Menu Sign In Contact FAQ
Banner
Welcome to our forums

The Barton Interpretation

So a CTR is an ATZ, or the opposite, or not at all? Anyway, I would believe the detailed definition (in the UK) would be important to the matter.

Can’t find any reference to this in SERA at all btw.

Last Edited by LeSving at 07 Jan 22:32
The elephant is the circulation
ENVA ENOP ENMO, Norway

An ATZ assumes the Class of Airspace in which it is situated, in the UK commonly Class G.

This is not controlled airspace so if the ‘Barton Interpretation’ is an interpretation by them as stated by Graham then that is ridiculous.

Will be interesting to see what follows.

EGBE

Airborne_Again wrote:

different countries have invented their own.

Based on the quoted text above, it appears that individual airports are now writing (or trying to write) air law in the UK. Normally, only federal governments (and their department civil servants) are able to write air law. I suspect that a judge could throw this out as not having any any legal basis.

In Canada, many municipalities have tried to control the airspace use around airports and inevitably they are taken to court by COPA and lose because air law is federal jurisdiction. Same in the US.

LSZK, Switzerland

Yes, I was doing the very British thing of making light of and finding self-denigrating humour in an actually quite serious situation, at least serious for those in the UK where it appears that you can commit a criminal offence for “busting” an ATZ where there is no ATC to authorise anything…hmmm…Hitchikers Guide to Airspace anyone??

skydriller wrote:

Yes, I was doing the very British thing of making light of and finding self-denigrating humour in an actually quite serious situation, at least serious for those in the UK where it appears that you can commit a criminal offence for “busting” an ATZ where there is no ATC to authorise anything…hmmm…Hitchikers Guide to Airspace anyone??

TBH I’ve interpreted Barton rules as:
1. If there is an ATC-AFIS-A/G and they are on the radio – talk to them, get the information and tell them what you are doing.
2. They can’t tell to NOT enter the ATZ unless they are ATC, but if they tell you stand by – stand by. They might be on the phone.
3. If they did not respond, then all clear, just announce to the local traffic what you are doing, how and when.
4. And yes, PIC is ALWAYS responsible for collision avoidance and you always check outside even if under radar control.

Am I being unreasonable?

EGTR

According to UK AIP:

2.7.2 Aerodrome Traffic Zones and Notification for Rule 11
2.7.2.1 Aerodrome Traffic Zones (ATZs) are not included in the Airspace Classification System. An ATZ assumes the conditions associated with the Class of Airspace in which it is situated.
2.7.2.2 Every aerodrome at which an ATZ is established is notified for the purposes of Rule 11 of the Rules of the Air Regulations 2015. As a minimum therefore, when flying within an ATZ the requirements of Rule 11 must be complied with.
2.7.2.3 ATZs at civil licensed aerodromes are notified in the UK AIP within individual aerodrome entries. ATZs at other than civil licensed aerodromes are notified in the UK AIP at ENR 2-2.
2.7.2.4 Where the requirements of the Class of Airspace of which an ATZ forms a part are more stringent than Rule 11 then those must be complied with. Thus, in Class G Airspace Rule 11 will be the relevant requirement, but in Class A Airspace the more onerous requirements of Class A take precedence.
2.7.2.5 Aerodromes at which ATZs may be established are those which:
Are government aerodromes; or

have an Air Traffic Control Unit; or

have an Aerodrome Flight Information Unit; or

are licensed and have a means of two-way radio communication with aircraft; and whose hours of operation are notified for the purposes of Rule 11.

2.7.2.6 Pilots should be aware that in order to comply with the provisions of Rule 11 they must adopt the following procedures:
Before taking off or landing at an aerodrome within an ATZ or transitting through the associated airspace, obtain the permission of the air traffic control unit, or where there is no air traffic control unit, obtain information from the flight information service unit or air/ground radio station to enable the flight to be conducted with safety.

Radio equipped aircraft must maintain a continuous watch on the appropriate radio frequency and advise the air traffic control unit, flight information unit or air/ground radio station of their position and height on entering the zone and immediately prior to leaving it.

Non-radio aircraft operating within a notified ATZ must comply with any conditions prescribed by the air traffic control unit, flight information unit or air/ground radio station prior to the commencement of the flight with any instructions issued by visual means.

2.7.2.7 Failure to establish two-way radio communications with the air traffic control unit, flight information unit or air/ground radio station during their notified hours of operation must not be taken as an indication that the ATZ is inactive. In that event, except where the aircraft is in a state of emergency or is being operated in accordance with radio failure procedures, pilots should remain clear of the ATZ.

2.7.2.8 Rule 11 does not apply outside the notified hours of operation. Permanent changes or temporary extensions to ATZ hours may be notified by United Kingdom NOTAM. Pilots should exercise caution, however, since some airfields may continue to operate outside of those notified hours.
The elephant is the circulation
ENVA ENOP ENMO, Norway

arj1 wrote:

Am I being unreasonable?

No, but the rules are clear wrt an ATZ with ATC. The problem is that an AFIS cannot tell you to standby or anything else in the air. And as for A/G, they could be sat at home or in a cupboard under the stairs, hidden behind 2 locked doors at the very bottom of a flooded basement infested with crocodiles….

And in the case of Barton, one of the latter two are responsable for a high number of MORs that are getting pilots busted… This is a big deal.

My own view is that any controlled airspace should be controlled by proper ATC, which are sufficiently staffed to be able to manage it, including transits. When they are not there, then the airspace should revert to class G – And that goes for ALL airspace, not just ATZs.

Regards, SD..

Last Edited by skydriller at 08 Jan 07:30

LeSving wrote:

Can’t find any reference to this in SERA at all btw.

You’ll find it in the definitions. Then there is one reference to VMC minima. That’s all, as far as I can tell.

ESKC (Uppsala/Sundbro), Sweden

2.7.2.7 Failure to establish two-way radio communications with the air traffic control unit, flight information unit or air/ground radio station during their notified hours of operation must not be taken as an indication that the ATZ is inactive. In that event, except where the aircraft is in a state of emergency or is being operated in accordance with radio failure procedures, pilots should remain clear of the ATZ.

I have never seen this before. It effectively states that if you receive no reply on the radio (very common especially at A/G stations) you are banned from landing and can bugger off somewhere else.

Non-radio aircraft operating within a notified ATZ must comply with any conditions prescribed by the air traffic control unit, flight information unit or air/ground radio station prior to the commencement of the flight with any instructions issued by visual means.

I assume this hopelessly worded paragraph has omitted the word “or” between the words “flight” and “with.” It is hardly possible to comply with instructions issued by visual means prior to commencement of a flight.

So much of this stuff is carelessly written and wide open to misinterpretation.

Last Edited by flybymike at 08 Jan 12:54
Egnm, United Kingdom

skydriller wrote:

The problem is that an AFIS cannot tell you to standby or anything else in the air.

Of course if you call them and they are busy dealing with something else they can tell you to standby on the radio. I think what you mean is that they can’t instruct you to remain outside the ATZ or similar in the air. But if the rule is you must be in two way contact before entering, and need information directly from them to you, in practice they can prevent you from entering.

2.7.2.6-8 of the AIP quoted appear to be advisory – the AIP can’t make rules if Rule 11 doesn’t require it. Rule 11 really should be clarified given the ambiguity identified earlier in this thread.

EGTK Oxford
Sign in to add your message

Back to Top