical when transiting the UK North/South. I have flown London to Scotland all on a HDG, no airways at all - and that is in the upper flight levels. At 090 you will be off airways for some or most of your route.

It is what it is - understaffed and underfunded. To be honest you are fortunate you were offered a comprehensive service outside CAS. I have been dumped out of CAS in the NW corner of London, doing 250kts and heading towards Oxford with a "squawk 7000 and freecall..." No chance of saying, "hang on a minute, I don't want to go VFR right now..."

I don't know about these - probably bad luck and a busy controller who perhaps didn't notice your IFR f/p. You evidently took it in your stride.

This bit is a bit confusing. I guess BQH is idiosyncratic - but there is only the one approach to RWY 21. 9kts of tail is just about within the cababilities of most commercial traffic. It is hard to see exactly who could get in on 03 since there was a 600ft cloud base - so I see your point I guess. The controllers weren't giving you vectors for the approach (as you mention) but steers for your course. You needed to cross the inbound approach to LCY and the climbout from STN. It's a busy bit of airspace.

This is simply a grumpy, unhelpful (and possibly overworked) controller. Of course you don't have to know the names of all VORs in the UK. I've been on the receiving end of this sort of bull**** myself. Everybody's approach will be different. Me - I'd have been back on, using up airtime until he gave me the LAM that he should have provided in the first place. YMMV

It was only Thames who can vector you for BQH - it's just the way it is. Biggin is established OCAS with no more than an overlarge ATZ to protect it. Changing approach setup at the last minute can be a feature of European aviation I'm afraid. I know of a crew that had six RWY changes inbound to Schipol one time.

Thames sometimes vector through on purpose (because they are also controlling perpendicular traffic into LCY, and sometimes they do it by accident - often not helped by crew charging around at 240kts 8 miles out of Biggin. The 4.5 miles is standard for Biggin. If I remember correctly the GS comes in at about 1800ft! There is no real procedure for BQH, it's just vectors to a low-level intercept on the ILS.

All in all it seems you picked a fine day to (leave me Lucille) do a tricky little route.

It's not just you - but you are flying at an unusual level, at an unusual speed, in unusual airspace. Like any trip - whether it goes easy or tricky can be simply a matter of luck. You had a bit of luck against you (but nothing you couldn't handle) coupled with unfamiliar procedures where the people you were talking to expected you to be familiar. It's not a rule that you have to know - they just expected that you did.

Sounds like you should be pleased with yourself that it passed off uneventful.

W,

Hats off to you, mate. On two counts.

Firstly, on a successful flight southbound despite the system.

Secondly, for having the 'lef' to come on here looking for background to the system knowing the defensive, sanctimonious crap you'd get masquerading as a serious response. Or did that come as a surprise?

eckhard,

Good post.

BTW, just for info, since I've now dug up my scribbled notes from the flight, the weather at Biggin Hill was (on the ATIS):

RY03 010/09 6000 RN 6BKN (later changed to 5BKN) 1022 (it was daytime, late afternoon)

Thanks to everyone who posted a considerate response or considerate critique and thanks for the insight from posters like JonDyer (and others).

As for those who sling mud, no it was not a surprise, but guess what I have to say to that....

In a few hours I'm going to pick up my baby, play in the park for awhile and enjoy the view over "my" mountain (Life in Peru). Then I might open a bottle of Peruvian wine or have me a yummie Pisco Sour when mamacita comes home...

All while you guys are busy shortening your own life expectancy by getting worked up and taking offense when none was intended.

I have many hundreds of hours IFR in Los Angeles airspace and consider myself very familiar, knowing all the VOR's and airways. Despite that I occasionally encounter controllers which are neither pleasant nor helpful. They give you "impossible" clearances, sometimes treat you as VFR when, in fact, you are IFR or vector you well above the glideslope. I remember one particular instance at Van Nuys where we just couldn't get established in time (poor vector, tailwind, steep G/S), executing missed approach to be told "IFR missed approaches are not allowed"

My point is, without giving you any explanation of the UK ATS system, there are good controllers and not so good controllers.

The UK ATC system can be a bit idiosyncratic if you are buzzing along at the lower levels and you could end up being inside and outside of controlled airspace at regular intervals.

For those sectors outside of CAS you will get the 'what service do you require' question. It is a UK thing. As Biggin (and Farnborough for that matter) are outisde of CAS you will eventually get this sort of response, albeit for the last few miles of approach at Biggin.

As far as Biggin is concerned, yes we only have one IFR approach to Rwy 21 (working on plans for the other end). So with one published approach expect a visual manoeuvre if runway 03 is in use. Cloudbase permitting.

Sounds like Thames dropped the ball a bit if they vectored you through the ILS and back on from the other side and above the approach. At least they offered a re-vector if you required.

If you are still at Biggin I am back in the office tomorrow (8/4/11) for more formative face to face comment.

Regards

Manager ATS Biggin

Edit: Oh you are in Peru? Forget the latter comment. :O

Vino: thanks so much for that offer, I will try to stop by on a future trip.

This trip was about 3 weeks ago, and I just had it in the back of my mind to try and get some insight/background about those various issues. Thanks for your input!

Kerling, why would we get delays? Having retired from the heavy stuff I now fly a medium twin into some of the busy spots in the US , at these places one sees a traffic mix never seen at any of the major Brit or EU airports, so if they can do it, why not you folks? As for N numbers having a few problems, we see a bit of this but its our own fault for having two official lingos in our ATC system, seems to worry them. Having said this, with the run down of the RAF and Britains lack of snow shovels the traffic should be a lot less this winter.

This post struck a bit of a chord with me, and a couple of the earlier replies unfortunately I am sad to say weren't very helpful.

Flying single-pilot, IFR, unpressurised (and therefore limited to a maximum of 10,000 feet) is, like many other areas of aviation, a demanding job, and therefore lurking underneath the original poster's questions is a far more subtle point that you'd only really appreciate if it's the game you are in.

Let's face facts. If you're in a light twin, you are not in an easy working environment. Sure, the type of people who fly them tend to have a reasonable experience level, certainly sufficient to allow flying the aeroplane to be second nature. But I'm afraid that the workload can go sky-high in the blink of an eye just through one seemingly innocuous aircraft related problem, or seemingly innocent instruction from a controller.

One such comment might be "route direct Lambourne". Fine, you might think...but it's dark, and your cockpit lighting is poor, and you're having to hand-fly because the company Ops manual prevents use of the autopilot in any icing conditions (that's if the autopilot even works at all). So...just what is the Ident for Lambourne? Ok...so which chart do you pull out first whilst hand-flying at night? Well, it might be on the approach plate for your destination. But then again, it might not be. It's the old problem - how can you look for something when you don't know where it is? Well, it'll certainly be on your airways chart. Anybody ever seen an airways chart as viewed in a light twin at night? And who's there to keep the aircraft level while you look for it? Frankly, this little situation is what happens on a lot of flights at 'this end' of aviation. You wouldn't have to sit in the right hand seat on a sector like this for very long before you witnessed it.

Here's another classic example which the original poster experienced - happens all the time. "You're now leaving controlled airspace. Squawk 7000 and freecall London/Scottish Information". Hang on a minute...where did that come from?! I'll try to give you the background on this one, as I get it week in, week out, and it really screws everything up:

So, you've sat down and planned an airways routing, even though you were pushed for time, you managed to find the one and only route which an aircraft limited to FL100 can file for. Well, that's if you're lucky! Go on...how many people out there could pull out an airways chart and find a convincing IFR route below FL100 in the UK? It's a nightmare. Sometimes you can, sometimes you can't. Sometimes you do find one, but it gets rejected as soon as you send it. OK, so your plan goes in without a hitch. You take off, start to fly the departure, and straight away get put on a radar heading. Fine, to start with everything seems great - the controller is doing your navigating for you.

Now, you punched the route into the GPS before you went, purely so it's there as a reference for you. But the longer you stay on the radar heading, the quicker you realise that you're actually a long way off the planned track. However, you realise that you're being given a far more direct routing and so you tend not to panic. And then all hell breaks loose in the cockpit. You're leaving controlled airspace... So you call up the FIR frequency. Now, I've been doing this a while, I've done a lot of VFR flying all round the British Isles too, and I know my way around. But there's a difference between IFR and VFR. You see, the FIR quite often don't know you're coming when you get 'booted out', and they ask you to 'pass your details'. What do you tell them? Just where are you? All you know is that you're on a radar heading, tracking nothing in particular, well to the East of your planned route, and with no idea how far away the next controlled airspace is ahead of you. And what's more, the FIR controller is operating non-radar, and so he can't tell you that either. This happens frequently in the UK.

The next thing that happens is (and full credit to London Info and Scottish Info, they work really hard for us guys) that the FIR controller does some ringing around, and gets back to you a few minutes later with a message from London Control. Generally something along the lines of "Remain outside controlled airspace, Squawk XXXX and for onward clearance contact......" Now this is tricky. Remain outside controlled airspace? So on what chart is class A airspace accurately depicted for those of us who don't know quite where we are, having left class A airspace on a Radar heading?

In summary, I have every sympathy with the original poster. What he has posted is a true reflection of what happens week-in, week-out for aircraft of that category trying to fly IFR routes in the UK. I suppose I am fortunate that I've found most of the 'gotchas' that lurk around in this country, I've heard of all the VORs, I know the difference between a basic service and a traffic service, I know that the FIR controllers don't have radar (unlike, say, Amsterdam), I know that you can't get from POL to DCS at FL100 in the day, but you can at night...the list goes on. I've learned most of these through bitter experience...and god know what I'd be like if every other country was the same as this - it's impossible to know all the subtleties.

I can pretty well guess from the way the poster has described the flight that he had probably taken all reasonable planning precautions prior to the flight. I know this because he is not asking unreasonable questions. I would love to see how some of the people who shot him down in the early replies cope in flight, I really would!

JonDyer

Very good post and I agree with everything you say. (I seem to remember agreeing with you a lot when we were flying CJs together)

Airbus38

Another well written post. Brings back many memories; some good, some not so good.

It seems as if the responses to this thread fall into two camps:

1. Pilots who try to do the right thing but who are somewhat frustrated by the limitations of the cockpit environment in which they find themselves and who find the ATC service in the UK a little 'different' from other parts of the world; and

2. ATC professionals who have maybe forgotten the realities of single-pilot IFR flying (maybe they never knew) and who expect all flight crew, whatever their origin, to have an intimate knowledge of the UK AIP.

Now don't get me wrong: I have the highest respect for UK Air Traffic Controllers and I would be the first to admit that I know next to b*gger all about the pressures and problems of their jobs, BUT - Let's not forget that ATC is there to provide a SERVICE to pilots, not the other way around! To avoid exaggeration of the issues raised in this thread, I should add that I generally receive an excellent service in the UK. It's the responses on this thread from some of our ATC colleagues that leaves me unimpressed.

I would have thought that it shouldn't be too difficult to provide the three-letter ident and/or freqeuncy of any radio aid within the sector being controlled. Or if the pilot is clearly having problems navigating towards a desired point, why not simply provide vectors while they sort themselves out?

Airbus38 provides an excellent explanation of the problems from the pilot's perspective. Where is the explanation from an ATC professional of the poor service that ATC gave to wwelvaert that day? All we have heard so far is: "This guy shouldn't be allowed in UK airspace", and "He obviously failed to prepare thoroughly enough".

I would be genuinly interested to learn so that I can plan accordingly before my next SP HPCA flight in UK airspace.

Now I have to pack my bags for yet another light jet trans-Atlantic flight. As always, I will look forward to the calm professional voice of the UK controller as I pass RATSU, southbound. Let's not fall out over this, but let's keep in mind who is serving whom.

Q? what service do you require
 

Full service with happy ending....is this ICAO.....

Works here in HK...:rolleyes:

glf

Seems on here that that the basic issue is one that anyone with any common sense would realise. You dont know what is going on at the other end of the RT.

Whilst ATC find it easy to critisize crews an apparent lack of knowledge, I have come across frequent examples at work of controllers displaying a complete lack of appreciation of what pressures and situations crews have to cope with. But will they ask their line manager for a fam-flight to be arranged for them ? Hmmmm...

Much as I want to defend my profession, it is true that there is a a distinct variation amongst ATC controllers about empathy with the guy at the other end of the mike. And the terse response regarding the "Lamborne" incident is, sadly, not as isolated incident as we would like.

Providing a Basic Service, I have encountered a few idiots with a "5 hrs a year" PPL, but also the majority who do know what they're doing. There will always be a variation in standards as long as they exceed the required minimum. I like think when I complete a shift that I've done a good job and been as helpful as possible, and tried to enhance our ATC reputation.

i read the initial thread and my gut reaction was "hmm, does this guy know what he is doing?", but having given it some thought and read various replies, its obvious there is a lack of understanding on both sides to a certain degree, and that there are also some very blinkered replies.

I've done loads of fam-flights, especially pre 9/11, mostly off my own back, as I love airplanes and flying. Especially in the US, things can be VERY different, as well as in some of the more obscure EU destinations. To expect crews to be familiar with every piece of airspace and procedure is completely unrealistic (though no excuse for poor preparation of course). If crews need help, then it should be offered - thats ultimately what ATC is there for.

Until controllers take more interest in the jobs the people they provide a service for are doing, and until crews make the effort to come and look around a busy ATC unit, these misconceptions (and subsequent snipping) will always be there.

Savannah Jet,

Very well said. Ignorance of each others environment is nothing new, it has been so as long as I've been in this business, fam flights or no. Bottom line is there are only a minority on either side of the mike who have an interest in looking over the fence, so to speak. As I look around at the newer recruits, that number gets smaller and smaller by the year. Maybe I'm hanging around in the wrong circles, but I could count on one hand the number of commercial pilots who have ever shown an interest in seeing the aviation world from the other side with all its' peculiarities, pressures and limitations.

The initial replies here would confirm for me that ignorance appears to be bliss for some.

BTW Airbus38 cracking post. In relation to finding that elusive IFR routing below FL120, this one has worked well for me so far

www.eurofpl.eu

wwelvaert

What date was your flight ? I can check the plan and see what you should have expected.

Appalling sanctimonious attitude from some (pilots?) but balanced approach from others, my sympathy to OP, welcome to the UK.

Humble 25 yr PPL

wwelvaert,

Nice to see some useful replies have come in.

Regrettably for flights like yours that may drop out of the lower levels of controlled airspace the UK system is often not very joined up and first time operators find this out the hard way.

If you were taken off your flight planned route by ATC then ATC should have okayed this with you first.

Had you been able to fly your planned route and been inside CAS the whole flight you would have kept the same squawk. It's the dropping out of CAS and then the airways controllers doing their best to get rid of you that leads to the numerous squawks and the requests for what service you want once you've left CAS. As mentioned, not a joined up system.

Once you get down to LAM and the London TMA the airspace can be quite complicated. I'd guess that you were vectored from LAM and passed east abeam London City at 4,000ft. If there are any arrivals/departures from City, they will be at 3,000ft at the point you pass abeam the airport hence you likely at 4,000ft. Once you pass City it then may not leave much time or room to get down from 4,000ft onto the Biggin ILS, especially if there was a tailwind hence possibly why high and not ideally positioned.

There are few private pilots in UK ATC these days and even fewer that have ever flown in the airways system themselves in GA type aircraft. Few even go on available fam flights in the larger stuff. The end result of that is awareness of your workload and problems/issues is regrettably not that great to non-existent. Hopefully this thread and any more like it might make some some sit back and think a little rather than fire off the pointlessly obnoxious stuff seen earlier.

Do keep posting and asking questions as and when you need and hopefully they'll be answered reasonably.

10w

I think it must have been this one...

(FPL-******-IG
-PA34/L-SDGY/S
-EGPC1230
-N0165F090 SMOKI W4D ADN DCT SAB DCT SAB165030 DCT NATEB DCT OTR DCT
SUPEL DCT DOLAS DCT BANEM DCT CLN DCT TRIPO
-EGKB0315 EGTR
-DOF/110318 ORGN/EGPCXHAA)

Unfortunate Choice Of Airfields
 

To the OP....

You've probably picked the worst corner of a very congested TMA, a lot of what you describe also applys to us Jet drivers, its just a very busy part of a small country and although unconventional you need to consider the proximity of Gatwick/London City/Heathrow.

The extended vectors and early / late turn ons are facts of life in that area, it takes a few go's to figure out what they're planning to do and even then that guarantees nothing for the next time.

Whilst it looks scrappy, you should be rest assured that theres always a plan in somebodys mind in the main......imagine an area as busy as that with lets say some of our "less" capable ATC'ers from the EU it would be carnage.

It would also be a good bet that your air miles flown were significantly less than planned

Vino: I think that is the flight plan. No excuses for the convoluted routing, that's what we were able to get accepted by the Eurocontrol folks in Brussels (at some point in this thread I fear my true nationality will surface).

I couldn't agree more. Other than the one controller at Lamboure all of the ATC controllers were very professional that day. This thread was certainly not meant as an offense to ATC controllers but as a clarification (ok, rant) about the system idiosyncrasies, or the totality thereof on that particular flight.

In hindsight very happy that I started this thread for the info that was posted from both ATC and pilot's sides. There's absolutely a difference between a procedural/regulatory understanding of the system and being conditioned by experience to some of it's ideosynchrasies.

Non IFR pilot question here: Would being on oxygen and flying higher have helped with a more direct routing and less handovers/transponder headaches?

Flying into Biggin IFR is not easy at the best of times, due to the proximity of Heathrow,CITY, Stansted Luton Gatwcik etc ++ all in the same area- it is a very busy area!! But looking at his filed flight plan, he filed IFR outside controlled airspace via SAB - OTR - CLN then his arrival via CLN(Clacton) via Tripo -this would explain his multiple transponder changes and muliple Radio changes? He would clearly have been expecting and briefed himself on SPEAR 1B star into Biggin(well that is what he filed?) ? If you look at the STAR chart you will find Lambourne (LAM) is clearly marked on the chart as Lambourne(LAM) So am a little surprised he couldn't understand and accept a direct Lambourne? It's very easy to knock the UK system but he filed and flew IFR outside controlled airspace and wanted all the perks of operating on the airway system ? :=
He didn't really understand what he had filed and was expecting ?
No system is perfect but I think UK around London is the best you can get, and to see UK based pilots saying otherwise is rather disappointing ?
I have spent 36 years(+17000 hours) flying worldwide and it still fills me with relief when I cross the UK FIR !!
Thanks ATC UK !!
ATP

Perhaps you can qualify that statement?

We share much of our IFR arrival procedures with City airport. Are you saying that flying IFR into City is also 'not easy' also?