Primarily for general aviation discussion, but other aviation topics are also welcome.
#1851610
I came across this earlier via FB, so copy here for information.

Image

As an aside, it appears to make the LLR a de facto TMZ/RMZ. Is that new? (Edit: It doesn't do this despite wording in the Barton document - see below. Also, it's not an RMZ of course, because it's Class D)
James Chan liked this
#1851611
Looks like good reasons to go elsewhere frankly.

Why bother when at the end of all that there's just Barton?

Rob P
#1851624
Dave W wrote:And the Lake District, Cumbria and Scotland...

You brought that on yourself by living in the land of cream teas and pasties. Those of us domiciled in sensible parts of the country have no cause to crawl the Mancunian tunnel :lol:

gasman wrote:Spare a thought for us poor souls who have to transit the LLR N-S to reach the promised land.
:lol:

Thought duly spared

Rob P
Dave W, gasman liked this
#1851629
Or just call up and request for transit.... which is not hard given today's much reduced scheduled flights.
#1851660
Dave W wrote:I came across this earlier via FB, so copy here for information.

As an aside, it appears to make the LLR a de facto TMZ/RMZ. Is that new? (Edit: It doesn't do this despite wording in the Barton document - see below. Also, it's not an RMZ of course, because it's Class D)


Within the Ops Notice, the asterisk highlights that full details including non radio / no transponder arrangements can be found in the full briefing document - I'm sorry if that wasn't clear. :cry:

The Ops Notice was published in good faith as we wanted to highlight that Manchester have begun to apply the LLR procedures to the letter and have very recently started checking any aircraft not following the procedures, so we want to help avoid anyone getting caught out.

Of course its still pretty straight forward hopefully so as long as you squawk 7366 and listen to 1818.580 (or follow the procedure if not suitably equipped). :thumleft: Or as someone else suggested you can always ask for a clearance!
#1851661
Thanks @rightofway. The reason it's not clear is that it explicitly says that the following rules "must" be followed, one of the musts given then being to squawk 7366.

It turns out that's not in fact a "must", but that's not what the document tells people.
#1851664
Dave W wrote:Thanks @rightofway. The reason it's not clear is that it explicitly says that the following rules "must" be followed, one of the musts given then being to squawk 7366.

It turns out that's not in fact a "must", but that's not what the document tells people.


Thanks, I can see that could be misinterpreted if not read with the * bit, I'll get an amendment out for where its published just to be clearer! :thumleft:
Dave W, Danny, riverrock liked this