bookworm wrote:I don't know who you mean by "the Great and the Good", but in case you misunderstand my post, I'm not recommending anything, I'm simply hypothesising why this is not an issue outside the UK.
BW you are indeed both Great and Good in the nicest sense and not alone in that respect on this thread. As such I do think you (and others) are being a bit naughty in responding to a problem by “hypothesising” that in other countries people get round it by breaking the law and then expecting people not to take this as a huge hint, if not a recommendation.
bookworm wrote:Why would they do that? They have no grounds for rejecting a VFR request, as the assessment of flight conditions is up to the pilot. They will only reject a VFR request if you seek to take-off or land in their CTR when the ceiling is below 1500 ft.
Maybe I have got this wrong, but I thought the current proposal was that SVR would be required to fly in a CTR when less than 1000 feet vertically from cloud, whether transit or landing. This would be the case with my example, which is why it would be rejected, as the example transit would be through both (which perhaps I did not make sufficiently explicit, sorry). Or is it worse than that: is SVR required, but only available in the CTR to landing traffic?
I am further confused by talk of ATZ’s, how are they relevant in this context please?
My humble contribution was prompted by PaulB’s earlier one on, I believe, the exact same issue but which got no useful response IMHO. The same has happened when this topic comes up on other fora. If I’m missing something, please straighten me out. How is this not a problem?
Anyone: how would you actually deal with the desired routing and conditions that I gave as an example? Elmsett - Northey Island - Sheerness - DVR? Cloudbase 2500 feet. No IR(R).
I believe at least one Southend ATCO is occasionaly here, how do they see it working?