I suggest SH needs to update his Sky Demon as Sarfend have even more space than his version above.

Also it seems to leave off many airfields which show on the NATS/CAA charts ?

However direct crossing of HRW should be amusing !

mike hallam.

WHERE? I reckon some local dialect pun must be intended but my Patagonian and Swahili are less sharp than they used to be.

And as for : from the list indicated below, which is meant by HRW?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HRW_%28disambiguation%29

Being born and bred from there, can I just point out the spelling is wrong. It should be:


Sahfend.

I think I like the idea of a surveillance mandatory zone if it is inside the existing airspace boundary. Large areas of the BHX airspace are not used as the departure gradients used to plan the airspace were so conservative I don't think there is an aeroplane that has been built in the last 30 years that needs 22 nm to climb to 6,000' in reality many aeroplanes make it in 10 miles or less.One of the departures allows something in the region of 30 miles for the climb to 6,000' I seem to remember the reason the gradients were low was for the ATP and an allowance for the hottest day with the least favourable wind and max weight and a pressure that meant FL55 was 6,500'. With the recent change of transition level being crudely implemented in that FL 55 became 5,500' the lower levels are also little used, or at least should be rarely used as planes should be flying Continuous Descent Approaches.
I recon there could be a surveillance zone inside that would act as a buffer so no need for it to be on the class g side.

bb

Wot? It's "Sahfen" ma'e.

OK, have your own fun but please terminate my doubts: is it Swahili or is it Patagonian or whatever else?

And I remain just as curious about the HRW bit. Or is that Welsh, perhaps?

Jan,
It is Swahili for Southend and the Patagonian abbreviation of HeathRoW.

Ah, how good to have literate reliable well-eddicated connections. Thanks, Donald, I knew I could count on you.

That said, didn't London-Heathrow use to be referred to as LHR? Or was that from a different or even enemy codebook?

Most of these airspace busts could be avoided if the CAA redesigned controlled airspace to suit present day IFR aircraft performance. Other than around IFR arrival and departure tracks at major airports, there should be no need for class A below 4 or even 6000ft.
For example why on earth is the London TMA base 2500 ft between Lhr and Lgw. and surrounding areas. ?

Why call it LFAT or LTQ when L2K is so much easier to remember and is probably more readily understood?

But not more readily understood than Le Touquet. ;)