Primarily for general aviation discussion, but other aviation topics are also welcome.
By Ibra
#1853138
rikur_ wrote:OP sounds a bit like requesting a MATZ transit and getting a response of 'Your MATZ transit is approved, not below 3000ft' ..... i.e. your MATZ transit isn't approved, you'll have to go over the top.
akg1486 wrote:Ibra wrote:
For VFR you have to clarify with a ATC for next handover before reaching zone boundary or ask to change frequency, I learned this the hardway, stuck at airspace boundary between Murcia & Alicante and between Cardiff & Bristol, in both cases, I got cleared hastly into airspace before getting thrown out of airspace on 90deg turns while going down like a brick...

I get the feeling that most VFR pilots aren't aware of this. Under IFR, the controller shall keep track of necessary future clearances, but under VFR it's up to the pilot to request a frequency change with enough time to reasonably expect to get the next clearance or time to take evasive action. It may vary depending on where in the world you are, but where I've flown (including a big piece of continental Europe) the ATS-unit giving you service normally prompts you to change. But if they don't, it's up to you.

I wasn't aware of the background on this. I was aware of the inconsistency that some days I'll get handover to the next unit, others get asked to freecall, and occasionally asked if I want a handover.

Leads back to a previous question - as a pilot is there any benefit of requesting a VFR transit, as opposed to an IFR transit?


If it's IMC, it has to be under IFR (or maybe SVFR for G-D-G zones)

If weather is sunny and back to back airspace above 3kft (e.g. Stansted & Luton, Bristol & Cardiff, Bournemouth & Southampton), I ask for IFR transits or don't go inside, usually it comes with handover

If it's Class G-D-G and sunny, I just ask VFR transit, it makes life easier for ATC as they don't have to provide separation...

You can't fly VFR or "IFR pop-up transits" for very long above 4kft in UK without hitting Class A at some point (you need IFR Eurocontrol FPL, airways join clerance preferably before starting the engine)

Elsewhere in Europe (except Spain, Italy, Paris), you can pretty much fly VFR on a straight lines if you turn up on at the gates at FL100 asking for VFR transit and saying you don't wanna go down, just claim there are one or two clouds bellow :lol:
User avatar
By rikur_
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1853162
Mike Tango wrote:The disadvantage of requesting an IFR clearance if it's a VMC day is that standard separation then applies between all IFR traffic. (In theory anyway) fewer aircraft fit into one piece of airspace if they are all IFR than if there is a mix of VFR and IFR.

Ah the nostalgia, I vaguely recall the last time I shared Doncaster's CTA with another aircraft.... ;-)
gasman, Flyin'Dutch', Pete L liked this
By AlanM
#1853165
David Wood wrote:Last week I was with a student flying a cross-country that involved transiting a block of controlled airspace (Class D). I'd warned the student that it was quite possible that that particular ATC might not let us through (separate issue) and that he should have a Plan B to route around.

As we approached he called them up on cue requesting a transit VFR. The lady's answer came back "can't give you a VFR transit, can you take an IFR transit?" We replied in the negative and, reverting to Plan B, stated that he would route to the east (implicitly remaining clear of controlled airspace).

Her subsequent response was puzzling on a number of levels (as an aside, I really wish I'd recorded it). The lady said words to the effect "Oh, if you're routing to the east then that's OK, you just need to remain clear of our ATZ [sic]."

I thought about this for a few seconds, trying to unpack what she actually meant by that. Mindful of the whole infringement hysteria I really didn't want there to be any ambiguity. So I called her and explicitly asked her to confirm that we were cleared through controlled airspace (CTA) on track to our destination not above 2000'. She said "Yeah, that's OK" or words to that effect. So, still scratching my head slightly, on we went and all was well.

OK, you could say, what's the problem? Well, from my perspective the problem is trying to unpack and explain this to the student (who might in the near future be flying the same trip on his own) in a way that equips him to deal with transits of controlled airspace in the future - and avoid infringing.

After all:
Although he made the correct initial call, at no stage did we have a specific clearance given to us in any recognisable format. I had to deduce it and then wring confirmation out of the controller. The outcome was a long way short of a standard-format clearance.
At no stage did we have a "you've entered controlled airspace, Radar Control Service." Yet we were definitely inside controlled airpace, I checked the Skydemon logs.
And the use of the term ATZ when I'm sure she meant CTR made me wonder if the good lady knew what either actually are.

There is part of me doesn't particularly mind this more casual approach to clearances. After all, on the continent they manage the whole process of GA in controlled airspace without making such a song-and-dance about it. But given all the hooohah about infringements in the UK I do think it's less than helpful if controllers don't play their part properly.

Anyone else had similar experiences?


It is hard to give a perfect answer without knowing the airspace or indeed the weather at the airfield (ie below VFR/SFVR minima at that airfield)
By Mike Tango
#1853178
rikur_ wrote:Ah the nostalgia, I vaguely recall the last time I shared Doncaster's CTA with another aircraft.... ;-)


In some airspace in days gone by the standard lateral separation for traffic at the same level was 60 nautical miles! :P

Indeed quite possibly still is, not sure what the lateral separation on the Ocean is these days?
User avatar
By PeteSpencer
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1853183
rdfb wrote:A few issues come to mind, which is why I haven't yet done it despite having an IR(R):

  • I have to consider the freezing level, which is often lower than where the controller might want to route me, so that has to be negotiated.
  • For a flight primarily OCAS, I often have to be lower than the terrain safe level, and therefore probably lower than the controller's minimum vectoring altitude. So IFR in CAS but VFR OCAS would often mean level changes that would also have to be negotiated.

None of these apply if I'm certain to remain VMC of course.


Freezing level also affects IFR flights if non FIKI.

I well remember having to bin an IFR flight planned at FL110 across the North Sea with my son to FD's Nijmegen fly in , when on the day (in July IIRC) the freezing level was at 3000ft.(yes, really) :roll:

Too low even for a stress free VFR flight

This necessitating high-tailing it to Stansted and hopping on a RYR to Niederrhein/Weeze.

Still made it to the party in time. :lol:
Flyin'Dutch' liked this
By johnm
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1853236
Gramet might well have shown you the picture and it could even have been clear up high :D
By Ibra
#1853244
rdfb wrote:[*] I have to consider the freezing level, which is often lower than where the controller might want to route me, so that has to be negotiated.


As a rule of thumb you can easily ask for lower down to airspace base or MVA/MEA or MSA but it's hard to ask for indefinite higher or start asking by +2kft increments (ATC feels you are hopless to reach the tops looking at your GS and RoC :lol: )

For flying in freezing bands, I find that flying uncontrolled IFR is stress free even in non-FIKI/non-Turbo, you just stay bellow airspace and handle it left/right or change altitudes yourself, or divert when you have enough or feel stuck

The same flights under controlled IFR will be a nightmare, especially when you are no clue where are you going and when you are climbing and what is under, for these I may need to rent one of those FIKI at 400£/h and shout on ATC to punch through on climb before it's too late or stay high untill your reach destination overhead

There are load of B737, ATR, TBM that have crashed after spending ages in the wrong place & altitude, in typical SEP (FIKI or not-FIKI) you have 2min max to do something about icing, it may **** ATC but no hard feelings: they fully understand we are flying mickey mouse aircrafts :D
User avatar
By PeteSpencer
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1853246
johnm wrote:Gramet might well have shown you the picture and it could even have been clear up high :D


Never , with my limited IFR experience, been tempted to fly up through the feezing level in the hope of finding better things especially for 90 minutes over the North sea :lol:

Still gotta get down again........................
AndyR liked this
By johnm
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1853301
AndyR wrote:Even in a FIKI capable aircraft it can get pretty serious, pretty quickly. Generally light GA is only equipped for light to moderate icing


Three things will generally stop me, serious icing risk, fog and crazy cross winds. :D
User avatar
By David Wood
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1853373
akg1486 wrote:
PeteSpencer wrote:Controller couldn't have been more helpful and unambiguous.

That sort of sums up more than 99% of all my encounters with controllers and other ATS! :thumleft: Any new pilot who reads this thread may think the opposite, so it's important to remember that the person on the other end of the radio is your friend.


I agree and I wasn't suggesting for one moment that controllers as a breed are unhelpful or incompetent; absolutely the contrary in my experience.

But in a way that's the reason why I posted the OP: because the interaction was so unusual. It wasn't a problem to me personally because I'm a reasonably experienced pilot and I was able to deduce/decypher what she meant and then double-checked it for my own protection. But because it was in a teaching environment it caused some problems in the sense that I had to explain to my student 'this is what she said; this is what she really meant; and this is how she should have said it.'

I wouldn't want any new pilot to read this and think that, taken as a whole, controllers aren't thoroughly helpful and professional. Would that all pilots were equally as professional... But I think that in the midst of the current infringement hysteria, whilst so much ire is directed at pilots, it is worth remembering that controllers don't always get it right either and that, if in doubt, it's the pilot's responsibility to check. He's the captain of the aeroplane and he needs to be 100% sure he understands what he's be told that he can or cannot do - and to challenge if he's not sure.
User avatar
By JonathanB
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1853381
Did you follow up with the unit?
User avatar
By akg1486
#1853393
@David Wood: I understand that it was an unusual occurrence and I'm glad you posted it. But a new pilot reading this thread (or many others!) could get the impression that poor communication with ATC is the rule and not the exception. So that's why I felt inclined to post.

Hopefully the lesson for those new pilots (and everyone else!) is that:

(a) ATC/ATS in general is professional and helpful: they are there for you
(b) you can't enter controlled airspace without clearance and as VFR-pilot you are responsible to request it
(c) if the magic words "cleared to" or "clearance in" aren't mentioned, you don't have a clearance
(d) if you are unsure, ask for confirmation: "please confirm that G-ABCD is cleared for zone transit from A to B at current altitude"
User avatar
By matthew_w100
#1853395
Mike Tango wrote:I’m only guessing, but I suspect there may be an agreement between TC Thames/SVFR (they look after the London Zone during the day) and Farnborough that traffic looking to also transit Farnborough CAS won’t be cleared past Ascot without either coordination or transfer to Farnborough. I think part of the London Zone is actually delegated to Farnborough in that area.

In which case though the r/t should be something like ‘hold at Ascot, for onward clearance contact Farnborough on…’, or if coordinated ‘you are cleared to enter Farnborough controlled airspace, after Ascot route…, contact Farnborough on…’

Ambiguity does no one any favours. I’d strongly encourage challenging ambiguous r/t or clearances immediately on the r/t, for both your own protection and to subtly point out to the controller that they should putting a deal more thought into what they are saying. There’s no excuses for it from the ATC side.


I think you hit the nail on the head. I wanted to exit via Woking, and my clearance to Ascot was "not above 1,200 ( :shock: ) so I didn't actually need to go through any F'boro CAS. But the controller was being perfectly reasonable to assume that I did need to talk to them. My mate following behind, who was heading east but north of Fairoaks was not handed over and cleared on to (I think) Epsom.

It was my first time through the Heathrow zone, and I was not expecting the abrupt instruction. So I think the "startle effect" had me floundering for the appropriate response and request for clarification. When a controller ends his instruction with a firm "good-bye" it does put you off further interaction! So I did as instructed and called F'boro (happily I knew the frequency and didn't have to look it up) and entered into negotiations with them. I was only a little bit past Ascot before we reached agreement as to where I was going next. I still don't know what I would have done had it been as hard to get through to F'boro as it had been earlier in the day. And I'm also unclear as to whether F'boro knew about me in advance or not, which confused my initial call to them.

As I say, it was all made worse by the startle effect. Next time I'll be able to anticipate better and handle the situation more comfortably. Every flight is a learning experience!
Mike Tango liked this
User avatar
By David Wood
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1853421
JonathanB wrote:Did you follow up with the unit?

I didn't. If I'd recorded it then I might have done so. But tbh in a busy day of instructing I've barely time for a cup of coffee, never mind a conversation with someone who may or may not have been on duty at the time and may or may not be interested in my call.