How to get more controled airspace
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Not a million miles from EGTF
Age: 68
Posts: 1,579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
One notable instance occurred around a regional airport without Class D.
Flying 10 miles out in Class G airspace I was transponding and talking to the radar controller. An infamous airline arriving and positioning for landing had detected me on their TCAS and started bullying the controller to instruct me to move further out. There were implicit threats made by the pilot that he would file an airprox if I didn't.
Fortunately the particular ATCO shut him up and I carried on safely on my way.
There are definite signs that certain airlines are pressurising ATCOs to cut the corners, to lean on non-commercial traffic, and to get operators to ask for larger than necessary airspace reserved for them
We are at the start of a proposal to gain Class D for a local regional airport. Again, they are asking for a huge area of airspace to be reserved for them, and squeezing both laterally and vertically the available airspace for GA users.
Flying 10 miles out in Class G airspace I was transponding and talking to the radar controller. An infamous airline arriving and positioning for landing had detected me on their TCAS and started bullying the controller to instruct me to move further out. There were implicit threats made by the pilot that he would file an airprox if I didn't.
Fortunately the particular ATCO shut him up and I carried on safely on my way.
There are definite signs that certain airlines are pressurising ATCOs to cut the corners, to lean on non-commercial traffic, and to get operators to ask for larger than necessary airspace reserved for them
We are at the start of a proposal to gain Class D for a local regional airport. Again, they are asking for a huge area of airspace to be reserved for them, and squeezing both laterally and vertically the available airspace for GA users.
This is what the airspace grabbers at Coventry are after:
Those wish to submit their comments have until 16 Jun to do so - just e-mail [email protected] , copied to [email protected] .
It's possible that the head of the directorate of airspace policy, [email protected] , might also be interested in knowing your views....
Those wish to submit their comments have until 16 Jun to do so - just e-mail [email protected] , copied to [email protected] .
It's possible that the head of the directorate of airspace policy, [email protected] , might also be interested in knowing your views....
Join Date: May 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 796
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Fuji Abound
"but we have to work to the rules the regulator sets us. "
Ah yes - so what regulation prevents you giving a transit overhead Gatwick?
Ah yes - so what regulation prevents you giving a transit overhead Gatwick?
Join Date: May 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 796
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by slim_slag
Take one of your cursory glances at a chart of any class B area in the States and you will see there are plenty of airports very close together indeed, they make the UK look quite inconsequential. You find small and large airplanes mixing it quite happily, each respecting the rights of the others to use a common airspace. I bet only LHR would definitely make class B if it was in the US, and yet wouldn't come close to the top 10 busiest in the States.
There was a very interesting discussion on here recently comparing the size of the LHR surface area with the size of the surface area of several busier airports in the US. What it appeared to boil down to is that at LHR, you have A340s which simply cannot climb very well and so gazillions of square miles of very usable airspace is closed off to small aircraft. Yet you put that same A340 at O'Hare and the thing is quite capable of getting smartly off the ground and out of the way of the many small aircraft safely buzzing around a few miles off the departure end of the runway. Seems like they just cannot be bothered in teh UK, and the controllers let them get away with it. In the States I suspect the Chicago controller would be on the radio telling the A340 jock exactly what was expected of him. As it should be.
I suppose it's only to be expected in the UK where ATC is simply underresourced and can hardly handle the commercial traffic, and airline pilots can get in the right seat of a jet with no idea of how GA really works.
There was a very interesting discussion on here recently comparing the size of the LHR surface area with the size of the surface area of several busier airports in the US. What it appeared to boil down to is that at LHR, you have A340s which simply cannot climb very well and so gazillions of square miles of very usable airspace is closed off to small aircraft. Yet you put that same A340 at O'Hare and the thing is quite capable of getting smartly off the ground and out of the way of the many small aircraft safely buzzing around a few miles off the departure end of the runway. Seems like they just cannot be bothered in teh UK, and the controllers let them get away with it. In the States I suspect the Chicago controller would be on the radio telling the A340 jock exactly what was expected of him. As it should be.
I suppose it's only to be expected in the UK where ATC is simply underresourced and can hardly handle the commercial traffic, and airline pilots can get in the right seat of a jet with no idea of how GA really works.
Would non-transponder equipped aircraft be allowed to operate in the same proximity to an airport as busy as Heathrow in the States? No, there would be a compulsory Mode C veil.
Within the limits of the class of the airspace there's a lot of light aircraft activity in the London Zone, I see it every day. The grass may be slightly greener over the pond, but not as bright a hue as many would have you think.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: He's on the limb to nowhere
Posts: 1,981
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
porco,
I guess we would need to define 'a lot'. As for Mode C, I am sure it helps keep Class B surface areas down to reasonable sizes in the States, but remember most of the traffic skirting around or flying over Class B (no Class A until FL180 remember) is unverified mode C, so would it really help in the UK?
But you bring up a good point about mandatory use of transponders being used to keep surface areas smaller. It should be possible to drastically reduce all this CAS in the UK when they force mode S down everybodies throats. That might be an acceptable quid pro quo for those in the South East. Can you see this happening?
I guess we would need to define 'a lot'. As for Mode C, I am sure it helps keep Class B surface areas down to reasonable sizes in the States, but remember most of the traffic skirting around or flying over Class B (no Class A until FL180 remember) is unverified mode C, so would it really help in the UK?
But you bring up a good point about mandatory use of transponders being used to keep surface areas smaller. It should be possible to drastically reduce all this CAS in the UK when they force mode S down everybodies throats. That might be an acceptable quid pro quo for those in the South East. Can you see this happening?
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Not a million miles from EGTF
Age: 68
Posts: 1,579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by slim_slag
It should be possible to drastically reduce all this CAS in the UK when they force mode S down everybodies throats. That might be an acceptable quid pro quo for those in the South East. Can you see this happening?
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The "unverified" status of a Mode C transponding target doesn't affect the usefulness of the return for TCAS purposes.
Also, the verification process appears to be a mere formality most of the time anyway. It's sole purpose seems to be to pick up transponders whose altitude encoder is duff. I do wonder what the point of this verification is, because I could be legally flying under the LTMA at 2400ft, non-radio, with a transponder returning FL150, causing everybody to sh*t themselves, but they have no means of checking because they don't know who (if anybody) he is talking to. And a lot of people fly OCAS non-radio (with a listening watch, say) with Mode C. I often do just that, but then my transponder (both KT76C and the later GTX330) permanently display the FL being returned on the LCD display. Doesn't almost every Mode C unit do that?
Robin
Hard to say what EASA will do. They are making encouraging noises about deregulating "VFR GA". What concerns many pilots is what tradeoffs will be done to placate the objecting committee members. Screwing IFR GA traffic is one possibility. I understand this may not be directly relevant to you but as I've said I don't think VFR GA is really seriously threatened in the long term; as a sport it will always carry on. There might be increasing problems getting one's certified spamcan maintained but for VFR flight there is the "PFA" type route and this looks like it will be widened; in fact the permit scene is well on the way to pushing out the CofA stuff as it is.
Also, the verification process appears to be a mere formality most of the time anyway. It's sole purpose seems to be to pick up transponders whose altitude encoder is duff. I do wonder what the point of this verification is, because I could be legally flying under the LTMA at 2400ft, non-radio, with a transponder returning FL150, causing everybody to sh*t themselves, but they have no means of checking because they don't know who (if anybody) he is talking to. And a lot of people fly OCAS non-radio (with a listening watch, say) with Mode C. I often do just that, but then my transponder (both KT76C and the later GTX330) permanently display the FL being returned on the LCD display. Doesn't almost every Mode C unit do that?
Robin
Hard to say what EASA will do. They are making encouraging noises about deregulating "VFR GA". What concerns many pilots is what tradeoffs will be done to placate the objecting committee members. Screwing IFR GA traffic is one possibility. I understand this may not be directly relevant to you but as I've said I don't think VFR GA is really seriously threatened in the long term; as a sport it will always carry on. There might be increasing problems getting one's certified spamcan maintained but for VFR flight there is the "PFA" type route and this looks like it will be widened; in fact the permit scene is well on the way to pushing out the CofA stuff as it is.
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: U.K.
Age: 46
Posts: 3,112
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm afraid not IO, most transponders simply have an ALT selector and you have no idea what it is actually sending out. Most new digital ones will give you a FL readout, but these are in short supply compared to the older types.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: He's on the limb to nowhere
Posts: 1,981
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Once called up a busy class B (4th busiest in world at the time, LHR around 15th) and requested an overhead transit. Approach told me my mode C was indicating FL410, I said sorry and will get it fixed and should I turn it off, approach said keep mode C on and immediately approved my transit request. No doubt I was causing TCAS mayham up in the flight levels but ATC didn't care, and neither did I 
One can transit overhead LAX in the SFRA with Mode C and without a clearance (but monitoring a certain frequency). Off the top of my head there is the Hudson river corridor, and Class E corridors at SAN that cross short final. There should be no reason why a similar approach to controlled airspace cannot be made in these somewhat smaller airfields too. The powers that be just have to make the effort, so I guess it will never happen.
One can transit overhead LAX in the SFRA with Mode C and without a clearance (but monitoring a certain frequency). Off the top of my head there is the Hudson river corridor, and Class E corridors at SAN that cross short final. There should be no reason why a similar approach to controlled airspace cannot be made in these somewhat smaller airfields too. The powers that be just have to make the effort, so I guess it will never happen.
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Anywhere
Posts: 2,212
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by IO540
I do wonder what the point of this verification is, because I could be legally flying under the LTMA at 2400ft, non-radio, with a transponder returning FL150, causing everybody to sh*t themselves, but they have no means of checking because they don't know who (if anybody) he is talking to.
And believe me - if the 2400ft / FL150 occurence happened you probably would find someone knocking on your door
but then my transponder (both KT76C and the later GTX330) permanently display the FL being returned on the LCD display. Doesn't almost every Mode C unit do that?
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 1,294
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Can i suggest to anyone here who thinks that they would do a better job of controlling that they actually spend time at an ATC unit. Also as to reducing the size of CAS , some of us have to work as close as we safely can to the edges of CAS just to maintain standard separation , it isn't as vast as you may make out.
They work to a different system in the US please do not even attempt to compare the procedures they can be quite different.
Whilst I am happy for aircraft to transit through the overhead I will not restrict the climb of a Jet aircraft when a simple routing east or west of the overhead will keep all people happy.
They work to a different system in the US please do not even attempt to compare the procedures they can be quite different.
Whilst I am happy for aircraft to transit through the overhead I will not restrict the climb of a Jet aircraft when a simple routing east or west of the overhead will keep all people happy.
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Not a million miles from EGTF
Age: 68
Posts: 1,579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Flower
>>>Whilst I am happy for aircraft to transit through the overhead I will not restrict the climb of a Jet aircraft when a simple routing east or west of the overhead will keep all people happy<<<
I'd rally like to spend some time in the tower and radar suite just to get an appreciation of what it is like. And I don't (normally) denigrate ATCOs.
However, we have now documented examples where VFR pilots have funnelled into a seriously dangerous situations to avoid discommoding commercial departures.
A colleague was one of a number of pilots who asked for a routing through the overhead of a large field, but was 'instructed' to fly to one side of the field and pass outside the ATZ. Others asked to pass on the other side of the field. Again they were 'instructed' to pass the other way
Within minutes they were caught in sea fog close to high ground and having to descend to low level to remain VMC. In the meantime ATC were dealing with a single airliner and took no remedial action despite the cries of anguish from the VFR pilots. Still I suppose 20 VFR pilots don't compare with 300 people off on holiday
Nice one ATCOs
>>>Whilst I am happy for aircraft to transit through the overhead I will not restrict the climb of a Jet aircraft when a simple routing east or west of the overhead will keep all people happy<<<
I'd rally like to spend some time in the tower and radar suite just to get an appreciation of what it is like. And I don't (normally) denigrate ATCOs.
However, we have now documented examples where VFR pilots have funnelled into a seriously dangerous situations to avoid discommoding commercial departures.
A colleague was one of a number of pilots who asked for a routing through the overhead of a large field, but was 'instructed' to fly to one side of the field and pass outside the ATZ. Others asked to pass on the other side of the field. Again they were 'instructed' to pass the other way
Within minutes they were caught in sea fog close to high ground and having to descend to low level to remain VMC. In the meantime ATC were dealing with a single airliner and took no remedial action despite the cries of anguish from the VFR pilots. Still I suppose 20 VFR pilots don't compare with 300 people off on holiday
Nice one ATCOs
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: TUOP
Posts: 81
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There may be some circumstances where, compared to the USA, the system in Europe is structured to the relative benefit of GA, rather than CAT, I can't think of any offhand.
Whilst there are obviously cases where they have come unstuck, the FAA trust in the competence of their PPL's, the CAA does not. Hence, in the US, when flying VFR, there is no clearance required to enter 'C' or 'D' airspace. Just that you must be in contact with ATC and squawk mode C in 'C'.
It seems to work there, but given some of the horror stories related in this forum it might not work here.
Whilst there are obviously cases where they have come unstuck, the FAA trust in the competence of their PPL's, the CAA does not. Hence, in the US, when flying VFR, there is no clearance required to enter 'C' or 'D' airspace. Just that you must be in contact with ATC and squawk mode C in 'C'.
It seems to work there, but given some of the horror stories related in this forum it might not work here.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: 75N 16E
Age: 54
Posts: 4,729
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
They work to a different system in the US please do not even attempt to compare the procedures they can be quite different
I would be happy (and I believe it would be sensible) for every "commercial" airport above a certain size (exeter / plymouth / Bournemouth / Gloucester / Cardiff / Bristol / Filton etc...) being surrounded with Class C airspace, to a certain radius, say 5nm, and to a certain altitude (say 5000'). BUT I would like to see the CAS stop at 5000' and have G above it for a few thousand, which is essentially the american philosophy. I would also like to see Class C services being offered by ATC, meaning that if I need to transit (which is less likely due to the above), I call up ATC and then I am given an altitude and mode C sqwark and will accept vectors. This would ease flight planning, especially IMCr IFR, reduce CAS busts (the standard dimensions are standard), and for people not wishing to talk, they can go over the top at 5500.
Nearly all airspace in the USA is toppable, including the Class B layer cakes surrounding the busy airports - which is why they can sign write over LA - they do it at +10,000'.
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 1,294
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A radius of 5nm is unworkable and only suits the VFR flight.
The problem isn't CAS it is the access too CAS . Come to an airfield where there is no problem with access and where the locally based GA pilots are more than happy for the airspace to be extended.
As for funnelling aircraft in to bad weather, many radar units are not even based at the airfield they work , and in the vast majority of cases are in room with limited access to windows so are unable to see any local weather, we rely on the METAR to tell us what is going on.
Whenever I give a VFR transit I always add the words, " advise if unable to maintain VMC and require to change heading or level" it is then up to the pilot to let me know if they have a problem.
Routings east/ west / north /south of the threshold work well, again at a quieter place like the one I work at you let them know the traffic they are conflicting with once visual then life becomes much easier. When you first start controlling you tend to use belts and braces in all scenarios, as you gain experience and confidence you gain a much greater awareness of what is likely to happen.
We are also not allowed to issue what are referred to as "unsafe clearances" that is why we in many cases cannot give the clearance through the overhead against a departure or arrival, once both aircraft are on the radar frequency then we can do so much more.
I have hosted many visits to my ATC unit and i know many of my colleagues do the same, it is however as easy as picking up the phone and asking if you can arrange to visit the unit , if you haven't been go along and visit if only so you can ask some of those questions that have been bugging you for some time.
The problem isn't CAS it is the access too CAS . Come to an airfield where there is no problem with access and where the locally based GA pilots are more than happy for the airspace to be extended.
As for funnelling aircraft in to bad weather, many radar units are not even based at the airfield they work , and in the vast majority of cases are in room with limited access to windows so are unable to see any local weather, we rely on the METAR to tell us what is going on.
Whenever I give a VFR transit I always add the words, " advise if unable to maintain VMC and require to change heading or level" it is then up to the pilot to let me know if they have a problem.
Routings east/ west / north /south of the threshold work well, again at a quieter place like the one I work at you let them know the traffic they are conflicting with once visual then life becomes much easier. When you first start controlling you tend to use belts and braces in all scenarios, as you gain experience and confidence you gain a much greater awareness of what is likely to happen.
We are also not allowed to issue what are referred to as "unsafe clearances" that is why we in many cases cannot give the clearance through the overhead against a departure or arrival, once both aircraft are on the radar frequency then we can do so much more.
I have hosted many visits to my ATC unit and i know many of my colleagues do the same, it is however as easy as picking up the phone and asking if you can arrange to visit the unit , if you haven't been go along and visit if only so you can ask some of those questions that have been bugging you for some time.
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Not a million miles from EGTF
Age: 68
Posts: 1,579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by flower
We are also not allowed to issue what are referred to as "unsafe clearances" that is why we in many cases cannot give the clearance through the overhead against a departure or arrival, once both aircraft are on the radar frequency then we can do so much more..
In the particular instance my friends experienced, pilots were already declaring a problem maintaining VMC but ATC continued to instruct aircraft to fly into that area without any warning of the conditions they were about to experience
The logic is that is 'Radar' know that a lot of aircraft are intending to make a similar routing, and it is possible to allow an overhead transit (it is legal after all), then he might choose to hold the commercial traffic to allow the fleet through. However, bitter experience shows that pressure from the companies will dictate that the VFR traffic will be sent away or an MOR or complaint will be filed.
That side of the equation none of us GA pilots ever see, but we know it happens.
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 1,294
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Robin regarding Flight priorities we do not delay flights which may or may not be on a slot for flights with a lower category unless safety will be compromised.
Have a look at MATS part 1 Section 1 chapter 4 page 5.
I'm not to sure where the problem lay with the flights you say were forced into non compliance with their licence, it is however the holder of the licences responsibility to conform to the privileges of their licence, I am not privy nor an I able to ask what qualifications the pilot may have we have to be told and as I said we may not be aware of any problems with visibility in a specific area. Once told of any difficulties I know the colleagues i work with and myself do everything we can to try to sort alternatives.
Have a look at MATS part 1 Section 1 chapter 4 page 5.
I'm not to sure where the problem lay with the flights you say were forced into non compliance with their licence, it is however the holder of the licences responsibility to conform to the privileges of their licence, I am not privy nor an I able to ask what qualifications the pilot may have we have to be told and as I said we may not be aware of any problems with visibility in a specific area. Once told of any difficulties I know the colleagues i work with and myself do everything we can to try to sort alternatives.