French low-level military routes
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: New South Wales
Posts: 1,794
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
French low-level military routes
OK, I really don't get this. These routes criss-cross France, generally marked as 800-1500ft 'ASFC', which means 'Above Surface'. My question is what exactly this means. In the Massif Central there is one of these routes which perpendicularly crosses a 3,000 feet deep V-shaped river valley. Does this mean the route dives to follow the contours of the valley as it crosses it, following a trajectory which no aircraft on earth, military or civil, could follow?
Surely not. Can anyone explain this to me?
QDM
Surely not. Can anyone explain this to me?
QDM
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: TL487591
Posts: 1,639
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The routes are used by training flights that frequently operate at speeds of up to 500 knots using terrain-following radar, radio altimeter and flight director equipment. Such aircraft are obviously unable to obey the normal rules of the air, and the corridors shown on the maps are designed to be wide and tall to avoid confict.
Most of the time, this means that the military aircraft concerned will be around 250-500 feet above the ground, leaving plenty of space in the tops of the corridors.
The intent is that GA and other flights comply with the corridors by flying at 1500 feet or better above the surrounding terrain. You are expected to use your intelligence when it comes to small valleys and bridges, rather than to seek too literal a translation of ASFC.
It is worth noting that high speed low-level military flights may take place at any point within French airspace and the French AIP urges pilots to ensure that they spend as little time below 1500 feet as possible, regardless of the presence or otherwise of such a defined corridor.
Most of the time, this means that the military aircraft concerned will be around 250-500 feet above the ground, leaving plenty of space in the tops of the corridors.
The intent is that GA and other flights comply with the corridors by flying at 1500 feet or better above the surrounding terrain. You are expected to use your intelligence when it comes to small valleys and bridges, rather than to seek too literal a translation of ASFC.
It is worth noting that high speed low-level military flights may take place at any point within French airspace and the French AIP urges pilots to ensure that they spend as little time below 1500 feet as possible, regardless of the presence or otherwise of such a defined corridor.
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Cheese-eating Surrender Monkey land
Posts: 80
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Two Donkeys is quite correct.
These corridors of airspace are designed to keep you out of the way of pilots who are not flying their aircraft visually. They are simply following a Director and a radar map. Actually, this kind of operations happens all over France, and the areas you see on your maps. are just the busiest corridors which the State has chosen to protect with laws.
The best advice in France is to climb above 1500 feet ASFC as soon as possible, and to stay there. Do not get too 'hung up' about the precise definition of 1500 ASFC. The intention is that you should be high enough above the ground to let a couple of us go underneath you very fast.
Ah memories...
These corridors of airspace are designed to keep you out of the way of pilots who are not flying their aircraft visually. They are simply following a Director and a radar map. Actually, this kind of operations happens all over France, and the areas you see on your maps. are just the busiest corridors which the State has chosen to protect with laws.
The best advice in France is to climb above 1500 feet ASFC as soon as possible, and to stay there. Do not get too 'hung up' about the precise definition of 1500 ASFC. The intention is that you should be high enough above the ground to let a couple of us go underneath you very fast.
Ah memories...
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: New South Wales
Posts: 1,794
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The best advice in France is to climb above 1500 feet ASFC as soon as possible, and to stay there. Do not get too 'hung up' about the precise definition of 1500 ASFC. The intention is that you should be high enough above the ground to let a couple of us go underneath you very fast.
Presumably therefore you don't actually need clearance to cross them, not that I intend to very much.
QDM
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Cheese-eating Surrender Monkey land
Posts: 80
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Generally, you cannot obtain permission to cross them, because if they are active, the aircraft using them are not under positive control from any ground unit, and the aircraft may be sufficiently low to prevent radar monitoring of their position.
If you cannot ascertain their status, don't even think about penetrating them. If you can obtain a clearance (controlling frequencies are in Delage, Bottlang etc) then no problem.
If you cannot ascertain their status, don't even think about penetrating them. If you can obtain a clearance (controlling frequencies are in Delage, Bottlang etc) then no problem.
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 37
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thrifty Van Rental:
You are correct that permission to cross them is not given by ATC. I recently flew accross France and had to cross several Military Restricted flying corridors. The TMA controllers I spoke to would offer information about whether they were active, and that was it.
No problem where the Restriction is 800 ASFC to 1500. However, I was forced to cross a couple of corridors that were designtated 800 ASFC +. In other words from 800ft to an unlimited altitude!
Before anyone says I should have gone round it, of course I would have if that were possible. But these particular corridors (near Geneva) are accross the whole of France!.
On the Friday afternoon I decided to just fly through them at 4000' on the assumption that French Military like our own don't fly on Friday afternoons or w/ends.
2Donkeys
On the Monday morning when Geneva told me the restricted areas were active I had no choice but to descend below 800ft AGL in order to remain clear.
From what you are saying that put me at great risk of collision as I have no means of seeing and avoiding a 500kts jet that according to the chart should have been ABOVE 800ft!
Also if I had an engine failure at <800ft I would have been in serious trouble with next to no time to restart/call ATC/PFL.
Is the French system of low level corridors complete Boll**x or am I missing something?
Barney
You are correct that permission to cross them is not given by ATC. I recently flew accross France and had to cross several Military Restricted flying corridors. The TMA controllers I spoke to would offer information about whether they were active, and that was it.
No problem where the Restriction is 800 ASFC to 1500. However, I was forced to cross a couple of corridors that were designtated 800 ASFC +. In other words from 800ft to an unlimited altitude!
Before anyone says I should have gone round it, of course I would have if that were possible. But these particular corridors (near Geneva) are accross the whole of France!.
On the Friday afternoon I decided to just fly through them at 4000' on the assumption that French Military like our own don't fly on Friday afternoons or w/ends.
2Donkeys
On the Monday morning when Geneva told me the restricted areas were active I had no choice but to descend below 800ft AGL in order to remain clear.
From what you are saying that put me at great risk of collision as I have no means of seeing and avoiding a 500kts jet that according to the chart should have been ABOVE 800ft!
Also if I had an engine failure at <800ft I would have been in serious trouble with next to no time to restart/call ATC/PFL.
Is the French system of low level corridors complete Boll**x or am I missing something?
Barney
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Cheese-eating Surrender Monkey land
Posts: 80
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Barney.
You need to check your charts
The "+" notation means that the airspace feature concerned goes higher than the vertical limit on the chart. French IGN charts only portray airspace upto a rather low limit. See the rubric for details.
To determine the correct vertical extent for the airspace concerned, you should check Bottlang, Delage or similar.
I would not make a habit of that if I were you... Quite apart from the risk you run by violating restricted airspace, 4000 feet (FL40) is an IFR level in France. Here we fly semi-circular + 500 with VFR.
TvR
You need to check your charts
The "+" notation means that the airspace feature concerned goes higher than the vertical limit on the chart. French IGN charts only portray airspace upto a rather low limit. See the rubric for details.
To determine the correct vertical extent for the airspace concerned, you should check Bottlang, Delage or similar.
On the Friday afternoon I decided to just fly through them at 4000' on the assumption...
TvR
Last edited by Thrifty van Rental; 5th May 2003 at 18:16.
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Cheese-eating Surrender Monkey land
Posts: 80
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hey Barney
Guess what? I talked to a friend of mine who still flies fast jets for the French Air Force. We are imagining that the corridor that you mentioned is the ARBOIS corridor. This is used for day and night training of Mirage pilots out of Dijon Longvic. In fact, it is basically the same as when I did my squadron training ahem,,, a few years ago.
It is active every weekday, and operations start at 09:30 local and stop at 17:00 local. Then they start again at sunset, and continue until midnight local.
On Wednesdays, they are only active until 14:30.
Training in the corridors whose upper limit is 2700 ASFC is currently very intensive. You may notice also, that many of the corridors also have assocaited stubs down to the surface from 800 ASFC.
Be careful out there. It sounds like some more pre-flight planning would perhaps be helpful for you.
Very happy to help you if you want it for a future trip.
Guess what? I talked to a friend of mine who still flies fast jets for the French Air Force. We are imagining that the corridor that you mentioned is the ARBOIS corridor. This is used for day and night training of Mirage pilots out of Dijon Longvic. In fact, it is basically the same as when I did my squadron training ahem,,, a few years ago.
It is active every weekday, and operations start at 09:30 local and stop at 17:00 local. Then they start again at sunset, and continue until midnight local.
On Wednesdays, they are only active until 14:30.
Training in the corridors whose upper limit is 2700 ASFC is currently very intensive. You may notice also, that many of the corridors also have assocaited stubs down to the surface from 800 ASFC.
Be careful out there. It sounds like some more pre-flight planning would perhaps be helpful for you.
Very happy to help you if you want it for a future trip.
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 37
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
TvR
In general thanks for the suggestions, but...
The + meaning above the level of the chart, well I used Jepps VFR Chart and at a glance there is airspace noted at FL195, somewhat above the ceiling of my a/c so I could not go above this corridor from Dijon, with the implications for SE safety at low level.
French VFR rules I'm familiar with, wrote 4000' in haste, was actually FL 35 having checked my plan. Sorry.
Extra time on flt planning, well when I trained on the sqn (also some years ago) I was only allowed 1hr to plan a 4 ship multi package strike, so anything over that I regard as a luxury.
An 800 ASFC + corridor is still just that, I can read a chart, and that doesn't help anyone get accross it- why can't French Military restrict their flying to defined areas which could be avoided, or certain altitudes which would allow GA a/c to cross at a sensible height? ie. not below 800'.
Barney
In general thanks for the suggestions, but...
The + meaning above the level of the chart, well I used Jepps VFR Chart and at a glance there is airspace noted at FL195, somewhat above the ceiling of my a/c so I could not go above this corridor from Dijon, with the implications for SE safety at low level.
French VFR rules I'm familiar with, wrote 4000' in haste, was actually FL 35 having checked my plan. Sorry.
Extra time on flt planning, well when I trained on the sqn (also some years ago) I was only allowed 1hr to plan a 4 ship multi package strike, so anything over that I regard as a luxury.
An 800 ASFC + corridor is still just that, I can read a chart, and that doesn't help anyone get accross it- why can't French Military restrict their flying to defined areas which could be avoided, or certain altitudes which would allow GA a/c to cross at a sensible height? ie. not below 800'.
Barney
Carbonfibre-based lifeform
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: London
Posts: 747
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm interested in the attributes of this military corridor near Geneva since I plan to fly through that area soon.
Which one are we talking about? The only one I can see which might fit the bill is R45. My Jeppesen (last year's) says it goes up to 2700AGL with a base of 800, dropping to ground level in some sections.
My IGN (this year's) says 800'AGL +, which the legend defines as meaning "to above 5,000' or 2,000' ASFC". It doesn't seem to indicate that parts of the area go down to the surface, but I may be missing some subtlety on the chart here.
My Aviasport 1:1,000,000 chart (last year's) shows it as 800 to 2,600', again with sections which go down to ground level.
So, apart from the slight disagreement between charts about the upper limit, it seems straightforward enough to go over it at the appropriate VFR level which gives at least 2,700' clearance above the surface.
Are we talking about the same corridor, or is there a more restrictive one lurking there?
Which one are we talking about? The only one I can see which might fit the bill is R45. My Jeppesen (last year's) says it goes up to 2700AGL with a base of 800, dropping to ground level in some sections.
My IGN (this year's) says 800'AGL +, which the legend defines as meaning "to above 5,000' or 2,000' ASFC". It doesn't seem to indicate that parts of the area go down to the surface, but I may be missing some subtlety on the chart here.
My Aviasport 1:1,000,000 chart (last year's) shows it as 800 to 2,600', again with sections which go down to ground level.
So, apart from the slight disagreement between charts about the upper limit, it seems straightforward enough to go over it at the appropriate VFR level which gives at least 2,700' clearance above the surface.
Are we talking about the same corridor, or is there a more restrictive one lurking there?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: New South Wales
Posts: 1,794
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So, apart from the slight disagreement between charts about the upper limit,
I'm finding this whole issue hard to get my head around and the flying corridors apparently rather restrictive (and scary), but this discussion is enlightening.
QDM
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Cheese-eating Surrender Monkey land
Posts: 80
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Barney
You had better tell us which corridor you had in mind. I will make a pretty good bet that you have either misread, or been misled by the Jeppesen VFR charts, which are well known for their inaccuracies.
The only corridor matching your general description is the one I indicated in my earlier posting, and the top for that airspace is 2700 feet ASFC.
I won't argue with you over flight planning Barney, but it seems to me that since by your own account, you chose to fly through the corridor without knowing when it was active, and without knowing its vertical extent, there is probably room for improvement.
As for the flying practises of the French military, I well remember a recent conversation I had with Rod Dean, late of the CAA GAD, in which he told me that the reason for not showing military flow arrows on British charts, was that the military will operate "anywhere" in the UK at low level, so such arrows were meaningless.
At least in France, we give you a few clues heh?
You had better tell us which corridor you had in mind. I will make a pretty good bet that you have either misread, or been misled by the Jeppesen VFR charts, which are well known for their inaccuracies.
The only corridor matching your general description is the one I indicated in my earlier posting, and the top for that airspace is 2700 feet ASFC.
I won't argue with you over flight planning Barney, but it seems to me that since by your own account, you chose to fly through the corridor without knowing when it was active, and without knowing its vertical extent, there is probably room for improvement.
As for the flying practises of the French military, I well remember a recent conversation I had with Rod Dean, late of the CAA GAD, in which he told me that the reason for not showing military flow arrows on British charts, was that the military will operate "anywhere" in the UK at low level, so such arrows were meaningless.
At least in France, we give you a few clues heh?
Carbonfibre-based lifeform
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: London
Posts: 747
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
QDMx3,
It is indeed a useful thread - I hadn't realised before that the IGN charts had such a low vertical limit for their coverage.
I've been using the Aviasport/Cartabossy 1:1,000,000 chart as well since it is very clearly presented and good for route planning, but I ordered the SIA 1:1,000,000 charts and VFR guide this evening as well from a French site which I found via the excellent nav2000.
As long as I can see out of the cockpit over the pile of charts, I should now have all the information I need, though it is a little worrying when they disagree about airspace limits.
It is indeed a useful thread - I hadn't realised before that the IGN charts had such a low vertical limit for their coverage.
I've been using the Aviasport/Cartabossy 1:1,000,000 chart as well since it is very clearly presented and good for route planning, but I ordered the SIA 1:1,000,000 charts and VFR guide this evening as well from a French site which I found via the excellent nav2000.
As long as I can see out of the cockpit over the pile of charts, I should now have all the information I need, though it is a little worrying when they disagree about airspace limits.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: New South Wales
Posts: 1,794
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nav2000 looks OK, but since I don't have Flash it doesn't seem very easy to navigate. Anyway, here's a nice clickable map of UK METARs and TAFs:
http://www.nav2000.com/pf/select_met...t=54.5&clon=-4
Two more questions:
1. Where can I buy one of these 1:1000000 charts and which one should I buy?
2. What is my best bet for getting weather at small grass strips around France. I'll be lost without my Internet connection!
QDM
http://www.nav2000.com/pf/select_met...t=54.5&clon=-4
Two more questions:
1. Where can I buy one of these 1:1000000 charts and which one should I buy?
2. What is my best bet for getting weather at small grass strips around France. I'll be lost without my Internet connection!
QDM
Carbonfibre-based lifeform
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: London
Posts: 747
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That map is nice - www.xcweather.co.uk do a similar thing. Nav2000 have an automated flight plan generator too which is interesting.
I ordered my charts through an online store with banner ads on the nav2000 site - I'll PM you the link. They're the same ones you can buy at most of the UK shops (except the Cartabossy one which I've never seen here), but they cost less in euros than we get charged in pounds!
I ordered my charts through an online store with banner ads on the nav2000 site - I'll PM you the link. They're the same ones you can buy at most of the UK shops (except the Cartabossy one which I've never seen here), but they cost less in euros than we get charged in pounds!
Official PPRuNe Chaplain
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Witnesham, Suffolk
Age: 80
Posts: 3,498
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I've flown round France a bit, and I always check those military routes in Bottlang. That gives vertical limits, and also the relevant info about what goes on and when, who to call for transit (if that can be done), and other useful info.
I wouldn't risk crossing one without that information. To borrow Rufus' pet comment "cowardice prolongs active life"
I wouldn't risk crossing one without that information. To borrow Rufus' pet comment "cowardice prolongs active life"
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: europe
Posts: 546
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FWIW
I use the French 'FIS' publication VFR flight package obtainable in the UK now. It contains amongst other things comprehesive details of all R and D areas and if used as part of flight planning, or refered to in flight if your plans change, you should have no problems.
Details include maps, operational hours, vertical limits, these being in precise figures not the sign of the +, and frequencies to contact for information and crossing permission.
I am not familiar with Bottlang, but it appears they have similar information.
The low level route virtually ringing France is as TvR states and should give little nav problem unless cloud base restricts flight .
I use the French 'FIS' publication VFR flight package obtainable in the UK now. It contains amongst other things comprehesive details of all R and D areas and if used as part of flight planning, or refered to in flight if your plans change, you should have no problems.
Details include maps, operational hours, vertical limits, these being in precise figures not the sign of the +, and frequencies to contact for information and crossing permission.
I am not familiar with Bottlang, but it appears they have similar information.
The low level route virtually ringing France is as TvR states and should give little nav problem unless cloud base restricts flight .
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 37
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
TvR
Corridor is R 45 S Jepps 2003. Parts of this corridor are surface +, the bit I crossed was 800+.
Your point about having military routes noted on civilian charts is very good, it gives us a chance to avoid them, provided an upper limit is stated on the chart!!!
It is not true that the RAF operate everywhere, they have designated low flying areas like French mil, which tend to be in unpopulated areas. These are just not shown on civilian charts.
But why the CAA can't at least publish military choke points on UK charts is beyond me.
Keef & Bluskis
Some useful sources of information you have suggested which I will refer to for future flights into deepest France! (which I enjoy greatly)
Barney
Corridor is R 45 S Jepps 2003. Parts of this corridor are surface +, the bit I crossed was 800+.
Your point about having military routes noted on civilian charts is very good, it gives us a chance to avoid them, provided an upper limit is stated on the chart!!!
It is not true that the RAF operate everywhere, they have designated low flying areas like French mil, which tend to be in unpopulated areas. These are just not shown on civilian charts.
But why the CAA can't at least publish military choke points on UK charts is beyond me.
Keef & Bluskis
Some useful sources of information you have suggested which I will refer to for future flights into deepest France! (which I enjoy greatly)
Barney