In the thread about the autorouter boscomantico said:
I know…the foreigners… but it is also partly their fault. Some assume that if they’re going IFR, they don’t need to give a single thought to which class of airspace they’re flying through. That’s just not the way it’s supposed to work.
That has me confused.
I was taught that for IFR I will receive a clearance that has a clearly defined limit and is a path I am supposed to fly. During the flight ATC can modify any part of it. My flight will be under ATC control and I cannot deviate from what I’ve been told nor have I to think about airspace – except when VMC and I share the airspace with VFR traffic unknown to ATC.
From what I’ve read so far I understand that in the UK I may get a clearance all the way to my destination airport with IAP and if somewhere along the route I leave CAS, I need to know about that and request re-entry into CAS? That would go against what I was taught. Or does UK ATC only give clearances to some CAS limit and upon leaving one has to ask for another clearance for the next section of the flight?
Can this be clarified?
IFR is a set of rules. It doesn’t mean you get anything. In many countries you get a radar service and ‘automatic’ clearances, but this is not inherent in IFR. In the UK, you can fly IFR with no clearances unless you need them. What clearances are required depends on airspace class. Certain airspace requires an IFR flight eg class A. But IFR does not inherently require a class of airspace.
for IFR I will receive a clearance that has a clearly defined limit and is a path I am supposed to fly. During the flight ATC can modify any part of it. My flight will be under ATC control and I cannot deviate from what I’ve been told nor have I to think about airspace
Stephan,
just take this extract of the French AIP for example…
…and see how that compares with your above statements.
Half of the key to the “UK problem” is that the UK has a lot of Class G.
In Class G, no clearance to fly is needed (as per ICAO) and thus no clearance is obtainable.
Also Class G does not require a radio contact.
Unlike Germany and some other places, the UK allows IFR in Class G.
This means the UK Class G is very much a free for all. You can fly in IMC, non-radio.
This is great if you know what you are doing 
The other half is that the UK has its ATS (air traffic services) tightly compartmented, with the Class A (which is most of the CAS there) ATC not serving traffic in Class G.
I would say that the other half that Peter mentions is the key to the problem. IFR in class G is not a problem in itself (as long as you know that you are in class G, obviously). Sweden also has lots of class G, but it is (almost) fully integrated into to ATS system.
Recently, I went to a talk regarding SESAR (Single European Sky ATM Research): what struck me was that there are 38 countries involved which they wish to integrate into a single ATC system. I wonder how long this will take with each country having it’s own national pride and requirements, Class G but a typical example? I did ask what was the future was for the chaps in the UK who what to fly their Tiger Moth, Non radio and non transponder from one side of the country to other. Short answer – they better install a transponder!
I did ask what was the future was for the chaps in the UK who what to fly their Tiger Moth, Non radio and non transponder from one side of the country to other. Short answer – they better install a transponder!
I think Europe in particular has fallen into the trap of confusing complexity with progress, and I hope to live long enough to see it turn around.
Its odd, is it not, reading so many near-neurotic posts written in strident tone (although not so often on this more rational site), saying that ever worsting conditions are inevitable and the only solution is less freedom, more rules and more stress. I think there’s actually no reason for private viation to get worse in Europe except for the compulsion that it should. Outside of Europe, I’m seeing myself in something of a uniquely good time for private ownership and private flying, over a period of maybe 30 years that started in 2000. Nice planes are becoming more and more affordable due to demographics, fuel prices although certainly high are not outrageous when taxed normally, and stuff like GPS is making either VFR or IFR navigation ridiculously easy in comparison to the past. I just see no reason to intellectually cower under government and take the position that complexity and restriction is somehow necessary, forced change for the worse is inevitable, and you must comply. That’s actually the opposite of what 38 countries agreeing to a few, basic rules could and should achieve very rapidly. The only problem Is the bureaucrats, for whom the average guy has developed unhealthy respect, who have not been properly motivated to understand that basic rules and basic infrastructure are the answer. Defining how people in 38 countries must tie their shoe laces is not the answer. Perhaps some day they or their descendants will learn through their failure.
If only those same EU bureaucrats spent 1/2 the money they waste on ‘shoe lace uniformity’ and theatrical social debate on radar, ADS-B, frequency allocations, uniform EU-wide airspace layout and real international infrastructure. And then left people alone to tie their shoe laces like they always have – for instance flying through widespread Class E controlled airspace with no transponder and no radio contact if that’s what they want to do.
I think Europe in particular has fallen into the trap of confusing complexity with progress, and I hope to live long enough to see it turn around.
Eurocontrol has 39 member states which are all fully sovereign countries with over 100 years of aviation history and the procedures that come with it and — very important — their own military with its influence and requirements. All agreements have to be approved by every member state, there is no majority vote. The result of that is a compromise that makes every country equally happy (or equally unhappy). Whenever you want to change something in such a setup, you have to make sure you’re not taking anything from a member state. The logical consequence is complexity.
In the US you have one FAA, one military and one government. That makes things a lot easier. Diversity is Europe’s weakness and Europe’s strength. Looking it how “easy” it is to fly between the US and Canada, I have to say that Europe has come a long way. Canada and the US have a lot more in common than e.g. Portugal and Poland and yet I can fly between those two countries without any real effort or formality (a flight plan for SAR purposes which takes 3 minutes and is free of charge and not even required in every case). My motivation for a PPL was to travel to places and I have ca. 10 foreign cultures within 2h of flying time, a pleasure I don’t find in the US.
Everything comes at a price. Whether that price is sometimes too high is debatable.
I would say that the other half that Peter mentions is the key to the problem. IFR in class G is not a problem in itself (as long as you know that you are in class G, obviously). Sweden also has lots of class G, but it is (almost) fully integrated into to ATS system.
There is no issue whatever with IFR in G.
The issue is in the context of automatic Eurocontrol IFR route generation and the implicit expectation (as per “classical” worldwide IFR) that you can collect your departure clearance, take off, fly the route (assisted by ATC along the way), fly the arrival, and land.
The UK has a super airspace system for GA (you can fly basically anywhere in Class G, non radio, non transponder (I don’t think that one is particularly “socially responsible”, actually, but lots of people seem to be proud of it) and I use that airspace all the time, often non-radio.
BUT the UK does not have an airspace system which facilitates the “classical” IFR flight, below oxygen levels. The UK has broken its airspace into two pretty well watertight compartments:
The two are deliberately rigidly separated. This is probably a result of funding issues, cost recovery, and other politics like that.
ATC services in CAS are very well organised, very professional, and are funded by the 2000kg+ enroute charges (and maybe stuff like big airport landing fees?).
It is tempting to say that ATC services in Class G (ATSOCAS) don’t officially exist but the govt has set up a number of radar equipped units which do provide various levels of service, which vary according how how much the sun shines (if it shines a lot you often can’t get a service). Most of these have a military-support purpose originally and probably still do that (on UHF I guess). I think it’s fair to say that today the main reason for the “popular GA” units like Farnborough Radar is to keep a lid on the large number of serious CAS busts (a few hundred a year) which shut down ops at major airports. Nobody pretends to be providing a “service to help GA” and indeed on any nice day you probably can’t get it. On top of this there is the FIS which is an ICAO obligation (even the Peoples’ Republic of Upper Volta has to provide an FIS) and this is done (in the south) by London Information, which has no official radar (they do have screens but aren’t ATCOs and especially aren’t radar ATCO pay grade, so they aren’t allowed to say anything on the radio suggesting they can see you, so London Info’s usefulness is really just for collecting IFR clearances from London Control, making Mayday calls, and Ryanair getting weather
So, the result is that flying “classical” IFR within the UK, with a Class G departure, involves flying “on your own” for a bit, and then calling up say London Control (via London Information, if the departure airfield didn’t give you the provisional departure clearance) and they will clear you into CAS and after that it works fine. This old writeup describes the procedure in detail, if departing from an airfield which does phone up London Control for you.
The issue discussed earlier is that the UK has so much Class G, and the Class A bases are in places so high (say FL145) that most flights across the UK at non oxygen altitudes will pass in and out of CAS, and since London Control don’t handle Class G traffic (generally) they will either throw away the flight plan the moment they get it from Eurocontrol, or they provide a service in CAS for the initial part of the flight and when you exit CAS to spend the next 100nm in Class G then will likely dump you to some local unit. And at that point your IFR clearance is gone for ever so even though your filed route re-enters CAS later on, you cannot continue the flight as filed. You are now “on your own” and have to remain OCAS from now on. It is this that creates havoc for pilots (especially foreign pilots) who are filing and flying with the expectation of “classical IFR” with a continuous IFR clearance. OK, a smart arse can say “Class G is not capable of supporting a clearance” which is true but the pilot is obviously entitled to be able to recover his original IFR clearance instantly at the end of the Class G section.
In practice the UK does make it work to some degree, but once you drop off London Control you end up working a mishmash of services, working frantically on the phone ahead of you to negotiate a transit of the upcoming bit of CAS and then transferring you, but it is definite that your implicit IFR clearance is gone for ever. From now on, every bit of CAS needs a separate and explicit clearance. That is, unless somebody can negotiate a re-entry into the Class A for you (only London Info, and a few of the radar units can do that) and then you are back with London Control and all the angels are singing. In rare cases, you can get a quick transit clearance of a piece of Class A (an airway e.g.) from a unit other than London Control.
A certain amount of commercial traffic flies in Class G – not all airports serving 737/Airbus traffic have CAS. These flights normally make arrangements for a continuous radar service however, and their saving grace is that in the UK almost nobody flies above about 3000ft and ~95% of traffic is at 1500ft or below.
The UK is not the only country where “classical IFR” needs oxygen levels, and my example of Cannes/Nice in France posted on the other thread is one example.
In Europe, all airspace is “owned” by the military and the civilians get what is left. This much is obvious from one look at any airspace map. The military don’t use most of what they have but guard it jealously – especially in some places like France – because if they admitted they don’t need it they would lose it. So you can fly (again, in say France) through a bit of mil airspace which is totally empty and its commander will angrily phone up the ATC you are flying under and demand you get out of there because it is an active zone. It’s going to be fun to integrate all the intense politics involved in this and I don’t think they ever will.
And at that point your IFR clearance is gone for ever so even though your flight re-enters CAS later on, you cannot continue the flight as planned or filed.
So being handed off from London Control to someone else indicates that? That’s how I understand it. Is London Control the only “classical IFR” ATC unit in the UK?
I assume the clearance limit for the clearance from London Control would indicate that as well. So I should be able to find the clearance limit on the map and then start calling ahead via London Information. Is that right?
Is there a writeup available about such a trip where leaving and re-entering CAS is shown? I would love to read it.
