VOR's to be turned off 2011
Moderators: John Dean, Moderator
VOR's to be turned off 2011
This is from our friends at AOPA. I have to say in an environment where infringements are a problem this appears complete madness.
It's been indicated by the CAA that the following VOR's are scheduled for decomissioniong, starting in 2011.
BKY - Barkway
DTY - Daventry
INS - Inverness
MAY - Mayfield
BEN - Benbecula
DCS - Dean Cross
JSY - Jersey
MID - Midhurst
BIG - Biggin Hill
DET - Detling
LAM - Lambourn
OCK - Ockham
BNN - Bovingdon
DVR - Dover
LON - London
PTH - Perth
BCN - Brecon
GAM - Gamston
LYD - Lydd
SAM - Southampton
BPK - Brookman’s Park
GOW - Glasgow
MAC - Macrihanish
TNT - Trent
CFD - Cranfield
GWC - Goodwood
MCT - Manchester
TRN - Turnberry
It's been indicated by the CAA that the following VOR's are scheduled for decomissioniong, starting in 2011.
BKY - Barkway
DTY - Daventry
INS - Inverness
MAY - Mayfield
BEN - Benbecula
DCS - Dean Cross
JSY - Jersey
MID - Midhurst
BIG - Biggin Hill
DET - Detling
LAM - Lambourn
OCK - Ockham
BNN - Bovingdon
DVR - Dover
LON - London
PTH - Perth
BCN - Brecon
GAM - Gamston
LYD - Lydd
SAM - Southampton
BPK - Brookman’s Park
GOW - Glasgow
MAC - Macrihanish
TNT - Trent
CFD - Cranfield
GWC - Goodwood
MCT - Manchester
TRN - Turnberry
021864
-
- Posts: 357
- Joined: Thu Jan 03, 2008 5:10 pm
- Location: Hinton in the hedges
That will be interesting as all the arrivals and departures into major airports in the UK are based on VORs, including most of these. Will their associated DME also be turned off?
Although many airliners use GPS input into their RNAV/FMS systems, quite a few dont. I know for a fact that some 737s 757s, 767s and RJ100s dont have any GPS input, thus with no VOR/DMEs to update their position they will be "lost"!
Although many airliners use GPS input into their RNAV/FMS systems, quite a few dont. I know for a fact that some 737s 757s, 767s and RJ100s dont have any GPS input, thus with no VOR/DMEs to update their position they will be "lost"!
-
- Posts: 370
- Joined: Wed Jan 16, 2008 3:56 pm
50% of our 757/767s don't have GPS updating and are dme/dme (or vor/vor if dme is not available) based for position updating. The other half of the fleet uses GPS without alerting for position discrepancy from the IRS (the source of info for the map display) and they are not currently PRNAV capable. PRNAV gives 95% of the time an accuracy of within 1 mile and is accurate enough to allow you to perform noise abatement arrivals.
Without VORs to fly past, we can't easily fly. Besides, Cardiff needs SIDs and STARs to get us onto the airways unless they are going to provide radar vectoring to airways.
Looking at the list, many seem to be ones that are somewhat surplus to arrivals at the major ports and serve only minor fields or passing GA. In other words, tough luck small aircraft operator!
Without VORs to fly past, we can't easily fly. Besides, Cardiff needs SIDs and STARs to get us onto the airways unless they are going to provide radar vectoring to airways.
Looking at the list, many seem to be ones that are somewhat surplus to arrivals at the major ports and serve only minor fields or passing GA. In other words, tough luck small aircraft operator!
Rob Thomas
034851
034851
-
- Posts: 294
- Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 11:00 am
- Location: Bristol'ish
-
- Posts: 91
- Joined: Sun Feb 24, 2008 5:59 pm
- Location: Worcestershire
Steve
I was wondering the same about PPL training, having just spent weeks working out what I need to do for upgrade from NPPL to JAR PPL.
Doing VOR/NDB type radio nav is really all there is that matters in my case, so what happens in 2011 then?
At the risk of thread drift, the whole of GA training needs a shake-down to take account of GPS anyway. I know its only secondary, but is a major safety and infrigement benefit nonetheless.
Simon C
~~~~~~
I was wondering the same about PPL training, having just spent weeks working out what I need to do for upgrade from NPPL to JAR PPL.
Doing VOR/NDB type radio nav is really all there is that matters in my case, so what happens in 2011 then?
At the risk of thread drift, the whole of GA training needs a shake-down to take account of GPS anyway. I know its only secondary, but is a major safety and infrigement benefit nonetheless.
Simon C
~~~~~~
-
- Posts: 257
- Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 11:00 am
From the AOPA forum at
http://forums.flyer.co.uk/viewtopic.php?f=26&t=57866
Quote
'I tackled DAP about this. The consultation document is NOT on their website, but they intend to add it next week.
I have also asked HOW to respond to the consultation - specifically to whom and by what medium.
I was going to post all this once I'd had all the answers. The person responsible for the consultation process had the temerity to write to me stating:
"GA pilots operating VFR should be navigating by means of a map and not relying on instrument navigation aids." '
End quote
Words fail me!!!
http://forums.flyer.co.uk/viewtopic.php?f=26&t=57866
Quote
'I tackled DAP about this. The consultation document is NOT on their website, but they intend to add it next week.
I have also asked HOW to respond to the consultation - specifically to whom and by what medium.
I was going to post all this once I'd had all the answers. The person responsible for the consultation process had the temerity to write to me stating:
"GA pilots operating VFR should be navigating by means of a map and not relying on instrument navigation aids." '
End quote
Words fail me!!!
-
- Posts: 294
- Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 11:00 am
- Location: Bristol'ish
-
- Posts: 91
- Joined: Sun Feb 24, 2008 5:59 pm
- Location: Worcestershire
I agree with what Steve B and Steve N said.
I don't mind paying to train and test using nav aids, if there are nav aids.
I do mind paying if all I'm officially supposed to do is read a map, that CAA comment makes me cross.
In any case, I know GPS is used in real life.
Come on CAA, isn't Flight Safety your remit?
Simon C
~~~~~~
I don't mind paying to train and test using nav aids, if there are nav aids.
I do mind paying if all I'm officially supposed to do is read a map, that CAA comment makes me cross.
In any case, I know GPS is used in real life.
Come on CAA, isn't Flight Safety your remit?
Simon C
~~~~~~
-
- Posts: 190
- Joined: Mon Jan 07, 2008 7:27 pm
- Location: Eynsford
-
- Posts: 91
- Joined: Sun Feb 24, 2008 5:59 pm
- Location: Worcestershire
There is an interesting thread on the Flyer Forum about this.
Somebody sensible there suggests removal of legacy radio nav kit is actually a step forward. But only on the condition that 'modern' nav aids(come on GPS is getting on to be 20 years old now) are properly adopted, and that regulations and training is changed to reflect that.
Well, it seems sensible to me anyway.
Cheers
Simon C
~~~~~~
Somebody sensible there suggests removal of legacy radio nav kit is actually a step forward. But only on the condition that 'modern' nav aids(come on GPS is getting on to be 20 years old now) are properly adopted, and that regulations and training is changed to reflect that.
Well, it seems sensible to me anyway.
Cheers
Simon C
~~~~~~
-
- Posts: 16
- Joined: Thu Mar 13, 2008 2:04 pm
These are the VORs that have so succesfully prevented airspace incursions for many years?
GPS is a fact of life now and offers a massive improvement in navigation accuracy. I have used Pocket FMS running on a cheap Navman car GPS and it offers fantastic capability for very low outlay and running costs. If the CAA were really serious about preventing incursions then they would provide an airspace map free of charge for car GPS use.
You never know, it might give GA more freedom as it wouldn't be justifiable to have such massive areas of controlled airspace.
GPS is a fact of life now and offers a massive improvement in navigation accuracy. I have used Pocket FMS running on a cheap Navman car GPS and it offers fantastic capability for very low outlay and running costs. If the CAA were really serious about preventing incursions then they would provide an airspace map free of charge for car GPS use.
You never know, it might give GA more freedom as it wouldn't be justifiable to have such massive areas of controlled airspace.
This is from our friends at AOPA. I have to say in an environment where infringements are a problem this appears complete madness.
There are also those that have infringed airspace BECAUSE of VORs. If you misread or set the wrong radial then infringement is more likely to happen! They are certainly not guaranteed stop the unwary.These are the VORs that have so succesfully prevented airspace incursions for many years?
More "idiot proof" or "human friendly" are moving map GPS as long as the database and map are up to date!
Being a professional flight navigator I always use ALL available nav-aids from GPS to VOR to plain "Looking out the window"! I also remember the uproar when they took away Decca and Omega - we got along fine without these that had definately seen their day. I guess it is time to say goodbye to the VOR as well?
Finally, accuracy of VOR is quoted as ±1.4°. ARINC 711-10 requires a receiver accuracy of ±0.4°. So best case at 60nm from the VOR you will be within 1/2nm of where you think you are - given today's congested airspace that just isn't good enough for infringements in my opinion. Don't forget that, Military Selective Availability (SA) on GPS was ended in 2000, improving the precision of civilian GPS from about 100m to about 20m.
There are more GPS approaches in the USA than VOR approaches so I believe it is time for VOR to be phased out...that is my two-penneth.
Gary Coleman
031196
031196
- Nigel Bailey
- Posts: 21
- Joined: Sun Jul 26, 2009 11:36 am
- Location: Suffolk
If there is a switch off of VOR/DME then I think it will take many years to complete. Sending out a big list of VORs that they intend closing seems to me to have an air of shock tactics about it and for that reason I smell a rat!
Are we about to see a consultation period over this which will emerge with some way of grabbing money?
Or am I just being cynical?
Are we about to see a consultation period over this which will emerge with some way of grabbing money?
Or am I just being cynical?