Stapleford looking to add an LPV (with ~500ft DH but that seems much better than nothing!).
http://www.flysfc.com/rnav-consultation-stapleford-flight-centre.php
http://www.flysfc.com/rnav-consultation-stapleford-flight-centre.php
I think it’s great, and wished many other airfields followed example (although changes of getting them at North Weald EGSX are ~nil, due to closeness with Stansted EGSS).
If you want to support this (or not): Survey link
Will they also get ATC?
I personally don’t really care, because I find the risk of a mid air (or ground) collision on an approach in IMC very low, even in uncontrolled airspace, due to the fact that it’s extremely unlikely that someone would be not transponding / not talking to anyone on radio.
I also find Southend Radar much better than Farnborough in terms of traffic advisory, so they could very well tell you that there is a primary return and you’ll just wait a bit until it’s gone to do your approach.
My understanding is that during IMC, A/G radio will advise to suspend VMC circuits. The advisory will presumably be effective for the school traffic. I don’t believe they intend to upgrade from A/G radio.
RobertL18C wrote:
My understanding is that during IMC, A/G radio will advise to suspend VMC circuits.
Why? IMC at 1,500 ft is perfectly fine for circuits below…
This approach replaces the “inofficial” VOR/DME approach currently in use, and most IFR training sorties use that approach for practice when they return, in VMC. They are just treated like an overhead arrival with a long final, and aircraft in the circuit arrange themselves accordingly.
So if current operational practice does not change, A/G will pass information and the pilots will deal with it.
Only passing on what I learned when I asked the question. Practice approaches in VMC would continue as you describe, but now with LPV as an option.
Why on Earth is there so much red tape? Environmental issues… really??
To be cleared for an IAP, you need a person who is an official ATCO – an approach controller. That is ICAO and the ATC unions are very hot on preserving this principle. That is how most of the world (including the USA) does it.
You and I and many others know there are alternative methods but achieving acceptance is not easy.
It is equally interesting that the A/G guy will get the power to prevent circuits, since circuits are normally flown in the air and he has no authority in the air 
Of course this is a great move forward but I wonder how it was arranged…
is any clearance needed in G?
But regardless if that point, I could see southerners radar helping out, given that it would likely reduce their own workload (since many people use Southend for practice)
You are right in that a clearance is not possible in Class G, but historically people have maintained that an instrument approach requires a clearance to be flown. It’s a very good point.
Southend would charge for any external use of their approach controller – very likely of the order of 50k-100k a year.
