The LAA Airspace Team is in discussion with the ATC managers at Bristol and Cardiff airports to see if there are any parts of the substantial CTR and CTA that commercial operations does not need and that might be given back to Class G airspace.
Recently Bristol consulted on adding a small amount of controlled airspace that was needed for commercial departures on to airway N864 towards BHD because the airspace they had was insufficient. So it is reasonable now to ask what airspace is no longer needed particularly now that Bristol Filton is closing.
Please give us your views on this and particularly tell us if there is a bit of controlled airspace that would be useful to you if it was given back as Class G.
Place your comments on this thread please.
John Brady
Bristol and Cardiff controlled airspace
Moderators: John Dean, Moderator
-
John Brady
- Posts: 284
- Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2008 8:39 pm
-
Nigel Hitchman
- Posts: 357
- Joined: Thu Jan 03, 2008 5:10 pm
- Location: Hinton in the hedges
Re: Bristol and Cardiff controlled airspace
As I mentioned elsewhere. Why does the controlled airspace need to be so wide?
Bristol now only had one runway 09/27, so why is the CTR sfc-6500 ft a circle? It should be a narrow rectangle either side of the runway, with straight in approaches and climbing straight out. Same with Cardiff.
Bristol now only had one runway 09/27, so why is the CTR sfc-6500 ft a circle? It should be a narrow rectangle either side of the runway, with straight in approaches and climbing straight out. Same with Cardiff.
014012
-
FlyOnTrack
- Posts: 142
- Joined: Mon Mar 10, 2008 2:47 pm
- Contact:
Re: Bristol and Cardiff controlled airspace
Note, Bristol have now updated their 'local VFR pilots' guide, last issued when Lyneham airspace went, to include Filton closing. It may also be re-issued in 2013 if/when any VRPs change. See hot news or the permanent links on FlyOnTrack http://www.flyontrack.co.uk
-
James Chan
- Posts: 89
- Joined: Fri Jan 04, 2013 2:49 pm
- Location: EGSX
Re: Bristol and Cardiff controlled airspace
Personally, I'd like to see airspace that takes on somewhat more regular shapes than one that has lots of little fillets / over-complicated base levels when there is no aerodrome or designated local flying area or similar underneath that space.
I think some examples of over-complication include the London City CTA and the tiny fillets SE and SW of the Norwich CTA. They add very little "value" to the flight and seem to do nothing but add to chart clutter.
This is because in such areas as there's not much to gain by squeezing underneath that space without talking to the controlling facility, and perhaps more to lose by the increased chance of an infringement if flown wrongly.
I think some examples of over-complication include the London City CTA and the tiny fillets SE and SW of the Norwich CTA. They add very little "value" to the flight and seem to do nothing but add to chart clutter.
This is because in such areas as there's not much to gain by squeezing underneath that space without talking to the controlling facility, and perhaps more to lose by the increased chance of an infringement if flown wrongly.
040161