UK: IFR Approaches in airspace G without tower

Not even that is true. You always have to look out when you can, no matter what airspace you are in. At least that is what i was taught.

Peter wrote:

Not quite… If you are IFR in Class G but VMC, you still have to look out. The ATC responsibility for separation is based on the airspace class, and I think you get it only in Class A-C or maybe even D?

You get IFR separation from all traffic in A-C. In D and E IFR only gets separation from IFR.

These are safety rules the German version of the NTSB (“BfU”) has released for IFR pilots:

For IFR pilots:

Kontrollieren Sie beim Anflug auf Verkehrsflughäfen, ob und wann ein Einflug in den Luftraum E erfolgt.
An- und Abflugrouten verlaufen nicht immer in einer TMA. On approach check at what point you will enter airspace E. STARs and SIDs are not always inside a TMA

Rechnen Sie im Luftraum E mit unbekanntem Flugverkehr. Beobachten Sie konsequent und aufmerk-
sam den Luftraum. Always take into account the possibility of unknown traffic in airspace E. Monitor the airspace closely

Denken Sie daran, nicht alle VFR-Flüge haben einen Transponder an Bord und stehen oft nicht in Kon-
takt mit ATC. Remember that not all VFR traffic carries a XPDR and is often not in contat with ATC.

Berücksichtigen Sie, Flüge nach Instrumentenflugregeln haben kein generelles Vorflugrecht vor Flügen
nach Sichtflugregeln. Im Luftraum E gelten die Ausweichregeln der Luftverkehrsordnung (LuftVO) für
alle Beteiligten gleichermaßen. Zu beachten ist explizit das Vorflugrecht von Luftschiffen, Segelflugzeugen, Hängegleitern, Gleitsegeln, Ballonen und Schleppverbänden. Remember that IFR flights do not always have the right of way. Inside the E airspace the avoidance rules are valid for all flights. Airships, gliders, hang gliders, ballons etc etc in general have the right of way.

Beachten Sie die Geschwindigkeitsbegrenzung: max. 250 KIAS unter FL100!
Do not fly + 250 KIAS below FL100

Airborne_Again wrote:

Towered airports in class G are possible but not common. In Europe, I don’t think you’ll find them anywhere except in the UK.

In France as well. Colmar is towered and in airspace G, as discussed here.

bookworm wrote:

the UK model is that there are no such approaches, because if an instrument approach is available then approach control must be provided.

I think that might be construed as “gold-plating” Article 172 ANO.

Another interpretation is that the requirements of paragraphs (a) and (b) apply where “there is equipment for providing aid … by radio or radar”. If the aerodrome has neither, or if it has one or both but they are simply not used for providing aid (for holding etc.), then nor does it need an approach control service. Aerodromes which have their own private or published (but not “notified”) RNAV procedures would fall into that category.

Peter wrote:

It is legal in the UK, in any reg whose State of Registry does not prohibit it (91.175 prohibits it for N-regs for example).

My understanding would be that it is also legal for N-reg in the UK. FAR 91.173 (a) refers to procedures prescribed in part 97, which applies only to civil airports in the United States.

Peter.

boscomantico wrote:

I would advise strictly against it of course, especially with the precision of today’s GPS approaches and autopilots.

The first ever GLS (GBAS) approach in the world was done in G at an AFIS airport (Brønnøysund). Today most of these smaller AFIS airfields have GLS as standard.

think my last post caused a misunderstanding. What I tried to say was that many pilots in Europe think that way of IFR (mindset “I don’t need to look out”). That is rubbish, as you all pointed out.

I would say that this what most VFR-only pilots think of IFR.

IFR pilots usually know these principles. Whether they will do it (expecting VFR traffic any time when in airspace classes D, E, F, G) is a different story.