Fly310 wrote:
Is there a document for how the UK treats published approaches at a “non-instrument runway”(or similar scenario)? We are trying to get this sorted in Sweden but the CAA is very scared…
The answer is yes, but it is about to be simplified, so it may be worth waiting.
Initially it will be LPV to 500’/1500m, but I have no doubt that the industry will be pushing for a relaxation on that once it has bedded in.
There is a lot of experience in designing this (14 airfields in the UK) and the first validation (LNAV only at first, for technical reasons, sadly) is tomorrow.
I hope that, given the news, we will have a lot of actual experience of putting them in by the Summer.
There are consultants in the UK (I can put you in touch with one who is managing 5 projects) who specialise in this, so we should have a package that the Swedish CAA can just pick up and run with.
RobertL18C wrote:
Great, but allowing GPS overlay non-precision approaches would also be a cheap and very valuable contributor to safety. No airline would fly an NDB using the ADF for real, but on the FMS.
While I agree and have argued long and hard about this, you only need a ropy old ADF to make this legal, and fly the approach on the GNSS in reality.
Great Timothy, please do so via PM.
Talking of Grant Shapps, I wonder if he could get some movement on getting rid of the GAR form for CTA flights (or at least reducing the notice requirement to 0). Perhaps I ought to pen a snail-mail letter.
alioth wrote:
Perhaps I ought to pen a snail-mail letter.
I think he may be a little busy just at the moment (though, to be fair, I’ve had a couple of personal one-liners from him in the last 24 hours.)
I would imagine that it would be more fruitful to address your wishes through your membership organisation (AOPA, LAA, PPL/IR, BHA or whatever).
Having said that, I would be very surprised if Grant can just issue a Papal Bull the way he has for GNSS approaches, because the Home Office, Foreign Office, Border Force, Special Branch, Spooks, Uncle Tom Cobley and all will all have their reasons for resisting change.
I would imagine that it would be more fruitful to address your wishes through your membership organisation (AOPA, LAA, PPL/IR, BHA or whatever).
Hey, I have an idea. If EuroGA became a closed forum, €100 annual membership, we would be the biggest GA organisation in Europe by a large margin
Hmmm… maybe not. Almost everybody would leave and we would be spending much of the new income on constant recruitment drives.
Would not stop us claiming credit for everything that actually happens, however.
And this is the “European problem”. All the organisations fight each other. All are dominated by “colourful” individuals (loose cannons, quite often). As a result none of them ever gets anywhere near critical mass. Some have one or two hard working individuals who do good work.
I wrote to Grant Shapps and got a long reply from the DfT. Stuff you send to him does get read. Probably the best thing is to post and email and make it clear in both that you are doing both. Email is just too dodgy, with spam filters etc.
If UK airports are really to get
that will be dynamite.
That’s a brilliant idea. Leverage all the mutual goodwill and respect between the forum and the authorities
That is exactly what I was thinking.
Peter wrote:
BTW the map is truncated to not show the Alderney LPV. I think that was UK’s first one?
Hu? I see three GNSS approaches there off the Normandy coast that I would say are Alderney, Guernsey and Jersey.
Nitpick: Alderney is not in the UK ;-)