gallois wrote:
ATAS = Air traffic advisory service which is a bit more helpful than a FIS which is just an information service, although here they do advise if asked. But it is not obligatory.
SERA easy access
GM1 Article 2 (27) air traffic advisory service
Thanks. I didn’t recognise the acronym which is not used in SERA.
ATAS = Air traffic advisory service which is a bit more helpful than a FIS which is just an information service, although here they do advise if asked. But it is not obligatory.
SERA easy access
GM1 Article 2 (27) air traffic advisory service
gallois wrote:
Whatever happened to Class F. Do any countries still have it? I seem to remember it provided an advisory service on request to IFR.
If the SERA definition of ATAS is anything to go by it works like the system in the USA
In ICAO, you only deploy Class F airspace for short term issues (just like “Pink Airways” but they are temporary Class A 
)
UK had permanent Class F in Scotland/Ireland but they decided to decommission and use Echo/Golf instead
In France, I had the impression “Surface-S IFR RMZ” in France does that, you get FIS service for IFR in Golf but you are expected to follow some instructions on joining airspace or advices when uncontrolled to keep the FIS service going?
gallois wrote:
On a personal level, I feel much more comfortable flying OCAS in IMC with that system than I do with the UKs free for all, non radio, transponder off and all the rest the things that @Peter frightened me with
The easy fix is to fly,
- In UK nationwide joined airspace, Class C starts from FL195 or low level Airways
- In UK nationwide TMZ, it starts from FL100, still no radio but you can have TCAS/TAS
UK weather & terrain & airspace offers the possibility to cruise IFR in dis-joint band 1500ft-3000ft amsl, you will not be visible on radar or radio even if you try, I doubt there is a technical or conceptual fix to that kind of flying other than climbing above it
However, it’s good to have that choice and flexibility rather than complicating your life, it’s an option to take, you are obliged but it’s there…remind me why people fly low IFR at 3kft? why can’t all countries make life easy & safe for GA IFR, just do it like Spain: IFR at +FL100 or grounded (or better Morocco, IFR at +FL200 or grounded, unless you fly +FL120 between 11am-12am and 2p-4pm)
Like “Echo Airways” in France at +FL65, they are an option for CAT & GA to fly if they want strict procedural IFR-IFR separation but most people skip them and take directs in Golf at FL70 or stay in Delta at FL120, lot of VFR also fly them in long touring on AutoPilot and FIS tends to pave their way for airspace access…
gallois wrote:
ATAS
What is that?
Whatever happened to Class F. Do any countries still have it? I seem to remember it provided an advisory service on request to IFR.
If the SERA definition of ATAS is anything to go by it works like the system in the USA.
On a personal level, I feel much more comfortable flying OCAS in IMC with that system than I do with the UKs free for all, non radio, transponder off and all the rest the things that @Peter frightened me with.
Does any European country have an ATAS as described in SERA, and if so where do you find the frequencies or telephone numbers?
in class C IFR-VFR separation is required, but there may be unknown VFR traffic in class E
That is true but I am sure we will talk about making mandatory radio in Echo for VFR…
Yes it’s easy to solve G/E 500ft complications if weather is IMC by making RMZ at the base with RT mandatory, or offering deconfliction or just allowing own separation…
LBA/ATC wanted PIC to say they own IFR separation in IMC on G/E transition and their genius was to do it is “confirm VFR or VMC” at the gates
Malibuflyer wrote:
Therefore it is ATC responsibility to separate you from IFR-traffic that is flying below Echo in Golf. As this can fly up to the boundary of Golf, the only way ATC can ensure this separation is to keep you at a sufficient vertical distance to Golf – therefore no clearance to the bottom of Echo possible.
Many other countries have a quite different view of this so it is not as clear-cut as you make it out to be.
Once the aircraft leaves controlled airspace (be it E or anything else) it will not be separated from anything. Of course the pilot knows this. So motivating a refusal of a clearance to descend out of controlled airspace by separation being lost 500 ft earlier seems to me simply a way of obstructing.
By the same logic, it would be impossible for an IFR aircraft to leave controlled airspace laterally.
Cobalt wrote:
Also, following that logic, ATC could never clear anyone from class C airspace into class E, because in class C IFR-VFR separation is required, but there may be unknown VFR traffic in class E so separation cannot be assured in the last 500ft or couple of miles to the boundary because there may be unknown VFR traffic.
Touché!
The simple fact that other countries have no such restriction demonstrates that this is not a universally held view.
Also, following that logic, ATC could never clear anyone from class C airspace into class E, because in class C IFR-VFR separation is required, but there may be unknown VFR traffic in class E so separation cannot be assured in the last 500ft or couple of miles to the boundary because there may be unknown VFR traffic.
Ibra wrote:
In the context here it’s about who do you descend & climb in Echo while keeping VMC with SCT, BKN & OVC?
We agree that it is very rarely possible to climb/descent VFR through a BCN layer in Echo. In SCT it is, however, sometimes possible as the clouds are not evenly distributed. It does typically include some steeper turns therefore it is possible more often in descent than in climb.
But in principle I agree: To fly VFR on top of a layer you typically need to have FEW or NSC where you want to climb above or descent below.
Cobalt wrote:
Of course they can’t provide a radar service below the MRVA, but they could very easily provide procedural separation, for example by only clearing one aircraft per sector in that altitude band.
It’s at all about MVRA and no, the problem can’t be solved by procedural separation as ATC has no control over IFR traffic in Golf. In Echo ATC is responsible for separation to other IFR traffic – not only to other IFR traffic in the same airspace class. Therefore it is ATC responsibility to separate you from IFR-traffic that is flying below Echo in Golf. As this can fly up to the boundary of Golf, the only way ATC can ensure this separation is to keep you at a sufficient vertical distance to Golf – therefore no clearance to the bottom of Echo possible.
I’ve had flights with BKN and OVC in E without any problem, all that is to it is to stay below or above them by at least 1000 ft and you are fine.
In the context here it’s about who do you descend & climb in Echo while keeping VMC with SCT, BKN & OVC? not how you cruise above it (or bellow with some courage)
I have done gliding in Germany in Echo with SCT, I am glad the cloudbase was higher in Bavaria, 4 times more than what I was used to in the UK
