Solent CTA Frequency
Thread Starter
Solent CTA Frequency
On the latest 1/2 mil and 1/4 mil England South charts, the Solent CTA frequency has been changed to 119.475.
Does anyone know if this is an error on these new maps, or whether the Solent CTA frequency has been changed to the same as that of the Bournemouth CTR? ENR-2-1-9 still seems to indicate 120.225.
Cheers
Nik
Does anyone know if this is an error on these new maps, or whether the Solent CTA frequency has been changed to the same as that of the Bournemouth CTR? ENR-2-1-9 still seems to indicate 120.225.
Cheers
Nik
Last edited by beatnik; 30th Mar 2009 at 20:08.
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Down South, preferably inverted
Posts: 235
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: uk
Age: 63
Posts: 714
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As post no 2
Frequency Error Solent CTA on new VFR Charts
01-03-2009
2009 VFR charts (quarter mil and half mil scale) which have Solent CTA depicted (around Southampton and above Bournemouth) show Bournemouth Approach 119.475 as the frequency for the whole of Solent CTA, when in fact it should show Solent Approach 120.225. The frequency 119.475 is actually used for Bournemouth CTR and directly above it (in the CTA) up to 3000'.
Frequency Error Solent CTA on new VFR Charts
01-03-2009
2009 VFR charts (quarter mil and half mil scale) which have Solent CTA depicted (around Southampton and above Bournemouth) show Bournemouth Approach 119.475 as the frequency for the whole of Solent CTA, when in fact it should show Solent Approach 120.225. The frequency 119.475 is actually used for Bournemouth CTR and directly above it (in the CTA) up to 3000'.
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What a mega c*ckup.
And since the CAA has turned charts into a profit centre (like everybody else in Europe) there is no possibility of getting electronic downloads of updated charts. Even Memory Map gets updates only when the CAA does them.
And since the CAA has turned charts into a profit centre (like everybody else in Europe) there is no possibility of getting electronic downloads of updated charts. Even Memory Map gets updates only when the CAA does them.
Thread Starter
Thanks for that Mad Girl and 007helicopter.
Do you think I can get a refund from the CAA for my recently purchased charts?
FWIW - the charts for South African airspace only cost R10 (0.70p) each - although admittedly they are not laminated. 
Do you think I can get a refund from the CAA for my recently purchased charts?
FWIW - the charts for South African airspace only cost R10 (0.70p) each - although admittedly they are not laminated.
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Oxford
Posts: 2,042
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Should appear as a NOTAM if your route takes you near the relevant airspace (e.g. did for me flying into Compton Abbas today).
Agree major cockup - like the deletion of Stokenchurch mast a year or two ago.
Tim
Agree major cockup - like the deletion of Stokenchurch mast a year or two ago.
Tim
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 683
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Solent CTA Frequency
beatnik, in answer to your original question, nothing has changed in the allocation or usage of the frequencies around Bournemouth and Southampton, it is simply a chart publication error.
In addition to Mad Girl's Fly On Track link, the relevant chart amendments for the Solent CTA frequencies can also be found here on the CAA website, via the link for the appropriate chart on the left-side of the page, under reference 12354 and 12396.
Amendments for current aeronautical charts are also notified by the CAA as part of their general publication and newsletter subscription service, which is free and you can selectively register here if you are interested.
Hope this helps ...
JD
In addition to Mad Girl's Fly On Track link, the relevant chart amendments for the Solent CTA frequencies can also be found here on the CAA website, via the link for the appropriate chart on the left-side of the page, under reference 12354 and 12396.
Amendments for current aeronautical charts are also notified by the CAA as part of their general publication and newsletter subscription service, which is free and you can selectively register here if you are interested.
Hope this helps ...
JD
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Aberdeen
Posts: 1,234
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So we pay our moeny and get a chart which bluntly is not fit for purpose,
But its Ok, there is some obscure weblink which tells you that the official chart is 'pants'!
Oh really? So the CAA who are in 'business' to regulate flight safety, send out information which is utter flawed and we have no recompense? I thionk not. Any half decent lawyer could construct a case where any level of ability would mean these probelms do not occur.
Perhaps a little less attention to the turnover plus 6% would help? Any chance of professional standards?
But its Ok, there is some obscure weblink which tells you that the official chart is 'pants'!
Oh really? So the CAA who are in 'business' to regulate flight safety, send out information which is utter flawed and we have no recompense? I thionk not. Any half decent lawyer could construct a case where any level of ability would mean these probelms do not occur.
Perhaps a little less attention to the turnover plus 6% would help? Any chance of professional standards?
Join Date: May 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 1,365
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
They've also not printed the compass rose for SAM VOR.
This makes plotting a fix a real task unless you stick on a massive compass rose with covers the whole of the SAM airspace.
Unfortunately, flying out of Bournemouth, it's the only VOR in the area.
This makes plotting a fix a real task unless you stick on a massive compass rose with covers the whole of the SAM airspace.
Unfortunately, flying out of Bournemouth, it's the only VOR in the area.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Cilboldentune, Britannia
Posts: 555
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
They've omitted the last E of the name of the airfield I fly from. Anyone know who we should communicate the errors to, couldn't see an address on the chart?
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 683
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That's a good and some might say justifiable rant gasax ...
So, what are you doing about it? Have you written to the CAA?
RTN11, the omission of the VOR rose at SAM was deliberate. I understand there was a school of thought that it was being mistaken for the EGHI Zone boundary. Personally, I think it simply introduces more ambiguity in a different area as well as being inconvenient and glaringly inconsistent - but that's just my opinion.
For anyone wishing to take up any of these matters with the CAA, or indeed offer future chart corrections or additions, an appropriate contact is [email protected] as mentioned on this page. From personal experience, I know they will be delighted to receive constructive
feedback on their efforts.
JD
So, what are you doing about it? Have you written to the CAA?
RTN11, the omission of the VOR rose at SAM was deliberate. I understand there was a school of thought that it was being mistaken for the EGHI Zone boundary. Personally, I think it simply introduces more ambiguity in a different area as well as being inconvenient and glaringly inconsistent - but that's just my opinion.
For anyone wishing to take up any of these matters with the CAA, or indeed offer future chart corrections or additions, an appropriate contact is [email protected] as mentioned on this page. From personal experience, I know they will be delighted to receive constructive
feedback on their efforts.JD
Last edited by Jumbo Driver; 31st Mar 2009 at 10:48. Reason: typo
