PPRuNe Forums - Well I never ...

PPRuNe Forums (https://www.pprune.org/)

- Private Flying (https://www.pprune.org/private-flying-63/)

- - Well I never ... (https://www.pprune.org/private-flying/293988-well-i-never.html)

Well I never ...

Quote:

The CAA has released proposals of a new system of Air Traffic Control Services Outside Controlled Airspace (ATSOCAS) which would involve the replacement of the current system of air traffic services such as FIS, RIS, Mandatory Control, Air Traffic Advisory Service and Approach Control Service with four new levels of service: Basic, Traffic, Deconfliction and Procedural.
The proposals come about due to concerns raised by controllers, pilots and incident investigators who were worried that there were differences in how the various existing ATSOCAS were being provided, and a general lack of understanding of the subject.
It's all part of a new 'industry-wide Airspace and Safety Initiative', which is a joint CAA, NATS, airports, GA and MoD effort to look into the major safety risks in UK airspace. See www.airspacesafety.com for information.
The proposals, which you can read online at the CAA website are part of a consultation which is due to finish on 14 December.

Was it just me that didn't spot this ? And how do we feel about it ?

FF :ok:

From what little I have read about this, the new names for the various "new services" appear to be just just that, ie the same services with new names that's all!?:rolleyes:

Rumour has it that MANDATORY areas for Mode S and initially Mode A/C equipped only may appear around the London airports under the LTMA.

So flybymike's calmness may need ammended. :D

I was purely talking about the new names which they seem to be proposing for existing services. Mode S and Mode C veils is another kettle of fish altogether.

Forgive my obvious naivety, but whats wrong with Mode C/S veils?

Surely they help to

cut down zone infringement through positive identification by ATC (ok, so will never stop someone who's determined to drive through not squawking)
help reduce airprox and allow suitable routing of conflicting traffic in good time due to positive identification
enable TCAS to do its job properly when conflicts do get too close

Or have I missed something? (apart from no electrics, ultra/micro lights with no spare capacity, etc... but would they be under the LTMA anyway apart from in known areas such as Dunstable?)

Alternatively, are the exceptions enough to warrent dismissing the idea totally?

(ducks and runs for cover)

Nothing wrong with Mode C or S veils for traffic that is able to make use of them.
Undoubtedly there will be much traffic which can not do so unless cheap portable txpdrs become available which are not a threat to life limb or one's manhood.
The issue of the difference between being "seen" and being "watched " is another one entirely

A pity that they couldn't have sorted out the FISO/AGCS confusion at the same time!

How will someone know whether the 'Basic' service they're being given includes some form of radar monitoring?

As I understand it ( and I freely admit this is just largely hearsay) "Basic" will be the equivalent of FIS, "Traffic" will be RIS, "deconfliction" will be RAS, and "procedural" will be ATC radar control for vectored ILS's etc.
Don't know what good a change of name alone will bring. The old names seemed perfectly self explanatory to me. But perhaps there is more to the master plan than I know (or understand.)

Quote:

How will someone know whether the 'Basic' service they're being given includes some form of radar monitoring?

Isn't that one of the reasons for the change? If you want/need a radar monitoring service then ask for traffic or deconfliction, not basic. Part of the confusion I believe comes from the 'F(R)IS' service that is sometimes (kindly) provided as a FIS.

Ian