Flying across an instrument approach VFR?

[T4RG4]

I very much appreciate the response. In reality my PLOG has me crossing through the approach to Shoreham at 2,000ft. My instructor didn't call this out and when playing around with SkyDemon (hey, tools and all that) it too turns a blind eye.

When flying that portion of the route, after leaving Goodwood Info, I'm using a basic service supplied by Farnborough Radar (Farnborough LARS East) and with transponder.

[fireflybob]

Have you thought of changing the planned track to route via the Shoreham overhead and call them for any relevant traffic information? Notwithstanding the holding pattern overhead Shoreham I would suggest this is safer than crossing the instrument approach a few miles out at 2,000 ft and probably easier for ATC to coordinate.

[T4RG4]

I hadn't considered it... but my first impression would be the likelihood of traffic, at 2k feet overhead Shoreham (arriving from differing positions) versus the single approach I can view whilst passing. It would likely be easier to simply alter my track left, to route around the approach. This was my original thinking and hence the thread creation. Else I'm just swapping one potential conflict for another, no?

Still a student (and always will be).

[tmmorris]

Even though you don't have an IR it's worth having a look at the typical profile of an approach. Without radar most aircraft will start by heading for the SHM beacon at a specific altitude assigned to them by ATC - at Shoreham this will not be below 2200 - before flying away from the field and starting to descend. A few miles out they will turn, then fly back towards the runway descending as they approach. This descent is usually at 300 ft per nautical mile. So, for example, they would be at 2000ft at just over six miles out.

If they have an approach GPS (still fairly rare) or in some other circumstances aircraft might position directly onto that final approach but the 300ft/nm descent still applies.

You can see therefore why the advice is to fly over the field - although 2000 will then put you in conflict with aircraft joining VFR...

Best advice therefore is still to speak to Shoreham Approach.

[Gertrude the Wombat]

"XXX Approach, G-ABCD, I'm planning to fly through your instrument approach to runway YY at [location] at [level], does this give you a problem?" works for me. Usually get thanks for taking the trouble to call, sometimes asked to report reaching a position or changing level.

[Gertrude the Wombat]

Originally Posted by Gertrude the Wombat

"XXX Approach, G-ABCD, I'm planning to fly through your instrument approach to runway YY at [location] at [level], does this give you a problem?" works for me. Usually get thanks for taking the trouble to call, sometimes asked to report reaching a position or changing level.

Flying over the field can route you through the instrument traffic in the hold, of course (depending on where it is - which is not marked on VFR charts).

[Pontius]

I'm using a basic service supplied by Farnborough Radar (Farnborough LARS East) and with transponder.

This is all very simple: get a Basic service from Shoreham instead. They'll know of any relevant instrument traffic.

[fireflybob]

Flying over the field can route you through the instrument traffic in the hold, of course (depending on where it is - which is not marked on VFR charts).

True but if you call Shoreham in adequate time coordination can take place to avoid a conflict by, for example, the aircraft in the hold climbing to a higher level. Easier than dealing with an aircraft on the instrument approach 5/6 miles from touchdown.

[chevvron]

Transitting over Cranfield one day at 3,000ft and they advised me of traffic in their hold at FL35. I simply climbed a few hundred ft to get out of his way. (I was VFR so remained on QNH rather than 1013)

[flyme273]

Seems to me, Farnborough Radar is the most suitable service to use.

Shoreham only know what is reported. Too much opportunity for non-reporting aircraft and late or inaccurate reports.

Flyme

[BossEyed]

Originally Posted by chevvron

Transitting over Cranfield one day at 3,000ft and they advised me of traffic in their hold at FL35. I simply climbed a few hundred ft to get out of his way. (I was VFR so remained on QNH rather than 1013)

Wouldn't that be more likely to result in a conflict?

[chevvron]

Originally Posted by flyme273

Seems to me, Farnborough Radar is the most suitable service to use.

Shoreham only know what is reported. Too much opportunity for non-reporting aircraft and late or inaccurate reports.

Flyme

Farnborough have excellent low coverage along most of the south coast using Pease Pottage radar, (which is on a hill just south of Gatwick,) apart from a few places where cover is cut off by the South Downs and even there they can still see down to about 1,500ft which is the lowest level they can provide radar service outside their SMAC.
Shoreham have an agreement with Farnborough that anything routing south of their VRPs will be transferred to Shoreham or asked to remain clear. (At least they used to when I retired, but that was over 8 years ago so it may have changed.)

[Heston]

Originally Posted by BossEyed

Wouldn't that be more likely to result in a conflict?

Depends on what qnh was?

[chevvron]

Originally Posted by BossEyed

Wouldn't that be more likely to result in a conflict?

Not if you can work out the height difference in your head, which ATCOs do all the time.

[BossEyed]

I meant, the conflict aircraft was (presumably - you don't give the QNH) above you, and you climbed to avoid him.

If the QNH on the day meant he was close to the same altitude as you then I understand. Hence the question.

[chevvron]

Originally Posted by BossEyed

I meant, the conflict aircraft was (presumably - you don't give the QNH) above you, and you climbed to avoid him.

If the QNH on the day meant he was close to the same altitude as you then I understand. Hence the question.

I can't remember the actual QNH, but I figured that FL35 was about 100ft below me so I climbed to give at least 500ft vertical. I actually think on looking back I must have been at an altitude of 3,500 not 3,000.

[Pontius]

Seems to me, Farnborough Radar is the most suitable service to use.

Shoreham only know what is reported. Too much opportunity for non-reporting aircraft and late or inaccurate reports.

I don't understand your thinking. He wants to deconflict from Shoreham's instrument traffic. Shoreham will know about their instrument traffic. If he talks to Shoreham they'll give him a squawk, Basic Service and will advise him of instrument traffic. How is Farnborough any better? What is the relevance of Shoreham only knowing what is reported if he's reporting?

This is not rocket science. Just talk to Shoreham.

[Low Level Pilot]

Why not follow the advice on your chart? If flying within 10nm contact the aerodrome ATSU, which is what a couple of other posts have suggested.

[DeeCee]

Last time I flew that route I passed Shoreham a couple of miles out to sea whilst talking to Farnborough South. Also I don't recall them having radar or an ILS.

[Low Level Pilot]

No ILS, but there are IAP's, which the half mil chart depicts and the ATZ legend box has the relevant comment - i.e. contact the aerodrome ATSU if within 10nm