The Greeks have always liked to be first at doing something. Now they’re competing in the subject of complicating airspace classification. It is ok for me to talk trash about Greeks as I am one and have the right to trashtalk myself. Also if you get offended by this, don’t read it.
Now to the age old question: If I fly within a TMA in Greece, what can I and what can I not do?
The unsuspecting VFR pilot would read AIP ENR 1.4 CLASSIFICATION OF AIRSPACE:
ENR 1.4.2.4.5: The airspace of TMAs is classified as class E, with the additional requirement of a continuous two-way radio communication for all flight.
Then the unsuspecting VFR pilot would read table ENR 1.4.1.1 for class E:
Class: E
Type of flight: VFR
Separation provided: NIL
Service provided: Traffic information as far as practical
Speed limitation (´): 250 kts IAS below 3050 m (10 000 ft) AMSL
Radio communication capability requirement: No (´´)
Continuous two-way air-ground voice communication required: No (´´)
Subject to ATC clearance: No
No at continuous two-way air-ground voice communication? We have our first contradiction with ENR 1.4.2.4.5 here already, but we give this one to ENR 1.4.2.4.5 as it is more restictive. Let’s see what those stars (´´) mean:
(´´) Pilots shall maintain continuous air-ground voice communication watch and establish two-way communication, as necessary, on the appropriate communication channel in RMZ.
As far as I know, there are no RMZs in Greece. None that I have found at least. Please let me know in case you know where they are defined since I have been contibuting airspace information to the Greek version of Open Flightmaps and I would really like to not miss anything.
At this point the unsuspecting VFR pilot would think that as long as he keeps continuous air-ground voice communication within a TMA, since it is class E, he needs no clearance and he can fly whereever he wants, as long as he flies responsibly and keeps separation himself of course, using information obtained through his mandatory continuous two-way air-ground voice communication channel.
Oh the unsuspecting VFR pilot would be so wrong.
A little further digging into the goldmine that is called Greek AIP reveals the following (thanks petakas!):
ENR 1.2.4.1: VFR flights, when operating above Greek territory at and below FL 195:
a) shall fly within the lateral limits of controlled airspace (airways, TMAs, MTMAs, CTRs),
b) shall follow VFR routes and altitudes where established, when flying within or into TMAs/MTMAs unless otherwise cleared by the appropriate ATC unit,
c) shall follow instructions and/or clearances issued by the appropriate ATC unit, when flying within or into TMAs/MTMAs where VFR routes and altitudes are not established.
What? Ok this is crazy, let’s take each line separately and try to analyze it:
a) Flight within uncontrolled airspace, e.g. class G, is not allowed… wtf?
b) TMAs that have VFR routes become controlled airspace? Class E requires no clearance for VFR, according to ENR 1.4.1.1, yet b) states the following: “…otherwise cleared by the appropriate ATC unit”. This is madness.
c) Again the same crap, class E airspace effectively becomes controlled for VFR flight since you have to “…follow instructions and/or clearances issued by the appropriate ATC unit”.
ENR 1.2.4.2: VFR flights, when operating above high seas but out of TMAs, MTMAs and CTRs at and below FL 195 are not obliged to fly within the lateral limits of controlled airspace.
High seas? The only thing high here is the person who wrote this line. I have never seen a chart displaying the boundary of high seas. Even if there is a chart displaying it (there is one probably somewhere and some guy here will probably try to dig it out to prove me wrong), there is no practical way for the unsuspecting VFR pilot to find a visual reference in the water.
Let’s conclude:
So why classify TMAs as class E if you are going to strip them of all the freedoms that class E provides? Classify them and class C or D and add additional VFR routes that do not require clearance. At least this way you would not have the unsuspecting VFR pilot assuming he has freedoms that he doesn’t have.
EDIT: I replaced starts with (´) as the former displays bold letters instead of stars.
says it all
Dimme wrote:
So why classify TMAs as class E if you are going to strip them of all the freedoms that class E provides?
So that you can provide Traffic Information “if possible” instead of always? Meaning, the VFR pilot has the freedoms of class D, but the services of class E.
I replaced starts with (´) as the former displays bold letters instead of stars.
To write a "*" verbatim, use the HTML escape *
Or
%*%
Dimme wrote:
VFR flight is not allowed outside of controlled airspace unless over high seas (or you’re flying high, apprehend this any way you like)
This AOPA Hellas tries somehow to demystify with paragraph 14. in www.aopa.gr/Info
Until a few years ago, Greece didn’t have any airspace classifications at all.
Until today, Greece does not have official VFR charts even though that is an ICAO obligation.
Thanks Dimme for pointing this out!
I have to admit, that it would probably have caught me out. I don’t tend to read the ENR section of the AIP of each country that I fly through, and I’d never have suspected that I’d need continious 2 way comms and a clearance in class E airspace.
How I’d be expected to always fly inside controlled airspace and remain VFR I don’t know. Presumably controlled airspace must cover most of the country down to a very low level.
Crazy stuff. Presumably it’s routinely ignored?
Most countries in “Europe” have no VFR charts – or no usable ones. Italy for example… I doubt there is much drive for making some nowadays because the vast majority of the locals in the affected countries fly only locally (or with transponders turned off, which means you won’t get busted unless you bust a CTR) and those who “go places” will be using one of the tablet products whose vendors have laboriously generated their own databases from the AIP data. For example I have EasyVFR on a tablet and I won’t be buying any VFR charts for anywhere.
And – yes this is off topic, and I hate to say this, after all my trips down there – Greece is finished now for GA anyway. The German takeover Fraport got things going nicely and then the local “Fraport is ripping everybody off so let’s do more of the same” airport management culture picked up where Fraport left off, so any port of entry will fleece you for some 3 figures. I paid €330 at Samos LGSM a month ago. The only exception is Sitia LGST (maybe €50) which is a very nice place but being at the far end of Crete most GA can’t reach it nonstop from anywhere useful. I feel very sorry for Greek pilots…
There was no issue with flying in Greece in the old days. How was this possible, with no airspace classification? Surely, a plane cannot fly in unclassified airspace. Not physically possible.
Peter wrote:
Most countries in “Europe” have no VFR charts – or no usable ones.
Which European country does not issue VFR charts? Useable or not is an entirely different question and a very subjective one, an official chart will at least be a clear reference.
Peter wrote:
There was no issue with flying in Greece in the old days. How was this possible, with no airspace classification?
Of course it’s possible but it was not ICAO compliant. Greece is a member of ICAO.
Am I the only one who has the feeling, that in those countries with a messy airspace (e.g. Belgium, France) VFR-flying is more or less about talking with ATC/FIS and have SD for planning and during the flight? That way not much can go wrong, especially when ATC also seems to be lost in some complicated airspace structure like in Belfast as Colm wrote. When flying VFR up high you are often treated like IFR-traffic after the second sector or so, at least in Germany.
