Menu Sign In Contact FAQ
Banner
Welcome to our forums

Controlled airfields without control zone / LFLG

We have been to the very nice airfield LFLG. The tower calls itself “Tower” and does issue landing clearances. But the field does not have a control zone. Is this a French thing or do other countries also have such arrangements? Over here when it is called tower is has at least a little control zone.

www.ing-golze.de
EDAZ

Yes. Several such airfields in France. Also Colmar, Lognes, Toussus, Biscarosse and maybe a few more.

Italy also has this in a few cases (Roma Urbe).

In the UK this arrangement is almost „standard,

EASA has ruled a few years ago that this is not in line with their guidelines and has to be eliminated in the future, but I don‘t know how far this has gone in the meantime. Of course, the UK can now ignore that.

Last Edited by boscomantico at 01 May 20:40
Mainz (EDFZ) & Egelsbach (EDFE), Germany

Toussus has IFR Tower ATC (3rd or 4th of France by number of traffic) in Golf without RMZ, ATZ nor Delta CTR…Grenoble does the same as well, it has IFR Tower ATC (PINS for helicopters) in Golf without RMZ, ATZ or Delta CTR

Near Paris there are plenty: St-Cyr, Chavenay, Lognes, Meaux all have VFR Tower ATC with RMZ though (Etampes previously), south you have: Le Luc Le Cannet, Cuers…in the other hand, Châteauroux has Delta CTR with AFIS and some “remote tower/approach”

Not clear what is exactly controlled by these tower ATC? my understanding (according to ATC), it’s runway surface, taxiway, visual circuit, instrument departure & arrival and short final bellow circuit height

PS: UK puts a nice ATZ in their VFR map but it is still Golf AD ATC zone not Delta CTR

ICAO puts “control zone” of at least 9.3 km (5 NM) from ARP on these

Last Edited by Ibra at 01 May 22:28
Paris/Essex, France/UK, United Kingdom

What is a “control zone”?

Administrator
Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom

CTR. I thought everyone calls it just control zone.

EDQH, Germany

You mean CAS?

You can have ATC (who thus issue a landing clearance) without CAS. Not just the UK.

Administrator
Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom

boscomantico wrote:

EASA has ruled a few years ago that this is not in line with their guidelines and has to be eliminated in the future, but I don‘t know how far this has gone in the meantime. Of course, the UK can now ignore that.

Well, then they should change SERA.5001(h)(2) so that it only applies to traffic on the airport manoeuvering area and not to traffic in the air! “VFR flights shall comply with the [requirement for having a clearance] … when forming part of aerodrome traffic at controlled aerodromes”

ESKC (Uppsala/Sundbro), Sweden

Peter wrote:

What is a “control zone”?

SERA definitions: “control zone” means a controlled airspace extending upwards from the surface of the earth to a specified upper limit; ICAO has the same definition. Abbreviated CTR. Used to provide controlled airspace for take-off and landing at controlled airports. Example: Gatwick CTR.

In this thread we’re discussing controlled airports that do not have a control zone.

Last Edited by Airborne_Again at 02 May 05:46
ESKC (Uppsala/Sundbro), Sweden

This is purely political because any CAS without radar cover must be operated procedurally. To operate it properly you need radar, not to mention the higher salary scale radar-qualified ATCOs, which dramatically increases the cost to the taxpayer. Therefore, where the traffic is “just GA”, the pressure is to remove the CAS/CTR because it is meaningless anyway.

In the UK, practically all CAS (and CTRs) is explicitly radar controlled. The UK could never implement a CTR for each ATC airport because the money would not come from anywhere. The UK could have never followed any EU rule on this, ever.

The CAA has recently moved to make ATZs (Class G) de facto CAS in terms of pilot sentencing, but that’s another story.

Administrator
Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom

Peter wrote:

This is purely political because any CAS without radar cover must be operated procedurally. To operate it properly you need radar, not to mention the higher salary scale radar-qualified ATCOs, which dramatically increases the cost to the taxpayer. Therefore, where the traffic is “just GA”, the pressure is to remove the CAS/CTR because it is meaningless anyway.

What is “purely political”? Of course you can have control zones with procedural control. With class D and prescribed VFR routes and holds (which many have) you don’t even lose much capacity. In VMC separation can also be done using visual observation of aircraft from the tower. (I’m dead serious.) The UK is unique in Europe in having lots of controlled airports without control zones. France has some, too, but every other country that I know of have control zones around every controlled airport.

ESKC (Uppsala/Sundbro), Sweden
20 Posts
Sign in to add your message

Back to Top