The thing that makes this particularly tricky is the triangle of Class A from 2500'+ just north of Chelmsford. Is that little piece of sky really required to be Class A down to that level? If that was removed or at least started from 3500'+ it would at least in part mitigate against the choke point for those trying to get to or from the East Anglia coast from the likes of Stapleford.
Anyone know why that triangle goes down to 2500'?
Thanks

Thank you.

Wasn't that the reason they are so omnipresent at Calais LFAC? ;)

LFAC is also Class D.
I would hazard a guess that the reason for Calais, is because it is the shortest water crossing combined with a much cheaper landing fee and not because of Class of Airspace.

It was Class D, but not anymore.

LFFA-B5523/14
A) LFAC CALAIS DUNKERQUE
B) 2014 Nov 03 00:00 C) PERM
E) CALAIS CTR DEACTIVATED :
AIRSPACE RE-CLASSIFIED TO G, AD CONTROL NOT PROVIDED

I regularly fly non transponder equipped microlights around UK airspace (actually mostly flexwings at present, as 1/10th of a Rollason Condor seems quite microlighty enough without needing to specifically fill up the 3-axis microlight column of my logbook, and as it happens, that has a functioning transponder).

I can't recall ever being refused entry to class D; I've occasionally been asked to modify my routing, which is fair enough if I'm using the airspace around a reasonably major airport. I probably do get asked to modify my routing a bit more often and make more position reports when I am not squawking, but presumably that's simply because the controller has less confidence about where exactly I am.

G

Thank you, GtE, this only confirms the UK is really a different place (though perhaps less single in this respect than in some others) - but in this case that is all to the good.

Perhaps a warning is in place: foreign microlighters flying into Belgium, keep OUT of class D! And that includes the CTR's and TMA's of all commercial airports, and all military bases when active.

Patowalker you are quite right. Maybe I should have a trifle more accurate. The propensity of Microlights up until 3 months ago was more likely to be because of the cost and shorter distance to Calais even though it was Class D rather than the Class D being the reason they didn't use LFAT.
I would assume they will continue to use LFAC for the same reasons.

ak7274 I quite agree and only mentioned L2K because Calais lost its Class D and Abbeville, the other favourite of UK microlighters, is in Class G.

Calais is training 3 bilingual AFISOs and has promised an improved service at the restaurant, so I hope it will remain popular with UK pilots.

It will remain popular with me and I don't fly Microlights. I still aren't happy with Southend Airspace even with all the reassurances though.

Daxwax siad: I agree that triangle raised to 3500ft would make life for GA much easier. From what I have I have seen that piece of airspace is not required by Essex Radar/NATS/Stansted. It was probably originally in place to provide protection for SID climbs towards Clacton or Detling with OEI. In my opinion, GA should be lobbying Stansted to rescind that airspace or continue to justify it.

So pick up the damn radio and let them know want route you want!

It's people who refuse to talk which they cannot accept.

Hmmmmm.
Pick up a radio and talk to them.
I do. The point is not that I should "pick up a radio" isn't even close to my point at all.
I have never had a problem talking to Southend and have often repositioned myself at their request.
The point I and many others are trying to make is that the Airspace is convoluted, disproportionate and probably not neccessary. The number of small Airfields in that area are going to find things difficult due to being in controlled airspace as soon as they are off the ground.Non radio Aircraft will be forced into a narrow choke point with a low ceiling. Many other factors may be a problem too.
Have you ever thought of looking at the consultation objections?
If one intends to be rude then one really should engage the damn brain before the mouth.

ak7424: this "fellow" has repeatedly read poorly, if at all, and written rudely, or worse. Best to ignore, nothing useful will come of it anyway, however well you may mean. Or much should have changed, which we can and should always hope for.

You're quite right Jan and I apologise for getting a little hot under the collar about something I am quite passionate about.
Thank you for putting me right.