Are we entitled to CAS entry?

johnh wrote:

But that’s not really relevant to Europe since afaik there is no Class B, certainly not in France.

Only the Netherlands has class B airspace for TMAs, which are delegated to the military “Nieuw-Millingen” ATC. All civil TMAs are class A, except for Eelde and Beek (class D) up to FL65/FL95.

Peter if you read the original post which led to this debate you might remember that I posted a REX report of someone who had been denied a clearance to Class C airspace.
I pointed that French pilots believe they are entitled (perhaps I should have written “entitled to expect”)
The vast majority of my flights in France have taken me into CAS. I outlined to Johnh what I do, and have done for more than 30 years, what pilots I often fly with do and what we were taught to do to get our PPL.
There are usually ways round, under, over CAS and RAs if you would rather not talk to anyone.
I cannot remember, ever being refused clearance. I have, however been asked to keep south/ north of the runway or not pass upwind of a particular runway being used due to traffic taking off in that direction. I have also been asked to go to a VRP.
Most ATSOs I have dealt with have been very helpful although I cannot deny you get the occasional unhelpful one.
The difference between IFR and VFR in CAS (apart from rules in avoiding clouds etc in VFR are different inside CAS and outside) is basically, as others have said, the Flight Plan.
IFR you follow the plan ATS know you are coming and when and have taken this into account in their flow management planning.
VFR you are calling up a few minutes before you arrive and giving ATS an airborne flight plan. ATS will normally try (in my experience) to fit you in if possible. Again as has already been said, inside CAS you are controlled. Whether you are in IFR or VFR you can’t just go off route or altitude as you see fit. If a.towering cumulus springs up in front of you either VFR or IFR you can’t just turn left or right to avoid it and you can’t of course fly through it VFR you need to ask for approval to change course to avoid.
I am not sure why pilots have problems believing that ATS is really there to help you.

gallois wrote:

ATS is really there to help you

Come on @gallois, this was the thinking 40 years ago… it is the other way round now

I don’t agree. I can only write about my experience in France. I have always found them very accommodating and very helpful.

boscomantico wrote:

You must be very old.

Or I started flying when very young

Peter wrote:

VFR is banned up there by agreement.

Actually, not by agreement but by ICAO standard. (Also what Cobalt said.)

Cobalt wrote:

Back to topic about “right to access” – a very long time ago, what is now “class C” airspace in Germany were “CVFR” (Controlled VFR) areas,

That was the case when I began flying in the 80s. Not only that, but to enter the CVFR areas you needed either an IR or a special CVFR rating which was only available to German license holders. Common practise among foreign non IR-holders was to request a clearance anyway and if you sounded competent you would get it. I never tried before I got the IR and then I would fly IFR anyway.

IIRC CVFR flights were supposed to use radio navigation. (VORs)

Peter wrote:

The original discussion was regarding France and the claim that GA is entitled to a CAS clearance (except VFR in Class A, obviously). It seems obviously nonsensical, because if it was true then CAS would be meaningless.

I don’t see why it should be meaningless.

Controlled Airspace means that movement inside it and entry into it is under ATC control (with the exception of Airspace E).

It does NOT mean that ATC has the right to refuse access without good reason such as overload or safety. That is why e.g. in Europe we have airspace regulation which for IFR means slots and for VFR can mean refusal or delay entering a particular block of airspace.

So in general terms, yes, GA is entitled to operate in CA like everyone else within the framework of ATC and under their control, which at times can mean them being unable to accomodate you.

Silvaire wrote:

The reality is that ATC denial of access to VFR preferentially in Classes B and lower is just a symptom of lazy or inept ATC. Nothing else.

Seeing how particularly VFR is treated in the US vs Europe, I think that denials into classes B e.t.c. are comparatively rare and usually happen for good reason i.e. emergency or traffic overload. Inaptitude or laziness is something I would rather attribute to some airports in Europe who are carefully outpricing and PPR’ing GA out of their area with no good reason at all.

I’ve experienced some denials in Europe mostly in Class D around airports when they simply were too busy to accomodate a VFR crossing but rarely so.

Two kinds of pilots in this thread.

First kind:

And the rest of us reading your posts in bewilderment and laughing at your stubbornness.