I have noticed that for March, they have for the first time for quite a while planned TWR or A/G staffing cover without any breaks/closures. Given that, do you know whether one can expect IAPs to be reinstated anytime soon?
Just checked. No news from the CAA, apparently.
The closures have disappeared some time ago, and ATC is available most of the time. But no news on the approaches. The CAA is said to be stalling. The psychological legacy of the Hunter crash and the extreme embarrassment to the CAA of the pilot getting acquitted are the most likely reasons.
There is a rumour that there is a new leaseholder!
I have just updated the KLN94 database and the approaches have finally disappeared. However the waypoints which I created by reference to the old waypoints (zero relative distance, zero bearing) are still there, which reveals something about the way the database is organised
Sure enough, as per above rumour, Shoreham has a new leaseholder.
The local council retains the freehold, as it always has, but they are scared of being seen as running a facility for the rich 
I wonder whether Albermarle, in administration for years, who took over from Erinaceous who went bust (yeah, this is aviation ) still have the head lease or if they have been replaced by Cyrrus.
Brighton City airport? Really!? Have they looked at a map recently?
(Or are they just trying to diassociate with the term “Shoreham crash”?)
I suppose it’s not as bad as “London Ashford” which is nowhere near either London nor Ashford, or worse still “London Oxford”.
I no longer see any NOTAMs published for EGKA and also the website no longer publishes the calendar with opening hours/type of ATS. Does that mean that Shoreham is “back to normal” with full ATC although still without any published IAPs?
No IAPs back yet but operating normal hours AFAIK, with A/G at times. It works fine. PPR during A/G AFAIK.
It has been naming itself “Brighton City” for some years, well before the Hunter crash.
All UK airports can be filed with an “I” FPL, including airports without a published IAP. Given that one can fly IFR in OCAS without clearance, it doesn’t matter whether the FPL is filed as I or Y. If I intend to fly the flight in CAS until almost all the way to the destination, I normally file as I, however this is where then IFPS validation comes in that effect either arrival routing or enroute routing.
Assuming you arrive from the continent and want to fly in the LTMA until just before EGKA, I would file I (which is what I do for departures/arrivals into EGLK unless I want the BIG-OCK shortcut) but obviously@Peter is literally the EGKA resident expert. :)
At Shoreham, the airspace is Class G and as far as anybody I know knows it is not illegal to fly any type of IAP to land there, including the previously published ones. You cannot use the normal terminology however because the IAP doesn’t exist. You just say you will report on long final…
It is definitely legal to fly DIY IAPs in the UK in a G-reg. Whether you can do it in other regs depends on whether their country of registry prohibits this. For example the N-reg position is potentially restricted by 91.175 and the applicability of 91.175 outside the US has been discussed a few times e.g. here. I am on holiday and don’t have the time to study it all currently, but it appears illegal to fly an unpublished IAP in N-regs. @ncyankee can most likely clarify it so I can update that 2008 writeup.
In practice the tricky thing is that if you do fly an IAP into an airport which has circuit traffic (1100ft QNH at Shoreham) then when you get visual you may have to go around to avoid the traffic found on the base leg, etc. With ATC and official IAPs they will merge the two, by asking traffic about to turn base to fly an orbit or some such. So, it works in say OVC009 conditions because they aren’t really be any circuit traffic, but it is not worth the bother in say OVC020 where you are better off descending over the sea some miles away and joining the visual circuit.
