[TyroGyro]

G-xxxx, Go around, I say again Go around, Acknowledge
G-xxxx, Vacate the centre-line. Fly down the disused runway, Acknowledge
G-xxxx, Orbit right for two minutes over the water, Acknowledge

I had them all in succession....on my FIRST SOLO !

gyro...
PA28...
Embraer...

The student gyro drew the short straw.
We'd been told by the Tower it would be "quiet", and a good time for a first solo....

[Ibra]

Kudos to ATC for calmly dealing with numerous unbooked, late or pop-up requests for beacon slots and managing to accommodate them The hold seemed busier than Bovingdon on a stormy day!

Edit for those unaware: Cranfield has pioneered the 'remote camera' system whereby all views of the airfield and approaches are presented to ATC on screens.
There is (as I understand it) no direct view 'out the window'.
I understand London City has a similar system.

So you were told to GoAround while on ILS outside ATZ in Golf and you just obeyed and bent the knee? you could have informed that you want to continue up to 2nm and make the IAP fee worth it

At that point it was “Cranfield Information” not “Cranfield Control” ? joking obviously, I would have done the same, just pointing it’s information service provided by ATC outside ATZ, control service is given inside ATZ

[PeteSpencer]

Even if an A/GS gives me a ‘go-around’ I will go-around and ask questions later .

Read my post again , carefully with the Cranfield plate in front of you : with a coupla hundred feet to go before DA when I’d already been cleared for a low approach by Cranfield Tower I was well inside their sphere of control/ATZ so a ‘go around’ was an immediate no-brainer.

As my IR revalidation examiner said to me this week -if you get a ‘go-around’ instruction your first thought is to get away from the ground you are fast approaching with no delay : the reaction is instantaneous- arguing the toss comes later if at all.

So I’m afraid I don’t know what you are on about .

[Ibra]

I misunderstood “halfway through the GS descent” then, yes you have to comply without checking

[lobstaboy]

It’s information service provided by ATC outside ATZ, control service is given inside ATZ

Not so (but I guess you know that). Outside the ATZ once you have an agreed service from the controller that is the service you are on.

[Ibra]

It’s information service provided by ATC outside ATZ, control service is given inside ATZ

Not so (but I guess you know that). Outside the ATZ once you have an agreed service from the controller that is the service you are on.

Of course it’s contractual (just like advisories and you lose service if you do differently) but it’s “information service” nonetheless (Flight Information Service) this covers a bunch of stuff like Deconfliction, Approach, Procedural, Traffic, Basic in Class G, the “control service” only happens inside aerodromes ATZ and in control CTR or airspace (Echo for IFR)/Delta/Charlie/Alpha

You should only get “cleared to land” or “go-around” inside the ATZ, if you are outside in Golf you get “information” or “advisories”, it’s all written in MATS (Cap493) or one can start with ICAO Annex 2 & Annex 11…

Obviously, one should just comply with last minute urgent instructions (e.g. “go-around”) from whoever it is ATC/FIS/AFIS/AG in ATZ or outside ATZ it as it makes life easier, ignorance is a bliss sometimes

[Cub]

The ATZ is completely irrelevant to this debate. The ATZ subsumes the classification of the airspace it is contained within.

[Ibra]

The ATZ is completely irrelevant to this debate. The ATZ subsumes the classification of the airspace it is contained within.

True but that is not the point, you can be controlled in Golf tough at controlled aerodromes (= ATC ATZ) !

You are always controlled in ATC ATZ for both manoeuvring area, circuit and departures/approach paths inside the ATZ

Outside ATZ in Golf you are not controlled: IFR/VFR you are the guy owning terrain, airspace and traffic avoidance and separation outside ATZ, I am sure any ATC will confirm that if you ask them

[A4 Pacific]

As my IR revalidation examiner said to me this week -if you get a ‘go-around’ instruction your first thought is to get away from the ground you are fast approaching with no delay : the reaction is instantaneous- arguing the toss comes later if at all.

Your “IR revaluation examiner” may have an academic view of what the testing environment would like to see. The reality in the ‘real world’ may be subtly different.

Personally I would only fly an ‘instantaneous’ go-around either at decision height with nothing sighted, (very frequently practiced!) or if instructed to “Go-around NOW”. (Breakout instructions on a SOIA approach would also require swift compliance.)

At any other time, 5 or 6 seconds to plan, or even re-engage an A/P, if it has a G/A mode, are rarely wasted. Particularly so in congested Controlled Airspace around the world’s capital cities.

As you told us, you suddenly got an unexpected message to commence a GA. The ‘unexpected’ aspect puts us all in a vulnerable position should we feel the need to react ‘instantaneously’. All because it couldn’t be confirmed the runway was vacant!

Of course you did have the advantage of always planning to GA rather than land. But even then, had the instruction come at, above, or closely below GA alt. Or in an unusual configuration, then it may have taken a little additional consideration? Particularly in a high performance and/or complex aircraft.

I went around….
Sitting smugly and nicely lined up on the ILS localiser at Cranfield yesterday, halfway through the GS descent, I suddenly got this message from ATC .

When I got home I phoned to see if I had committed some transgression…

Turned out they had lost their ‘runway situation’ screens and although I had been cleared for low approach and go-around, they could no longer confirm that the runway was vacant.

I merely offer a nuanced view from someone who for years has striven to learn every trick available to avoid having to demonstrate any ‘superior skills’ I may once have possessed!

[Cub]

The ATZ is completely irrelevant to this debate. The ATZ subsumes the classification of the airspace it is contained within.

But that is not the point, you can be controlled in Golf tough at controlled aerodromes !

You are always controlled in ATC ATZ for both manoeuvring area, circuit and departures/approach paths inside the ATZ

Outside ATZ you are not controlled: you are the guy owning terrain, airspace and traffic avoidance outside the ATZ, I am sure any ATC will confirm that if you ask them

Ibra. I think you fundamentally misunderstand the purpose of an ATZ. Everything you describe relates to either the classification of the airspace you are operating within and/or the ‘contracted ’ service you are in receipt of via the U.K. Flight Information Services. The fact that you are either inside or outside of an ATZ has nothing to do with the ‘status’ of the instruction.

[Ibra]

Yes I agree one has to decouple ATZ from the service and the service from the unit

Ignoring AFIS/AG, what is the purpose of ATC ATZ? any reference on it’s definition?

The only reference that I have comes from MATS, it explicitly states that VFR/IFR can operate without clearance outside the ATZ, is that only for those “without a service”? but I fail to see how one can be controlled outside ATZ without CAS?

It’s one of those circular thingies

[Ibra]

At any other time, 5 or 6 seconds to plan, or even re-engage an A/P, if it has a G/A mode, are rarely wasted. Particularly so in congested Controlled Airspace around the world’s capital cities.

I agree, I always done it slowly, 6 seconds, SEP aircraft can GA without losing more than 50ft, it’s not 200T jets with load of engine & mass inertia

People exaggerate the risk of hitting the ground in pistons, in VMC I do go-around at 50ft it’s no drama, on ILS I never lost more than 50ft dipping bellow DH (10% rate of descent) even after taking 10 seconds to execute a go-around, but if mis-executed, it has a high chance to go t**s up…I just go 1,2,3,4,5 on power, pitch 8deg, raise gear/drag and relax while speed accelerate on runway heading trim before raising rest of flaps about 6s-10s before pressing whatever button in COM/NAV

I know in twins or jets examiners like to see action in asymmetric go-around but there is not much of tha hurry in singles but people have different perception of the risk of hitting the ground

[Cub]

Yes I agree one has to decouple ATZ from the service and the service from the unit

Ignoring AFIS/AG, what is the purpose of ATC ATZ? any reference on it’s definition?

The only reference that I have comes from MATS, it explicitly states that VFR/IFR can operate without clearance outside the ATZ, is that only for those “without a service”? but I fail to see how one can be controlled outside ATZ without CAS?

It’s one of those circular thingies

Perhaps we could turn the debate on its head? How can you be ‘controlled’ within the ATZ inside Class G. Your contracted obligations under U.K. FIS when operating inside an ATZ in Class G are exactly the same as outside of the ATZ.

[Paul_Sengupta]

but there is not much of a hurry in singles

There is if you're about to flare into a deer.

[PeteSpencer]

As my IR revalidation examiner said to me this week -if you get a ‘go-around’ instruction your first thought is to get away from the ground you are fast approaching with no delay : the reaction is instantaneous- arguing the toss comes later if at all.

Your “IR revaluation examiner” may have an academic view of what the testing environment would like to see. The reality in the ‘real world’ may be subtly different.

Personally I would only fly an ‘instantaneous’ go-around either at decision height with nothing sighted, (very frequently practiced!) or if instructed to “Go-around NOW”. (Breakout instructions on a SOIA approach would also require swift compliance.)

At any other time, 5 or 6 seconds to plan, or even re-engage an A/P, if it has a G/A mode, are rarely wasted. Particularly so in congested Controlled Airspace around the world’s capital cities.

As you told us, you suddenly got an unexpected message to commence a GA. The ‘unexpected’ aspect puts us all in a vulnerable position should we feel the need to react ‘instantaneously’. All because it couldn’t be confirmed the runway was vacant!

Of course you did have the advantage of always planning to GA rather than land. But even then, had the instruction come at, above, or closely below GA alt. Or in an unusual configuration, then it may have taken a little additional consideration? Particularly in a high performance and/or complex aircraft.

I went around….
Sitting smugly and nicely lined up on the ILS localiser at Cranfield yesterday, halfway through the GS descent, I suddenly got this message from ATC .

When I got home I phoned to see if I had committed some transgression…

Turned out they had lost their ‘runway situation’ screens and although I had been cleared for low approach and go-around, they could no longer confirm that the runway was vacant.

I merely offer a nuanced view from someone who for years has striven to learn every trick available to avoid having to demonstrate any ‘superior skills’ I may once have possessed!

Thanks for that:

Forgive me if I prefer to take the advice of a very well known and highly qualified and experienced IR examiner who I have known for ten years though many flight revalidations and whose opinions are valued by very many pilots of all competence levels, rather than that of a faceless forum pseudonym who I do not know from a bar of soap.

Just sayin'