Primarily for general aviation discussion, but other aviation topics are also welcome.
User avatar
By Dave W
Another Airspace Change Proposal, this time at Keevil (North of Salisbury Plain, near Trowbridge).

A Temporary Danger Area, to be activated every now and again by NOTAM for Watchkeeper UAVs to operate into the SPTA permanent Danger Areas.

More detail here:
Keevil Airfield Temporary Danger Area Proposal - 47 Regt RA (2Mb PDF)
I wonder why it needs such a big circle. One would have thought it could have a much smaller one connected by a corridor to the SPTA.
By Lefty
Tim Dawson wrote:I wonder why it needs such a big circle. One would have thought it could have a much smaller one connected by a corridor to the SPTA.

Yes, I would have thought the could have just created a corridor between the existing ATZ and the military training area. However it is not that much bigger than the existing ATZ - 5nm Vs 4nm diameter.
User avatar
By Dave W
The TDA dimensions appear to be based initially on this (from the PDF linked in the OP):

Whilst the 2nm circle is marked on civilian charts, do the civ charts also incorporate the "...pilots are advised..." statement, or is that on the military chart set only? (The example given is from a military low level chart, I believe).

The original circle is then further expanded in diameter (and the centre slightly displaced) so that the TDA circle grazes the existing EGD123 Northern Boundary to enable an entry point onto the SPTA.
User avatar
By Dave W
The ACP does say that a DACS will be available from Boscombe unless the WKs are actually in transit, and if NOTAMed it doesn't start until (IIRC) 1100 Local, finishing at 1730 M-F.

I'm not sure how often EGD120 at Boscombe has been activated, but it's not been that frequently. This may well be similar.

This is what the proposed DA will look like in SkyDemon.

As Dave points out, their proposed circle only intersects D123 with a line less than 1nm across. If 1nm is enough of a corridor (one must assume it is, since their aircraft are not allowed out of the danger areas) then it's not clear why they want a circle 5nm across.

How many UAVs in this fleet of theirs are going to be using this proposed airspace?
kanga liked this
There's another detail point to be made, which Tim has highlighted.

Why is the upper level of the TDA based on a surface datum? 3,500ft altitude would be far more appropriate.

I wonder if the originator is an experienced aviator?

PS I am impressed that the originator of a nav product puts his supermarket in as a waypoint. And why not? ;)
XX liked this
From the links in the OP it seems to still be at Stage 1 in the ACP process (CAP1616).

Your post prompted me to look: It isn't until Stage 3 that it will open up for consultation.
Edit: Post corrected - I was initially looking at an outdated document.
Tim Dawson liked this