Temporary Restriction of flying: NE Norfolk coast

[niknak]

Working Hard, sorry for the tardy response, but no, I had nothing to do with the decision to implement this restriction, but I do have a vested interest as an acto who has to work in that area.

All unit managers and north sea operators (civil and military) were consulted, and given the chance to make an input, which they all did, and I think that this was what they all agreed would be the best way to do things.

It probably isn't perfect, but life very rarely is.

[WorkingHard]

Niknak - no apology necessary we all have lives to lead outside these pages and any response is always welcome. You and others pointed us in the right direction to get some clarification on this and I have learnt a valuable lesson. I spoke to someone in DASP and had the most interesting conversation. My terminology may somewhat inexact in what follows but the gist is correct. Essentially this restriction was assessed as necessary by NATS because of their rolling programme to update the radar heads. This left an area where the radar and atc services would be degraded. The specific area covered by the AIC is an area where NATS is MANDATED to provide atc services. Surprise, surprise, atc required in the open FIR !!!! It seems this is true and so in order to comply with the "licence", NATS had to place restrictions so that what remains of radar could be used to ensure a/c are seen. Military were very against this but of course the rig operators have a voice (unlike GA) that is heard and they know their rights.
Perhaps some of you guys out there with great knowledge can tell us all which other area are like this, i.e. where atc service has to be provided.
It was also very enlightening to hear about more controlled airspace being proposed, sponsored primarily by Eastern Airways.

[FNG]

The NATS Licence is a public document, which you may browse at your leisure:-

http://www.caa.co.uk/erg/default.asp?page=585

[WorkingHard]

FNG - thanks for the link. However you did not answer the question posed - namely "Perhaps some of you guys out there with great knowledge can tell us all which other area are like this, i.e. where atc service has to be provided"
Of course you may not know the answer and just posted a link to a very lenghthy document.

[FNG]

I might know the answer, but you would have to ask a lot more nicely than that. Oh, and stop taking the conspiracy pills.*


*OK, I admit it, the TRA is to conceal the fact that Elvis is flying in on one of the Bermuda Triangle aircraft, piloted by Lord Lucan, in order to visit Shergar in that place near Marham where Kennedy ordered them to keep the captured alien spaceship before he was killed by L Ron Hubbard.

[WorkingHard]

Is that the lawyers reply to distract us from the truth then? Do you really know the answer or do you require a fee to even answer that? I'm sorry you read my last post that way as it was not intended to upset or hurt anyone. However if you're going to take it personally then so be it.

[FNG]

Working Hard, do you work especially hard to be such hard work? I am more than happy to offer occasional legal answers here without thought of fee, but as you are determined to be so blunt, the answer to this one will have to be RTFM*. The second half of the post was, by the way, a joke. If you are really interested in conspiracy theories, I can recommend several thousand websites to occupy your time. Would you rather start with the Philadelphia Experiment, or with the CIA planted electrodes in my brain stuff?



*perhaps later on when I have drunk more coffee, I might post the page references, but Acrobat 6 is reasonably, well, acrobatic, or at least it is on my PC.


EDIT: There was a report on the Today prog on Radio 4 this morning about fast jet vs rig-helo conflicts: http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/today/listenagain/ (0652)

[WorkingHard]

FNG - Unreservedly withdraw anything which may have offended. If you read my post after I talked to DASP you will see that I had simple reasons given and no conspiracy theory at all. It was a most enlightening conversation with a "bod" who is also a GA pilot so he understood the concerns expressed here.
Now, other than a fee (joke please), what else will tempt you to giving up the information. I like to think I am good at some things but trawling through documentation (did I hear you say diplomacy as well?) is not one of them. So PLEASE be a decent fellow and help.

WH

[FNG]

Peace, joy, harmony and understanding. From memory, pages 8 and 95 might do it: see the definitions of "Core Services" and "Specified Services". Anyone that wishes to point out that I have the page numbers wrong may award themselves whichever medal they find in the box by the door on the way out.


Edit: pages 9 and 96, so I claim the medal myself. The North Sea Helicopter Advisory Service does not really have any close parallels elsewhere in the UK or offshore. Otherwise, in very broad summary, provision of a service is mandated for the London and Scottish FIRs, for the approaches to the main London terminals, and for the oceanic area for which the UK provides ATS under international agreements.

[M609]

From a casual observer, and ATCO, it's seems that the root case is that the traffic levels dictate a higher degree of protection then what class G really gives, and that a higher then mandated service is defacto beeing exectued in the open FIR on a regular basis. When the tools of the trade is downgraded, here comes the restrictions.....and I quite understand that they are needed.


But then again, the UK colleauges hang their hat on the type of service provided and not the airspace, like the rest of the world do.

Hope this case works out for all of you anyway.

M609