Please can anyone with local knowledge have a look at the issues that arise from the proposal to change the airspace between Glasgow and Edinburgh from Class E (that you can fly in VFR as if it was Class G) to Class D which will require the usual crossing clearance. This will be a very big control area filling the gap between the Forth and Clyde.
Advice will help me assemble the LAA response.
Details at http://www.nats.co.uk/text/251/glasgowconsultation.html
Thanks
John Brady
Changes to the Glasgow CTA
Moderators: John Dean, Moderator
-
John Brady
- Posts: 285
- Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2008 8:39 pm
Come on Chaps
Is there nobody who knows about this area of the country and can express an opinion? I thought that BB residents had an opinion on everything!
John
John
I use this area a little and can understand why there are few objections. Typical cloud ceilings are 2500 or less and the few times I have transited the area above 2500 there has been some heavy traffic visible.
More often than not getting that high is not possible. It is a big area and it will force transits to be lower all the time - but most of the time I have been through here at less than 2500 ft.
I would have thought that if Glasgow (who are generally the poorest of the Scottish Class D areas for transits) want to protect constant aspect approaches then 3000 ft would be more than low enough.
Pete Morris
More often than not getting that high is not possible. It is a big area and it will force transits to be lower all the time - but most of the time I have been through here at less than 2500 ft.
I would have thought that if Glasgow (who are generally the poorest of the Scottish Class D areas for transits) want to protect constant aspect approaches then 3000 ft would be more than low enough.
Pete Morris
-
John Price
- Posts: 192
- Joined: Mon Jan 07, 2008 7:27 pm
- Location: Eynsford
John,
A few thoughts of mine over the Glasgow CTA.
Since the CAA is currently reviewing all class E airspace with a view that it it should be discontinued. I get the feeling that NATS is getting its retaliation in first by going for class D as opposed to to finding the area downgraded to class G and losing all control.
They mention extensively that the problem is not being able to identify traffic in the area and at what altitude it is flyind at.
They mention that there have been no problems at present due to the ' proactive approach of NATS Glasgow ATC'. Is the anything to assume that this will change ?
I also find it amusing that safety has been so compromised that only an immediate change to their specifications is the only way foward.
They rearly are banging the safety drum loudly all the way through this doccument.
Perhaps a TMZ here would be a better solution with a base of 3500'
This would give suitably equiped aircraft a transit through the area at a higher level and ATC the ability to gather information on them, whilst maintaining access at lower levels for non transponder equipped aircraft.
The higher ground to the NW of the area up to approx 1700' does give only a small clearence between the ground and the base of controlled airspace (800'). Whereas it could be up to 1800'.
The problem with the area is that its a bit of a hang on from years gone by and Glasgow ATC have been using it for there own ends and now want it permanently, prior to it being downgraded.
On a broader note I think that since the mode S agenda did not go to plan for the CAA and NATS. I think that NATS may now go on an 'airspace grab' nationwide.
John.
A few thoughts of mine over the Glasgow CTA.
Since the CAA is currently reviewing all class E airspace with a view that it it should be discontinued. I get the feeling that NATS is getting its retaliation in first by going for class D as opposed to to finding the area downgraded to class G and losing all control.
They mention extensively that the problem is not being able to identify traffic in the area and at what altitude it is flyind at.
They mention that there have been no problems at present due to the ' proactive approach of NATS Glasgow ATC'. Is the anything to assume that this will change ?
I also find it amusing that safety has been so compromised that only an immediate change to their specifications is the only way foward.
They rearly are banging the safety drum loudly all the way through this doccument.
Perhaps a TMZ here would be a better solution with a base of 3500'
This would give suitably equiped aircraft a transit through the area at a higher level and ATC the ability to gather information on them, whilst maintaining access at lower levels for non transponder equipped aircraft.
The higher ground to the NW of the area up to approx 1700' does give only a small clearence between the ground and the base of controlled airspace (800'). Whereas it could be up to 1800'.
The problem with the area is that its a bit of a hang on from years gone by and Glasgow ATC have been using it for there own ends and now want it permanently, prior to it being downgraded.
On a broader note I think that since the mode S agenda did not go to plan for the CAA and NATS. I think that NATS may now go on an 'airspace grab' nationwide.
John.