An interesting week

Jonathan Smith · Post by **Jonathan Smith** » Sat Mar 28, 2009 11:25 am

Q) EGTT/QRTCA/IV/BO/AW/000/030/5130N00003E015
FROM: 09/04/02 04:00 TO: 09/04/02 21:00
E) RESTRICTED AREAS (TEMPORARY).
RESTRICTION OF FLYING REGULATIONS MADE UNDER ARTICLE 96 OF ANO 2005
(MIL ACFT SHOULD COMPLY WITH JSP552 201.135.9).
AREA 1, NO ACFT IS TO FLY WI AREA BOUNDED BY 513547N 0001221W -
513505N 0001022E THENCE A CLOCKWISE ARC OF A CIRCLE RADIUS 6.5NM
CENTERED ON 513019N 0000319E TO 512507N 0000923E TO 512541N 0000828W
THENCE AN ANTICLOCKWISE ARC OF A CIRCLE RADIUS 12NM CENTERED ON
512812N 0002713W TO 513547N 0001221W.
REGULATIONS FOR AREA 1 DO NOT APPLY TO ANY ACFT IN THE SERVICE OF
THE MET POLICE OR FLYING IN ACCORDANCE WITH SPECIAL FLIGHT
NOTIFICATION 03/09 OR SPECIAL FLIGHT NOTIFICATION 36/09 OR
FLYING IN ACCORDANCE WITH A CLEARANCE FROM LONDON HEATHROW ATC,
LONDON CITY ATC, OR RAF NORTHOLT ATC IF TAKING OFF FM OR DEPARTING
FROM THESE THREE AERODROMES.
AREA 2, NO ACFT IS TO FLY WI AREA BOUNDED BY A CIRCLE RADIUS 14NM
BASED ON 513003N 0000146E, EXCLUDING AREA 1 DEFINED ABOVE.
REGULATIONS FOR AREA 2 DO NOT APPLY TO ANY ACFT IN THE SERVICE
OF THE MET POLICE OR FLYING IN ACCORDANCE WITH SPECIAL FLIGHT
NOTIFICATION 03/09 OR SPECIAL FLIGHT NOTIFICATION 36/09 OR FLYING IN
ACCORDANCE WITH A CLEARANCE FROM LONDON HEATHROW ATC, LONDON CITY
ATC, RAF NORTHOLT ATC, LONDON STANSTED ATC, LONDON LUTON ATC,
SOUTHEND ATC, FARNBOROUGH ATC, BIGGIN HILL ATC OR THAMES RADAR.
AUS 09-03-0263C/AS7.
LOWER: SFC
UPPER: 2500FT AGL

Q) EGTT/QRTCA/IV/BO/W/000/025/5149N00008E025
FROM: 09/03/31 19:00 TO: 09/04/03 08:15
E) RESTRICTED AREA (TEMPORARY). RESTRICTION OF FLYING REGULATIONS
MADE UNDER ARTICLE 96 OF ANO 2005 (MIL ACFT SHOULD COMPLY WITH JSP552
201.135.9). NO ACFT IS TO FLY WI AREA BOUNDED BY 515700N 0001700W -
515700N 0002600E - 513500N 0002600E - 513500N 0001700W - 515700N
0001700W. REGULATIONS DO NOT APPLY TO ANY ACFT IN THE SERVICE OF THE
METROPOLITAN POLICE OR FLYING IN ACCORDANCE WITH SPECIAL FLIGHT
NOTIFICATION (SFN) 03/09 OR SFN 36/09 OR FLYING IN ACCORDANCE WITH A
CLEARANCE FM NATS TERMINAL CONTROL SWANWICK, LONDON STANSTED ATC,
LONDON HEATHROW ATC, LONDON CITY ATC, OR RAF NORTHOLT ATC.
AUS 09-03-0263B/AS7.
LOWER: SFC
UPPER: 2500FT AMSL
SCHEDULE: MAR 31 1900-2100, APR 03 0615-0815

Q) EGTT/QRTCA/IV/BO/W/000/025/5131N00001W005
FROM: 09/03/31 18:00 TO: 09/04/03 07:00
E) RESTRICTED AREA (TEMPORARY). RESTRICTION OF FLYING REGULATIONS
MADE UNDER ARTICLE 96 OF ANO 2005 (MIL ACFT SHOULD COMPLY WITH JSP552
201.135.9). NO ACFT IS TO FLY WI AREA BOUNDED BY 513611N 0001400W -
513611N 0000000E/W- 512637N 0000000E/W - 512637N 0001400W - 513611N
0001400W. REGULATIONS DO NOT APPLY TO ANY ACFT IN THE SERVICE OF THE
METROPOLITAN POLICE OR FLYING IN ACCORDANCE WITH SPECIAL FLT
NOTIFICATION (SFN) 03/09 OR SFN 36/09 OR FLYING IN ACCORDANCE WITH A
CLEARANCE FM LONDON HEATHROW ATC, LONDON CITY ATC, OR RAF NORTHOLT
ATC. HELICOPTER ROUTE H4 CLSD FM LONDON HELIPORT TO ISLE OF DOGS
THROUGHOUT PERIOD.
AUS 09-03-0263/AS7.
LOWER: SFC
UPPER: 2500FT AMSL
SCHEDULE: MAR 31 1800-2359, APR 01 0000-0700 1600-2359, 02 AND 03 0000-0700

Q) EGTT/QRTCA/IV/BO/W/000/020/5130N00008W003
FROM: 09/03/30 10:00 TO: 09/03/30 12:30
E) RESTRICTED AREA (TEMPORARY) FOR STATE VISIT.
RESTRICTION OF FLYING REGULATIONS MADE UNDER ARTICLE 96 OF THE ANO
2005 (MIL ACFT SHOULD COMPLY WITH JSP552 201.135.9).
NO ACFT IS TO FLY WI 2.5NM RADIUS OF PSN 513030N 0000731W (CHARING
CROSS) EXCEPT THOSE IN MET POLICE SERVICE OR LONDON AMBULANCE
SERVICE OR ACFT APPROACHING RWY 10 AT LONDON (CITY) AD NOT BELOW
1500 FT AMSL EAST OF NORTH/SOUTH LINE THROUGH 513030N 0000514W
(LONDON BRIDGE). HEL ROUTE H4 AND NSF/ENSF (NON STANDARD
FLIGHT/ENHANCED NON STANDARD FLIGHT) CLEARANCES CONTAINED WITHIN
AREA WITHDRAWN FOR DURATION.
AUS 09-03-0216/AS7.
LOWER: SFC
UPPER: 2000FT AMSL

ffg · Post by **ffg** » Sat Mar 28, 2009 1:28 pm

That's pretty sweeping, isn't it?

Make way for the great and the good (and the others) of the G20...

Leesr · Post by **Leesr** » Sat Mar 28, 2009 9:03 pm

With your help, Jonathan, these rather large restrictions have been promoted over a wide GA internet audience (notwithstanding the NOTAM that the pilot audience should adhere to anyway). Thanks for your help in so doing.

Might one wonder in advance how many GA infringements will actually take place? My bet is on 12 GA, 5 Mil, 1 CAT.

I also note that no facility has been made for Stapleford...are they just expected to close down for the duration?

Rob L

Dave Hall · Post by **Dave Hall** » Sun Mar 29, 2009 12:41 am

Do you reckon it's to make sure they aren't interrupted in their meetings/sleep, or to stop terrorists from dropping in?

Bill Scott · Post by **Bill Scott** » Sun Mar 29, 2009 11:12 am

Dave Hall wrote:Do you reckon it's to make sure they aren't interrupted in their meetings/sleep, or to stop terrorists from dropping in?

Of course it will stop terrorists... I'm sure they read the NOTAMs and abide by them

Just the sme that our nuclear power stations are safe, we have impregnible 2000ft bubbles around them.

Mind you, I suspect that QRA South will be at fairly high state of readiness. What do we reckon on the time to be overhead London TMA from Coningsby? Or, perhaps they might bring some aircraft further down (Lyneham/Brize) for policing the skies overhead?

Better read up on interception procedures

Jonathan Smith · Post by **Jonathan Smith** » Sun Mar 29, 2009 9:46 pm

Rob L wrote:With your help, Jonathan, these rather large restrictions have been promoted over a wide GA internet audience (notwithstanding the NOTAM that the pilot audience should adhere to anyway). Thanks for your help in so doing.

Might one wonder in advance how many GA infringements will actually take place? My bet is on 12 GA, 5 Mil, 1 CAT.

I also note that no facility has been made for Stapleford...are they just expected to close down for the duration?

Rob L

Rob,

If you are referring to the 14 nm circle for the G20 then I believe the idea is to generate a 'known traffic environment' rather than close down operations. As the NOTAM says flight may be continued with a clearance from a number of ATC agencies, so I think there is no reason why traffic cannot access Stapleford or anywhere else in the outer area providing they are speaking to and identified by one of the agencies listed. Departures or circuit traffic at Stapleford could phone Farnborough, advise what they want to do, be allocated a discrete squawk and get on with it. AIUI

Brian Hope · Post by **Brian Hope** » Mon Mar 30, 2009 6:10 am

And what if they do not have a transponder to be 'identified' from? This is the usual overkill that does absolutely nothing to increase the safety of those on the ground whilst causing inconvenience to law abiding citizens.
Still, I expect it will all be worthwhile, they'll probably make themselves feel warm and fuzzy inside for a few weeks by promising millions in aid to eradicate poverty and then, once again, do nothing but quietly sweep it under the carpet and hope we won't notice.

Jonathan Smith · Post by **Jonathan Smith** » Mon Mar 30, 2009 7:11 pm

Brian Hope wrote:And what if they do not have a transponder to be 'identified' from? This is the usual overkill that does absolutely nothing to increase the safety of those on the ground whilst causing inconvenience to law abiding citizens.

You don't have to have a transponder to be identified on radar.

Brian Hope · Post by **Brian Hope** » Mon Mar 30, 2009 7:27 pm

Yes you do. Many wooden aircraft do not give a reliable trace on radar. I experienced this myself on a number of occasions, though I now have Mode A/C.

Jonathan Smith · Post by **Jonathan Smith** » Mon Mar 30, 2009 9:00 pm

Brian Hope wrote:Yes you do. Many wooden aircraft do not give a reliable trace on radar. I experienced this myself on a number of occasions, though I now have Mode A/C.

I bow to your superior knowledge

Nick Allen · Post by **Nick Allen** » Tue Mar 31, 2009 12:38 am

Many wooden aircraft do not give a reliable trace on radar.

All those billions of dollars the Americans spent on stealth technology...they should just have developed a 21st century Mosquito!

(And it would even have been made from a renewable resource...)

Brian Hope · Post by **Brian Hope** » Tue Mar 31, 2009 4:58 am

I tried telling them....wood they listen!