Primarily for general aviation discussion, but other aviation topics are also welcome.
#1693189
James Chan wrote:
Do members of the Forum not think that air traffic control should only be within controlled airspace


Of course.

Bring on a little more Class D for Gloucester that looks a bit like a MATZ and surround that with a much larger bit of Class E that joins that with the ATS route system.

EASA’s ruling makes sense.

Just increase the size of the ATZ to 5nm radius; with ATC that effectively makes the ATZ controlled airspace.
#1693191
No thanks. No need to amend a botch with another botch. ;-)
Talkdownman liked this
#1693267
chevvron wrote:Just increase the size of the ATZ to 5nm radius; with ATC that effectively makes the ATZ controlled airspace.
James Chan wrote:No thanks. No need to amend a botch with another botch

In uncontrolled Class G airspace Class G ATZs are themselves uncontrolled airspace, regardless of any 'botch' or any apparent 'effect'. Rule 11 under incongruous ATC simply requires 'permission', not control or 'ATC clearance'. This absolute fatuous nonsense should be sorted out....by the Civil Aviation AUTHORITY.
#1694183
rohmer wrote:Can you give examples, please? It would be useful to know for future airspace design criteria. Thanks


Just in my Area:

La Rochelle
Bergerac
Brive

These aerodromes have ATC hours and the Class D is active during this time, usually when there are expected commercial flights, around 5-8 a day. Outwith this time there is no ATC, the airspace becomes Class G and communication is self announcement in French. Often there are NOTAMs reducing published ATC hours during the winter.

There are many other examples in France of regional airports working this way.

Regards, SD..
kanga, bilko2, rohmer and 1 others liked this
#1694220
I recall flying in to, I think, a Great Vintage Flying Week End at Kemble some years ago (all the way from Oaksey Park). Must have been sometime around 1998.

When it came time to leave there was a long queue of slow moving and frustrated aeroplanes heading for the active runway and a very timid FISO holding things up.

She would respond to a call of 'G-ABCD ready for immediate' when the aircraft at the hold saw a reasonable gap between landing aircraft, with 'G-ABCD hold'.

After a while she gave up and shut-down the 'service' (such as it was). Pilots then were allowed to use their common-dog and use the available gaps to get the hell out of Dodge - the back-log cleared in very short order.

And I don't recall anybody dying, not even once. And at that point that was a very busy aerodrome indeed with probably a movement every 45 seconds or so, including take-offs and landings not just a stream of departures.
bilko2, mick w, Katamarino liked this
#1694225
Although I don't know the exact circumstances of the above, all I can say is that AFIS is constrained by the CAA 'rule' that only one aircraft is permitted on the runway at a time, unlike with ATC where 'behind the landing (type) line up, be ready immediate' and 'land after the (type) ahead' are permitted.
I once tried to get the CAA to agree to some form of 'land after' procedure for AFIS in order to avoid unwanted go-arounds (eg slow aircraft which you can see will vacate the runway before the next aircraft touches down and you know that if it touches down without 'land at your discretion' the FISO must MOR it) but their remark was 'if it gets that busy maybe we should require you to provide ATC rather than AFIS' so I had to shut up.
User avatar
By bilko2
#1694269
People are very expensive.
IMHO in the future we pilots will need to be able do without ATC and make do with EC

If there is a "known environment", which everyone seems so keen on these days, why not give the information to the pilots and let them do the avoiding.
#1694278
CloudHound wrote:There's a Formation Aerobatics training group at Barton. Top blokes.

But they're not allowed to practice formation take offs.

If they're operating as a formation and using a callsign 'XXXX Formation' why not?
#1694312
matspart3 wrote:Won’t bore you with the finer details but AFIS isn’t an option for Gloucester, I investigated it several times in the past.

Basically, the volume and complexity of traffic rule it out.

Same at Wycombe and Redhill.
#1694361
chevvron wrote:Although I don't know the exact circumstances of the above, all I can say is that AFIS is constrained by the CAA 'rule' that only one aircraft is permitted on the runway at a time, unlike with ATC where 'behind the landing (type) line up, be ready immediate' and 'land after the (type) ahead' are permitted.
I once tried to get the CAA to agree to some form of 'land after' procedure for AFIS in order to avoid unwanted go-arounds (eg slow aircraft which you can see will vacate the runway before the next aircraft touches down and you know that if it touches down without 'land at your discretion' the FISO must MOR it) but their remark was 'if it gets that busy maybe we should require you to provide ATC rather than AFIS' so I had to shut up.



Understood, but that wasn't the problem in this case. She wasn't letting aircraft line up and depart in gaps between landing aircraft that were, to the requesting pilots, clearly large enough to safely enter, line up and take-off.

I watched it happen time after time.
#1694470
Amazing how the CAA manages to Gold Plate and complicate aviation in the UK.
It could be all very simple. Recently transiting through Troyes for Customs and a meal. We arrived while the ATC operator was at lunch. Normal procedure and promulgated.
The ATC reverts to Air/Ground quite safely while light aircraft and gliding operations continue. We had carried out an LPV GNSS approach and shortly after a comercial Charter B737 also landed off a GPS approach.
Troyes has LPV approaches for both landing directions. (Pie in the sky of course re the UK.)
At his lunch I politely asked I asked the ATC guy how many mid air accidents Troyes surely must be having due to his absence. He was mystified when I told him that many UK airfields close in the same circumstances.
PS no such related incidents he can remember.
Katamarino liked this