Primarily for general aviation discussion, but other aviation topics are also welcome.
By cessnafixedwing
#1718416
I was based at Wickenby for many years and did Old Buckenham numerous times.
But why cross the wash? Why not skirt around the coast instead and fit in a visit to Boston's lovely grass strip (610m), followed by a stop at Skegness . Both great fields, friendly folk and with Wickenby will make for a great day.
Enjoy!
User avatar
By Rob P
#1718467
That's ^^^^^ a very circuitous route to get to Wickenby from Old Buckenham. :scratch:
By cessnafixedwing
#1718470
Rob P wrote:That's ^^^^^ a very circuitous route to get to Wickenby from Old Buckenham. :scratch:



Agreed, but he did say he was "newly qualified" so I made the suggestions on the assumption that he might favour the buzz and experience of visiting new fields over the need to fly direct and in minimal time

Both Boston and Skegness are a delight to visit and neither is particularly challenging.
User avatar
By Selev
#1718476
cessnafixedwing wrote:I was based at Wickenby for many years and did Old Buckenham numerous times.
But why cross the wash? Why not skirt around the coast instead and fit in a visit to Boston's lovely grass strip (610m), followed by a stop at Skegness . Both great fields, friendly folk and with Wickenby will make for a great day.
Enjoy!


Yes, good idea, and i do intend to visit those airfields as well, TBH the reason i want to go to Wickenby first is to visit the museum as one of my distant relatives flew from there during the war. But if i can get an early day and a reasonably good wx day i'll ... well ...make a day of it :D
kanga liked this
User avatar
By Rob P
#1718506
Well he could go almost anywhere within the range of the aircraft and his ability to squeeze it in there. Are we actually going to list all the airfields of East Anglia and the East Midlands? In which case, I see your Fenland and raise you East Kirkby.

Rob P
BirdsEyeView liked this
By G-JWTP
#1718525
BirdsEyeView wrote:
G-JWTP wrote:Better call, is to ak Conningsby for a traffic service ( in their hours of watch), the'll then keep you informed of all the other stuff that's about.

G-JWTP


I do Coningsby frequently up to Humberside and the north. The OP says he will be going up through the East coastal side to Wickenby.

Asking for a traffic service when a MATZ is handling their own traffic is not the 'better' call out over to the East; unless for some reason you are transiting their overhead. Why on earth would you want to do this? Coningsby will often tell you if they are 'recovering' aircraft or there is likely to be traffic in their approach circuit. But you will likely be at 3,200ft + amsl and they at 1,000ft aal. If that's the case, you will have a lovely view seeing the 29 Squadron (XXX) typhoons below you...

Coningsby is very likely not going to give you a traffic service. They will tell you about all the stuff around if a conflict is likely on a basic service - it's what they do at Coningsby. They are a great LARS. Ask for a traffic service by all means, but expect to be given a basic.

:)


Genuine question:

Why would you ask a LARS controller for a basic service?

G-JWTP
rdfb, defcribed liked this
By chevvron
#1718578
G-JWTP wrote:
Genuine question:

Why would you ask a LARS controller for a basic service?

G-JWTP

By calling, you become 'known traffic' and can be identified if necessary in order to pass traffic information to the LARS unit's own traffic.
You can also hear other aircraft on frequency and build your own 'picture' of where they might be in relation to yourself.
Bobcro, BirdsEyeView liked this
By chevvron
#1718651
VRB_20kt wrote:BS in Lincs and Yorks in practice seems to be quite useful. It's not particularly busy and you get a decent situational awareness of those on frequency

Likewise with Farnborough/London LARS.
User avatar
By Charliesixtysix
#1718690
chevvron wrote:
Charliesixtysix wrote:Genuine question:

On what basis does (?can?) Waddington issue a clearance to operate above 1500ft aal within Wickenby ATZ ( see AIP sect 2.22)?

http://www.ead.eurocontrol.int/eadbasic ... -06-20.pdf

An LoA?


The AIP reference to requiring a clearance from Waddington apparently stems from the presence of a small part of their MATZ stub lying within the Wickenby ATZ. I have asked around of a local resident of Wickenby and it appears this is a legacy from some time ago that has fallen into disuse, but is still shown under section 2.22.

I certainly cannot recall hearing of a clearance to operate within the upper 500ft of Wickenby ATZ either being requested of, or granted by Waddington ATC - however, given the wording in the AIP, it does pose interesting possibilities of how any incident investigation might develop in the event of a problem occurring within that bit of the ATZ perhaps?