Tue Jun 15, 2021 10:53 am
#1852932
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?
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?