Standard/Non-standard altitudes in cross country VFR flying

lionel wrote:

My understanding is that they are not.

ICAO Annex 11:

2.2 Objectives of the air traffic services
The objectives of the air traffic services shall be to:
a) prevent collisions between aircraft;

3.3 Operation of air traffic control service
3.3.1 In order to provide air traffic control service, an air traffic control unit shall:
[…]
c) issue clearances and information for the purpose of preventing collision between aircraft under its control and of expediting and maintaining an orderly flow of traffic

In class D airspace, both IFR and VFR are “under its control”.

It get’s interesting in Class D when ATC don’t have a radar, they may clear you for a procedural VFR route with mandatory VRP but when you start from the wrong position that will take you in conflict with other IFR traffic (I had a first hand experience of that at Almeria last week )

Airborne_Again wrote:

ICAO Annex 11:

2.2 Objectives of the air traffic services
The objectives of the air traffic services shall be to:
a) prevent collisions between aircraft;

3.3 Operation of air traffic control service
3.3.1 In order to provide air traffic control service, an air traffic control unit shall:
[…]
c) issue clearances and information for the purpose of preventing collision between aircraft under its control and of expediting and maintaining an orderly flow of traffic

In class D airspace, both IFR and VFR are “under its control”.

To me, “Issue [clearances and] information for the purpose of preventing” means they provide (as I wrote) “advice and help”, not that they take responsibility for it, when they provide information (as opposed to precise clearances). But it is not obvious that I’m right on that.

In the CTR/circuit, I don’t see that C and D would differ. I have never experienced any difference. Some 10 years ago maybe, AVINOR wanted to make all airports C airspace, like in Sweden. But due to massive protest, that didn’t happen (if I remember correctly). Today almost all are D, while only a couple still are C. TMA s are all C. I don’t know why (and don’t care enough to find out )

LeSving wrote:

Some 10 years ago maybe, AVINOR wanted to make all airports C airspace, like in Sweden. But due to massive protest, that didn’t happen (if I remember correctly).

Do you know why the protest? There is absolutely no problem with VFR in Swedish CTR/TMA?

I don’t remember the details. Those things have changed gradually and slowly over many years. Had a look, and it seems ENVA is in fact the only controlled airport left today still in C. It also looks like several TMAs now are D, not C. There may be a system in it, but it’s not visible to me

Dimme wrote:

I have been cleared for approach as number 2 behind large jets in class C many times

Yes, that’s how it’s done all the time, but is it correct? C is IFR-IFR and IFR-VFR separation by ATC. When I’m being told I’m cleared final as number two behind another VFR, that is OK, but as number two behind another IFR, is that really correct? It makes me responsible for IFR-VFR separation. Shouldn’t this be class D? I don’t know, the difference is mostly theoretical anyway IMO. Separation is assured because the jet flies much faster than a SEP, not by the SEP “separating itself” from the jet. VFR traffic could possibly be more flexible in D vs C I guess (CTR), but that’s very much up to the individual controller.

LeSving wrote:

but as number two behind another IFR, is that really correct? It makes me responsible for IFR-VFR separation.

It is entirely correct. As I’ve written before, “separation” has a very specific meaning and in some cases normal separation standards can be reduced at the controller’s discretion and the aircraft are still considered to be separated. This is one of those cases.

Yes, probably correct. Which brings me back to the original thought of what is the difference between C and D in a CTR. There seems to be none.