CAA scrapping VFR?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: 180INS500
Posts: 137
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CAA scrapping VFR?
Surprised this hasn't appeared here yet.
Flight International 20-26 Feb.
UK pushes Mode S.
"NATS and the UK CAA say they are seriously concerned about near-collisions involving commercial air transport aircraft and military or GA types in areas where airliners have to transit uncontrolled airspace to approach or depart from several provincial airports. As a consequence, the CAA could close uncontrolled airspace to VFR operations."
Flight International 20-26 Feb.
UK pushes Mode S.
"NATS and the UK CAA say they are seriously concerned about near-collisions involving commercial air transport aircraft and military or GA types in areas where airliners have to transit uncontrolled airspace to approach or depart from several provincial airports. As a consequence, the CAA could close uncontrolled airspace to VFR operations."
Guest
Posts: n/a
Blatant scare tactics to appease the lo-co airlines who use out of the way aerodromes such as Robindoncasterfinningleyhood International Chavport for Commercial Air Transport, then demand virtually Class A airspace to protect them.....
This is the better answer:
The only problem being that Mode C will not satsify Bliar's Big Brother Surveillance Society aspirations.....
This is the better answer:
The only problem being that Mode C will not satsify Bliar's Big Brother Surveillance Society aspirations.....
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Dublin
Posts: 2,547
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Current UK Class B and C airspace levels are unlikely to affect these classes of aircraft
dp
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: South of Iceland
Posts: 46
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Squeak 7700 ...
VFR Mode C optional, Mode A not permitted
So what is this then ? I may have mode C but not Mode A in Class E-G if I'm VFR ? How does that work ?
Is this another CAA Wonderwhizzplan ?
No so - it is my idea to give a little rather than lose a hell of a lot to the whims of the lo-co airlines plundering Class G - and to the policing deisres of the Bliarite surveillance society.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: up North
Posts: 661
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Is Dublin’s radar mode s compliant? If not then mode c will be just fine…..
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 1,114
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Or maybe why don't they finally rip up the old charts and airspace and start again.
Give all of these so called "commercial airports" who operate with uncontrolled airspace around them a class D entry/exit corridor and proper sids and stars to facilitate the big boys through them. Then give each and every airport a VFR transit corridor right over the top. You could use a common frequency to announce your intentions and to make it even simpler lets say for arguments sake that you cross it using the semi circular or quadrantal rule not below 3,000ft and not above I dunno say 5,000. By law you would have to be tuned into the frequency when you transit but not necessarily get clearance from a controller BUT if the brown stuff hit the fan then the controller could get on frequency and be able to contact you. If the weather is naff then you could always try and negotiate a non standard transit at a lower level.
Give all of these so called "commercial airports" who operate with uncontrolled airspace around them a class D entry/exit corridor and proper sids and stars to facilitate the big boys through them. Then give each and every airport a VFR transit corridor right over the top. You could use a common frequency to announce your intentions and to make it even simpler lets say for arguments sake that you cross it using the semi circular or quadrantal rule not below 3,000ft and not above I dunno say 5,000. By law you would have to be tuned into the frequency when you transit but not necessarily get clearance from a controller BUT if the brown stuff hit the fan then the controller could get on frequency and be able to contact you. If the weather is naff then you could always try and negotiate a non standard transit at a lower level.
Why do it if it's not fun?
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Bournemouth
Posts: 4,779
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Potkettleblack,
A great idea, which works very well in other parts of the world (I'm thinking specifically of the US).
But I wonder how useful it would be in the UK with our weather? I can think of no more than a handful of days in the last, say, 6 months when it would have been sensible to plan a x-country VFR flight at 3000'.
FFF
-------------
A great idea, which works very well in other parts of the world (I'm thinking specifically of the US).
But I wonder how useful it would be in the UK with our weather? I can think of no more than a handful of days in the last, say, 6 months when it would have been sensible to plan a x-country VFR flight at 3000'.
FFF
-------------
But when somewhere like Robindoncasterfinningleyhood Intergalactic Chavport tries to demand masses of Class D to suit its lo-cos, having decided to become the cuckoo in the local nest?
Busy GA areas are not just busy with the £100 bacon buttie brigade transiting from one place to another - there is as much need for GH areas etc for training, aerobatics and everything else the open FIR provides.
Being in RT contact with some minor airport radar controller for your flight is not going to be acceptable for many, some of whom don't have RT, let alone a transponder
'New' commercial airports should not think that, just because they want to fly a few oiks to Ibiza, or let fat cats fly in for the local races, that this gives them an immediate right to demand more airspace control.
Busy GA areas are not just busy with the £100 bacon buttie brigade transiting from one place to another - there is as much need for GH areas etc for training, aerobatics and everything else the open FIR provides.
Being in RT contact with some minor airport radar controller for your flight is not going to be acceptable for many, some of whom don't have RT, let alone a transponder
'New' commercial airports should not think that, just because they want to fly a few oiks to Ibiza, or let fat cats fly in for the local races, that this gives them an immediate right to demand more airspace control.
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
But I wonder how useful it would be in the UK with our weather?
There is an enduring myth that the UK has bad weather. The USA has thunderstorms which will dismantle a 747, temperatures far more extreme than the UK, has the same warm/cold fronts, has mountains, deserts, the lot.
The thing is, one can't pick just one single thing and try to change that on the basis that it works well elsewhere. The UK airspace system "works" because we have loads of Class G at low level. We have airports with instrument approaches where (subject to PPR) you can just turn up and ask for an ILS or whatever. We can fly in cloud in Class G non-radio. We have the IMC Rating which legalises all these practices.
We also have an IR which is set up for would-be airline pilots (mostly un/under-employed young men with plenty of time to sit exams) which is out of practical reach of most pilots who are at the stage of their life where they can afford to fly IFR in their own plane, but that doesn't matter because one can fly around in cloud in Class G...
We also have an ATS service with a water-tight separation between IFR enroute sectors, and all the "dross" below that, with the latter getting no service, unless they can get some "limited radar due to controller workload" scraps from some LARS unit.
The US model would work perfectly in Europe, but only if the other bits they have were all in place: Class A base at 18000ft, a proper ATS service for everybody, an practical "private IR", etc.
Some of the US stuff, like a decent ATS service, isn't going to happen in the UK unless the funding system is overhauled (ATC is nationalised, basically) which isn't going to happen. But the rest they could do. France manages OK for example.
There is an enduring myth that the UK has bad weather. The USA has thunderstorms which will dismantle a 747, temperatures far more extreme than the UK, has the same warm/cold fronts, has mountains, deserts, the lot.
The thing is, one can't pick just one single thing and try to change that on the basis that it works well elsewhere. The UK airspace system "works" because we have loads of Class G at low level. We have airports with instrument approaches where (subject to PPR) you can just turn up and ask for an ILS or whatever. We can fly in cloud in Class G non-radio. We have the IMC Rating which legalises all these practices.
We also have an IR which is set up for would-be airline pilots (mostly un/under-employed young men with plenty of time to sit exams) which is out of practical reach of most pilots who are at the stage of their life where they can afford to fly IFR in their own plane, but that doesn't matter because one can fly around in cloud in Class G...
We also have an ATS service with a water-tight separation between IFR enroute sectors, and all the "dross" below that, with the latter getting no service, unless they can get some "limited radar due to controller workload" scraps from some LARS unit.
The US model would work perfectly in Europe, but only if the other bits they have were all in place: Class A base at 18000ft, a proper ATS service for everybody, an practical "private IR", etc.
Some of the US stuff, like a decent ATS service, isn't going to happen in the UK unless the funding system is overhauled (ATC is nationalised, basically) which isn't going to happen. But the rest they could do. France manages OK for example.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: 75N 16E
Age: 54
Posts: 4,729
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
But I wonder how useful it would be in the UK with our weather? I can think of no more than a handful of days in the last, say, 6 months when it would have been sensible to plan a x-country VFR flight at 3000'.
PotKettle...'s idea is a brilliant idea, and would work well in the UK. The US doesn't have some magical weather phenomina, parts may have better weather like Arizona for example but even that is not always true. Try meating a thunderstorm line in the desert in the middle of summer when you are struggling to stay at altitude due to density anyway
Even the LA basin has freezing levels down to 4000' regularly in the winter and lots of visible moisture, and with MEA's 6000-11000 in the area icing can be a real factor.Anyway, I'd rip up the airspace and give Class C to all the major airports, but limit the top of the cake to 5500 AGL then have class E until the upper airspace. Less major airports (The Exeter and Plymouth types) I'd drop a Mode C vale around. The major change though would be to reclassify airwyas.....why do they need to be A?
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: UK,Twighlight Zone
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I might be missing something but in class D airspace, if I am flying a B737 and some **** in a glider or microlite gets in my way I am in just as much danger as if the offending machine was a spam can. Why should gliders and micro-****es be exempt from having altitude reporting transponders in class D?
In reality these pilots will have had less formal trainning in many cases then a JAR PPL A and are therefore more likely to cause problems!
In reality these pilots will have had less formal trainning in many cases then a JAR PPL A and are therefore more likely to cause problems!
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 433
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Rules of the air!
"I might be missing something but in class D airspace, if I am flying a B737 and some **** in a glider or microlite gets in my way "
..... errr...who's way ?
The Rules of the Air Regulations 1996 (Statutory Instrument 1996 No. 1393) - Section IV - 17 (2), suggests that being bigger, smellier and noisier doesn't mean that you have right of way-
"(i) flying machines shall give way to airships, gliders and balloons"
Now, I accept that in practice, if I see a big Bong hurtling towards me, I'm not going to insist that it's my right of way to the point of a loud bang.
On your training point, I'd suggest that some glider pilots may possibly have less formal training than a PPL. Some will have the same and others will have considerably more...Indeed quite a few glider pilots fly airliners as well. Whether this makes then better qualified to dial in a few digits and press a button I'm not so sure about.
A key issue with transponders is that gliders don't carry enough power to run a transponder. Some gliders don't have ANY onboard electrical equipment. Mind you, it does mean that the carbon footprint is rather small!
..... errr...who's way ?
The Rules of the Air Regulations 1996 (Statutory Instrument 1996 No. 1393) - Section IV - 17 (2), suggests that being bigger, smellier and noisier doesn't mean that you have right of way-
"(i) flying machines shall give way to airships, gliders and balloons"
Now, I accept that in practice, if I see a big Bong hurtling towards me, I'm not going to insist that it's my right of way to the point of a loud bang.
On your training point, I'd suggest that some glider pilots may possibly have less formal training than a PPL. Some will have the same and others will have considerably more...Indeed quite a few glider pilots fly airliners as well. Whether this makes then better qualified to dial in a few digits and press a button I'm not so sure about.
A key issue with transponders is that gliders don't carry enough power to run a transponder. Some gliders don't have ANY onboard electrical equipment. Mind you, it does mean that the carbon footprint is rather small!
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Midlands
Posts: 2,359
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
“In reality these pilots will have had less formal training in many cases then a JAR PPL A and are therefore more likely to cause problems!”
A PPL A is likely to fly with an instructor for 1 hour every 2 years. Your average glider pilot with an xc endorsement will have flown probably 10 times with an instructor over a two year period. He is also going to fly more hours and be more current. In gilding the CFI and duty instructor has much more say in your day to day flying and falling below standard just once will get you put straight on checks. By comparison most PPL a’s are unsupervised.
As an ex glider man who also has 16 years power experience, I am quite happy sharing the sky and see no reason to criticize my fellow aviators just because I do not understand them….
Rod1
A PPL A is likely to fly with an instructor for 1 hour every 2 years. Your average glider pilot with an xc endorsement will have flown probably 10 times with an instructor over a two year period. He is also going to fly more hours and be more current. In gilding the CFI and duty instructor has much more say in your day to day flying and falling below standard just once will get you put straight on checks. By comparison most PPL a’s are unsupervised.
As an ex glider man who also has 16 years power experience, I am quite happy sharing the sky and see no reason to criticize my fellow aviators just because I do not understand them….
Rod1
Join Date: May 2001
Location: 75N 16E
Age: 54
Posts: 4,729
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A key issue with transponders is that gliders don't carry enough power to run a transponder. Some gliders don't have ANY onboard electrical equipment. Mind you, it does mean that the carbon footprint is rather small!
Which is what may happen in reality.
"Hello Bourenmouth, Hi, yes I would like to do a bit of gliding in your controlled airspace....No, I don't have a radio, no I don't have a transponder, you see we don't have any electrical equipment onboard....why? Because we don't, and we don't feel that as gliders we should have to fit any....what do you mean bugger off?........"
Join Date: May 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 4,631
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"Hello Bourenmouth, Hi, yes I would like to do a bit of gliding in your controlled airspace....No, I don't have a radio, no I don't have a transponder, you see we don't have any electrical equipment onboard....why? Because we don't, and we don't feel that as gliders we should have to fit any....what do you mean bugger off?........"
I am very much against unnecessary class D airspace.
However, whilst inside CAS of any description I like to feel that I am within a known traffic enviroment and therefore since gliders who chose to operate within CAS, could if they were bothered fit a mode C transponder, I feel they should be required to do so.