Doncaster Sheffield Airspace Grab
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Wiltshire
Posts: 68
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Doncaster Sheffield Airspace Grab
Apologies if this has been posted elsewhere, but here's a copy of Doncaster's proposed airspace grab. Where's Robin Hood when we need him to protect us from the Sheriff of Nottingham,who evidently currently works for Peel Airports?
Robin Hood Doncaster Finningley Sheffield Arthur Scargill International is currently in Class G airspace. As a GA pilot, I will resist ANY attempt to increase the level of Class D airspace in order to facilitate the wholesale loco airline transport of the pierced, tattooed, shell-suited dregs of society to some Mediterranean destination where they can drink and drug themselves into oblivion!
The airport's business plan should not assume any increase in the level of airspace beyond a 2.5 mile Class G ATZ merely to suit the commercial aspirations of Chavair - we have already seen this being attempted at Coventry.
How is it that Humberside manages without the size of airspace grab proposed for Finningley?
The airport's business plan should not assume any increase in the level of airspace beyond a 2.5 mile Class G ATZ merely to suit the commercial aspirations of Chavair - we have already seen this being attempted at Coventry.
How is it that Humberside manages without the size of airspace grab proposed for Finningley?
In the Peel Group's Airspace Grab document they state:
The ATZ extends to a radius of 2½ nm from the centre of the aerodrome up to 2000 feet above aerodrome elevation. The airspace within this ATZ is also Class G although pilots must obtain permission from ATC to enter the ATZ. In the local area there is a profusion of GA activities associated with Sandtoft airfield, which also has an ATZ, located only 7 miles from Robin Hood Airport Doncaster Sheffield. Other airfields in the vicinity include Gamston, Sheffield, Sherburn-in-Elmet and Netherthorpe embracing myriad aviation activities. Moreover, there are numerous gliding and microlightssites plus parachuting takes place at nearby Hibaldstow. The nearby military airfields of RAF Waddington, RAF Coningsby, RAF Scampton, RAF Cottesmore, RAF Cranwell and RAF Barkston Heath generate considerable traffic, much of this operates at low level. The Lincolnshire Area of Intense Aerial Activity (AIAA) is situated to the south of the Airport and the Yorkshire AIAA is to the north. In summary there are a multitude of disparate aviation operations in the area and this is now further complicated by the ever increasing operations from Robin Hood Airport Doncaster Sheffield.
Actually, it just indicates that it was a stupid place to put a new airport!
They also state:
The plethora of flying activities described above taking place in uncontrolled
airspace has led to a number of safety-related incidents which together with the illustrations of predicted growth underline the pressing need for a revision in the airspace arrangements.
But they haven't substantiated their claim that 'a number of safety-related incidents' have occurred with any examples.
I have also been told that they are planning an increase in training movements - including RAF - and other ways of increasing their commercial development. Although that is supposed to be 'rather hush hush for the moment'. Clearly the intent is to say "Look how busy we are - we really need all this Class D airspace we've asked for!"
You can read the whole Airspace Grab proposal at http://www.robinhoodairport.com/page...tation_94.html .
The ATZ extends to a radius of 2½ nm from the centre of the aerodrome up to 2000 feet above aerodrome elevation. The airspace within this ATZ is also Class G although pilots must obtain permission from ATC to enter the ATZ. In the local area there is a profusion of GA activities associated with Sandtoft airfield, which also has an ATZ, located only 7 miles from Robin Hood Airport Doncaster Sheffield. Other airfields in the vicinity include Gamston, Sheffield, Sherburn-in-Elmet and Netherthorpe embracing myriad aviation activities. Moreover, there are numerous gliding and microlightssites plus parachuting takes place at nearby Hibaldstow. The nearby military airfields of RAF Waddington, RAF Coningsby, RAF Scampton, RAF Cottesmore, RAF Cranwell and RAF Barkston Heath generate considerable traffic, much of this operates at low level. The Lincolnshire Area of Intense Aerial Activity (AIAA) is situated to the south of the Airport and the Yorkshire AIAA is to the north. In summary there are a multitude of disparate aviation operations in the area and this is now further complicated by the ever increasing operations from Robin Hood Airport Doncaster Sheffield.
Actually, it just indicates that it was a stupid place to put a new airport!
They also state:
The plethora of flying activities described above taking place in uncontrolled
airspace has led to a number of safety-related incidents which together with the illustrations of predicted growth underline the pressing need for a revision in the airspace arrangements.
But they haven't substantiated their claim that 'a number of safety-related incidents' have occurred with any examples.
I have also been told that they are planning an increase in training movements - including RAF - and other ways of increasing their commercial development. Although that is supposed to be 'rather hush hush for the moment'. Clearly the intent is to say "Look how busy we are - we really need all this Class D airspace we've asked for!"
You can read the whole Airspace Grab proposal at http://www.robinhoodairport.com/page...tation_94.html .
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: 180INS500
Posts: 137
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think that it is about time that as many GA pilots as possible started to plan flights though these Class D zones that are springing up and when refused access put in a complaint to the CAA. I have no major objection to the establishment of CAS where there is free and equitable access for all airspace users. Where the service provider is unable to accommodate traffic then they are failing in their obligations to the CAA to run airspace and should thus be reported accordingly.
Its time for GA and non-commercial airspace users to start making noises - in much the same way that NATS have started their enhanced airspace infringement reporting process.
Its time for GA and non-commercial airspace users to start making noises - in much the same way that NATS have started their enhanced airspace infringement reporting process.
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Ireland
Posts: 187
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Info on this proposal can be seen at the following:
http://www.primarysolution.co.uk/Data/index.htm
http://www.primarysolution.co.uk/Data/index.htm
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Anywhere
Posts: 2,212
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In fact - let's go one stage further
The plethora of flying activities described above taking place in uncontrolled airspace has led to a number of safety-related incidents which together with the illustrations of predicted growth underline the pressing need for a revision in the airspace arrangements.
I have also been told that they are planning an increase in training movements - including RAF - and other ways of increasing their commercial development. Although that is supposed to be 'rather hush hush for the moment'.
Clearly the intent is to say "Look how busy we are - we really need all this Class D airspace we've asked for!"
I have no major objection to the establishment of CAS where there is free and equitable access for all airspace users.
Where the service provider is unable to accommodate traffic then they are failing in their obligations to the CAA to run airspace and should thus be reported accordingly.
Last edited by Chilli Monster; 7th Jan 2007 at 10:29.
During the 'Informal Consultation' period required by DAP in the airspace change process, all the above comments HAVE to be addressed by Peel; if they're not, DAP will merely chuck the application back and say try again.
Any establishment of regulated airspace requires the operating authority to make provision for access to other users eg transits from Sheffield to Sandtoft, plus Sandtoft MUST be allowed free operation within their own ATZ, and allowed access to/from that ATZ to the surrounding class G airspace. Peel must also supply statistics regarding transits, incidents etc. to 'make their case'. Believe me I've done it and it's a long drawn out process taking at least 6 months, normally double that.
Any establishment of regulated airspace requires the operating authority to make provision for access to other users eg transits from Sheffield to Sandtoft, plus Sandtoft MUST be allowed free operation within their own ATZ, and allowed access to/from that ATZ to the surrounding class G airspace. Peel must also supply statistics regarding transits, incidents etc. to 'make their case'. Believe me I've done it and it's a long drawn out process taking at least 6 months, normally double that.
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Bordeaux, France
Posts: 581
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's necessary to remember why the airspace was introduced in the first place (known traffic environment) and as such there will be times when safety requires a judgement call that may not enable a transit. A more balanced view would be that the service provider attempts to allow free and equal access, bearing in mind that it is better to slightly re-route a GA transit rather than having 200 tonnes of kerosene burner going around
I have been held both in the UK and France at regional airports with only a few commercial flights per day due to the landing 737 (ie its about 5-10mins away), and it only really bothers me if I get charged a fortune for the landing and parking - guess which country? As for being denied controlled airspace access, its never happened in France yet, but on my infrequent visits to the UK, it has happened for about 50% of the time....
Whats the betting that this new peice of airspace, if approved, will be one of those where everything stops for the commercial movement of the day, and where an attitude, of 'this is MY airspace' will prevail for transits?
Cynical.....moi??? Regards, SD..
It is regretful that some ATC units in class D airspace seem 'unable to handle' a mixture of IFR arrivals and departures mixed with VFR transits and end up 'instructing' the VFR transits to remain clear. The procedures for handling transits with minimum disruption are clearly laid down in the MATS Part 1, and as I said, DAP require the airspace controlling authority to make provision to allow access to other airspace users.
Interestingly I note from AIP amendments that SRA's are about to be introduced at Robin Hood; does this mean they've got an on-site radar now? If so, this should be used to facilitate VFR transits now, not just if class D is introduced. This will give the local GA fraternity more confidence in the ability of the ATC unit to facilitate transits mixing with their IFR traffic.
Interestingly I note from AIP amendments that SRA's are about to be introduced at Robin Hood; does this mean they've got an on-site radar now? If so, this should be used to facilitate VFR transits now, not just if class D is introduced. This will give the local GA fraternity more confidence in the ability of the ATC unit to facilitate transits mixing with their IFR traffic.
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Anywhere
Posts: 2,212
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't think it's installed yet. The airspace proposal states they're getting one (future) with SSR from Claxby. Still to be controlled from Liverpool though.
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: uk
Posts: 470
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes, there is an on-site radar head now.
Can't see a problem with the whole class D issue myself.
As both an airline and private flyer, I can see both sides of the coin, but I consider airspace protection for heavy IFR traffic in the terminal area to be vital.
Can't see a problem with the whole class D issue myself.
As both an airline and private flyer, I can see both sides of the coin, but I consider airspace protection for heavy IFR traffic in the terminal area to be vital.
There should be no problem with class D provided the controlling authority operate it in the correct manner, but as I said, other units apparently don't.
One of the conditions from DAP for its approval will be not to deny access for transit traffic.
One of the conditions from DAP for its approval will be not to deny access for transit traffic.
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Maders UK
Age: 57
Posts: 806
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have used the airport several times since it opened. The last time I flew in there was 2 weeks ago under IFR and have found both its opening hours and service excellent - with the exception of the lack of avgas (compared to its close neighbours who close early for tea). Yes there is a handling charge but I don't mind paying this provided I am given a good service. (Cost me £65 or so for landing handling, departure, 3 nights parking etc..).
I don't see the problem with more class D and welcome the enhanced safety that having more controllers watching more scopes brings to the area. I can't remember the last time I was refused a class D transit or sent around the houses by a controller.
Let's not all get so negative and get our knickers in a twist in such a hurry - there are positive safety aspects to be gained out of this.
SB
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Anywhere
Posts: 2,212
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And just wait and see how difficult it becomes to route from the south of the country to the north when this occurs. In one swift blow, unless the dimensions are changed, you will cut the country in half as far as GA is concerned.
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Maders UK
Age: 57
Posts: 806
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As that isn't likely to happen (it'll be the same person sat at the same screen) I fail to see your point.
And just wait and see how difficult it becomes to route from the south of the country to the north when this occurs. In one swift blow, unless the dimensions are changed, you will cut the country in half as far as GA is concerned.
And just wait and see how difficult it becomes to route from the south of the country to the north when this occurs. In one swift blow, unless the dimensions are changed, you will cut the country in half as far as GA is concerned.
I frequently travel Southwest to Northeast from Plymouth to Humberside and transit Bristol, Birmingham and East Midlands airspace without let or hindrance.
All you need to do is ask and you will get a transit. ATC are invariably professional, courteous and accomodating - they are on our side as far as I am concerned.
Perhaps I am missing something but AFAIK:
More controlled airspace = more controller workload = more controllers = more safety.
I would far rather Finningley be used as a regional airport (with late opening hours ATC and an ILS) than that beautiful long runway have weeds grow through it and be allowed to decay (a fate that has befallen far too many ex-military airfields in this country).
Expansion of the controlled airspace around it for heavy/light traffic separation was always inevitable from a safety point of view.
SB
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: UK,Twighlight Zone
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
personally I quite like controlled airspace. I turn on my Mode S (that no one can actually see..) and ask politly for a crossing and get a nice easy crossing. East Mids are exceptionally accomodating (allthough I do have 5 months and 21 days before Chilli will give me my next airways join.. ). I can see Chilli's point about the country being cut in half with the Doncaster airspace but lets hope the controllers responsible for Doncaster appreciate that they are the new boys in the area and accomodate the little guys.
whatever we may think chav air will continue to grow and so will the use of the regional airports. as pointed out earlier at least it keeps airports open and available even if it is at a price.
whatever we may think chav air will continue to grow and so will the use of the regional airports. as pointed out earlier at least it keeps airports open and available even if it is at a price.