Looking for basic/traffic service info
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: London
Posts: 320
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A couple of months ago, at a rock solid 2,300ft near WOD, I received an unsolicited call from the Farnborough ATCO to tell me "Not above your current level due to Heathrow inbounds above".
There then followed a bit of a jumbled conversation, during which I asked her if that was a request or an instruction as I was confused as to the purpose of the call. She fumbled her response, decided it was "advice" and muttered something about Heathrow inbounds being downwind.
It was all complete and utter nonsense, but doubtless as part of their self promotion, has been chalked up as one of the 3,000.
There then followed a bit of a jumbled conversation, during which I asked her if that was a request or an instruction as I was confused as to the purpose of the call. She fumbled her response, decided it was "advice" and muttered something about Heathrow inbounds being downwind.
It was all complete and utter nonsense, but doubtless as part of their self promotion, has been chalked up as one of the 3,000.
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: London
Posts: 320
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just to add... twice in the last year, on a Traffic Service, I've had close encounters with other aircraft who were both also in receipt of a Farnborough service.
A PA28 at Guildford, which the UKAB decided was an Airprox category A and didn't have any nice things to say about Farnborough in their summary, and more recently a Dove, who I saw in good time so no big deal, but was about 200 metres away from me, same level and opposite direction and close enough that I was able to identify it as a Dove. Reported that as an MOR, failure of service, but surprisingly, no reply or follow up to the MOR.
I do not have any confidence in their radar services, particularly the West position.
A PA28 at Guildford, which the UKAB decided was an Airprox category A and didn't have any nice things to say about Farnborough in their summary, and more recently a Dove, who I saw in good time so no big deal, but was about 200 metres away from me, same level and opposite direction and close enough that I was able to identify it as a Dove. Reported that as an MOR, failure of service, but surprisingly, no reply or follow up to the MOR.
I do not have any confidence in their radar services, particularly the West position.
Last edited by jollyrog; 8th Dec 2017 at 11:44.
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Do I come here often?
Posts: 898
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Correction: the SERVICE peters out near Aylesbury, but radar coverage is excellent. I've never seen the new Bovingdon 23 cm radar but if it's any near as good as the Debden which can see aircraft just above the ground at Wyton, then barring some shielding by the Chiltern Ridge, low coverage in the WCO area must be quite good. Even when I was at Farnborough, the Heathrow 10cm radar could see traffic just below 1,500ft in this area.
Just in case you think the lower limit of 1,500 ft below which Farnborough will not provide radar service is due to radar coverage, it's not. In the planning stages, the CAA insisted we put a common lower limit on radar service provision over the entire LARS area rather than have sectors where the lower limit varied from this so we came up with 1,500ft for terrain clearance. Even this of course, doesn't apply within 3nm of the Midhurst and Sevenoaks TV masts though!
Just in case you think the lower limit of 1,500 ft below which Farnborough will not provide radar service is due to radar coverage, it's not. In the planning stages, the CAA insisted we put a common lower limit on radar service provision over the entire LARS area rather than have sectors where the lower limit varied from this so we came up with 1,500ft for terrain clearance. Even this of course, doesn't apply within 3nm of the Midhurst and Sevenoaks TV masts though!
SND
A couple of months ago, at a rock solid 2,300ft near WOD, I received an unsolicited call from the Farnborough ATCO to tell me "Not above your current level due to Heathrow inbounds above".
There then followed a bit of a jumbled conversation, during which I asked her if that was a request or an instruction as I was confused as to the purpose of the call. She fumbled her response, decided it was "advice" and muttered something about Heathrow inbounds being downwind.
It was all complete and utter nonsense, but doubtless as part of their self promotion, has been chalked up as one of the 3,000.
There then followed a bit of a jumbled conversation, during which I asked her if that was a request or an instruction as I was confused as to the purpose of the call. She fumbled her response, decided it was "advice" and muttered something about Heathrow inbounds being downwind.
It was all complete and utter nonsense, but doubtless as part of their self promotion, has been chalked up as one of the 3,000.
Your altimeter may have been showing you 2,300ft, but the mode C on radar might have been as high as 2,500ft and still been within tolerance. A slight bit of turbulence and with no control input on your part, your Mode C is showing 2,600ft ie inside controlled airspace.
I lost count of the number of times my traffic routing through WOD in either direction at 2,400 ft (seen on Mode C and confirmed by the pilot) triggered a TA on Heathrow traffic which was descending towards it and remaining inside controlled airspace, then I would get an irate phone call from the TC Group Supervisor complaining about my traffic which I would then quietly point out was operating quite legally outside controlled airspace.
Then it was written reports all round.
I hate TCAS!
The multiple radar sources can certainly see north of Aylesbury and coverage extends at 2,400ft a considerable distance further north, but the controllers aren't allowed to provide radar service outside the LARS North boundary as portrayed on the official maps. If they could, they would.
Having said that, I often DID provide service north of Aylesbury but I think I got away with it.
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: London
Posts: 320
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Were you watching a radar display? Did you see the Heathrow inbound traffic descending to 3,000ft for the 09L ILS heading towards you?
Your altimeter may have been showing you 2,300ft, but the mode C on radar might have been as high as 2,500ft and still been within tolerance. A slight bit of turbulence and with no control input on your part, your Mode C is showing 2,600ft ie inside controlled airspace.
Your altimeter may have been showing you 2,300ft, but the mode C on radar might have been as high as 2,500ft and still been within tolerance. A slight bit of turbulence and with no control input on your part, your Mode C is showing 2,600ft ie inside controlled airspace.
I appreciate what you say, but it was a case of Farnborough being Farnborough. She didn't ask me my altitude, which I believe would have been the appropriate call if I was activating CAIT.
I do not need warnings when I have 200ft at my disposal and am not bouncing around. That's not what I took their service for.
3rd Sep, 0840Z.
I was watching my altimeter. It was fine. It said 2,300ft. My SkyDemon said 2,300ft. The FR24 trace of my flight shows 2,300ft. QNH 1015. It was as calm as anything up there, my level was as stable as it gets and my flight record confirms that.
I appreciate what you say, but it was a case of Farnborough being Farnborough. She didn't ask me my altitude, which I believe would have been the appropriate call if I was activating CAIT.
I do not need warnings when I have 200ft at my disposal and am not bouncing around. That's not what I took their service for.
3rd Sep, 0840Z.
I appreciate what you say, but it was a case of Farnborough being Farnborough. She didn't ask me my altitude, which I believe would have been the appropriate call if I was activating CAIT.
I do not need warnings when I have 200ft at my disposal and am not bouncing around. That's not what I took their service for.
3rd Sep, 0840Z.
I don't think Farnborough controllers get a readout from CAIT which in my experience (which I admit could be out of date)i usually only operates in CTRs not CTAs.
Join Date: May 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 48
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just to add... twice in the last year, on a Traffic Service, I've had close encounters with other aircraft who were both also in receipt of a Farnborough service.
A PA28 at Guildford, which the UKAB decided was an Airprox category A and didn't have any nice things to say about Farnborough in their summary, and more recently a Dove, who I saw in good time so no big deal, but was about 200 metres away from me, same level and opposite direction and close enough that I was able to identify it as a Dove. Reported that as an MOR, failure of service, but surprisingly, no reply or follow up to the MOR.
I do not have any confidence in their radar services, particularly the West position.
A PA28 at Guildford, which the UKAB decided was an Airprox category A and didn't have any nice things to say about Farnborough in their summary, and more recently a Dove, who I saw in good time so no big deal, but was about 200 metres away from me, same level and opposite direction and close enough that I was able to identify it as a Dove. Reported that as an MOR, failure of service, but surprisingly, no reply or follow up to the MOR.
I do not have any confidence in their radar services, particularly the West position.
Shirley in the case of a Cat A airprox, the Farnborough controller involved would have been the subject of (shall we say) 'interviews'? I know I certainly was (Dunsfold departure vs one downwind for PAR 25)
Jollyrog: what type of service were YOU getting from Farnborough at the time of that AIRPROX?
Jollyrog: what type of service were YOU getting from Farnborough at the time of that AIRPROX?
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: london
Age: 60
Posts: 439
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jammed Stab - There are no real 'areas of responsibility' in the sense I think you mean because there is no real responsibility - basic service in general, and certainly outside controlled airspace is more of a priviledge than a requirement ! think of it more as 'areas of possibility'.
In response to your request for more info about how to get some external service:
Firstly, consider the airspace definitions as your first place to start. Obviously if you are in controlled airspace ( ie not G ) then you will have someone to provide service. If you are around busy airspace but not inside it, you may find mandatory or recommended radio or transponder requirements, which again will point to who to speak to. ( the oxford/luton comments above are good examples and both excellent at being helpful/providing whatever service they can spare)
Then , if well outside controlled airspace, the LARS coverage map does show coverage, but quite a lot of it is not H24, so that is not always helpful.
Then, you can ask for basic service from anywhere you are flying close to, or over the top of.
Then, there is London/Scottish information, which does have good coverage, but is only really of use if you need info such as METARS or if you are in minor difficulties. They don't have radar service , as stated above. (but they can 'look over the radar operators shoulder')
but to clarify your original question - basic service is indeed really basic. It is really only having someone to talk to. Here is the definition
A Basic Service is an ATS provided for the purpose of giving 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.
Basic Service relies on the pilot avoiding other traffic, unaided by controllers/
FISOs. It is essential that a pilot receiving this ATS remains alert to the fact that,
unlike a Traffic Service and a Deconfliction Service, the provider of a Basic
Service is not required to monitor the flight.
That is from this doc https://publicapps.caa.co.uk/docs/33...74Issue2_3.pdf
which you may find helpful.
You are, of course, not obliged to use any service or even have a radio when in class G.
Does that help?
In response to your request for more info about how to get some external service:
Firstly, consider the airspace definitions as your first place to start. Obviously if you are in controlled airspace ( ie not G ) then you will have someone to provide service. If you are around busy airspace but not inside it, you may find mandatory or recommended radio or transponder requirements, which again will point to who to speak to. ( the oxford/luton comments above are good examples and both excellent at being helpful/providing whatever service they can spare)
Then , if well outside controlled airspace, the LARS coverage map does show coverage, but quite a lot of it is not H24, so that is not always helpful.
Then, you can ask for basic service from anywhere you are flying close to, or over the top of.
Then, there is London/Scottish information, which does have good coverage, but is only really of use if you need info such as METARS or if you are in minor difficulties. They don't have radar service , as stated above. (but they can 'look over the radar operators shoulder')
but to clarify your original question - basic service is indeed really basic. It is really only having someone to talk to. Here is the definition
A Basic Service is an ATS provided for the purpose of giving 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.
Basic Service relies on the pilot avoiding other traffic, unaided by controllers/
FISOs. It is essential that a pilot receiving this ATS remains alert to the fact that,
unlike a Traffic Service and a Deconfliction Service, the provider of a Basic
Service is not required to monitor the flight.
That is from this doc https://publicapps.caa.co.uk/docs/33...74Issue2_3.pdf
which you may find helpful.
You are, of course, not obliged to use any service or even have a radio when in class G.
Does that help?
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: London
Posts: 320
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: London
Posts: 320
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Shirley in the case of a Cat A airprox, the Farnborough controller involved would have been the subject of (shall we say) 'interviews'? I know I certainly was (Dunsfold departure vs one downwind for PAR 25)
Jollyrog: what type of service were YOU getting from Farnborough at the time of that AIRPROX?
Jollyrog: what type of service were YOU getting from Farnborough at the time of that AIRPROX?
I can only assume that LARS West was bandboxed with approach (something which I always opposed because it was so difficult to predict when you would need to split the frequencies and have an extra controller standing by) and the workload got too high. In such a case, the controller gives priority to Farnborough arrivals and departures, but that's no excuse, the Watch Manager or Senior Controller on Duty should have been there to assist.
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: London
Posts: 320
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have made my opinion very clear on the other forum.
They choose (are instructed) to provide a DS to all their inbounds, by default.
Providing a DS is hard, so they complain that they need CAS.
Because they can’t get CAS, their primary method of resolution has become to “control” the light GA, in the guise of “coordination “.
They use the LARS West position to achieve this.
The West ATCOs are overloaded and have (mostly) insufficient capacity to provide higher levels of service than Basic to light GA, particularly at the times when higher services would be desirable.
The solution is clearly to remove step 1 from this process but TAG won’t let them.
Watch the video from the Flying Reporter’s visit to Farnborough and see the manager squirm when questioned about this.
Filed another MOR last week. Clear skies, night, hardly anything up there, yet I was *summoned*, from another frequency to West. Upon initial call, attempted to impose a service (declined) for “coordination”. Just me and the jet up there, yet with the whole region available to apply the DS to the aircraft in receipt of it, or downgrade him to TS, primary resolution was *still* to control the light GA.
They choose (are instructed) to provide a DS to all their inbounds, by default.
Providing a DS is hard, so they complain that they need CAS.
Because they can’t get CAS, their primary method of resolution has become to “control” the light GA, in the guise of “coordination “.
They use the LARS West position to achieve this.
The West ATCOs are overloaded and have (mostly) insufficient capacity to provide higher levels of service than Basic to light GA, particularly at the times when higher services would be desirable.
The solution is clearly to remove step 1 from this process but TAG won’t let them.
Watch the video from the Flying Reporter’s visit to Farnborough and see the manager squirm when questioned about this.
Filed another MOR last week. Clear skies, night, hardly anything up there, yet I was *summoned*, from another frequency to West. Upon initial call, attempted to impose a service (declined) for “coordination”. Just me and the jet up there, yet with the whole region available to apply the DS to the aircraft in receipt of it, or downgrade him to TS, primary resolution was *still* to control the light GA.
'Providing a DS is hard'
Well actually it's not (and don't forget I did it for 34 years when it was called RAS and before it was called DS) provided the controller provides 'quality' traffic information as well as vectoring aircraft clear of conflictions. The easiest ones were the fastest; with a Buccaneer doing 500kts at 2000ft (legal 'cos he's military) you could look 10 miles ahead, point it at a gap in traffic and know he would be OK.
More recently with the advent of TCAS which I disliked intensely, I used it to advantage passing traffic info to an aircraft under DS (or RAS as it was then) and my aircraft replying 'we've got it on TCAS, no confliction' and there it was on the tape so if there was an Airprox report, I was covered as was the pilot.
I can't comment on your MOR of last week because I don't know the exact circumstances.(maybe Sonic does)
Well actually it's not (and don't forget I did it for 34 years when it was called RAS and before it was called DS) provided the controller provides 'quality' traffic information as well as vectoring aircraft clear of conflictions. The easiest ones were the fastest; with a Buccaneer doing 500kts at 2000ft (legal 'cos he's military) you could look 10 miles ahead, point it at a gap in traffic and know he would be OK.
More recently with the advent of TCAS which I disliked intensely, I used it to advantage passing traffic info to an aircraft under DS (or RAS as it was then) and my aircraft replying 'we've got it on TCAS, no confliction' and there it was on the tape so if there was an Airprox report, I was covered as was the pilot.
I can't comment on your MOR of last week because I don't know the exact circumstances.(maybe Sonic does)
Avoid imitations
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
Posts: 14,573
Received 415 Likes
on
218 Posts
TBH, I often inwardly groan when someone calls up for a deconfliction service, if the frequency is already busy. It means that the airwaves are going to be constantly full of instructions and responses to that one aircraft, to the detriment of everyone else. It can be a major distraction, to the point of becoming a flight safety issue. I've often decided we're better off going "en route" in those circumstances.
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: London
Posts: 320
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm rather sad that you have that opinion about my successors and/or ex colleagues and puzzled that under TS you weren't warned of the traffic.
I can only assume that LARS West was bandboxed with approach (something which I always opposed because it was so difficult to predict when you would need to split the frequencies and have an extra controller standing by) and the workload got too high. In such a case, the controller gives priority to Farnborough arrivals and departures, but that's no excuse, the Watch Manager or Senior Controller on Duty should have been there to assist.
I can only assume that LARS West was bandboxed with approach (something which I always opposed because it was so difficult to predict when you would need to split the frequencies and have an extra controller standing by) and the workload got too high. In such a case, the controller gives priority to Farnborough arrivals and departures, but that's no excuse, the Watch Manager or Senior Controller on Duty should have been there to assist.
The report does criticise me for not reporting the Airprox on the RT, but to be honest, I'd lost interest in them by then and just wanted to get off their frequency. I did report it online promptly, but the report says that the ATCO has no recollection. Convenient.
Last edited by jollyrog; 11th Dec 2017 at 13:25.
