Volcanic Ash Restrictions

[Mike Cross]

Some of you will be aware of ATSIN 182 and some of you may have experienced some of the results during the last period of ash restrictions.

Following on from that I have on behalf of AOPA UK been in contact with the CAA's Air Traffic Standards Division with a view to clarifying policy and trying to ensure that practice follows policy.

AOPA UK was concerned that some of the wording in the ATSIN could result in unwarranted restrictions and withdrawal of services to non-turbine powered aircraft. In particular the following:-

6. Advice to ATC and FIS Providers
6.1 Extensive instrumented test flying throughout UK airspace has demonstrated that Volcanic Ash exists in multiple layers across the UK FIRs and that there are predicted to be some areas with higher concentrations that could pose an immediate hazard to flight safety. These areas (No Fly Zones) shall be contained within designated areas, the co-ordinates for which will be issued by NOTAM by the CAA.
6.2 ATC and FIS Providers should treat these areas as No Fly Zones for aircraft, within which services should not be offered; although assistance to enable a pilot to exit such an area in the most expeditious and appropriate manner should be provided.

Although termed "No Fly Zones" there was no prohibition on flying in them and no Restriction of Flying in accordance with Art 161 of the ANO was imposed.

It was not the intention that piston engined or unpowered flight would be restricted but the wording of ATSIN 182 might have caused ATSU's to refuse for example to provide clearances through Class D or to provide Flight Information services to gliders, balloons or piston engined GA.

As you'll appreciate the situation is very fluid. ATSD has noted my concerns and I can advise as follows:-
A new Statutory Instrument was signed yesterday which is designed to allow restrictions to be placed on flying as a result of ash contamination. It's not yet on the OPSI Website and I therefore don't know the detail.

It is likely that ATSIN 182 will be re-written in the light of the new SI and will provide better guidance that takes account of the effects of ash contamination on different power sources or on unpowered aircraft such as gliders.

Any NOTAM that need to be raised are also likely to be worded differently.

Mike Cross
AOPA UK

[Nigel Hitchman]

Hi Mike,

thanks for the info. Yesterday (Sunday 16th) I flew back from Breighton to hinton late afternoon. Transiting thru doncaster class D, no mention was made of the volcanic ash and they let me pass thru without hinderance even though their airfield was closed. However, when asking for transit of the East Midlands class D, they told me that their airspace was closed due to volcanic ash and they werent "allowed" to give me a clearance to enter. I questioned, that surely if they were closed, then their airspace reverts to class G, but they said that wasnt the case. They said that it was a CAA rule that they couldnt give me clearance, not their airfield policy (basically saying yes we know its stupid, but its the CAA not us!)

Hope we get some clarification out to airfields, it really needs to be the case that if they are closed all airspace reverts to class G and that no restrictions are put on piston engined aircraft and gliders.
Interestingly I was told that the parachute club were prevented from climbing into the airways last time the airspace was closed!

thanks
Nigel

[Rod1]

Mike, and AOPA have been very active on the ash problem;

“In the meantime AOPA UK has provided a mechanism for reporting incidents here.”

Are we involved and if so are we publicizing the fact? Large qty of GA is having real problems, the instructions to airfields are a shambles and many are saying NFZ=No Fly.

Rod1

[JohnMead]

ATSIN 184 published today is quite clear in exempting Gliders, Balloons and Piston Powered Aircraft operating VFR and NOT engaged in Public Transport, from the refusal of service.

[Rod1]

5.1 Extensive instrumented test flying throughout UK airspace has demonstrated that Volcanic Ash exists in multiple layers and that there are predicted to be some volumes of airspace with higher concentrations that could pose an immediate hazard to flight safety (NFZs).

5.2 ATC and FIS Providers should not offer a service within a NFZ unless the pilot is operating under VFR and the aircraft is a glider, balloon or piston powered aircraft and not operating for the purpose of public transport.1 This restriction does not apply to operational emergency services flights (e.g. Air Ambulance).
ATC and FIS Providers may also provide a service to an aircraft in the above categories within controlled airspace that is:

• operating under VFR within Class D airspace;

• operating under Special VFR in other controlled airspace provided that it is the only aircraft in that airspace block.
In the event of an aircraft inadvertently entering a NFZ, assistance to enable a pilot to exit such a volume of airspace in the most expeditious and appropriate manner should be provided.

[Nigel Hitchman]

thanks John and Rod, that seems to clarify things. Maybe I can charge EMA for the extra fuel I had to use to avoid their zone that they should have let me through!!!

Not sure why only one aircraft can operate SVFR in other airspace, seems a bit drastic, Particularly considering the LHR zone if LHR is closed!

But really lets hope we dont get any more!!