Access to Controled Airspace
Thread Starter
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 264
Likes: 4
From: south of 60N
Access to Controled Airspace
Another forum is reporting:-
"I've just read in Gasco Flight Safety Mag for spring 2011 that the CAA intends all aircraft operating in controlled airspace to be fitted with IFR approved GPS capable of area nav. No portable set will comply, so I suspect many of us will be barred from CAS.
"I've just read in Gasco Flight Safety Mag for spring 2011 that the CAA intends all aircraft operating in controlled airspace to be fitted with IFR approved GPS capable of area nav. No portable set will comply, so I suspect many of us will be barred from CAS.
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
From: EuroGA.org
This is the BRNAV equipment requirement for which an IFR GPS installation is the only possible "GA" means of compliance.
Currently BRNAV is mandatory in CAS for IFR above FL095.
They are proposing to lower the FL095 figure. I am sure this will apply only to IFR flights on Eurocontrol flight plans (often called "airways" flights in the UK) which need the full IR anyway (the IMCR is practically useless in this context due to most UK CAS being Class A, and the IFR privileges of the IMCR are not valid outside the UK).
It won't apply to VFR flights in CAS - it cannot because "VFR is VFR" and one cannot mandate BRNAV or any form of radio nav on VFR traffic which has ostensibly been taught nothing beyond "WW1 map+stopwatch" flying. In the same vein ATC cannot require IFR traffic to report at a VRP
I am also pretty sure it won't apply to IFR flights in Class D e.g. an IFR transit of the Solent Class D via SAM at 4000ft, which is routinely done by IMCR pilots. If BRNAV was mandated for these transits, it would make a mockery of the IMCR privileges and equipment carriage requirements because the IMCR would be constrained to Class G, forcing a lot of IFR routes below the MSA and closing off instrument approaches to many airports.
If GASCO says what you say above, it would not be the first time they printed garbage.
Currently BRNAV is mandatory in CAS for IFR above FL095.
They are proposing to lower the FL095 figure. I am sure this will apply only to IFR flights on Eurocontrol flight plans (often called "airways" flights in the UK) which need the full IR anyway (the IMCR is practically useless in this context due to most UK CAS being Class A, and the IFR privileges of the IMCR are not valid outside the UK).
It won't apply to VFR flights in CAS - it cannot because "VFR is VFR" and one cannot mandate BRNAV or any form of radio nav on VFR traffic which has ostensibly been taught nothing beyond "WW1 map+stopwatch" flying. In the same vein ATC cannot require IFR traffic to report at a VRP
I am also pretty sure it won't apply to IFR flights in Class D e.g. an IFR transit of the Solent Class D via SAM at 4000ft, which is routinely done by IMCR pilots. If BRNAV was mandated for these transits, it would make a mockery of the IMCR privileges and equipment carriage requirements because the IMCR would be constrained to Class G, forcing a lot of IFR routes below the MSA and closing off instrument approaches to many airports.
If GASCO says what you say above, it would not be the first time they printed garbage.
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 1,035
Likes: 0
From: Plumpton Green
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
From: EuroGA.org
One has to smile reading stuff like
BRNAV is RNP5.0. One could fly within 5nm by following the M25 
BRNAV is a boat which left the port about 15 years ago. Still, he's probably a very good accountant.
CAA Director of Airspace Policy, Mark Swan, explained: “Extending B-RNAV to lower levels of controlled airspace will mean that aircraft will be able to fly with greater accuracy and enable us to make the changes to the UK’s airspace structure that are needed to ensure we maintain a safe and efficient system for all airspace users.”
BRNAV is a boat which left the port about 15 years ago. Still, he's probably a very good accountant.
