This is funny… normally, one sees this the other way round, controlled airspace or restricted areas abruptly ending at a country of FIR boundary.
Interesting to note that, based on actual accident history, both the “controlled airspace” and “voluntary ATC in Class G airspace” seem to produce roughly the same level of safety for these small-ish airports
Silvaire wrote:
What exactly did they “hate”? Doing their job? Obviously most of the world’s GA operates most of the time in Class E without any problems.
They hated it because the whole area’s airspace was atrociously designed and allowed aircraft to fly in class E without any clearance right in the way of where IFR traffic was being vectored, the allocated class D was not properly sufficient to protect approaches on one side of the airport whereas it was on the other, the complex (badly designed) airspace also led to many technical infringements from aircraft thinking they were in class E and straying without a clearance into class D because it is/was very unclear where which bit of airspace started and stopped where. We are talking about a region here which has an commercial IFR airport (alveit a small one) that has absolutely no controlled airspace until a few miles west of it across a border a different authority grants it a few triangular pieces.
Peter wrote:
because VFR gets around all kinds of issues Cannes LFMD did that for years but it isn’t notamed currently
You will find similar NOTAM at Annecy or Chambery now. Because that’s their high season (ie winter ski).
Pirho wrote:
I used to fly both IFR and VFR around class E and I know that the controllers absolutely hated it (and I believe successfully campaigned to get it changed to class D). They used to treat the class E as if it was class D (or even C) as far as they reasonably could.
What exactly did they “hate”? Doing their job? Obviously most of the world’s GA operates most of the time in Class E without any problems.
Sure there is a long history of airport units disliking or prohibiting IFR cancellation – because VFR gets around all kinds of issues 
Cannes LFMD did that for years but it isn’t notamed currently (maybe in the AIP).
I used to fly both IFR and VFR around class E and I know that the controllers absolutely hated it (and I believe successfully campaigned to get it changed to class D). They used to treat the class E as if it was class D (or even C) as far as they reasonably could.
Pirho wrote:
Going back to the original question, I believe the rules that loco posted make it fairly clear but I do have quite a lot of experience of the exact same scenario, being told to standby when it was requested – I always did assume the VFR clearance was the cause in this delay
Except that you do not need a VFR clearance in Airspace E.
I do these IFR-VFR-IFR-Training flights pretty regularly and even during the VFR portion, where I voluntarily stay on the Radar frequency and the IFR squawk, the controllers ask you for headings or min/max altitudes to provide separation to other IFR traffic. So it’s kind of a “hybrid” operation…
Thanks to all who replied!
NCYankee wrote:
In the case of class B, a VFR clearance would be required, but there is no requirement for a VFR clearance inside of C or D airspace, there are just equipment requirements and communication requirements.
Yes, there is. In Europe (this is EuroGA, remember? ) and generally everywhere outside the US as the requirements are in the International Rules of the Air (ICAO Annex II).
Btw: isn’t the term “implied clearance” used in the US for VFR in class C and D?
Indeed, I believe the comms vs clearance for B C D airspace is a USA thing, in any part of europe I’ve been in a clearance is required for VFR in B C and D. The only place I’ve been which this doesn’t seem to happen in practice is Portugal where you have to file a flight plan for all VFR flights outside of the local area (I believe that’s the rule) and then you seem to be able to fly more or less as per your flight plan, getting a seamless service between Lisboa info/mil and whoever they transfer you to. I specifically remember flying from Cascais near lisbon to Portimao in the Algarve and when transferred from Lisboa info to Faro Radar who’s class C I needed to enter, they seemed completely baffled at my attempts to request a clearance and never gave me one, just telling me to continue.
Going back to the original question, I believe the rules that loco posted make it fairly clear but I do have quite a lot of experience of the exact same scenario, being told to standby when it was requested – I always did assume the VFR clearance was the cause in this delay. I often did this going to the Ise of Man from SE England and would cancel IFR at WAL VOR near Manchester and more often than not I was told to stand by, and then it would come back as “IFR cancelled at time xx:xx, cleared to leave controlled airspace by descent, maintain VFR”. I assume sometimes this has to do with how in class D IFR is separated from each other but not from VFR so maybe there are considerations about whether the controller can still maintained a properly separated environment within the units own rules.
I dont see how a controller could allow you to cancel IFR in CAS without being able to provide an alternative clearance, which might not be convenient or indeed, even possible.
