[Mike Tango]

If an ANSP cannot turn a profit today, they'll have to obtain a loan like many other businesses, or if unable, dissolve and become the air-equivalent of Network Rail / Great British Railways.

Going somewhat off piste, sorry, but I think it's relatively important.

They already have, circa £800M I think in the form of drawing down on already existing credit plus at least one new loan.

What concerns me is that when times were good and NATS was essentially just paying down debt incurred at PPP and being a dividends cash cow to the tune of hundreds of millions for the government and a small number of airlines, there were still justifiable oft heard calls that services geared to the lighter end of the aviation spectrum were, being polite, rather woeful.

Now the company is facing arguably the most significant threat to its existence it has ever had, if it wasn't prepared to invest in services to light GA when it was in theory somewhat rolling in cash, what chance of any significant investment in the short to medium term for any desired improvements and is it more likely that the rather woeful current offerings will instead be further eroded?

Should the company ultimately fail and end up back in full government ownership, that is not any better a position as far as services to GA are concerned. It would still almost certainly equal no investment for that segment of the aviation spectrum, and as individuals you'll be further out of pocket in the form of more government debt than current circumstances dictate anyway. Effectively NATS would be costing you more for even less.

I would wish for a far better level of service to GA than the company has ever offered over the last decade or two, but I fear current circumstances are instead just going to give an excuse to withdraw even further from the already pitiful levels on offer and certainly provide the excuse for no meaningful improvements for the forseeable.

The most frustrating thing being, from the point of the PPP forward, it could all have been done so, so, so much better.

[Mike Tango]

RUBBISH!
This will increase controller workload by introducing unknown '7000' squawks into an area where the controller is trying to provide TS or even DS whereas if you do call even for basic, the controller can identify you (and verify your Mode C if you have it), so it's much easier for the controller to give a good service to everyone if these 'unknowns' become 'known'.
By all means set a 'listening ' code if there is one notified so the controller can attempt to contact you, but don't fly around in a busy LARS area on 7000 and expect the controller to pass traffic info or avoiding action on you to those who choose to request a radar service.

A bit harsh.

I'm with James to a degree. There comes a point where it's a Catch 22 on a busy day, the frequency becomes saturated and nobody gets a good service because nobody can get a word in.

Anyway, since Farnborough covered a large chunk of its surroundings in CAS I doubt they do too much DS outside CAS these days. So to a degree, at least in that part of the south east, it's possibly fairly irrelevant in that respect.

[James Chan]

if it wasn't prepared to invest in services to light GA when it was in theory somewhat rolling in cash, what chance of any significant investment in the short to medium term for any desired improvements and is it more likely that the rather woeful current offerings will instead be further eroded?

Mike - Without regulation, private companies would pay its senior executives fat wages, maximise dividends to its shareholders, and minimise all its costs. Effective legislation / regulation dictates what they can or cannot do.

Core regulated infrastructure in telecoms make such a case. The effect has been lower call charges, data charges, and roaming charges for the consumer whilst ensuring the line is of sufficient quality for speech and data.

So if the DfT mandates that the CAA has powers and oversight of effective airspace re-organisation and removal of wasteful fragmentation and duplicated systems/assets, then the CAA can tell NATS (or any ANSP) where those parameters and boundaries of that operation lie.

And hence any company that serves that volume of airspace will have to show they can meet standards of service provision. And if standards are not defined - well then it's obvious there is no incentive to offer anything beyond what’s being collected out of our nav charges.

[Mike Tango]

So if the DfT mandates that the CAA has powers and oversight of effective airspace re-organisation and removal of wasteful fragmentation and duplicated systems/assets, then the CAA can tell NATS (or any ANSP) where those parameters and boundaries of that operation lie.

For the regulated side of the business the DfT/CAA have been able to do that if they wished for many, many years already. The only real focus of both has been driving down costs/delays for the airlines.

The unregulated side is moving ever more quickly towards a lo-cost airline carrier style when it comes to contracts, one that is not conducive to non-core service level improvements.

[James Chan]

So some minimum standards need defining.

Driving down costs/delays for the airlines should in-turn drive down costs/delays for GA flights also.

GA becomes “core” if they fly (IFR) into and out of an aerodrome. Non-core cannot be neglected - otherwise the core operation will be affected: For example I do not expect to have to fly an instrument approach several times or get stuck in a hold because so many keep busting and infringing airspace.

For a commercial airliner these extra fuel and time costs are passed to the passenger. When flying non-commercially the pilot pays too.

[rdfb]

I only ever use London info if I am out of range of a LARS service. Even then as somebody said above I just check in and out again with nothing in between. I just like having somebody on the end of the radio in case of emergency and the need to MAYDAY. I Guess I could also just have 121.5 keyed in and save the hassle of Contacting somebody.

I used to think that, and I used to do that. And then I realised that in practice, London Information is so busy that I'd likely to have to wait for a gap to get a mayday call in. So I stopped. I get a traffic service if it's available (usually it isn't). Otherwise, if I have an emergency, [edited to add: after aviating and navigating of course] I intend to change my squawk first (as it's quick and I don't have to wait for anything), and then when I have time, switch to 121.5 quickly and use that. No need to have it keyed in and ready, since most radios have a function to switch to it quickly (eg. on a GNS430 you can hold down the transfer button).

I've also occasionally tried to use London Information for some actual information, and got frustrated waiting for the number of people checking in and out. So for me that's another reason not to use them to just check in and out.

[chevvron]

Anyway, since Farnborough covered a large chunk of its surroundings in CAS I doubt they do too much DS outside CAS these days. So to a degree, at least in that part of the south east, it's possibly fairly irrelevant in that respect.

I was thinking more about places like Humberside, Exeter and Gloster (sic) where they have radar based iaps but no CAS, plus military airfields which only have an ATZ - disregarding the fact they might have a MATZ which is Class G airspace.

[bilko2]

IMHO:

Legitimate reasons to talk to London Info:
Get weather
Get danger area info
Listening watch over water etc
Pan or emergency
Training (with the caveat that the instructor should point out what FIS is for)
Call destination airfield and tell them I'm late (not too often!)
etc

What this does NOT include is calling them because you have no one else to talk to and giving them detailed waypoint info for your bimble over the home counties and expecting to get traffic information.

[Iceman]

And, of course, you won’t get a FIS in the UK these days as it’s now a BS. The number of UK pilots that I’ve heard requesting a BS in France is embarrassing !

I always have box 2 on 121.5 MHz when not receiving an ATIS / VOLMET so that I can monitor it in flight and so that’s it’s only one short button flick away if I need it in a hurry for transmit (no good declaring an emergency on London Info as the first thing that they’ll say is call D&D on 121.5 whereupon you’d have to give all of your details again at a time when your workload will be high).

Iceman