Transponder and aerobatics

Silvaire wrote:

Just out of interest why in either place would you be in mandatory radio contact when flying in Class E airspace? A country specific requirement for ATC control of VFR traffic?

Germany requires an ATC clearance for VFR aerobatics in class E.

Is that still the case even after SERA?

Yes, even after SERA the proposed amended national regulations of the air that are currently with the 2nd Chamber of the German Parliament state in § 14:

1. Aerobatics are only permitted in VMC and when all passengers agree. Aerobatics in microlights are not permitted.
2. Aerobatics below 1500ft AGL, above cities, other densely populated areas, human gatherings and airports are prohibited. The locally responsible CAA of the Bundelsand may grant exceptions.
3. Aerobatic flights conducted within the area of uncontrolled aerodromes require AFIS approval.
4. Aerobatics flights in controlled airspace (read: airspace E which is everywhere in Germany and required for all aerobatic flights due to altitude) and above controlled aerodromes require a flight plan.

And § 21 says that an ATC clearance is required before commencing aerobatics in controlled airspace.

The parliament’s remarks on §14 state that SERA.3130 leaves it up to the national authorities to regulate aerobatics.

I could never see why airspace E was called controlled airspace in a strict sense . This really only applies to IFR traffic , controlled anyway. But VFR traffic has no restrictions in E in at all, just visibility matters: You don´t need radio contact with ATC, no ATC clearance into E, no separation between traffic, only S-transponder on above 5000ft , but otherwise VFR s totally uncontrolled. It is nice to be in contact with FIS but does not help much for traffic avoidance. It is also nice to tell FIS where you do aerobatics. But to me “controlled airspace” seems debatable as far as VFR is concerned. So why should ATC clearance for aerobatics be required when E clearance is not ?? I believe tell FIS about your actions if you like and you are OK. Vic

I could never see why airspace E was called controlled airspace in a strict sense…

Well, the VFR weather minima are very different between controlled and uncontrolled airspace if nothing else.

Certainly distance to clouds is different in E , but what is “controlled” about that ? E is a mixed airspace with IFR controlled and separated to each other, but VFR is not and not separated to IFR. So IFR has no priority over VFR traffic and avoidance has to be kept by seeing VFR traffic, no ATC control here. Above 5000 msl we have transponder mandatory and that helps ATC, but gliders still don´t need that and could be found even in clouds. So IFR should be aware of that in “controlled” E . I could do all sorts of “air work” below 10000 ft when C starts, flying zig-zags or whatever, keeping clear of clouds as E requires. No clearance of ATC or radio contact expected at all. So why should I suddenly need ATC “clearance” for doing acro when I never need that for the whole airspace E when VFR ?? I don´t see the logic here. S-transponder on all time should be good enough for the purpose – and calling FIS is nice. I think the wording in the papers about controlled airspace is not sufficiently specific regarding VFR. Vic

Just define “controlled airspace” as “airspace controlled for certain or all types of traffic” and your problem goes away

How do you define “aerobatics” for the purposes of that German law?

SERA Article 2 contains the definitions:

‘aerobatic flight‘ means manoeuvres intentionally performed by an aircraft involving an abrupt change in its
attitude, an abnormal attitude, or an abnormal variation in speed, not necessary for normal flight or for
instruction for licenses or ratings other than aerobatic rating.

Does it define “abrupt” “abnormal” etc?

I can see they picked the wording out of FAR 91.303

but that doesn’t define the aircraft attitude, which is much more usefully defined elsewhere (can’t find it right now) as anything exceeding 30deg pitch or 60deg roll.