Primarily for general aviation discussion, but other aviation topics are also welcome.
  • 1
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
  • 13
By AlanM
#1707072
So, using the vast evidence of The Flyer Forum, the shocking news is;

No units offer a 100% success rate.

No units offer a 0% success rate.

As most ATCOs will tell you, there are 1001 factors that impact on allowing access to a CTR.

Imagine my surprise!? :shock:
User avatar
By Full Metal Jackass
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1707074
AlanM wrote:So, using the vast evidence of The Flyer Forum, the shocking news is;

No units offer a 100% success rate.

No units offer a 0% success rate.

As most ATCOs will tell you, there are 1001 factors that impact on allowing access to a CTR.

Imagine my surprise!? :shock:


Yes but there’s a difference between a nearly 100% success rate and an apologetic controller and a nearly 100% failure rate where the controller is only too eager to make his distaste with GA clear - wouldn’t you agree?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
By AlanM
#1707082
Full Metal Jackass wrote:
AlanM wrote:So, using the vast evidence of The Flyer Forum, the shocking news is;

No units offer a 100% success rate.

No units offer a 0% success rate.

As most ATCOs will tell you, there are 1001 factors that impact on allowing access to a CTR.

Imagine my surprise!? :shock:


Yes but there’s a difference between a nearly 100% success rate and an apologetic controller and a nearly 100% failure rate where the controller is only too eager to make his distaste with GA clear - wouldn’t you agree?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Totally agree. And after 30 years+ in the RAF, NATS (LARS and LATCC) I have
Yet to meet an ATCO who’s distaste (your word) for GA translated to withholding access to CAS.
By AlanM
#1707083
stevelup wrote:
AlanM wrote:No units offer a 0% success rate.


Bristol might be getting close to that...


Not according to this thread!

Maybe someone could create a league table.......

Seriously; some GA pilots hugely impress me with their ability (solo in the CCT this week at Jersey had impeccable RT and spatial awareness) and on the same day I hear transit aircraft who read back three items in three transmissions incorrectly. Then switched frequency by mistake.

It is easy to name and shame a unit with no proof. Yet ATCOs never appear on here shaming G-xxxx and Nxxxx.

We realise people are human and life is just too short.
User avatar
By Andrew Sinclair
#1707084
TheFarmer wrote:Who did the RT? You or the student?


The student. We even got 2 x clearances from Bristol although I admit one was a departure clearance and the other a join. :cyclopsani:

I am not defending Bristol but I think there are certain times when a transit is more likely and some when not. At the moment with the summer season swinging into action there are lots more orange, dark blue, light blue and green tubes flying between say 06:00z and 09:00z, 11:00z and 13:00z and again 16:00z and 18:30z so those are avoids really.
User avatar
By flybymike
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1707095
The student. We even got 2 x clearances from Bristol although I admit one was a departure clearance and the other a join. :cyclopsani:

I don’t think zone clearances for departure and rejoin (for a based aircraft?) count as transits. :wink:
User avatar
By A le Ron
#1707098
I have a Bristol refusal rate up to 20%, compared with one refusal elsewhere in 1100 hours of flying. I have drawn my own conclusions.
By chevvron
#1707110
AlanM wrote:So, using the vast evidence of The Flyer Forum, the shocking news is;

No units offer a 100% success rate.

No units offer a 0% success rate.

As most ATCOs will tell you, there are 1001 factors that impact on allowing access to a CTR.

Imagine my surprise!? :shock:

Using RT instead of RTF being one :twisted:
User avatar
By defcribed
#1707131
chevvron wrote:
defcribed wrote:
Delta_Wing wrote:the tower was "far too busy" for a route overhead the field and to remain outside controlled airspace


I guess they have a different concept of 'busy'. Gatwick do it routinely while operating at full capacity with a constant stream of approaches.

The main problem of course is missed approaches by IFR traffic. If the missed approach, which may be because of a radio failure so ATC cannot 'modify' the standard procedure, involves a climb to the level you are requesting to transit at, that may be the reason for refusal.


Not sure I follow here? Are you saying they can't grant a transit that goes through the published missed approach procedure?

The problem with that idea is that the path of the missed approach procedure varies depending on where the aircraft is when it goes missed.

Every time I've crossed Gatwick I've crossed behind one landing and in front of the next landing, such if he went missed we would in theory conflict. Ok I would probably cross his path before he got there, but I'm still crossing the MAP.

I still don't get why Gatwick can do it routinely with a much higher traffic density but Bristol cannot.
By AlanM
#1707138
defcribed wrote:I still don't get why Gatwick can do it routinely with a much higher traffic density but Bristol cannot.


Maybe, just maybe, the perceived traffic intensity is a red herring.

Maybe, there are two or three radar controllers on LGW and one on BRS.

Maybe, there are three tower controllers at LGW and one on BRS.

Maybe, the lack of GA in the CCT and VFR departures/inbounds at LGW makes it less complicated and time consuming.

Trust me; just IFR traffic into/out of an airport is an absolute breeze compared to integrating IFR and VFR.
User avatar
By defcribed
#1707152
AlanM wrote:
defcribed wrote:I still don't get why Gatwick can do it routinely with a much higher traffic density but Bristol cannot.


Maybe, just maybe, the perceived traffic intensity is a red herring.

Maybe, there are two or three radar controllers on LGW and one on BRS.

Maybe, there are three tower controllers at LGW and one on BRS.

Maybe, the lack of GA in the CCT and VFR departures/inbounds at LGW makes it less complicated and time consuming.

Trust me; just IFR traffic into/out of an airport is an absolute breeze compared to integrating IFR and VFR.


Then Bristol should employ as many controllers as are necessary to do the job properly and facilitate crossings. Unless we start from the premise that non-commercial aircraft do not have equal rights to use that airspace then it isn't acceptable to effectively close the airspace to transiting aircraft on the basis of not having enough staff.

Is there any significant VFR/CCT traffic at Bristol? I thought the charges were prohibitive.
By callump
#1707163
Regarding Gatwick they still only have 1 Tower position and 1 GMC which are both extremely busy and 2 Radar positions (which may be bandboxed) but I think the reason it works so well is the routing (clearance limit and not above1500’) is very standardised and being on 6 mile spacing a lot of the time (1 in 1 out) allows for a crossing over the threshold after the lander. It does still increase workload slightly because of the extra RTF and passing traffic information to inbound but it’s not usually too onerous because there’s no visual circuits or anything like that.
Transits in the Radar environment tend to increase work load quite considerably if they are at random tracks and levels because each one can come into conflict more than once with the inbounds and other traffic inside CAS whereas if there is some standard VFR route which is de conflicted from inbounds/outbounds that makes it more efficient.
By AlanM
#1707170
defcribed wrote:Then Bristol should employ as many controllers as are necessary to do the job properly and facilitate crossings. Unless we start from the premise that non-commercial aircraft do not have equal rights to use that airspace then it isn't acceptable to effectively close the airspace to transiting aircraft on the basis of not having enough staff.

Is there any significant VFR/CCT traffic at Bristol? I thought the charges were prohibitive.


Yes. There should be enough ATCOs to facilitate no delay for any aircraft. But back in the real world........

And the next time you are sat on the tarmac with the crew saying we have an ATC slot, you may well see that not just VFR aircraft get delays due to ATC congestion, saturation and sector capacity. And you can bang on all you like about saying you (GA) are an equal, but the CAA and DfT will probably disagree. As does the CAP493.
Last edited by AlanM on Fri Jul 19, 2019 10:41 am, edited 1 time in total.
  • 1
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
  • 13