Menu Sign In Contact FAQ
Banner
Welcome to our forums

UK CAA proposal to change VFR minima in class D airspace

Here:

http://publicapps.caa.co.uk/docs/33/CAP%201779%20SERA%20Consultation.pdf

local copy

In short: aligning with ICAO/SERA (abolishing the rather useful exception that <3000ft and <140kt, you needed only to be clear of cloud) and mitigating the change in our rather wet and cloudy country by relaxing the controller’s responsibility for separating SVFR traffic that is <3000ft and <140kt, allowing SVFR clearances to effectively replace the exception.

Andreas IOM

I’ve mentioned elsewhere that the changes proposed here don’t seem to actually solve the problem, but instead make the rules more complex.

Last Edited by James_Chan at 04 May 09:12

alioth wrote:

In short: aligning with ICAO/SERA (abolishing the rather useful exception that <3000ft and <140kt, you needed only to be clear of cloud) and mitigating the change in our rather wet and cloudy country by relaxing the controller’s responsibility for separating SVFR traffic that is <3000ft and <140kt, allowing SVFR clearances to effectively replace the exception.

What is the logic here, and what is the problem? Why is, and what makes the exception, useful in D airspace in the first place?

I can’t see any logic, especially as the 3000ft/140kt thing was never enforceable or even detectable unless you had the head of CAA enforcement sitting in the RHS.

BTW, CAA pdfs are best dropped into the forum (like images). Online, the half life of the usual CAA URL is measured in days

Administrator
Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom

The CAA proposal seems entirely reasonable and should have very little impact (if any) on VFR traffic.

ESKC (Uppsala/Sundbro), Sweden

In many countries they use the airport METAR to define whether VFR within CAS is permitted or not.

On the one hand, I find the suggestion sensible (alignment with international standards etc). On the other hand it will make my job more tricky as I’m required to undertake elements of it VFR, not special VFR.

Fly safely
Various UK. Operate throughout Europe and Middle East, United Kingdom

Option 4 has a big impact if the controlling airfield is on a hill, such as in Bristol, or if it is in a rain shower while elsewhere in the zone is clear. It also defeats @Peter’s point about enforceability.

There are not many topics on which I am Brexit, but this one is getting under my skin. Pilots don’t want it, ATC doesn’t want it, ANSPs don’t want it, the CAA doesn’t want it, the DfT doesn’t want it, no-one in the UK wants it; but Brussels says we have to have it. It’ll get worse when we have no vote at the EASA table.

EGKB Biggin Hill

This seems to have just come out

ORS4 1312

Administrator
Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom

I think it is just a renewal of exactly the same ORS4 that has been published several times, first as the ORS4 no. 1067 on December 9th 2014. There is another UK specialty about special VFR (first published as ORS4 no. 1119 on August 3rd 2015), and exemptions to minimum altitudes (ORS4 no.1124 of August 13th 2015). And lots of other UK exemptions from SERA depending on what the AOC says, or whether it is search-and-resque, or medical service.

Many of the exemptions arguably make sense but it does somewhat defy the idea of finally getting standardized rules of the air (the S in SERA). And these are EU regulations (not AMC’s) which generally means that they are hard law all over EU, but UK CAA does not really care about that? In any case, it is not easy for a foreign VFR pilot flying in the UK to find out what to expect in D airspace. I am a little uneasy with doing away with required distance to clouds in D airspace as there is no separation required between IFR and VFR aircraft according to SERA – although I have been told that such separation is actually maintained in the UK – which is maybe the rationale behind the exemption?

Last Edited by huv at 10 Sep 21:09
huv
EKRK, Denmark

There are all alleviations so if you follow SERA you’ll still be in the right.
Yes some units tend to operate the class D a bit like class C. They interpret the bit that ATC should help prevent collision rather strongly.

Does Danish ATC let you go through class D just saying: “there is a stream of IFR arrivals, just avoid visually”?

Nympsfield, United Kingdom
17 Posts
Sign in to add your message

Back to Top