All UK VFR Charts have grid MEF (Maximum Elevation Figures) printed. These, as (with one correction)
Backpacker says, are the:
MSA (Minimum Safe Altitude) is an IFR term (talking about it wrt VFR flight can only be confusing) and,
in the legend, on UK charts it specifically says that for the MEF "NB: THIS IS NOT A SAFETY ALTITUDE"

The MEF can, however, be an easy way to calculate the MSA (just add 1,000", or 2,000' in mountainous areas)
rather than searching all along 5nm either side of your proposed route.

Most (all?) European VFR Charts do not give MEF, but rather give an already calculated MSA for each grid.

Some IFR charts give a Minimum Sector Altitude which, confusingly, also is abbreviated
MSA (but this will always be at, or above, the Minimum Safety Altitude.

It is important to have read the legend, on whatever chart is being used,
so that it is known what the figures represent.

I just went throught the pile of old charts I have here. The Jeppesen VFR+GPS charts give an Minimum Grid Area Altitude like I said below, and do so consistently across all European charts. I also have an old Dutch "ICAO" chart here (2009; issued by the LVNL) which doesn't give any grid numbers whatsoever. From 2010 onwards the Dutch "ICAO" charts were issued by the German DFS, and these show MEF figures. But these MEF figures seem to use 328' (100m) to account for unknown obstacles, then add a further 30', and then round up. Or they add 60' to a known obstacle, then round up.

In the Netherlands we've got a new printer, once again, for the "ICAO" charts. I haven't seen their charts yet.

I've also heard the term "Minimum Vectoring Altitude" in this context. I guess both these numbers also need to take into account radar/radio performance, standard climb and descent gradients and so forth. So there may well be a reason why they're higher than the MSA. AFAIK the only time an IFR flight is below the MSA, will be on departure and approach, and of course these departures and approaches are carefully surveyed individually for terrain and obstacles.

When these things are clearly laid down for all to see why do we get so may: "Well, my instructor said..." posts?

This isn't aimed at any individual on this thread or any other, just a query after reading these posts for years.

Sorry, this is terrible thread drift and I hope that the OP got the answer they needed before we all headed off on this somewhat irrelevant (to the original question) MSA, MEF discussion.

Because there the only laid down limit for VFR cruising height is actually 0' assuming no structure/people etc so there is in truth no minimum height for VFR flight until you start taking into account structures, built up areas etc. what then happens is instructors bring in the en route MSA without explaining properly why you should know this (in case you lose VMC) and hence the confusion. What should happen is a proper explanation of why MSA is noted and a better briefing of what are sensible minimum heights to continue when VFR.

Many thanks for all your replies, it has cleared up a lot and makes more sense. I have decided on 1700 ft and will contact Bournemouth. Just need the weather now!

And remember transiting the airspace IFR will incur costs of £60.

http://www.southamptonairport.com/st...sOfUse_SOU.pdf

It is also understood wef 1/4/14 the use of oxygen through that airspace will be
offered by ATC as an optional extra. The tariff will be calculated on airspeed at £27.50 per minute, plus vat. :}

Interesting reading! I've transited the Solent CTR/CTA IFR many times and have not yet been charged.

Southampton Airport
 

Hi All,

In relation to the Southampton International Airport Conditions of Use document as issued on the 28th March 2013, we can confirm that Southampton Airport will not be charging for IFR zone transits. We have never charged any aircraft for a zone transit under IFR or VFR conditions.

This charge relates to aircraft that utilise the ILS at Southampton for non-training purposes i.e. cloud breaks under IFR conditions. This charge should not be confused with the use of the ILS for training purposes, for which there is a separate charging structure that will come into effect on the 20th May 2013. We will provide further information on this if required.

The relevant paragraph within the Conditions Of Use document is being updated to make this position clear. The updated document will be posted on the Southampton Airport website shortly.

Southampton Airport has worked extremely hard over the past 18 months to engage with the GA community and to date have had over 150 general aviation pilots visit the airport to discuss airspace safety and general operations around the Solent zone. We would like to take this opportunity to extend this invitation to any club, organisation or syndicate that would like to visit us.

We fully intend to continue to engage with the G.A community. On behalf of Southampton Airport, If you have any further queries or comments please do not hesitate to contact me by email on [email protected] Please note that I am unable to respond to questions through this forum, I can only respond directly through email on the address as above.

Thank you.

Mike

Nonetheless £60 for each IFR movement in and out of the airport is extremely expensive, particularly for aircraft less than 2T.

Hi,

Just for further clarification - This charge will not be applied to aircraft that use the ILS for landing at Southampton.

Mike

Mike SOUAirport

Exemption only if an ILS is flown? What happens if 02 is in use or the ILS is off for maintenance?

theolderflyer
Glad you got an answer to your original question

foxmouth
I'm afraid there is.
In EASA land it is 500' agl - and, consequently, the UK has now also adopted this.

BackPacker
Your quote above is only true of SIDs, STARs and IAPs
Nothing to prevent any flight, from/to any airfield, in any airspace
being flown according to IFR - This is currently true in the UK
(and elsewhere?) and will be true for the whole of Europe from
April 2014 when SERA comes in to force.

Not until SERA becomes effective?