Menu Sign In Contact FAQ
Banner
Welcome to our forums

Controlled airspace where VFR should be allowed but isn't

It would be useful to have a thread collecting data on this.

The bits which immediately come to mind are

  • French ban on VFR above FL120 in “Paris area” – here. This is notamed so while “illegal per ICAO” is at least “official”
  • Swiss ban on VFR in its Class C – unofficial AFAIK until you try to fly there

Other examples?

Administrator
Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom

Peter wrote:

Swiss ban on VFR in its Class C – unofficial AFAIK until you try to fly there

Did you try to ask for a clearance? ;-)
Seriously: From my experience you’ll almost always get cleared to cross Zürich TMA (as an example) without any problems.

Germany

Bristol NATS Delta (goes up to FL200)

Paris/Essex, France/UK, United Kingdom

Thomas_R wrote:

Seriously: From my experience you’ll almost always get cleared to cross Zürich TMA (as an example) without any problems.
Please send us some reports of such occurrences (where and when). I’ve always been refused to enter Geneva or Zurich TMA so far, no matter how I asked so far, except for the published VFR routes at FL100 through the Geneva TMA. I do know some success stories from colleagues, how flew through the Zurich TMA during the night (NVFR) or during the first (hard) Covid-lockdown, but that’s not for daily use. Even when talking to Alps Radar, they do send you down from the general class C below the TMA. No chance to get a TMA clearance on normal days, even when you get a clearance into general class C.

I would say, the Swiss class C airspace is even more restricted, compared to the Milano class A airspace, where I got a VFR clearance twice. Also clearances into the general class C airspace in Switzerland are extremely restricted during military operational hours, see also Peter’s video when he canceled IFR at FL160 or so, in order to do some orbits around the Eiger and Jungfrau.

Same counts also more or less for the class C Munich and Frankfurt TMA in Germany. No chance to get a clearance on normal days. The Germans do accept you above FL140 or so, while passing Frankfurt or Munich, but that does require a suitable airplane and oxygen. Other German class C TMAs are however no big deal, like Köln/Bonn. It always depends on the traffic of course.
Last Edited by Frans at 13 Apr 13:23
Switzerland

Frans wrote:

Same counts also more or less for the class C Munich and Frankfurt TMA in Germany

I’ve crossed Munich several times already VFR in Airspace C. Even in Microlights No problem. I noticed however that the rate of success is a lot higher when I filed a VFR flight plan where I indicated the route I want to fly. I had anything in between FL60 and FL100. Asked on FIS frequency for coordination and I’d say 4 out of 5 got a go. I don’t know how the current situation is after the new airspace coordination software got online maybe 4 to 8 weeks ago. I was told that they’d be far more restrictive now regarding VFR in C, regardless whether below or above FL100 – due to staff shortage. However, so far, I mostly got what I politely asked for.

Regarding Frankfurt airspace C it depends. In general it’s a lot more strict than Munich or others, however, again, I had my share of flights therein. Maybe I’m just lucky, but the Flight Information Service really tries to help coordinate something. And apologize if it’s not possible. (and by the way do assist if you’re about to possible enter unintentionally)

Germany

Barcelona TMA, particularly over the sea. Class D starts at 2000 or 3500 ft. The chart indicates a ‘VFR sector’ from AGL/AMSL upto the base of Class D. However, you do regularly get clearance for that class D, depending on which rwy is in use at LEBL.

Last Edited by aart at 13 Apr 17:46
Private field, Mallorca, Spain

I had anything in between FL60 and FL100

There is no reason why ATC can’t offer VFR clearance at those levels in Charlie? especially, if they can vector VFR & IFR well above transition altitudes and usually away SID/STAR platform, there is lot of room…

It’s VFR transits under 3000ft agl that are tricky, as start they need to hand you to tower if you are “blocking” the runway during the VFR transit

Last Edited by Ibra at 13 Apr 17:53
Paris/Essex, France/UK, United Kingdom

Frans wrote:

Please send us some reports of such occurrences (where and when)

Last Monday, Swiss General Class C at FL150 between Mollis LSZM and the Matterhorn. Both on outbound and return leg.

Friedrichshafen EDNY

That’s been pretty standard since I went down there in 2004. FL129 right across the Alps, across RESIA (Samedan). Good if there is no cloud, and no wind

The Q is WHY? How can these dodgy practices continue without anybody questioning it – apart from here?

Stockholm Syndrome?

The UK has FCS1522 for reporting refused transits. I don’t know how many reports go in but I do know that UK ATCOs who post on social media (mostly they are on FB, though in the past they were all over the two UK chat sites, under nicknames) really dislike this scheme, labelling it as “ATC bashing”.

Administrator
Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom

tschnell wrote:

Last Monday, Swiss General Class C at FL150 between Mollis LSZM and the Matterhorn. Both on outbound and return leg.
That’s not the Zurich TMA… General class C is indeed not a problem, as mentioned in my post as well.

Peter wrote:
Stockholm Syndrome?
Could be the case. If you look on Instagram for example, quite a few pilots seem to have a kind of Stockholm syndrome in their relationship with ATC. They’re often screaming like “Thanks to the Air Traffic Controllers of @ … for making this possible!!!!” , for actually pretty simple things, like a CTR crossing.
Last Edited by Frans at 13 Apr 21:13
Switzerland
56 Posts
Sign in to add your message

Back to Top