London gets LARS!
 

Very good news.

Wow. I can't believe something positive like that is going to happen. Though about time - especially for those teaching the IMCR

Included in my prayers will be:

"Dear Lord, please let it be H24"
(slim chance I know)

Great news though. Now we have this coming our way, lets hope they structure it to meet demand - in otherwords AVAILABLE ON WEEKENDS!

7 days a week probably same hours as present Farnborough operation.

I think youll find Farnbourgh can be very hard to talk to on weekends (at least the LARS bit)

Radar coverage?
 

According to the link, Farnborough are identified as the unit that will be providing LARS in the London area up towards Luton and Stansted. Does Farnborough have suitable radar coverage to provide LARS below 2400ft QNH that far NE?

Magp1e,

In this day and age with high-speed data links, the location of the radar head(s) and the controller are (to all intents and purposes) independent.

SD

Saab

In my mind, it is not really what was asked. It is not about where London LARS sits, but the quality of what is being presented to them. A single source radar is unlikely to provide everything needed at the lower levels around the LTMA. A composite source brings in other SRG factors. Yes, datalinks are relatively easy. Finding a suitable source will be the key.

This news of a London LARS is indeed excellent. But does anyone know how many frequencies will be allocated, and the division of sectors?
The wonderful guys and gals at Farnborough LARS do an unbelievably good job given the so often gross congestion on 125.25, which is not just at weekends. But they are only covering less than 20% of the space under the TMA (plus Odiham MATZ crossings, etc).

Up to a few years ago, Dunsfold operated a LARS, and this gave enormous, valuable relief to the congestion, as they split the area between them.

I'm a very frequent user of Farnborough LARS, and on my visit there they told us how much they wanted us to log in with them, to know our intentions to aid threading their Bizjets through the busy Class G airspace. It seems to me that a minimum of 4 controllers, each on their own frequency, is needed to cover the whole area under the TMA.

Ooo good, glad to see they have worked out their priorities then.

Grow up mate

It is not about saving a bizjet! If you both come together you could both die.

MikeJ - you are probably correct - I can't see it happening safely with less than four freqs. Not sure if that has been looked at though..........

Yep, I think we just about worked that out.

Strangely, we also worked out that if a couple of light twins come together you also both die.

Even more strangely, if two light singles come together the result is vaguely similar.

I am afraid aircraft aren’t to choosey about whether they are pretty bizjets or a couple of old Turkeys.

Reality is there is far less chance of a Bizjet hitting another aircraft firstly because the time they spend OCAS with a Farnborough departure is minimal and they will be fitted with TCAS.

Sorry if I took MikeJ’s comments literally, and even with my usual cynicism I don’t suppose NATS are really providing this service to aid the controllers threading the odd bizjet through those nuisance light aviators!

Since the callsign "London Radar" is already taken. What will they call themselves? If they are going with the river motif (a la "Thames Radar") how about "Lea Radar" for the bit north of the Thames and "Mole Radar" for the bit to the south????!!!!!!

Or we could resurrect some names from the past "Kent" and "Bedford" perhaps??

G W-H

(Just been to the pub - full of good ideas!!)

Fuji

Even for me, the number of times you mention NATS in a derogatory post is quite alarming.

SO tell us, what have NATS done to upset you??? :)

GA in much of the London area practically operates in a 1,400 foot corridor with many choke points caused by CAS. I suspect the amount of traffic has increased, as has the speed, whilst the service has diminished.

NATS principally provides a service to aircraft operating within CAS. Understandably, given their remit, historically they have done little to provide a service to traffic OCAS. Perhaps cynically some would say “one reason for the provision of a London LARS now is to reduce the number of CAS infringements” or “to aid threading their Bizjets through the busy Class G airspace”.

Our Government on the other hand is charged with providing common access to our airspace and for ensuring users can expect to use our airspace as safely and efficiently as possible. At least for that reason our Government retains a significant shareholding in NATS.

Our Government therefore has a difficult balance to achieve between the profit motivated aspirations of a commercial national air traffic service provider and the needs of GA.

Radar heads operated by NATS already provide significant cover for the London area. The data “exists” and could be provided at marginal cost to other LARS units who are competent to provide a service OCAS. NATS has historically been reluctant to provide such data feeds at marginal cost.

NATS has done b%44er all to upset me, they do precisely what I would expect them to do within the terms of their remit.

However, I am very concerned about the terms of their remit.

Put simply, and IMHO, if you create a system that constricts traffic in the way that has occurred around London without an eye to the increase in speed and volume of that traffic and the service it needs to conduct itself safely you are negligent.

For these reasons if you think it is NATS that has upset me you are seriously misguided.

Realistically NATS are not altruism providers, and so for their failings you had better look elsewhere.

Finally, if you think that was derogatory you are also misguided. In fact quite the opposite, I cant imagine the average controller at Farnborough wants GA to log in with them purely to enable the efficient flow of their Bizjet traffic, and if they do, I doubt they would want to give this impression. In so far I was intending to put the record straight.

With respect to you, that statement is not true. Simple as that.

Whilst I haven't been a big fan of NATS in terms of GA service provision, surely the fault stems from the Government providing a profit driven PPP company - and the CAA for not paying for LARS. (Aren't they they ones that take most many from GA - not NATS??)

During the "Privatisation" many of us in NATS were predicting the subsequent dropping of LARS by units as having a big hit in the GA world. I don't remember too much support for us in stopping the PPP from any of the organisations that perhaps should have helped block the PPP. How vocal were the BHAB/HCGB/AOPA etc?

As I said I think this is very good news and we should not look a gift horse in the mouth.

However, as this is a discussion forum :) let me add that I also wish that the PPL training scene was overhauled to include GPS training, and the usage of moving map GPS units became as widespread in training as it is in some sectors of GA.

Then, there would be far fewer CAS busts, and IMHO it is CAS busts (and the resulting possibility of a major accident) that are the primary driver behind this new service.

Apparently, the provision of a radar service which must cost somebody an extra £1M a year in ATCO salaries alone (counting employer's contributions and benefits) is easier to achieve than dragging the PPL syllabus, kicking and screaming, into the 20th century.

Just an observation...

IO,

Regarding GPS training, I think the present scheme of navigation should continue to concentrate on the basics of DR but the individual should be encouraged to make use of modern aids where available after PPL qualification. Otherwise, it will only increase the cost of the licence. Also, if the use of GPS is introduced too early, human nature being what it is, pilots will undoubtedly rely on it too much and not become proficient in the basics, which may have the opposite effect to that required.

An "add-on" training scheme post PPL, maybe; such as the "pass-plus" for driving might be a way forward. Trouble is, there are so many different types of GPS equipment; from my own experience, the most difficult part of GPS is working out which buttons to press to get the desired effect to appear on the magic box!

To try to answer some of your questions:
Initially there will one extra sector working alongside the present 125.250 person. Frequency is to be allocated, but don't be surprised if it sounds familiar. Farnborough already has access to two radar heads at Heathrow plus the Pease SSR head (sited south of Gatwick). It's probable the Stansted primary will be added to this tally, plus maybe Debden SSR.
Transponder codes are in short supply; Farnborough already has use of much of the 04XX block and maybe the rest could be allocated. But don't be surprised if an aircraft at (say) Basingstoke is allocated the same code as one at (say) Thurrock.