Sure, but then the concept of Class G airspace is fundamentally incompatible with that – i.e. it’s not within the aerodrome’s power to restrict who flies which tracks in the sky.
In extremis, any A/G or AFISO unit can prevent entry into the ATZ simply by not returning the radio call. The Barton Interpretation saw to that.
Sure that makes sense when it’s under the control of ATC.
But when it’s not and parties are just ‘unofficially’ using it then I can understand why they would ask the school to stop.
The loss of FTO IAP income is a big thing. This is why most airports charge for IAPs; if they didn’t they would get FTOs from far away fly there for the IAP and not land 
I can see the problem with a flying school using it. That would result in lots of traffic on it (flying schools will have lots of movements each hour) and makes a collision much more likely than the odd random visitor.
A flying school based at an airfield where there is an RNP approach have been asked not to join. In a manner that can remotely be confused with the published RNP approach.
Apparently they have been told that it is being used inappropriately then its approval will be removed.
Personally I just join at a 6 mile final and use skydemon as it gives a lower minima
Assuming it’s an A/G radio service when there’s no ATC, you do need to have established two-way communication before entering the ATZ.
Yes indeed I forgot about that.
It just takes an MOR and NATS will retrieve the radar data to bust you with.
Also I am sure most if not all airfields have a “nonexistent laptop” which pics up the usual sites, including ADS-B with high accuracy, so they can see you anyway unless you are non-txp.
Peter wrote:
You cannot enter the ATZ without ATC clearance but if there is no ATC then clearly you can…
Assuming it’s an A/G radio service when there’s no ATC, you do need to have established two-way communication before entering the ATZ. That is something the CAA are quite hot on right now and came out of all the hullaballoo at Barton, who were MORing anyone who didn’t.
You are also technically supposed to announce entering / leaving the ATZ and in doing so state your height (that has to be an old RAF influence lingering), but I have literally never heard anyone actually do that. Displaying the usual finger on the pulse, he who must not be named at the CAA told me that everyone does it, all the time, at every A/G and AFIS aerodrome in the UK.
Peter wrote:
has not seen a mid-air in IMC since around WW2
OK then clouds seem to be the safest portion of the naked emperor, I mean, the sky.
Which is why my preference for a non ATC letdown to get into Shoreham, is a traffic service to confirm I’m clear of traffic, and descend over the water to VMC.
Becoming VMC at anything greater than 1200ft before joining the circuit, seems a safer option to me.
I do subscribe to the ‘great big sky’ theory in IMC but thats based on general flying, and not near an approach sector of an airfield.
To me, doing a ‘non std radio’ approach from 5 miles is akin to a ‘straight-in’
Just thinking. Could it be to prevent two pilots from flying the same track at the same time? If you fly non-controlled IFR using an IAF and an approach no one separates between aircraft. Normally this is not an issue because when no one flies on the exact same track the probability of an in-flight hit is very low. But not so if all use gps precision down to meters in an RNP approach.
Of course, that technically is a risk. You wouldn‘t even need to fly an RNP approach with 0.3 HSI scaling for that. It might be enough if two aircraft fly the same route between two points, but in opposite directions, on 2-axis autopilot with GPSS and all. This is a risk that GPS has brought to us. In the days of radio nav, the tolerances were too high to really risk a collision.
I also never fly VFR along airways/between two VORs, but flown by GPS nowadays. Too high a risk to have someone else do the same thing, with same type of avionics. Always fly „random“, self-created tracks when VFR.
In the instrument approach scenario, this is usually mitigated by using the radio. In France for example, most instrument approaches may be flown, in IMC, without any ATC, but if every traffic announces his position and intentions, the risk is minimized.
