Was that you, again?
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 1,160
Likes: 0
From: An ATC centre this side of the moon.
Come on guys we all know that the military think they own most of the airspace in the UK......Take a look at the TRA's over the north sea, they book them on a daily basis often causing UK civil enroute traffic to have to fly extra track miles to avoid but how often do we see them actually using the area,s they have booked!!!
How often do they activate D701 causing oceanic traffic to reroute and then often never actually use the area!!.......try getting the powers to be to create a new airway to protect civil traffic from the fast jet boys and all they do is throw their toys out of the cot...!!!
How often do they activate D701 causing oceanic traffic to reroute and then often never actually use the area!!.......try getting the powers to be to create a new airway to protect civil traffic from the fast jet boys and all they do is throw their toys out of the cot...!!!
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 509
Likes: 0
From: The front end and about 50ft up
I shall go flying this weekend ... I shall fly through my local MATZ ... I shan't call them ... they won't be there ... just like Marham MATZ last weekend, I'd wager
Joined: Jun 2000
Aviation Qualifications: ATCO
Posts: 271
Likes: 23
From: LONDON England
I am sorry but the 'oh dear' is aimed at those who take such a poor attitude towards safety of the aircraft. Messing about in a MATZ, regardless of your thoughts on them, without making contact with the ATSU, is reckless to say the least!
Joined: Jun 2000
Posts: 683
Likes: 0
From: UK
This subject always brings out the high-and-mighty (usually military) pontificators - it has been thrashed to death so many times on these threads.
Just read your AIP at (ENR 2-2-3) - and make your choice ...
JD
Last edited by Jumbo Driver; 19th October 2008 at 19:55. Reason: typo
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 274
Likes: 0
From: Mornington Crescent
Come on guys we all know that the military think they own most of the airspace in the UK......Take a look at the TRA's over the north sea, they book them on a daily basis often causing UK civil enroute traffic to have to fly extra track miles to avoid but how often do we see them actually using the area,s they have booked!!!
How often do they activate D701 causing oceanic traffic to reroute and then often never actually use the area!!.......try getting the powers to be to create a new airway to protect civil traffic from the fast jet boys and all they do is throw their toys out of the cot...!!!
How often do they activate D701 causing oceanic traffic to reroute and then often never actually use the area!!.......try getting the powers to be to create a new airway to protect civil traffic from the fast jet boys and all they do is throw their toys out of the cot...!!!
Anyway, this is getting away from the point. To add my tuppence worth, I would just point out that just because you can do something, doesn't mean it is to be done! I agree that legally it is permisable to fly a civilian aircraft in a MATZ, in the same way that it is legal to fly at 2000' at ten miles on the extended centreline of, say, DTVA. It doesn't make it sensible to do so! I think it's probably the attitude which is most worrying - it seems that some posters on here have an almost provocative attitude to a notion which is deisgned with safety in mind, not to divy up the airspace as part of a greater p1ssing contest.
I must remind myself yet again that military aviators are always right and us civvy chaps are just useless
Anyway, it's late and I only swung by to look for some info about re-validating my PPL. Just had to add my thoughts on this!
Blunty
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 168
Likes: 0
From: UK
Jumbo
I quote from your own reference (my emboldening):
"3 Availability of the MATZ Penetration Service
3.1 A MATZ Penetration Service will be available during the published hours of watch of the respective ATS Units. However, as
many units are often open for flying outside normal operating hours, pilots should call for the penetration service irrespective of the
hours of watch published. If, outside normal operating hours, no reply is received after two consecutive calls, pilots are advised to
proceed with caution. Information on the operation of aerodromes outside their normal operating hours may be obtained by telephone
from the appropriate Military Air Traffic Control Centre:
(a) North of 5430N - Telephone: Scottish ACC (Mil) 01292 - 479800, Ext 6703/4.
(b) South of 5430N - Telephone: London ACC (Mil) 01895 - 426150."
Edited to add: I completely agree with Blunt's comments - mil FJ operators generally want Class G airspace just as much as GA, and bickering such as this does no-one except the airspace-grabbers in commercial aviation!
I quote from your own reference (my emboldening):
"3 Availability of the MATZ Penetration Service
3.1 A MATZ Penetration Service will be available during the published hours of watch of the respective ATS Units. However, as
many units are often open for flying outside normal operating hours, pilots should call for the penetration service irrespective of the
hours of watch published. If, outside normal operating hours, no reply is received after two consecutive calls, pilots are advised to
proceed with caution. Information on the operation of aerodromes outside their normal operating hours may be obtained by telephone
from the appropriate Military Air Traffic Control Centre:
(a) North of 5430N - Telephone: Scottish ACC (Mil) 01292 - 479800, Ext 6703/4.
(b) South of 5430N - Telephone: London ACC (Mil) 01895 - 426150."
Edited to add: I completely agree with Blunt's comments - mil FJ operators generally want Class G airspace just as much as GA, and bickering such as this does no-one except the airspace-grabbers in commercial aviation!
Joined: May 2006
Posts: 2,042
Likes: 0
From: 2 m South of Radstock VRP
Tell you what, we won't tank through your MATZ if you chaps don't tank through our air chart marked aerodrome control zones. Sittles and Roddige (next door to the National Memorial Arboretum) spring to mind.
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 4,729
Likes: 0
From: 75N 16E
'bout time they made MATZs class D in my opinion......I rarely fly in them as I would rather go over the top. I do occasionally clip the stub at my home airfield on take off (Actually I just remembered I don't, the stub starts at 1000' AGL 
) but I have been lined up for take off when a super puma has gone over the end of the departure end of the runway at 30' and 100 kts......but hey ho, live and let live....They always provide me with a LARS when I ask for it, so I'll let them have a bit of Class G in return 
) but I have been lined up for take off when a super puma has gone over the end of the departure end of the runway at 30' and 100 kts......but hey ho, live and let live....They always provide me with a LARS when I ask for it, so I'll let them have a bit of Class G in return
Joined: Jun 2000
Posts: 683
Likes: 0
From: UK
You may rarely fly in them but, for heaven's sake, we're giving away far too much Class G airspace at the moment already - we certainly shouldn't consider offering any more.
JD
Hovering AND talking
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 5,711
Likes: 1
From: Propping up bars in the Lands of D H Lawrence and Bishop Bonner
Going back to the original post, we haven't heard from Speedbird; not sure of the point of the question! Was it the fact that it was over Marham or the standard of the PFLs?
It's Marham, it's the weekend, they're all living it up in Swaffham and Downham Market! We don't know whether the aircraft didn't make a call and when answer came there none, the pilot did some PFLs.
Cheers
Whirls
It's Marham, it's the weekend, they're all living it up in Swaffham and Downham Market! We don't know whether the aircraft didn't make a call and when answer came there none, the pilot did some PFLs.
Cheers
Whirls
Joined: Jun 2000
Posts: 683
Likes: 0
From: UK
If it is EGHS you are talking about, the stub actually starts at 891' aal EGHS, because the stub base is 1000' on QFE at EGDY, which is 109' lower than EGHS.
JD
Avoid imitations
Joined: Nov 2000
Aviation Qualifications: ATPL
Posts: 15,115
Likes: 1,091
From: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
GBZ,
Could you please explain the dimensions of the "aerodrome control zones" at Roddige and Sittles and on which chart they are marked? Thanks.
Tell you what, we won't tank through your MATZ if you chaps don't tank through our air chart marked aerodrome control zones. Sittles and Roddige (next door to the National Memorial Arboretum) spring to mind.
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 168
Likes: 0
From: UK
ShyTorque:
I too thought about mentioning that, but thought I would be being too much of a pedant, no offence! While neither has a "Control Zone" as such, both are marked on mil low flying charts as avoids. Which raises another good point - there are far more bits of airspace which the miltary have to avoid than in the civilian world. Your average GA spamcan could quite legally go through the overhead of both those airfields at 500ft, whereas the military in their good grace and generosity have agreed to avoid both. Mistakes may regrettably happen, and I'm sure GBZ has the apologies of the operators concerned, but an attempt has at least been made.
I too thought about mentioning that, but thought I would be being too much of a pedant, no offence! While neither has a "Control Zone" as such, both are marked on mil low flying charts as avoids. Which raises another good point - there are far more bits of airspace which the miltary have to avoid than in the civilian world. Your average GA spamcan could quite legally go through the overhead of both those airfields at 500ft, whereas the military in their good grace and generosity have agreed to avoid both.
Mistakes may regrettably happen, and I'm sure GBZ has the apologies of the operators concerned, but an attempt has at least been made.
