MATZ penetration and communication with a military airfield
If airspace is too busy to be left to class G procedures than it must be changed to something "up", be it E or D or C or whatever. But yes, there's a cost to that.
BTW if you Brits had decent (i.e. radar-based) FIS than you could report your position and intentions on their frequency, to the benefit of all. Because of course I agree it is a small effort to communicate one's whereabouts and intentions. At least if carrying a radio - not required in class G unless a RMZ has been set up.
And by the way, @chevvron did recommend staying clear of MATZ while stating they are class G. Or did I, stupid continental, miss some subtlety of the English language?
BTW if you Brits had decent (i.e. radar-based) FIS than you could report your position and intentions on their frequency, to the benefit of all. Because of course I agree it is a small effort to communicate one's whereabouts and intentions. At least if carrying a radio - not required in class G unless a RMZ has been set up.
And by the way, @chevvron did recommend staying clear of MATZ while stating they are class G. Or did I, stupid continental, miss some subtlety of the English language?
you can legally ignore them (but not the embedded ATZ) however it would be unwise to do so
Last edited by Jan Olieslagers; 15th Oct 2017 at 21:14.
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: 23, Railway Cuttings, East Cheam
Age: 68
Posts: 3,115
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't think he stated they are class F unless I've missed something. Jan, you are a respected poster and no one is calling you a stupid continental, after all we are all Europeans regardless of politics, it's a geographical fact! 
I fly near the busy Humberside airport wich only has an ATZ. In fact I believe far more movements than Doncaster which has a great wedge of class D. No need to call them, can fly blindly through their instrument approach, fly around their ATZ etc etc. Is it wise to do so? I would have thought airmanship would say otherwise.
I fly near the busy Humberside airport wich only has an ATZ. In fact I believe far more movements than Doncaster which has a great wedge of class D. No need to call them, can fly blindly through their instrument approach, fly around their ATZ etc etc. Is it wise to do so? I would have thought airmanship would say otherwise.
Yes of course it is good airmanship to aviate, navigate, communicate. But can authorities - whose responibility is to organise safety and stability - leave room for stupidity/lack of responsability of the masses, then count on good airmanship to avoid accidents? I always understood UK airspace is a mess but wondered why - I am beginning to understand that sheer thrift on the government side is a major contributing factor.
Last edited by Jan Olieslagers; 16th Oct 2017 at 08:21.
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: 23, Railway Cuttings, East Cheam
Age: 68
Posts: 3,115
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well yes you have a point! A couple of years ago I was working Humberside when a load of microlighters who had been to a fly in at North Coates jammed the frequemcy with general chit chat when the controller was trying to vector a commercial flight from Amsterdam onto the ILS. He had to ask them quite forcefully to shut up and another GA pilot remarked that he had never heard such a disgraceful racket.
It's generally OK here but as you say there are always idiots. I don't think that legislation would make any difference.
It's generally OK here but as you say there are always idiots. I don't think that legislation would make any difference.
[QUOTE=thing;9926127]I don't think he stated they are class F unless I've missed something. Jan, you are a respected poster and no one is calling you a stupid continental, after all we are all Europeans regardless of politics, it's a geographical fact!
Class F airspace no longer exists in the UK. Likewise the UK CAA does not designate any Class B airspace in the UK, so we only have Classes A (TMAs and airways below FL195) C (Airspace at and above FL195), D (most CTRs and some CTAs below FL195), E (some CTRs below FL195), G (all other airspace)
Class F airspace no longer exists in the UK. Likewise the UK CAA does not designate any Class B airspace in the UK, so we only have Classes A (TMAs and airways below FL195) C (Airspace at and above FL195), D (most CTRs and some CTAs below FL195), E (some CTRs below FL195), G (all other airspace)
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: On the wireless...
Posts: 1,901
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
....which under the section 'Other Regulated Airspace' says:
...which begs the question 'why are military procedures in the civil AIP?' MATZ procedures are not compulsory for civil pilots so how can MATZs be categorised as 'regulated airspace'?
observation of MATZ procedures is not compulsory for civil pilots
...which begs the question 'why are military procedures in the civil AIP?' MATZ procedures are not compulsory for civil pilots so how can MATZs be categorised as 'regulated airspace'?
OK. lets get down to basics here. My biggest worry as a GA recreational pilot is arriving in the same bit of airspace at the same time as another flying machine!
Therefore, regardless of the whys and wherefores of air law etc. Why not call up the relevant frequency for the area that you are in or approaching. its common sense and polite! also and most importantly, it improves safety for everyone!
Rant over. By the way, this is a great bottle of wine!
Therefore, regardless of the whys and wherefores of air law etc. Why not call up the relevant frequency for the area that you are in or approaching. its common sense and polite! also and most importantly, it improves safety for everyone!
Rant over. By the way, this is a great bottle of wine!
So that CAA investigators can turn round and say 'it's in the AIP' and thereby place the blame on the pilot for an incident in the vicinity of a MATZ or inside a MATZ.
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Mare Imbrium
Posts: 638
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
OK. lets get down to basics here. My biggest worry as a GA recreational pilot is arriving in the same bit of airspace at the same time as another flying machine!
Therefore, regardless of the whys and wherefores of air law etc. Why not call up the relevant frequency for the area that you are in or approaching. its common sense and polite! also and most importantly, it improves safety for everyone!
Rant over. By the way, this is a great bottle of wine!
Therefore, regardless of the whys and wherefores of air law etc. Why not call up the relevant frequency for the area that you are in or approaching. its common sense and polite! also and most importantly, it improves safety for everyone!
Rant over. By the way, this is a great bottle of wine!
Yes agreed. But there are vast swathes of UK airspace where it is not obvious which is the relevant frequency because areas overlap or are not well defined.
Noting correct frequencies should be part of flight planning.
I don't think it has been mentioned yet but a little bit of local knowledge helps and communicating with ATC, even if it is just to say "hello I am here..." makes everyones life that much easier AND safer.
ATC will accommodate your request if it is safe to so. Those that think it is fun to fly over an active military airfield at 3001ft on their QFE without so much as a "Hi" need to consider what actually flies in and out of that field. I wouldn't recommend doing this at the likes of Valley or Leeming where you are likely to encounter a Hawk conducting a PFL from above you, in the radar-blind overhead; that is just asking for trouble.
Don't be scared to talk to ATC, you might be pleasantly surprised/ shocked just how much is going on around you that is putting your little pink skin in harm's way:-)
ATC will accommodate your request if it is safe to so. Those that think it is fun to fly over an active military airfield at 3001ft on their QFE without so much as a "Hi" need to consider what actually flies in and out of that field. I wouldn't recommend doing this at the likes of Valley or Leeming where you are likely to encounter a Hawk conducting a PFL from above you, in the radar-blind overhead; that is just asking for trouble.
Don't be scared to talk to ATC, you might be pleasantly surprised/ shocked just how much is going on around you that is putting your little pink skin in harm's way:-)
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Starring at an Airfield Near you
Posts: 371
Received 15 Likes
on
7 Posts
Meanwhile, in another thread somewhere:
“’Ere, these Military Types fly over the ATZ and through the approach to my aerodrome without a bye or leave, real inconsiderate like….”
And consider the implications of crossing, unannounced, the final approach track – outside the ATZ - to a military aerodrome, where (for instance) a Tornado pilot, on his IRT, may be conducting a ‘swept’ PAR, under IFR, at about 165kts, nose high, with the infamous ironmongery around the windshield area....
Just pointing out that there’s 2 sides to every story.
“’Ere, these Military Types fly over the ATZ and through the approach to my aerodrome without a bye or leave, real inconsiderate like….”
And consider the implications of crossing, unannounced, the final approach track – outside the ATZ - to a military aerodrome, where (for instance) a Tornado pilot, on his IRT, may be conducting a ‘swept’ PAR, under IFR, at about 165kts, nose high, with the infamous ironmongery around the windshield area....
Just pointing out that there’s 2 sides to every story.
Last edited by Downwind.Maddl-Land; 17th Oct 2017 at 13:44.
Out of interest and though I don't fly anymore, I ALWAYS used to make all the calls ie request transit, entry and departure plus any position calls I thought relevant/necessary when the MATZ was not active. I am aware that the MATZ freq may are "monitored" by other RAF controllers who, from time to time, will answer and the MATZ at an operational airfield may be reactivated at short notice, however unlikely that may seem. On top of that it helps to give others better situational awareness. As others have said, nothing to be afraid of, go for it.
If you, as a GA aircraft are talking to the Matz controller it will be on VHF. However I think the Military aircraft will be on UHF, so you won't know where they are.
.
.
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Starring at an Airfield Near you
Posts: 371
Received 15 Likes
on
7 Posts
scifi: It's the controllers' responsibility to advise you of relevant traffic, notwithstanding 'frequency separation'; that's what he's there for. Even under Basic Service:
Mil controllers have an unenviable task of providing IFR ATC services to high workload aircraft (frequently single-crewed) in completely unregulated airspace where their high performance requires the use of a high airspace volume; providing 5NM and 3000ft separation under Deconfliction Service against unknown traffic in the Vale of York/Lincolnshire AIAA is no easy matter.
So don't be 'that guy' snurgling along, 'VFR' at 800ft, clear of cloud and in sight etc, under - but across - a MATZ panhandle "because I can" - just call; there's no charge!
2.3.1 Basic Service provides advice and information useful for the safe and efficient conduct of flights. This may include weather information, changes of serviceability of facilities, conditions at aerodromes, general airspace activity information, and any other information likely to affect safety. The avoidance of other traffic is solely the pilot's responsibility.
2.3.3 Pilots should not expect any form of traffic information from a controller/FISO and the pilot remains responsible for collision avoidance at all times. However, where a controller/FISO has information that indicates that there is aerial activity in a particular location that may affect a flight, they should provide traffic information in general terms to assist with the pilot's situational awareness. This will not normally be updated by the controller/FISO unless the situation has changed markedly, or the pilot requests an update. (My bold)
Notwithstanding the very clear definition above (my italics) as to to who is responsible for what, the controllers' wretched 'duty of care' caveat also plays a part and leads to accusations of controllers 'over-controlling' in Class G airspace. You're damned if you do and very damned if you don't.2.3.3 Pilots should not expect any form of traffic information from a controller/FISO and the pilot remains responsible for collision avoidance at all times. However, where a controller/FISO has information that indicates that there is aerial activity in a particular location that may affect a flight, they should provide traffic information in general terms to assist with the pilot's situational awareness. This will not normally be updated by the controller/FISO unless the situation has changed markedly, or the pilot requests an update. (My bold)
Mil controllers have an unenviable task of providing IFR ATC services to high workload aircraft (frequently single-crewed) in completely unregulated airspace where their high performance requires the use of a high airspace volume; providing 5NM and 3000ft separation under Deconfliction Service against unknown traffic in the Vale of York/Lincolnshire AIAA is no easy matter.
So don't be 'that guy' snurgling along, 'VFR' at 800ft, clear of cloud and in sight etc, under - but across - a MATZ panhandle "because I can" - just call; there's no charge!
controllers 'over-controlling' in Class G airspace
Class G is per definition NOT CONTROLLED thus there is nothing to control let alone to over-control.
Neither can there be a controller, there merely can be a radio operator. Who may be in duty bound to offer information but not a syllable more.
It keeps on confusing and annoying me that the Brits so complicate matters that are essentially so simple.
It keeps on confusing and annoying me that the Brits so complicate matters that are essentially so simple.
When in Rome, do as the Romans.
Last edited by fireflybob; 17th Oct 2017 at 19:32.
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: UK
Age: 78
Posts: 249
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The call to a MATZ is to tell them you are crossing it and do they have any conflicting traffic. Not to request their permission. Only a military pilot has to follow orders. Of course you have to avoid the ATZ like any airfield. So it is a polite call to tell them you are unless unhealthy to do so.
