Inverness Airspace Consultation

[astir 8]

Yet another airport wanting to join the "big boys" with lots (excessive?) CAS!

I've yet to see any Inverness traffic as low as 6000' over Kingussie - they're usually way higher.

Anyone flying in central/northern Scotland should take note and at least respond.

Inverness Airspace Change Consultation | General Aviation | Inverness Airport

Question:- If the airlines save all the time and fuel being cited, why is it us who have to pay for the transponders?

[John R81]

Comment made.

Note that you can't leave the "organisation" box empty (as it claims) as the form will reject. Here I added "Not blank to avoid rejection"

[gasax]

To think that this is a publically subsidised quango which then produces an airspace grab of staggering arrogance. What is it about the mentality of these people?

This is the same airfield whose 'development plan' states it will be too busy to accept parked light aircraft. But it has a CAT level in the same ballpark as Blackpool - which is going bust!

So kept afloat by public subsidy now they want ot own all the surrounding airspace. And to do so they are quite prepared to say the noise and pollution will be minimised - to pretty much the levels they are currently at....

[mad_jock]

Its need because ATCSOCA is such a pile of bollocks.

There has always been problems with gliders in the areas on the class E.

And the black isle is still available for PPL training.

As long as the radar is manned I can't see it being a problem.

Its just to be honest resetting things back to the old days of procedural control at INV. VFR traffic not needing to be separated from traffic on finals by 5 miles.

Personally I think it will be better than the current pile of pish they have to comply with.

[astir 8]

Mr Jock

Please could you be more specific regarding your statement "There has always been problems with gliders in the areas on the class E".

i.e. where, when and how often

Ta

[mad_jock]

The southern bit has gliders from Feshie bridge and when the mountain wave is running they have zero problems climbing in IMC if they are getting lift. And they don't paint very well on radar.

And the level is what unpressurised IFR traffic will be at or some visual approach profiles will be at if they are coming in heavier CAT machines.

Its 6K base its not really an issue for fixed wing VFR traffic. If your going IFR and above MSA its not an issue for you as you will be equipped anyway.

The ridge to the north has always had its issues. It has traffic in and out bound through it and under it is also the run in for Tain range under it. Again 5200ft is not really an issue for a VFR SEP. Gives you loads of air under you for the ridge if you want to go over the top but most will be going up the road past Tain at 2-3k. Once had a student (glider conversion) who I pulled the power on for a PFL near Knockbain and the bugger managed to get us right along the ridge to set up for a landing on the old Tain runway in a tommy climbing 2k feet in the process from 3k.

To be honest it is a lot less room than they are using now for vectoring and as traffic outside CAS will be deemed separated it should mean a lot less over controlling to get there deconfliction service minimums. It will now be perfectly acceptable for light aircraft to fly up the coast towards town with something on the ILS in sight. Just now it doesn't matter if you can see it or not they will try and shift the traffic to the north by over 5 miles or hold them at Munlochy bay until its landed.

Black isle training area is open at a reasonable level for normal stuff. Stalling you will have to get permission to climb such is life.

Personally as its new and mainly for separating SEP VFR out the way of the IFR I think they should shift the northern boundary for the SFL to a line Muir of Ord, TV mast, Cromarty. Just makes life easier for people not to bust it. And in the south windfarm(davot), edge of Nairn river, Forries. Zero real effect on the VFR traffic realistically, but makes life easier knowing where the boundary is. To the SW straight line from the corner of the class E through Urquhart Castle to erskadale, then straight line to The peak of wyvis. Or just go up through the wind farm to the corner of the stub.

But its just sorting out a problem with the current bollocks setup with services in uncontrolled airspace.

I can't see anything there that would restrict the flight profiles I would normally do in a SEP in the area apart from stalling exercises and maybe a PFL from 3.5k over the black Isle.

As CAS applications go in my opinion its not taking the piss, it doesn't create chock points, they haven't tried for ridiculous amount to surface level its only really 10 by 5 mile which is smaller than what they are trying to currently exclude VFR traffic from to protect the final approach for IFR traffic on a de-confliction. And the stepped increases doesn't force VFR traffic into stupid low levels above the ground to get places.


Definitely better than being told to hold at Munlochy when something orange is 15miles out on base until its trogged its way down finals to land on 08. And you could see the bloody thing since before it passed DAVOT.

[astir 8]

Hi Jock

I'm one of the guys in the gliders flying out of Feshiebridge. And it looks like we're the ones taking the hit on airspace. Especially the conversion of advisory route N560D into CAS starting at 6000' going to FL105.

I've never seen any Inverness traffic anywhere near that level and if you look at the actual use of that route on

http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/2582/20130...yDensities.pdf

then the actual traffic patterns in it look like:-

FL75 - 55 Nil
FL95 - 75 Nil
FL115 - 95 nothing going all the way through
FL 135 - 115 mimimal
And then it begins to build up a bit

And most of the traffic in Scotland is routing direct to destination in anything but N560D.

So why are we going to be stuck with a huge bit of airspace at 6K top FL 105??

All answers welcome

[highlandinstructor]

I would personally encourage all pilots this may affect to actively oppose this. Not only to HIA but to NATS/CAA also. A consultation carried out by HIA. The mind boggles.

Inverness does not have the volume of traffic to merit CAS.

Anyone who flies there will relate to how poor ATC can be already. They regularly seem overloaded with the light workload they have. "after departure maintain 2000' till advised" anyone? In Class G? But barked out as though it's an order.

This will just be another stick to beat the GA pilot with. We'll be orbiting all over the Highlands until Loganair or Easyjet have disembarked!!

[mad_jock]

Astir8 I have nearly hit gliders round there twice while IFR in a CAT machine.

Its class E+ nothing stopping you going in it. Just you have to have a transponder so the CAT aircraft TCAS systems will avoid you. Its for your own good as well as everyone else.

And all IFR traffic used to be forced over to the west up it to get them out of Taysector. Trust me I have had enough attempts to get TALLA Angus DCT INV and got punted over to Foyle like it or not. Hundreds of tons of Jet A wasted over the years.

http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/2111/20140...tter_FINAL.pdf

Don't know if you have seen that as well.

That document you have provided is Flight planned levels.

At 30 miles out in that position looking for a 3 deg descent in for 05 you would expect to be about 9000ft. At 250knots they may go low to give them a bit of room to bleed off the speed. But the procedural arrival from the south has the traffic at not below 5.8k before 25 miles and then drops it on 3 step downs after that.

So there will be some pan ops procedural approach bollocks involved in that bit being asked for.

If they are using 23 I agree they will be way higher above FL135

[astir 8]

Yes I saw www.caa....FINAL etc. Seems like the EU rule as ever.

So let me guess:- Will the guys saving the hundreds of tons of fuel pay for our transponders?

I doubt that the answer would be more than two letters.

We pay, they gain

Or in my case, since fitting a transponder would double the value of my glider, I lose airspace.

p.s. Whatever happened to Pink Headsets?

[mad_jock]

pinky is still over on the west coast I think.

That bit of airspace being class E+ won't save anyone any fuel.

Personally I would push for it to be E at weekends or none existing.

http://ripassetseu.s3.amazonaws.com/...2014_Issue.pdf

your biggest problem is going to be when they don't want to man the radar and operate in procedural mode.

Personally I think all these CAS applications will be approved and trying to stop them is flogging a dead horse. You would be better working with the fact its going to happen but get things changed to lessen the blow.

The change to ATSOCAS has basically made it impossible for regional airports to operate without CAS with commercial routes into them. And CAS is just another way for authorities to extract income from fresh air.

Actually the more radical solution would be to get the route changed so instead of GLA- INV it actually is Angus -> INV or a direct radial from TLA to INV its what 99% of the traffic wants to do anyway going up there.

Fire it into a route planner and get the difference in track miles between TLA-> FOYLE ->INV and TLA -> INV.

The airlines would be good for the change as well, it would save thousands of tons of fuel per year. Make the savings from getting Class D at INV look like a piss in the moray firth.

It would only effect the Belfast City route negatively.

Then your class E+ would be further east and I presume not a big pain in the bum if it comes in over Cairngorm your going to have a chunk of it somewhere just where it will be the least pain in the backside.

[astir 8]

No we don't want it over the Cairngorms, thanks, that's where the wave boxes are (if we ask nicely) for proper high flights. Last week one guy did 26500' which isn't too bad with no engine.

Thanks for the arrivals/departures info. Makes you wonder where they get the 1600 movements a month figure from. Or is that a lot of P38 circuits as well?

[mad_jock]

I think it includes all the GA flights out of inverness but an hour of circuits counted as 1 movement or 2.

But most people think that a flight is one movement its not.

Each Takeoff is a movement and each landing is a movement.

Which gives you an average of 27 flights a day.

Week days scheduled its 22 flights and on SAT its 12 and Sun its 10. So 122 in 7 days.

And 67 GA flights +freight and the rest in 7 days so call it about 10 a day which seems about right if not low.

I don't know if they will have included the helicopters from PDG or not.

But its all way down since my day both scheduled and GA. And in them days all we had was a procedural tower controller.

They wouldn't need Class D if the current system in Class G wasn't such a complete and utter pile of bollocks and VFR traffic was deemed Separated from IFR and no stupid radar separations applied to traffic that can see each other. Ie like what its going to be like when they get class D.

[Maoraigh1]

As an Inverness-based VFR pilot, I see the need for some form of controlled airspace for the IFR traffic - both the commercial and the GA jets. I always thought Class F was crazy - E+ makes sense. But there are some possible problems.
1. The 2400' Inverness max height up to the 2000' Highland Restricted Area min height going north, west of Tain Range.
2. The 5200' max box on W6D to Stornoway is only 200 above the 5000' min of the Highland Restricted Area below it.
And on what QNH for both of these?
3. It effectively closes the Great Glen west of the town for single engine.

But the big problem for me, if true, is that VFR entry to all that space will be on visibility at Inverness Tower. I've flown through it in glorious visibility and winter sunshine, to land at Knockbain, when Inverness had "85 metres in freezing fog". And will fog near the airfield count - eg strips of mist from the chipboard factory and seafog over the firth?

[mad_jock]

From my knowledge the status of the airport LVP state would be limited to the CTR ie the airspace down to ground level ie the 5 by 10 mile block round the airport, access to the CTA's shouldn't be affected. And in other areas of Class D I have worked in such as Bristol and LBA you can still operate VFR in them when nothing is landing at the airfield. If they do try and limit you chirp it and they will be forced to change things.

The base limits for link to the routes north and west seem to be set with the old advisory route bases. I suspect these will be up for negotiation so you can get a bigger slot. The bases seem to have been chosen to fit in with the old limits which were based I think for above MSA and being able to contact Scottish for a radar service. And for the old advisory routes it was regional QNH. But as its now linked in with Inverness those bits will be INV QNH. For the 5200ft I can't see anything at that level IFR so I don't think you will get much objection to getting it increased to be honest. And there is that little traffic anyway I can't see it being a problem getting cleared up to what ever level you like virtually as soon as you depart in class D.


As for the no access to the great glen after the town you have 1500ft base going up to 2200ft base at lochend. Once your at Munlochy head SW until you at the Dual carriageway and then head for the corner or town at 1000ft-1500ft and there is nothing they can do to stop you getting to the great glen. That's airspace that currently they would try and over control you out of if there is anything even hinting that they would be on the Ils. And remember as well VFR is deemed separated from IFR so in theory running along the coast towards town feet wet not above 1000ft with something on the ILS should be possible in Class D.

In fact this Controlled airspace is going to be as much a beating stick to current ATC practises as it to VFR pilots there is huge chunks that I have had huge arguments about flying in VFR in with IFR inside 15 miles CTA-1 mostly. Which they can do absolutely nothing to stop you now going into, as now as your deemed separated if your in class G and the IFR is in class D even if you only have 500ft separation.

So to me this is a two ended stick, yes it limits you in certain bits of airspace the Black Isle for training area being one for certain exercises. But it actually opens up airspace below the bases which currently they try and exclude you from, and get pretty ****ty and blackmaily about when you refuse to play their game. So for what I would fly in the area the class D would be less bollocks than the current situation.

In fact in the works machine I would be more restricted and have to change more than I would in a SEP, I would normally be at 1500ft doing 220knts aiming for just west for the smoke stack on a visual for 05 from the north and the same at the radio mast/Cromarty Gap now I wouldn't be able to go below 2400ft.

So draw up two lists instead of just one negative. Do a positive list as well and then look at your negative lists and see if with your reply to the consultation you might get a compromise with a 1000ft raise in the base in certain areas which I think you will be limited to the class E+ stuff because I can see why they need those bases in class D to conform to pan-ops compliant arrival procedures.

For once I see more good than bad in this application for CAS mainly because it limits over controlling of VFR traffic in class G from a 25 mile radius circle round the airport to a block 10 by 5 miles.

[NorthSouth]

mad jock:

Just now it doesn't matter if you can see it or not they will try and shift the traffic to the north by over 5 miles or hold them at Munlochy bay until its landed.

no stupid radar separations applied to traffic that can see each other

Do they really do that at Inverness? If so, where do they train their ATCOs? An aircraft on a Deconfliction Service descending below 2700ft on the final approach to 05 (i.e. at 8.3 miles) or 2100ft on the approach to 23 (6.4 miles), cannot in any case be provided with deconfliction advice on any conflicting traffic because they're then below the ATC Surveillance Minimum Altitude. All the controller can do is provide traffic information. And that would have to be done before the aircraft transfers from Approach to Tower. And if the conflict occurs before the IFR descends below those levels or transfers to Twr, for VFR traffic that's speaking to Inverness, the separation should be 3nm not 5nm (unless for some reason CAA has not approved 3nm separation). And as you hint, even if the IFR is on a DS, if the controller gives traffic info to both pilots and they both confirm they have the other in sight, there is no requirement to provide 5nm separation. Either the controller can ask if the IFR is happy to continue against that traffic, or the pilot of the IFR can say he is happy to continue because he is visual with the conflicting traffic. That kind of agreement is normal in ATC operations in Class G.

Funnily enough, my last experience of a VFR transit across the top of Inverness involved us being cleared through the overhead when an Easyjet was taking off, without us being asked if we were visual with him and without the controller asking the Easyjet if he was visual with us or even being told of our presence. Got to admit I was horrified. Wasn't unsafe cos we were visual throughout but I watched him like a hawk in case he did an early turn to the south.

[NorthSouth]

I've just looked at the consultation document. Most of the VFR routes they propose in Figure 5 are a nonsense. The whole point of established VFR routes through CAS should be to provide as much physical separation as possible from IFR flights so that no-one gets delayed. The suggestion that flights from the east route direct from east of Nairn to the field via the railway line will mean that, for a 90-knot aeroplane, the controller will need to have a period of at least 5 minutes when no IFRs are landing on 23/departing 05, because the route goes so close to the approach/climbout. Even worse for the "Southern City" route, which goes almost underneath the 05 final approach. The result will be lots of delays to VFR flights, and/or controllers and pilots adopting unofficial routes just to expedite traffic.

To avoid these problems, they should have a route to the south at right angles to the runway, like they have for the "Cromarty" route via Rosemarkie. It could go via the village of Croy.

They should also have new VRPs at Loch Moy and Munlochy Bay.

[mad_jock]

Funnily enough, my last experience of a VFR transit across the top of Inverness involved us being cleared through the overhead when an Easyjet was taking off, without us being asked if we were visual with him and without the controller asking the Easyjet if he was visual with us or even being told of our presence. Got to admit I was horrified. Wasn't unsafe cos we were visual throughout but I watched him like a hawk in case he did an early turn to the south.

If the tower controller can see you both your deemed separated. Remember they have two modes radar and procedural. In procedural mode the tower guy doesn't need a radar release. And its not unsafe. I suspect if the radar had been live you wouldn't have got through the overhead.

I agree about the VFR routes. The heilmed transiting to and from the hospital will be the usual user if not the only user of that route. If folk are going to the Great glen they will either head straight over to the Black Isle or run down the glen to the South to see the rail viaduct and culloden then head straight from there.

As for Nairn I always went from there towards Cawdor castle and then held near the Junction which meant you then had the choice of both runways at that end.

The main issue is that they clear airspace to give the IFR a chance of a clean run in separated on a visual. Which is one of the reasons why I think the CAS will help VFR traffic they will be forced to keep the IFR high to remain in CAS. The IFR will be effected because to remain in CAS they won't be able to blast towards a 3 mile final and still get there profile smooth they will have to slow up getting towards the CTR edge then dump the height so they can make their 500ft gate. If they want a 3 deg approach they will have to head out for a 6-7 mile final every time visually which removes any benefit and fun to be honest.

But this will only really screw with Logan. Now the local BE crews are gone I suspect that visiting crews will be just sticking to the full procedures. EJ always have done.

And as for the first comment. Its exactly what the main problem is with the current situation. And why I think the CAS will benefit the VFR traffic. As I said its a two ended stick. The Munlochy to the dual carriage way then to the canal at not above 1000ft north of the bridge I was screamed at for refusing coordination with a saab in sight since it came past dingwall coming in from NW cleared down to 2k ish I can't remember what it was but know there was zero chance getting anywhere near it unless I was flying with the only tommy with afterburners on the planet. Now the Saab will be at 3500ft and I would be left alone. I can't see them being able to get them lower than that as they will just have TCAS events all the time. The can't lower that area because they wouldn't have 500ft over the top of Mount Eagle mast.

And as I said for all the profiles I would fly in the area VFR SEP apart from stalling and PFL's and to be honest I would more than likely go and hide in Tain range anyway, this CAS would not effect me. It would remove a heap of bollocks unrequired separation due to the way the ATSOCA is implemented.

Personally I think they are making a rod for their own backs in typical HIAL style with this and it will be seen to spectacularly backfire. All it will take is one attempt to move VFR SEP in class G so an IFR can leave then enter again to get a visual profile and report straight in to chirp with it and then they will be more constrained with their IFR traffic than currently.

Personally I would say leave as is apart from the class E+ bits need raising a bit and possibly an exemption for transponders in the bit near Feshie at weekends.

GA users get a meeting together get everyone 100% up to speed with there airlaw concerning Controlled airspace. Don't get someone from HIAL to tell you the rules because they will just make up rubbish to get things to work the way they want them to. Get Die HH up from Perth or Stuart H from Prestwick. And when they take the piss file a chirp on them. MOR's are pointless because they sit in a Q for 3 months and then all ATC have to do is reply "resolved the issue internally" with a chirp the CHIRP ATC guy gets on the phone to the head ATC airspace bloke at the CAA and says "got one for you to look at".

Let them have it but make sure they run it properly and don't invent crap under the heading of "best practise" " industry standard" "We do it this way for expeditious safe handling of traffic".
Get them to do it by the book and report them when they take the piss.

If you do quite quickly they will be wishing they never applied for it.

[Good Business Sense]

Hi Mad Jock or any of you fine, knowledgable aviators out there,

I know you will know the answer (in the nicest possible way).....

Now, normally I'm pretty good at reading this kind of stuff but I've just spent a few hours on this Class E and its introduction - looking at the wording of all the official stuff it seems to me that there is deliberate move to confuse ... or maybe it's just me ! For a while it seemed "classified"

Question is - in a Class E +TMZ piece of airspace am I right in saying that with my transponder on that can just truck on through the Class E airspace without talking to ATC - as is my want in Class F airspace at the moment.

I agree with you completely re. rod for their own back

Cheers

[mad_jock]

Yep as long as your VFR, don't have to speak to them or receive a clearance. IFR you do.