Egham 6nm rad Restricted !
Thread Starter
Egham 6nm rad Restricted !
Today's Egham FMD restriction has grown this evening from 2nm rad to 6nm rad. It covers Fairoaks and a small place called Heathrow. It's knackered all heli movements around the SW corner of the London zone with H3 out of bounds.
On the Notam DEFRA are the Emergency Controlling Authority - with a phone number.
I called that number and it's answered by muppets who know nothing - and even less about aviation.
I bet NATS are happy......DAP will be getting this as an email.
Lower limit (FL): 000
Upper limit (FL): 030
Centre and radius (nm): 5124N00030W006
Parent ICAO: EGTT
Start date/time: 12/09/2007 16:28 UTC
End date/time: 17/09/2007 17:00 UTC(estimate)
Activity period: null
Lower height limit: 000
Upper height limit: 030
RESTRICTED AREA (TEMPORARY) ESTABLISHED OWING TO THE FOOT AND MOUTH
INCIDENT AT EGHAM. RESTRICTION OF FLYING REGULATIONS HAVE BEEN MADE
UNDER ARTICLE 96 OF THE AIR NAVIGATION ORDER 2005 IN THE AREA BOUNDED
BY A CIRCLE RAD 6NM CENTRED ON 512428N 0003025W. PILOTS ARE FORBIDDEN
TO FLY WI THE DESIGNATED AIRSPACE WITHOUT PERMISSION OF DEFRA
(EMERGENCY CONTROLLING AUTHORITY) TEL 020 7904 6365. ATC UNITS CLOSE
TO THE INCIDENT AREA ARE REQUESTED TO ADVISE ACFT ON THEIR FREQ OF
THE CONTENTS OF THIS NOTAM. MIL ACFT SHOULD COMPLY WITH JSP 552
201.135.9. FIXED WING ACFT MAY TRANSIT THE AREA UNDER CONTROL OF
LTCC, FARNBOROUGH ATC OR FAIROAKS ATC. HEL MAY CONTINUE TO USE ROUTES
H2 AND H9.
On the Notam DEFRA are the Emergency Controlling Authority - with a phone number.
I called that number and it's answered by muppets who know nothing - and even less about aviation.
I bet NATS are happy......DAP will be getting this as an email.
Lower limit (FL): 000
Upper limit (FL): 030
Centre and radius (nm): 5124N00030W006
Parent ICAO: EGTT
Start date/time: 12/09/2007 16:28 UTC
End date/time: 17/09/2007 17:00 UTC(estimate)
Activity period: null
Lower height limit: 000
Upper height limit: 030
RESTRICTED AREA (TEMPORARY) ESTABLISHED OWING TO THE FOOT AND MOUTH
INCIDENT AT EGHAM. RESTRICTION OF FLYING REGULATIONS HAVE BEEN MADE
UNDER ARTICLE 96 OF THE AIR NAVIGATION ORDER 2005 IN THE AREA BOUNDED
BY A CIRCLE RAD 6NM CENTRED ON 512428N 0003025W. PILOTS ARE FORBIDDEN
TO FLY WI THE DESIGNATED AIRSPACE WITHOUT PERMISSION OF DEFRA
(EMERGENCY CONTROLLING AUTHORITY) TEL 020 7904 6365. ATC UNITS CLOSE
TO THE INCIDENT AREA ARE REQUESTED TO ADVISE ACFT ON THEIR FREQ OF
THE CONTENTS OF THIS NOTAM. MIL ACFT SHOULD COMPLY WITH JSP 552
201.135.9. FIXED WING ACFT MAY TRANSIT THE AREA UNDER CONTROL OF
LTCC, FARNBOROUGH ATC OR FAIROAKS ATC. HEL MAY CONTINUE TO USE ROUTES
H2 AND H9.
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: n/a
Posts: 1,425
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FIXED WING ACFT MAY TRANSIT THE AREA UNDER CONTROL OF
LTCC, FARNBOROUGH ATC OR FAIROAKS ATC.
LTCC, FARNBOROUGH ATC OR FAIROAKS ATC.
Anyhow guess I should scrub my heli flying from fairoaks for the next few weeks.
Thread Starter
No police or HEMS exemptions either. Bit of a prob for Fairoaks ASU ?
This NOTAM appears to have been drawn up by a human suffering from FMD.
12nm dia to 3000ft - what are they thinking of ?
This NOTAM appears to have been drawn up by a human suffering from FMD.
12nm dia to 3000ft - what are they thinking of ?
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: 400ft
Posts: 20
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
They're thinking it'll stop pictures of culled cows being dropped into trucks. Yet last time they tried to do it the newsies reverted to library footage (from vertically challenged camera positions). Idiots
Ive just spoken to the man on the controlling authority telephone no. as I am due to fly out of Fairoaks on Friday.
With his permission I asked can I relay the reasons, for sizing and operational restrictions and he agreed that I could do 'what i felt appropriate', please bear in mind that I am not quoting him directly (so don't moan at him, if I have got this wrong, it is my fault) as I did not record the conversation.
The size has changed as they are looking at multiple premises and if they put a 2 mile exclusion around each of them it would have made something even worse to navigate around.
DEFRA are not trying to stop the local flyer in the pursuit of their legitimite business but do appear to want to keep the noise issue above the affected cattle to a minimum. They are working with the flying schools (or possibly the airfield cant remeber) at Fairoaks to come up with an agreed but restricitve way in and out of the Fairoaks ATZ.
He did not think that my request to leave Fairoaks due south and route around the zone towards Farnborough would seen unfavourlably and whilst I have not yet received a written permission, I was told to expect some form of reference no to quote to ATC.
They don't particularly want to be bombarded with requests from us (just because of Workload) but if the ATSU at the airfields concerned can't help or haven't managed to sort out an agreed procedure, then Individual operators can feel free to contact the emergency contact no in the Notam for permissions, and can expect subject to the needs af DEFRA at the affected sites a fairly favourable response (my words).
I don't believe I've added or removed too much by way of Chinese whisper, but the guy I spoke was very helpful and although not an aviation man very mindful of what we are trying to achieve, whilst carrying his job aswell.
Gary
With his permission I asked can I relay the reasons, for sizing and operational restrictions and he agreed that I could do 'what i felt appropriate', please bear in mind that I am not quoting him directly (so don't moan at him, if I have got this wrong, it is my fault) as I did not record the conversation.
The size has changed as they are looking at multiple premises and if they put a 2 mile exclusion around each of them it would have made something even worse to navigate around.
DEFRA are not trying to stop the local flyer in the pursuit of their legitimite business but do appear to want to keep the noise issue above the affected cattle to a minimum. They are working with the flying schools (or possibly the airfield cant remeber) at Fairoaks to come up with an agreed but restricitve way in and out of the Fairoaks ATZ.
He did not think that my request to leave Fairoaks due south and route around the zone towards Farnborough would seen unfavourlably and whilst I have not yet received a written permission, I was told to expect some form of reference no to quote to ATC.
They don't particularly want to be bombarded with requests from us (just because of Workload) but if the ATSU at the airfields concerned can't help or haven't managed to sort out an agreed procedure, then Individual operators can feel free to contact the emergency contact no in the Notam for permissions, and can expect subject to the needs af DEFRA at the affected sites a fairly favourable response (my words).
I don't believe I've added or removed too much by way of Chinese whisper, but the guy I spoke was very helpful and although not an aviation man very mindful of what we are trying to achieve, whilst carrying his job aswell.
Gary
Thread Starter
My update: called the ECA phone number in the NOTAM. Answred by someone at DEFRA who "just picked up someone else's phone." Explained reason for call. Told that they didn't undersgtand what I was talking about - she would get another bod to call me.
30 mins later DEFRA man called. Explained again. He said he knew nothing - but would get someone to call me.
60 mins later DEFRA press officer called to say that we should speak to the CAA.
There are only 2 lawful reasons a RA(T) can be established: (1) in the public interest or (2) in the interests of national security. With traffic at ground level permitted inside these Restricteds, there is no reason why either of these reasons can be used. The M25 isn't shut.
As for noise - that's b*ll*cks. For lawd's sake - these animals live next to 2 motorways.
No - this is DEFRA taking authority over our airspace to keep the media out. And thereby mucking up everyone else.
30 mins later DEFRA man called. Explained again. He said he knew nothing - but would get someone to call me.
60 mins later DEFRA press officer called to say that we should speak to the CAA.
There are only 2 lawful reasons a RA(T) can be established: (1) in the public interest or (2) in the interests of national security. With traffic at ground level permitted inside these Restricteds, there is no reason why either of these reasons can be used. The M25 isn't shut.
As for noise - that's b*ll*cks. For lawd's sake - these animals live next to 2 motorways.
No - this is DEFRA taking authority over our airspace to keep the media out. And thereby mucking up everyone else.
