Psst - want to stop infringements?

[Bouncy Landing]

I too saw the prototype map for LTN/STN "corridor" and think it excellent, but thats only havf the point.

Workinghard's suggestion is excellent and similar to mine - at the very least if the commercial operators (airlines or major airfields) want all this CAS to "protect" themselves the very least they shoud do is stump up the cost of giving us some assistance to avoid "their" airspace. Incidentally airspace is, like the ocean, the property of everyone / no-one, no-one has bought it, as you would with land property (ground). What give them the right to effectively "claim"it?

[chrisN]

I have been told that airspace was effectively "nationalised" so the government disposes of it as it wishes, without compensation to those disadvantaged and without cost to those to whom it is given.

[Genghis the Engineer]

One should of-course bear in mind that we are allowed, subject to procedures, to fly in the majority of controlled airspace. The problem really is that whilst this isn't a problem on a planned route, it's a nuisance if you want to "just fly", as lets face it we often do.

The need for notification and communication however does increase both pilot and controller workload, arguably without much real benefit to either.

G

[skua]

I agree with most of what has been said, particularly Genghis' earlier comments. There has to be a "holistic" (urgghhh management speak) approach to this which involves looking at releasing surplus CAS. My particular bugbears are the BIG/LGW corridor, and ditto LUT/STN. The geography and CAS floor/sides, are OK in low traffic/good VMC days (an oxymoron in the South East!) But in marginal VMC they give one precious little leeway for avoiding murk or metal.

Skua

[Genghis the Engineer]

Which raises an interesting question. For such GA corridors, would it be worth having nominal flow arrows on the chart? Effectively, create a one-way system.

G

[slim_slag]

For such GA corridors, would it be worth having nominal flow arrows on the chart? Effectively, create a one-way system.

In all the VFR corridors I know which are 'uncontrolled', the chart will supply an altitude to fly depending on direction. If 'controlled' you will be assigned an altitude by the controller. So separation is maintained vertically and not laterally.

Ha, just woken up thinking of one which is not like that! San Diego has a VFR corridor where you ARE separated laterally and not vertically, and the chart has flow arrows on it. Back to bed.

[topunicyclist]

Talking to controllers

I think some GA pilots can often be apprehensive about talking to controllers of major airports when transitting near a CTR.......a case in point would be Birmingham where pilots were/are actively encouraged *not* to contact Birmingham ATC if not intending to enter the CTR (I've never flown that way, but have read this on the notams or elsewhere - cannot recall exactly where!).

In summary, provision of better ATS for pilots flying in the vicinity of CTRs would, in my opinion, be a benefit, particularly in instances where a pilot becomes "temporarily uncertain of position".

Hope this doesn't repeat too much of what has already been said.........

[TheFox]

Rustle have you ever heard of a a340 ?

The problem with charging large rental for airspace around airports is that the people paying for it are not the ones having to use it.

[Charlie32]

One thing that would improve GA utilisation of limited ATC services in areas like Luton/Stansted is for ATCOs to have the equivalent of CRM training. In other words, they need to understand that they will not get the most efficient RT performance out of GA pilots by telling them in aggressive tones to keep clear of controlled airspace (we are usually trying to despite doing a hundred and one other thing including maintaining a good look out).

Most GA pilots are very sympathetic to the workload of the ATCOs and don't delibarately try and irritate them. But we are not perfect and when we get things less than perfect we need a bit of help rather than a B*****ing.

[BRL]

B.T.T.T.

[bluskis]

Beg your pardon. What does that mean?
Hope I now have enough words to pass the filter.

[BRL]

bluskis It simply means Back To The Top. Its nothing sinister. I done this whilst I stuck the Anne Welch thread up for a while so people can make a note of the memorial service.

Don't really like more than 2 threads stuck to the top although recently there were 4 up there there are now only 2 again.