Primarily for general aviation discussion, but other aviation topics are also welcome.
By chevvron
#1782074
CloudHound wrote:Their Safety Case was predicated on Approach Control and at one stage they had controllers with ADI ratings.

As other applicants have AGCS that shouldn't be a complete show stopper but the SC will need to be rewritten and the CAA convinced that in the locality IAPs can be safely handled.

It's the CAA who require ATC to be provided at Booker, (several controllers a few years ago were actually NATS controllers working at West Drayton and doing Wycombe on their days off but of course they were all moved to Swanwick) but I suppose this continuing will depend on whether the gliding club returns.
As far as I know, the SafeSkys contract for ATC was for ADV/ADI rated controllers not APP.
#1782085
flyingeeza wrote:Good news indeed.
We do need to support proper airfields like Booker where a wider spectrum of aircraft types can operate from. :thumright:


'Proper airfield' is an interesting description.

Never anywhere else have I been made to feel so much like they were doing me a favour by allowing me to give them money in exchange for services.
Danny, stevfire2 liked this
User avatar
By CloudHound
#1782166
Just spotted an error in my original post.

I should have written... predicated on No Approach Control... as their application was under the old CAP1122.

As you say they provided a Tower service under direction from CAA.

Without the gliding club and potentially lower traffic figures, I see no reason why a recast SC wouldn't be acceptable.
User avatar
By James Chan
#1782177
As with Stapleford and Lee On Solent.
User avatar
By Marvin
#1782189
CloudHound wrote:Without the gliding club and potentially lower traffic figures, I see no reason why a recast SC wouldn't be acceptable.


The correspondence I’ve seen has the gliders operating from the South Side.

Between now and 31/07 new AGCS will be training their new procedures.

Fully open from 1st Aug.
By chevvron
#1782193
ArrowStraight wrote:If they do go Air/Ground it'll be interesting to see if they're allowed to keep their ATZ. If not they'll have a hell of a problem with overflights..........

A licensed airfield only needs a 'means of 2-way communication with aircraft' to be eligible for an ATZ.
By chevvron
#1782198
Marvin wrote:
CloudHound wrote:Without the gliding club and potentially lower traffic figures, I see no reason why a recast SC wouldn't be acceptable.


The correspondence I’ve seen has the gliders operating from the South Side.

Between now and 31/07 new AGCS will be training their new procedures.

Fully open from 1st Aug.

I thought someone said earlier they were working out a way for the gliders to operate north side of the runway although looking on satellite photos, there doesn't seem to be a lot of room there.
If the owner does want to operate gliders south side using only A/G, he'll have to devise some pretty robust procedures acceptable by the CAA to de-conflict gliders landing on 24 grass from aircraft taxying on 'Alpha'; on the other hand if they went unlicensed...; but could they have an iap then?
stevfire2 liked this
User avatar
By Rich V
#1782219
G MacDonald  wrote:Goodwood is A/G and has an ATZ.


No it's not A/G. Gwd is AFIS, and has been for a long time. Some years ago there was a period when A/G was used as default due to FISO staff shortages, long resolved.
User avatar
By xtophe
#1782296
The gliders no. They are silent or some old one might whistle a bit.
But the tugs have an engine and are flying a lot of small flights (7-10 mins) so they should avoid the noise sensitive areas and/or vary their climb-out and circuits.