Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Flight Deck Forums > Rumours & News
Reload this Page >

North Sea Airspace Changes

Rumours & News Reporting Points that may affect our jobs or lives as professional pilots. Also, items that may be of interest to professional pilots.

North Sea Airspace Changes

Old 11th Mar 2003, 17:12
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Near VTUU or EGPX
Age: 65
Posts: 319
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
North Sea Airspace Changes

Hi everybody,
Hope you are all ready for the complete restructure of ALL the routes over the North Sea on March 20th, when Scottish Control take over a sector from LACC.
Scottish will now interface with Amsterdam/Maastricht and Copenhagen.
I hope all your company route planners are ready, especially for those aircraft that are eastbound over the Atlantic that night !
As I am only a coalface ATCO, please don't ask me where to find the info on the changes, I am sure that someone in your Ops department will have it ! (or not)

Regards,
The Fat Controller is offline  
Old 11th Mar 2003, 18:31
  #2 (permalink)  

Keeping Danny in Sandwiches
 
Join Date: May 1999
Location: UK
Age: 76
Posts: 1,294
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I hope that we are not having "Scottish" controlling English Airspace.
sky9 is offline  
Old 11th Mar 2003, 21:39
  #3 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 343
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Have been for some time now mate!
Bigears is offline  
Old 12th Mar 2003, 09:38
  #4 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: S.E England
Posts: 118
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Angel

http://www.eurocontrol.int/ais/ahead...th-sea/ris.htm

For anyone wishing to prepare themselves check the link above.
As stated at the top this should not be used for aircraft navigation but only for planning purposes. The AIP amendments for the states concerned will contain the final changes.


Cheers
YS
You splitter is offline  
Old 12th Mar 2003, 15:58
  #5 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Costa del Swanwick
Posts: 834
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I reckon the route LARGA-BOSUM will be used by ATCOs quite a lot
250 kts is offline  
Old 12th Mar 2003, 20:48
  #6 (permalink)  

Watchdog Delta Hotel
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: here but there in 6 years
Posts: 128
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Also eastern airways crews may be interested to know you will have our full and undivided attention on pennine radar
as we are keeping it going solely for you

Think we should change it to eastflight radar
talk to you all soon
mainecoon is offline  
Old 13th Mar 2003, 19:12
  #7 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Any Bar
Posts: 142
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
What a great use of manpower keeping it open for a handfull of crappy jetstreams in and out of that hub Humberside.
jocko0102 is offline  
Old 13th Mar 2003, 22:53
  #8 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: The Beautiful South
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Exclamation

I can say that we controllers at a major(ish) scottish airport are not ready for the changes. We still don't have the correct phone lines, procedures and training to know whats going on. It looks like it will be a desperate SI and lots of phone calls through other sectors when it happens.
Do you think those passengers paying 300 quid each way on Eastflight are aware that they are messing with all the fast jets over the north sea only on a RIS?
A couple of times if the pax had looked hard enough I am sure they must have seen some hairy moments!
eddyboog is offline  
Old 15th Mar 2003, 20:55
  #9 (permalink)  
Psychophysiological entity
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Tweet Rob_Benham Famous author. Well, slightly famous.
Age: 84
Posts: 3,293
Received 67 Likes on 32 Posts
I spent some time between NWI and ABX prior to 9/11, and the operation was far from satisfactory due to fast military traffic.

We have had military pilots that fly these details on our jump-seats from time to time, and there is no doubt that they think as we do…it is an unsafe merging of two disciplines.

I personally had several increase-rate TECAS warnings – two on one day – and yes, I’m sure that if the passengers knew the truth we would have lost most of them to alternative routes or even other forms of transport.

If the exercises could have been contained within the promulgated areas there would have been no problem. There were times when the, very helpful and concerned, “London and Scottish” controllers seemed overwhelmed… and this is certainly not a criticism, they should never have been put in this position.

This route has had a long history in aviation terms, and is and always has been important to the oil industry. To route via airways would not have been viable as the increase in time was huge… the pax simply would not have used Norwich.

As an aside, while on the subject of NWI, many large-ish aircraft were starting IT’s out of this field, and on a busy summers day the transit to the sanctuary of an airway was fraught with problem
Loose rivets is offline  
Old 20th Mar 2003, 10:08
  #10 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Scotland
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Question

Well, has it all worked?
downto5 is offline  
Old 20th Mar 2003, 17:13
  #11 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: care home for redundant has beens
Age: 57
Posts: 238
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
You must remeber that Eastern aren't really bothered about any kind of radar service. The only thing that matters is direct routing to save costs, flight information service is OK for them.

I remember operating a J41 for them when it was still on my companies AOC. When radar gave us avoiding action outside controlled airspace to keep clear of military traffic there was nothing but a chorus of moans and groans from the LHS about the extra time being added to the flight.
skianyn vannin is offline  
Old 20th Mar 2003, 20:30
  #12 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Hants, UK
Posts: 1,064
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
It went OK from London's point of view . There were a handful of aircraft (particularly certain UK LCOs..) who needed vectors because they didn't have the new data, and the computer adaptation was a bit dodgy in places, but generally it was OK.

And we moved more aircraft per hour than we did under the old system!! So I suppose it will be judged a success
eyeinthesky is offline  
Old 21st Mar 2003, 11:37
  #13 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Near VTUU or EGPX
Age: 65
Posts: 319
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
It seems to be OK from a Scottish point of view.
Considering the size of the project and all the changes, it all went much better than many of us expected.
As previously mentioned, a few computer adaptation problems (nothing new there) , but the few aircraft that came Eastbound last night seemed to know where to go, albeit that most got direct routeings.
The only comment to my colleagues on the South coast is, PLEASE do not direct-route process any traffic in NAS.
It happened a couple of times in the middle of the night and caused major headaches for our ATSAs as it produced garbage strips, and they had to sort out the flight in a relatively short space of time before it got to Copenhagen's airspace.
The Fat Controller is offline  
Old 21st Mar 2003, 12:36
  #14 (permalink)  

More than just an ATCO
 
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Up someone's nose
Age: 75
Posts: 1,768
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
No big problems at Maastricht yesterday except some operaters, DLH for one, had incorrectly filed for EGCC. We caught most of them in time.

Today LACC refusing dct. OTBED etc. as was agreed in the LOA but we can work with that.

Biggest plus for us, no more FLAS; against that the routing inbound EDDL, EDDK etc. needs to be looked at as the tfc. turns through the westbound route at an inconvenient position.

Lon More

More than just an ATCO
Lon More is offline  
Old 22nd Mar 2003, 23:12
  #15 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Just like to set the record straight re Eastern Airways and "Flight Information Service" - we use Radar!
And thanks Pennine for all your help.
BOYED is offline  
Old 23rd Mar 2003, 00:13
  #16 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Dublin
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Ended up with a 10hr restriction today cos company ops filed us on an airway not due to open until midnight! At least we were first in the queue for it, I suppose.
valiantbusser is offline  
Old 24th Mar 2003, 08:19
  #17 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Hants, UK
Posts: 1,064
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Lon More: The FLAS issue amuses me, as it seems a big issue for some people. I cannot remember a single time when I have refused (or seen refused) traffic which Maastricht offered at non-FLAS levels. All we did was vector it around as we used to. But the FLAS at least gave us a little protection and (as the US like to say) a 'heads up' on any conflict.

The problem now is that we have no such prompt, and the two overflights at FL340 etc which conflict at TOLSA may still be working another unit (you or Scottish) with less than 3 minutes to go to the conflict point... Fortunately these conflicts will only be with the 'bucket and spade' flights from Scandinavia and not the LTMA inbounds which are down at FL310. So I suppose the logic is that because there are relatively few westbound bucket and spades that the risk is acceptably low..
eyeinthesky is offline  
Old 24th Mar 2003, 17:54
  #18 (permalink)  
Pardoned PPRuNer
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: GlassGumtree
Posts: 387
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Angel 3 minutes ... I dream about three minutes

Eyeinthesky - if you think that is bad you should see REDFA, we get two acft that converge at REDFA usually with about 45 secs notice b4 loss of Sep coming from ....oh hold it....it comes from one sector.

Different situation
TrafficTraffic is offline  
Old 25th Mar 2003, 09:15
  #19 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Hants, UK
Posts: 1,064
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Yawn... TT is back on the usual track of trying to wind us up.

While we're talking about FLAS:

We're now supposed to get all EBBR and certain French airfield arrivals and a large number of German airfields including Dusseldorf down to FL290 by LAMSO. Apparently this is because Maastricht are unable to get them down in time otherwise.

Let's look at that then:

LAMSO to EDDL approximately 160 nm. Maximum level: FL290.

REFSO to EGLL 119nm. Maximum level without checking: FL400.

How about we have a FLAS which restricts all LL inbounds to, say FL 300 by REFSO and see how TT gets on with that? Then perhaps he won't moan so much. Perhaps he might have to use radar headings instead of own nav REFSO one on top of the other!
eyeinthesky is offline  
Old 28th Mar 2003, 07:19
  #20 (permalink)  

More than just an ATCO
 
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Up someone's nose
Age: 75
Posts: 1,768
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Eye in the sky wrote "Yawn... TT is back on the usual track of trying to wind us up."
Actually, he's pretty much correct, parallel headings does not always equate to parallel tracks
You are correct, the level request was almost never refused, then why did we have to waste our time making the request - especially as we were normally aware of the traffic ?
The reason for FL 290 is that it was requested from your side during the negotiations.
In any case, have you tried asking for FL330?
The proposed re-alligned UR12 will cross the Tacan Route about 20 miles E. of the bdy. but we are advised that LACC and London Radar will ensure separation of eastbounds - oops, sorry, a pig just flew past the window.
REFSO - EDDL +/- 160 nm agreed, however REDFA - PAM +/- 95nm and the traffic has to be 8 nm E of PAM at FL260 and with Amsterdam, clear of all the other traffic.

If you want EGLL inbounds lower, again ask for it, only don't forget during peak traffic we may have to co-ordinate with the lower sector.

BTW of course they come on top of one another, they are all routing via the same point REFSO, and are vertically separated.

edited for brevity and clarity

Last edited by Lon More; 28th Mar 2003 at 20:51.
Lon More is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.