Notices
Private Flying The forum for discussion and questions about any form of flying where you are doing it for the sheer pleasure of flight, rather than being paid!

Heathrow CTR

Old 30th May 2014 | 14:59
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
Community Builder
Community Influencer
20 Anniversary
 
Joined: Nov 2005
Aviation Qualifications: PPL
Posts: 12,458
Likes: 368
From: Wildest Surrey
Heathrow CTR

Will be re-classified as class D airspace wef 18 Sep 2014. Mode S transponders will be mandatory for traffic requesting transit.
Part of the zone close to Heathrow airport will require PPR for transit.
chevvron is offline  
Reply
Old 30th May 2014 | 16:56
  #2 (permalink)  
 
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,631
Likes: 0
From: Los Angeles, USA
About time. The whole idea of class A to the ground anywhere was just wrong.
AdamFrisch is offline  
Reply
Old 30th May 2014 | 18:36
  #3 (permalink)  
 
Joined: Mar 2012
Posts: 412
Likes: 0
From: Unna, Germany
Can only hope they adopt the same changes around Amsterdam......
Steve6443 is offline  
Reply
Old 30th May 2014 | 19:02
  #4 (permalink)  
 
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 8,266
Likes: 1
From: Berkshire, UK
God help us.....
HEATHROW DIRECTOR is offline  
Reply
Old 30th May 2014 | 20:00
  #5 (permalink)  
 
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 1,901
Likes: 1
From: On the wireless...
Ooh Goody, Ockham-Bov VFR...
Talkdownman is offline  
Reply
Old 30th May 2014 | 21:26
  #6 (permalink)  
20 Anniversary
 
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 1,113
Likes: 2
From: Iraq and other places
Can only hope they adopt the same changes around Amsterdam......
How exactly? Unless it has changed in the last two years, I never had any trouble getting VFR transits across Schiphol.
Katamarino is offline  
Reply
Old 30th May 2014 | 22:13
  #7 (permalink)  
 
Joined: Mar 2012
Posts: 412
Likes: 0
From: Unna, Germany
Quote:
Can only hope they adopt the same changes around Amsterdam......
How exactly? Unless it has changed in the last two years, I never had any trouble getting VFR transits across Schiphol.
I think you're missing the point I'm trying to make. You might be able to get a VFR Transit via the Schiphol CTR but to get to it, you need to be under 1500 feet to avoid the Class A airspace around it unless you gain an SVFR clearance. Personally speaking, reducing the range of altitudes between which GA aircraft can operate is hardly conducive to safety. Think about it - Dutch Airspace guidelines say you have to fly at least 1000 feet above built up areas yet the highest altitude to fly is 1500 feet. By allowing the reclassification of (eg) Schiphol TMA1 from Class A to Class D Airspace, at least VFR traffic have the option to ask for a transit at a higher altitude, currently Class A means NO, irrespective of the utilisation of said airspace; concerning SVFR, I have only been granted such a clearance once....

edit: looking at the Dutch AIP, I find it incredible that the Dutch actually recommend that, due to inadvertent infringements, VFR pilots flying under the TMA 1 should fly at 1200 or 1300 feet, thus restricting the available airspace further still...

Last edited by Steve6443; 30th May 2014 at 22:27.
Steve6443 is offline  
Reply
Old 30th May 2014 | 22:54
  #8 (permalink)  
20 Anniversary
 
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 1,113
Likes: 2
From: Iraq and other places
And let's not forget the Mode S debacle which had us all switching off our transponders when near Schiphol a few years ago
Katamarino is offline  
Reply
Old 18th September 2014 | 07:44
  #9 (permalink)  
 
Joined: Jun 2010
Posts: 57
Likes: 0
From: London
heathrow class d

So why is it being reclassified?
tomboo is offline  
Reply
Old 18th September 2014 | 07:56
  #10 (permalink)  
 
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 575
Likes: 0
From: Hither and Thither
Isn't it because of European rules?
Special VFR under Europe is defined as a VFR flight, and you cannot have VFR flight in Class A Airspace. Therefore the airspace must be re-classified to one that allows VFR flight. Class D selected as being the one most suitable for the existing Special VFR procedures to continue with minimal change.
Red Four is offline  
Reply
Old 18th September 2014 | 08:06
  #11 (permalink)  
 
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 1,901
Likes: 1
From: On the wireless...
Reading this might help.
Talkdownman is offline  
Reply
Old 19th September 2014 | 10:21
  #12 (permalink)  
20 Anniversary
Veteran: Army
 
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 415
Likes: 1
From: UK
Why not Class B, like in the States?
sapperkenno is offline  
Reply
Old 19th September 2014 | 11:28
  #13 (permalink)  

Avoid imitations
Community Builder
25 Anniversary
Veteran: Air Force
 
Joined: Nov 2000
Aviation Qualifications: ATPL
Posts: 15,116
Likes: 1,091
From: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
Why not Class B, like in the States?
The document linked to in the post above yours explains all that.
ShyTorque is online now  
Reply
Old 19th September 2014 | 12:02
  #14 (permalink)  
 
Joined: Jul 2010
Posts: 2,807
Likes: 10
From: Ansião (PT)
FWIW: I heard a rumour that Brussels CTR will became class D very soon, whereas it always was class C. Reason is rumoured to be that ATC are unable to cope with the obligation to separate VFR traffic (lots of low-flying helicopters around) from IFR (mostly airliners).
Jan Olieslagers is offline  
Reply
Old 19th September 2014 | 18:54
  #15 (permalink)  
15 Anniversary
 
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 50
Likes: 0
From: London
Was this already in place in the past week or so?

I do transits through the Heathrow CTR pretty frequently, maybe one a week. I did two transits last Sunday, one direct Fairoaks to WOD NDB and the other Beaconsfield-BUR NDB-Ascot-Fairoaks. Historically, it's always been SVFR in my experience.

The direct Fairoaks to WOD I received a transit clearance and NOT an SVFR clearance which confused me. I was corrected as I read back "Cleared SVFR direct WOD NDB not above 1,500'" but I was specifically corrected to a transit, not SVFR, by the ATCO.

On the other occasion, I received cleared transit Beaconsfield-BUR not above 1,500 then SVFR not above 1,000 after BUR, to maintain separation from the IFR traffic on LHR approaches/departures, and I assume that using SVFR not above 1,000' avoids the 1,000' rule.
Howard Long is offline  
Reply
Old 19th September 2014 | 18:58
  #16 (permalink)  

Avoid imitations
Community Builder
25 Anniversary
Veteran: Air Force
 
Joined: Nov 2000
Aviation Qualifications: ATPL
Posts: 15,116
Likes: 1,091
From: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
It does but the 500 foot rule still does apply.
ShyTorque is online now  
Reply
Old 19th September 2014 | 19:16
  #17 (permalink)  
 
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 84
Likes: 0
From: UK
From now on you should expect a VFR (weather dependent) clearance between BUR-ASCOT not above 1200ft in order for you to be able to comply with the 1000ft rule
Vortex Issues is offline  
Reply
Old 19th September 2014 | 19:25
  #18 (permalink)  

Avoid imitations
Community Builder
25 Anniversary
Veteran: Air Force
 
Joined: Nov 2000
Aviation Qualifications: ATPL
Posts: 15,116
Likes: 1,091
From: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
Similarly, the London Heliport Local Flying Area maximum altitude is now raised to 1300 feet QNH.

That one was always a gotcha at 1000 feet, although pilots were exempt from the 1,000 foot rule inside, it wasn't possible to achieve that altitude without busting the rule just outside, in the descent..
ShyTorque is online now  
Reply

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.