Doncaster Sheffield - New Class D Airspace

[Pudnucker]

With many of the airlines on the verge of bankruptcy and cutting routes, surely the smaller airports that don't welcome GA, want CAS protection etc etc will all have to do a massive blaircumbrown u turn and realise that they HAVE to welcome in previously unwelcome traffic to make a profit...

[flybymike]

We can dream I suppose....

[EastCoaster]

I'm curious to know why I'm being singled out for "attack", for want of a better way of putting it?!

All I've done in my previous two posts is to try to help explain why, at such an early stage in the life of the commercial airport, it may have been decided that the implementation of CAS at DSA is necessary! Obviously not only the airport authority wanted it, but also DAP and the CAA must have thought there was sufficient grounds for concern for the safety of aircraft in the area that not only was it approved so early, but also that the process was so quick! Their decision, not ATC's!

And another thing, I have no problem with GA flyers, nor does anybody that I know. All I was doing, as is clear from what I've written previously, was expressing dissatisfaction with those who have deliberately, negligently, or simply absent-mindedly put other airspace users in the area at risk by their actions (or lack of), for whatever personal reasons or motivations.

Neither did I try to say that ATC are the environmental arbiters of aviation. To try to do so would be pure silliness. ATC are responsible for the safety of the aircraft under their care, and under normal everyday working conditions are expected to exercise a high degree of environmental consideration in the routeing of aircraft, while trying to minimise the level of disruption and disturbance caused to those who must live and work in the vicinity of the airfield! On the other side of the argument is the economic pressure from the airlines and aircraft operators to minimise track mileage flown and thereby reduce the cost of fuel-burn per flight! However, I will clarify this by stating that when there is the possibility that the safety of a flight could be compromised (whether GA or CAT), then the environmental considerations go out the window - SAFETY is paramount! And that, once again, is why the CAS is being established! Not so that everybody who doesn't happen to possess an AOC can be excluded from flying in the area!

Why is it that most people are ASSUMING that there will automatically be an instant deterioration in the strong working relationship that's been forged between DSA ATC and the GA airspace users in the area over the last 3 years or more? Why don't we all just wait and see how things pan out?? Or is that just me being naiive and wanting to believe that people actually want to work together for the safety and enjoyment of all concerned. After all, we're all only doing our jobs! We still have to work with each other at the end of the day.

[Lurking123]

EC, unfortunately you have tried to talk reason in a forum where some others simply object without rational thought.

[WorkingHard]

EC - a very considerate response. I believe the problem lies in part by the idiots who dont talk/squak/listen etc as you so rightly said BUT there are problems with airspace acces that so many GA pilots have experienced. It is sad but true as we hear many times on these forums. As DSA is not going to be very busy we should see virtually no transits refused and if they are then they should be properly and officially questioned. This is not taking a stance before the event really no more than stating the obvious. I for one believe we have the best ATC in the world but there is the odd "trouble spot" for GA

[bigfoot01]

EC, I think your tone may have been a contributing factor:

"Does anybody really believe.."
"But if you need to bitch and moan.."
"a number of beligerent individuals.."
etc.

You make some interesting points, but by the way you have made it, I find it difficult to be sympathetic to the "why are you having a go at me?" post.

[EastCoaster]

One of two

I take your point Bigfoot01, and I apologise if I've gotten anybody's back up with anything that I've said.

I was merely trying to present another point of view as to why there is a need for the CAS, and what effect it might have on day-to-day flying around DSA; rather than the ridiculous speculation which prevailed on this thread from many of the contributors that intimated a "land-grab" of some sort by the airport and proposed almost blanket ill-treatment of GA and hobby pilots by an ATC unit that has already proven it's worth over and over again.

Try looking at it from the other side of the fence however, just for a few moments!

• Imagine that you were one of the controllers who had been unfortunate enough to have been on duty when one of the "beligerent individuals..." had been out playing and had to suffer the needless stress of having to deal with the situations that resulted from those individuals' actions, and subsequently had to spend hours filling out paperwork and filing reports on the incident;

• Imagine then that you are one of the controllers who works at DSA who has always striven to provide the very best service possible to everybody who uses the area; and then reads all of the crap that's been posted here about how suddenly things are going to change because the airport is now the "Big Cheese" because it's got Class D and they can't go in there in their PA28 or C560 or whatever, just because ATC decided, 'cos they're not carrying fare-paying bucket-and-spade brigade passengers to or from EGCN, so there!! And this despite the fact that ATC continually strive to provide the same level of service to everybody in the area, even though it's only the aircraft that actually land/depart from EGCN who pay the controllers' wages! But they have more right to be in the area in their GA flight anyway!!

• Then you hear moans about ATC placing restrictions on their flight that are designed to keep them just as safe as the "bucket-and-spaders", while conveniently ignoring the restrictions that are often placed on the airliners and other GA IFR flights to keep them away from smaller aircraft thus keeping the crews of the smaller aircraft safe as well!!

[EastCoaster]

Two of two

Now tell me: How the hell would anybody know what ATC might be thinking if they don't ask? Presumably this is where the misunderstanding and misinformation creeps in - perpetuated by individuals who have formed a supposition following an interaction and not followed it up to test the veracity of their conclusions! There you go, I have just made the same mistake: I've formed an opinion without checking the facts!
And how the f#*k can anybody tell what's going to happen in the future after the CAS becomes operational; unless there's been a rush on crystal balls at Madame Zelda's Emporium of Exotic Goods That Might Be Useful for Divining the Unkown?

Does that cover the "bitch and moan" bit satisfactorily?? I think all of the above probably covers the "Does anybody really believe.." bit as well!!


Given the unfair, unfounded and groundless presumptions and attitudes that were displayed earlier, and the finger-pointing and blaming that was directed at a thoroughly professional and often stretched ATC unit, and by extension at an airport operator that has been a bloody good employer to a lot of people and has helped in starting an economic revival in an area that has long-since been depressed; now while still imagining that you are a member of said ATC unit, how do think you would feel now?!

You see, it's not just "why are you having a go at me...?", you're having a go at everything that I believe in, and everything that I know from experience to be true. And yes, before you ask, I have worked inside CAS as well as outside!

I promised myself that I wasn't going to allow myself to get drawn into a debate on this, or for that matter to allow myself to rise to the bait and lose my temper. My sole intention on posting here (in a forum that I've never before been into, and after this experience am extremely unlikely to venture anywhere near to ever again!) was to hopefully help dispel some of the misunderstanding and misinformation that was being bandied around in here! But there, I've done it. I've lost my cool. That's the last time I'll stick my head above the parapet and try to help!


Right, rant over. I believe I've said enough. I'm outta here, good luck to you all. If any of you ever happen to be in the area of South Yorks./North Lincs. please don't hesitate to give me a call. Otherwise, enjoy your lives.

Goodbye


P.S. Lurking123, thank you for your kind words. Ditto all who have expressed a positive/objective opinion on this thread.

[WorkingHard]

EastCoaster, it is right to get a view from the opposite side of the radar but it is also right that BOTH sides should listen to each other, It APPEARS that what is so often true is that the side with the biggest clout shouts down the others. I am sure you and your colleagues are very professional in your work otherwise you would not be there but that is not to say that some ATC units do not give equal access to all airspace users in accordance with safe operations and not just CONVENIENT operations. I think what many contributors are saying, albeit perhaps not using temperate phrases at times, is that ATC often do not appear to give equal access to the large area they control. Perhaps one should properly refer to an air grab rather than a land grab because if it was a land grab you would have to pay for it and as it stands at the moment you pay nothing for your exclusive right to keep others at bay. The economic argument is pure and simple hogwash and has no relevance whatever to your stance. GA in the area provides more employment and almost certainly produces a lot more income for the area than your employer ever will. Remind us again where your ATC unit is physically!
How many CAT flights per day are you expecting and what will you do for the rest of the day? As for attiudes not changing when you have this class D ask some of the local GA pilots how it changed as soon as your "invitation" period expired after you had the GA community help you train at DSA. No I have no rant and no axe to grind with DSA but let us please get the facts straight and then we may learn a little from each side.

[EastCoaster]

"right that BOTH sides should listen to each other"

I couldn't agree more. So why is it then that I have seen nothing here to convince me that any of the contributors who started out on an offensive tack in this thread have actually listened to anything that's been posted in rebuttal of any of the opinions/nonsense that's been posted as "fact"?
Why do contributors continually argue that just because it's CAS there will automatically be exclusions, where there is no empirical evidence to support this position where DSA is concerned? I cannot recall a single occurrence where a GA flight has been refused ATZ transit, and where others have been asked to adjust their track... well that's already been covered ad nauseum; there's no need to continually rehash old ground.

Nobody's denying that there are certain custodian's of airspace in this country who haven't exercised the most responsible control over it, but the evidence at DSA points to the opposite. So for the Love of God can we please stop generalising and insinuating that ATC at EGCN are "GA-Unfriendly" and will do all in their power to keep GA non-terminal traffic out of the area! If contributors have gripes about the policies in place at other ATC units, then would they please refrain from airing those gripes where they are not relevant! As I've already said - nobody can predict the future!

WRT your question about the initial "invitation" period: Have you considered the possibilty that maybe that might have been a deliberate policy on the part of the airport authority, not ATC; and rather than being designed to exclude GA owners from being able to use the airport "because they weren't wanted", it might actually have been designed to discourage GA owners who might have wanted to base their aircraft there, in order that the establishment of the airport had as little an impact as possible on the business of the surrounding GA airfields? How might they have felt towards the airport if suddenly they haemorrhaged business as privately owned aircraft suddenly upped and left for the bigger airfield with H24 ops?? Just speculation on my part mind you, but certainly worth considering, don't you think? In fact, local GA still forms a very important part of Controller training at DSA, as I'm sure it does at most airports around the country, and local pilots often avail of fee-free training when there is a controller in training or a Validation Board in progress. That combined with the fact that there is always a friendly, professional and courteous manner on the RT between ATC and GA, and there is quite often the odd bit of friendly banter exchanged when workload permits, tells me that there can't be that much bad-blood between ATC and the private pilots who frequent the area!

"Air grab"/"Land grab", I'm afraid you're allowing yourself to get bogged down in symantics WorkingHard. You would have a point about having to pay for it if it weren't for the fact that it costs a huge amount of money to operate a block of CAS. Don't forget about the capital outlay required to set the whole thing up in the first place: infrastructure and equipment purchase, installation, setup and subsequent ongoing maintenance; manpower recruitment, training, and continual licensing and revalidation, application administration costs and consultation costs.... the list just goes on and on. Nobody ever thinks about these things.

"exclusive right to keep others at bay.."
Yes, you are right, ATC are vested with that executive authority under the law, but not to be used frivolously. It's there as a fall back to ensure the safety of flights. And again, let's not tar EGCN ATC with the sins of others until the case for the prosecution has been proven in evidence. And as has already been advocated on so many previous occasions if it happens in the future and the belief is that it has happened unfairly, then follow the correct procedure and report it to the relevant authority.

It appears that there are some individuals here who are so intransigent in their opposition to CAS, that no amount of logic or reasoned argument presented in opposition to their position will soften their stance and help them to see that maybe there is a good reason for it's establishment.

At least we appear to have gotten away from the argument that there can be no possible justification for the airspace based on traffic levels!

[helimutt]

I always thought pilots would plan their flights instead of just bumbling around the skies. So Doncaster has CAS. So what. Do you need to fly through it really? If you're locally based, the atc'ers will get to know you and you're abilities etc. I've always found this the case.
You can fly around the edge of CAS without speaking to a soul or even fly over the top of it. I can't see why so many are upset about this. Yes, Doncaster airport is hardly a busy airport and I think Humberside would benefit from some sort of CAS around it. I am biased about that though. There are so many GA a/c fly around the Humber area without talking to the right people. We do fly low level sometimes (well, above 500' anyway) and often told to look out for motor gliders, microlights, and fixed wing out of North Coates and Beverley etc.

At least the Radar controllers and atc'ers at HUY do deal with this GA traffic very well.

Is the CAS having an impact on Sandtoft for booking out etc? I know from working at Sandtoft in the past they (DON)were always on the phone complaining we didn't talk to them when in the circuit!!?? Eh? No CAS then.

[BarTT]

So, where do I start?
You ask a G/A airfield if there is any traffic in potential conflict with the IFR being positioned for the ILS to be told nothing. then have to give avoiding action as a departure from that other airfield that had nothing is flying through your 8 mile final, then decides to call you when through the centre line after you've given the ILS traffic avoiding action! Or you ask for traffic "we have a departure, but we don't know which way it's going" That was yesterday.
Today, somebody inbound Sandtoft calls 3 miles southeast of Doncaster when flying up from the south. Good job we had no IFR departures, because they would have had a significant delay. Why leave it so late to give a call?
TOM inbound from the west, had to be kept at 70 due a 60 transit which was no problem, until unknown traffic at 65 popped up 10 mile east of him on a converging heading (again, not a problem as this was then co-ordinated with another unit) The problem was this primary south of it. TOM had to be given avoiding action to the west and vectored around it (this primary had delayed an out bound earlier because it flew 4 miles south and west of CN without talking to us!) Think the TOM decided to go visual just to get on the ground quickly.
This is a real shame, because it tarnishes things for the other 99% of flights that call, and will go out of the way to help you if they can. I don't see why with controlled airspace things will change much. It would just be nice to talk to everyone!!

[207592]

Risk Adverse Or Deteriorating Performance?

Perhaps my memory is too long, but I recollect that when the RAF operated Vulcans out of Finningley, the SATCO telephoned CFI EGNF to advise when 02 was in use, so that look out could be kept for 'heavies' on approach over Scofton. 'Twas the same when Finningley was a ANS. Are the take-off and descent profiles of commercial aircraft so different from the old warbirds?

To whoever mentioned the viability of EGCN, affirmative, Peel Holdings have asked for rate relief because the airport is making a loss. It does not add up, does it? But then, that company opened and closed Sheffield City Airport.

[SFCC]

Peel Airports most certainly did NOT open Sheffield City Airport

They did shut it, however.

[Friio4]

The radar ATCO's that control Doncaster also control Liverpool. I have been a radar ATCO at Liverpool for over 16 years and cannot remember refusing a transit clearance of Class D airspace. I admit on occasions offering alternative routings dependant on the traffic situation, but honestly cannot recall an absolute refusal to transit the CTA/CTA.
When controlling at Doncaster I have always politely requested transit traffic either route east, south etc of the airfield or cap their level, knowing full well they dont have to unless its in the ATZ to facilitate IFR arrivals and departures. In my experience, over 3 years now at Doncaster, the vast majority of transitting aircraft have been more than happy to oblige, even offering reroutes on some occasions.
I can see no reason at all why transit traffic should be refused point blank transit clearance of the new airspace, but can see the need for the occasional reroute, which at the end of the day will only be for the reasons of safety and expedition.
At the end of the day it is a very busy piece of airspace , despite some peoples views. Doncaster can handle about 34 IFR scheduled plus unscheduled movements, over 200 transits ( those are the ones in RT contact!) a day. I realise that 34 scheduled movements is not a lot compared to other airports but when they are trying to to integrated with all the other traffic in the area is seems an awful lot more.
There is always an invitation open for anyone who flies in the area to visit in order to have a better understanding of the operation. Remember though, the radar is over at Liverpool.

[jumpseater]

Some examples of types that can be/have been seen in the visual circuit at Doncaster. Needless to say they don't show up on Teletext as movements.

The environment issue is a real one. I've done a large amount of work with noise complainants, though not at DSA. people get used to aircraft flying 'known' approaches and departure routes, when they vary significantly, 'non standard' they raise concerns amongst the populace very quickly, who can and do object to all aviation in all its forms.

So the 73 that is 'off course' becomes any aircraft that is seen. That gives grass roots problems for people wanting to use grass strips, increase flying from a location with planning regulations etc etc. It also does the wider aviation community no good, in giving free ammunition to the detractors/environmental campaigners who oppose any form of aviation. In a previous life I visited a small airfield between two commercial ones that was having a hard time, because the 'public' associated their movements with those of the larger airports. Unfortunately for Joe Public that distinction generally, isn't there. Not to mention adding fuel burn to an operator at low level, pax concern if a go round occurs, and the resultant coverage, how many sensationalist threads have there been on this forum about a simple 'go round'? They can all be environmental factors to varying degrees.

[gasax]

I'd have no issue with the whole country being covered in class D airspace if the controllers did not restrict traffic from entering. Unfortunately that is not what actually happens. For good (although perhaps not terribly robust) reasons they prioritise CAT into their fields. They reduce the workload by keeping GA out.

Last weekend I tried to transit Teeside twice. Not below 2500' was the answer - just about possible in the conditions - but hardly a transit. We got the same treatment from several MATZ, cleared to transit but remain clear of the empty ATZ, again hardly a transit.

With Humberside making an application for Class D as well the situation for north south transits in this area could become very difficult if access is not readily available. From past experience most GA pilots know that whatever the good intentions it is always easier to refuse access than grant it. Hence the resistance to more Class D.

[snapper1]

What is the point of the bl**dy airport being there at all? Its not necessary. East Mids, Leeds/Bradford and Humberside are all within easy reach of the population around Doncaster.

[CrazyMonkey]

Volume Of Cas Unwarranted And Risky To Ga

What an utter mess the whole area will be especially when Humberside gets their share of CAS. I have major concerns for GA:

Firstly, training aircraft (GA and mil) are going to be cornered in to ever smaller chunks of airspace increasing the avoidance manoeuvres required to miss one another (are Donny or Humberside going to allow general handling in class D airspace? just transits I suspect).

Secondly, increasing R/T on a busy training sortie will detract from the learning itself.

Thirdly, if ATC are really so GA user friendly (to be fair, they are pretty good right now) are they prepared for the extra RT calls that will come at them (when we get one)? I refer this to the likes of Stansted who almost always blankly refuse any transits of CAS, not because there isn't space, but because the controllers are too busy. A dedicated 'LARS' frequency may be required.

Finally, the massive volume of CAS will lead to an increase in infringements...not due to negligence but due other factors (inexperience, nav error, weather). Most pilots have been there but I wonder what will happen to these individuals (legally). Okay, they should have been talking to ATC but many pilots are reluctant to do so because they are afraid to talk on busy, quick fire, frequencies. That doesn't mean they aren't safe pilots...from my experience, chatting on the radio reduces the effectiveness of the other senses...ie lookout. Coventry accident?

In my view the volume of CAS is unwarranted and will increase the flight safety risks amongst the GA community.

[danieloakworth]

I think it's a little unfair to compare RHADS and HUY. Humberside have applied for the establishment of a small amount of CAS to mitigate what they have percieved as a steady increase in risk to their traffic in recent years. Ahead of publishing the consultation document they have visited numerous airfields in the region to explain their reasons for the application. In terms of size there really is no comparison between the 2, HUY have gone for protection, RHADS went for full connectivity.