Yes but "separation by hoping that nobody else will be there" is against every neural connection of my deformed German brain... If everybody had ADS-B and receiving equipment, this might be OK but just hoping, I don't think that is an acceptable solution. Even if it works. It's Russian roulette with a very big drum.
It's Russian roulette with a very big drum.
There is an argument (and I did read some evidence for it, but I can't find it anymore), that below a certain level of traffic, ATC actually increases the risk of collisions by funnelling traffic along their preferred routes.
In solid IMC away from airports, choke points and VOR's I'm quite happy without radar separation.
There have been no known civilian mid-airs in UK airspace in IMC since WW2.
There are about 2 mid-airs every year in VMC, usually either close to aerodromes or in "unusual" situations. Nearly all of them happen below about 1500ft.
On a day like today, the skies are almost totally devoid of light GA.
If you were really worried you could install a €14k TCAS system and hope, probably fairly reasonably, that none of the nontransponding crowd will be flying in IMC.
I do see some traffic when I am in IMC, near my position, but it is nearly always Mode A, so I can't be sure they are in IMC. It is massively likely however they are in fact flying very low; perhaps below 1000ft, because nearly all Mode A traffic which I do manage to spot turns out to be flying very low.
The most unfortunate thing about UK Class G is that one cannot usually get VMC on top, because the Class A base is too low. I have done some flights VMC on top, e.g. Shoreham-Gloucester (EGKA-EGBJ) which via GWC is doable at 5400ft, but that is rare.
So, one often flies all the way in 100% solid IMC, which makes it harder IFR than the Eurocontrol IFR one does with the IR which is usually a piece of cake.
The other VERY BIG THING which very few people know about until they fly with TCAS is that a radar service does not report all traffic. I see loads of traffic on my system which is potentially conflicting and which the controller does not tell me about. Other pilots who have TCAS equipped planes tell the same story. So the "total protection" of a radar service is an illusion. It merely improves the odds. Maybe the controller does not see it on radar but I doubt that because SSR traffic should be highly visible. More likely he is on the phone, or on UHF speaking to military traffic. And you get loads of traffic reports which you have to acknowledge but which are completely useless e.g. traffic 5nm away - which one would probably not spot on a 100km vis day with binoculars if it is white and against the sky.
It's a pity that the UK has so little CAS
Ooopps. I think there is too much CAS here, at least in South. You can call LARS and get a traffic service, which helps a lot flying IMC OCAS.
Ooopps. I think there is too much CAS here, at least in South.
E is the type of CAS I am referring to...
Maybe the controller does not see it on radar but I doubt that because SSR traffic should be highly visible. More likely he is on the phone, or on UHF speaking to military traffic.
I don't think that is correct. The report on the mid-air over the Lake of Constance (swissguide, the Russian passenger jet that collided with the cargo plane) had a lot of background information. There are automated and independent systems that monitor all traffic targets and generate alarms. Every airprox will result in an investigation and it's automated systems that determine whether there was a violation of separation minima.
IFR in G is nice, I would never want to prohibit this. However, I think the UK would be better served by putting its convoluted airspace A in the trash and introducing E starting very low. Most of the reasons for IFR in G would be gone then, what is left is departure and approach into non instrument airfields. Basically how they do it in the US. I hope this is what SERA will bring us, in all countries.
The report on the mid-air over the Lake of Constance
Yes but that was in CAS.
Also if they obeyed their TCAS II (which trumps everything apart from GPWS) they would have been OK.
However, I think the UK would be better served by putting its convoluted airspace A in the trash and introducing E starting very low.
I agree about E, because it renders illegal people flying through e.g. ILS glidepaths non-radio (if in IMC), but it will never happen in the UK because of the massive cost of controllers to provide the IFR service in the Class E. The UK operates a cost recovery system, and GA below 2000kg (which is 99% of it) doesn't pay. And if you made them pay they would just fly VFR, and if you made them pay for VFR too, they would fly without a transponder...
I also agree about A, which should be B or C.
I think what we have is a product of decades of "development". The UK IMC Rating is good for IFR in Class D,E,F,G. Not A. If it was good for A then it would be practically same as the IR, and there would be a massive uproar among the guardians of all things pure. The exclusivity of the IR must be safeguarded, and if it means that only airline pilots can get it, that's fine. That is what we have in the UK...
Everything fits together nicely 
I agree about E, because it renders illegal people flying through e.g. ILS glidepaths non-radio (if in IMC), but it will never happen in the UK because of the massive cost of controllers to provide the IFR service in the Class E.
In another thread Peter mentioned an estimate of £10M/year to provide continuous Class E airspace in the UK. Notwithstanding the current fee-based funding mechanism, I have to admit that this sum seems very small to me in relation to the benefit.
UK tax receipts (according to Wikipedia, the fountain of all knowledge ;-) are about £600 billion/year. So if I've calculated it right, the cost represents less than 9 minutes of taxation per year... to provide what I'd view as the basic starting point for IFR in the country. Obviously much greater amounts of UK tax revenue get spent on nonsense, as they do in every country.
It still boggles my mind that many or most countries in the world consider basic aviation infrastructure optional - but that's just my POV.
Thanks much for the nice trip writeup - I enjoyed reading it.
this sum seems very small to me in relation to the benefit
What benefit? In Class G Above FL100, there is universal provision of radar based traffic/deconfliction service by London Mil [not sure about weekends, though - does anyone know?]; below that you need to be almost in Scotland to NOT get a radar service from somebody if you want it.
Yes, it could be better (it is disjointed; while I have not beaten the 8 squawks while within the UK, I am probably close), but I like the casualness of transitioning to IFR at my whim without needing anyone's approval, no slots, no need to stick to Eurocontrol routings and all the hassle that comes with the way class E is operated in real life.
Now replacing Class A with Class C'; that would be of benefit.
boscomantico: Not quite what ICAO had in mind though...
Don't confuse instrument flying with "flying under instrument rules" (= IFR flying). The latter is exactly what ICAO had in mind with "flight plans, clearances, permanent radio contact, radar and generally just doing "what the controller tells us to do"" as you write. When transporting unsuspecting paying customers in the back there is nothing else every commercial pilot or airline would accept to do (or would be permitted to do by most aviation authorities).
Now replacing Class A with Class C'; that would be of benefit.
Excactly. Proper class C not like the class C above FL195, which is treated like A.
I don't see the befit of Class E, just more costs. I prefer to choose my route and don't see a point to send a flight plan to Eurocontrol for a hop from Coventry to Leicester as it is 900ft cloud base and E would start at 1000ft.
