Menu Sign In Contact FAQ
Banner
Welcome to our forums

UK LARS service - how can it be improved?

The thing is all other countries have a nationalised ATC which is subsidised by the general taxpayer.

AFAIK NavCanada is a private company. However they run from a minimal number of highly organised ACCs.

I don't get this point. These are private companies that can charge what they like. Berlin, Düsseldorf are the same. Airspace I see as different from airports.

Be careful of what you wish for! Should ANSPs which are private companies too charge whatever they like? If you actually like that idea, the number of affordable runways, ramp spaces, and ATC services and airspace available to you will become fewer and fewer.

It shouldn't cost THAT much to land, 'handle', and park a light aircraft overnight at Edinburgh or East Midlands or Manchester or Bristol's off-peak times, but somehow with the presence of CAT, it does

I don't get this point. These are private companies that can charge what they like. Berlin, Düsseldorf are the same. Airspace I see as different from airports.

EGTK Oxford

But under the proposals for the Enroute IR (EIR), didnt that allow flight in all controlled airspace

Yes it will, if/when it arrives.

Administrator
Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom

If Class A became Class D, the IMCR would probably be abolished instantly.

But under the proposals for the Enroute IR (EIR), didnt that allow flight in all controlled airspace, or was it still restricted to up to class B or something?

The thing is all other countries have a nationalised ATC which is subsidised by the general taxpayer. The UK, even pre ATC privatisation, operates some level of cost recovery / compartmentalisation and it won't fund services to GA, beyond the ICAO obligation to provide an FIS (London Info, etc).

This isn't going to be solved. We can talk about it and moan about it but it won't happen.

The extensive Class A fits well with the old established IMC Rating which, if the UK had no Class A, would be for all practical purposes equivalent to a full IR and lots of people would be up in arms about the resulting undermining of the IR. You just can't do that; the Falklands will go to Argentina before that happens.

The relative lack of Class G service goes hand in hand with the ability to do non-radio IFR in Class G also, which is a brilliant privilege and, frankly, these days with GPS, you don't need enroute ATC assistance to fly around. Most pilots who know where they are going don't talk to anybody when enroute in Class G. If you call up London Info they will ask you ETAs to waypoints, which is extra work for you because you will get there when you get there...

The whole edifice hangs together and nobody is going to be changing it, IMHO.

If Class A became Class D, the IMCR would probably be abolished instantly.

Administrator
Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom

PS. All that said I'm not expecting GA should get a free ride - you can either recover these small costs through taxation (e.g. USA), an annual license (e.g. Canada) or navigation/runway charges at the airport concerned.

It shouldn't cost an arm and leg just to make use of infrastructure and services that probably wouldn't be there if CAT wasn't around. CAT is going to need more airspace and runways and fly more direct, efficient routes in future. And GA needs to share such runways and airspace safely.

Why is it that other countries can provide superior services for less? I very much doubt they are being particularly wasteful with their spending.

I'm a firm believer in 'user pays'.

Yeah, but this doesn't work. Let me explain why:

  1. Access to Airports. Every GA pilot has seen it in the UK. The big come along and with all their handling and security requirements, and consequently squeeze out the small, just like what happened at Southampton. It shouldn't cost THAT much to land, 'handle', and park a light aircraft overnight at Edinburgh or East Midlands or Manchester or Bristol's off-peak times, but somehow with the presence of CAT, it does.

  2. Access to Airspace. So much class A airspace everywhere in the UK, perhaps with the deliberate intention to exclude most of GA which flies VFR. Then CAT moans about all the infringements which peculiarly occurs much more so in England than anywhere else in the world. Well provide a better, more organised, cost-effective radar service in lower airspace and let aircraft fly though it safely! Just look at complex areas like New York and Frankfurt to see how they do it.

I'm a firm believer in 'beneficiary pays'.

The unionisation and 1970s working practices that stop London Info FISOs looking at a radar screen need to be dismantled. Every aspect of aviation seems to be 30 years behind the real world. If it wasn't serious, it'd be hilarious.

I often say that Arthur Scargill was in the wrong business.

If he had been in aviation, he would have had a clear run, all the way to a peaceful retirement.

The magic "S"-word would have deflected even Maggie's handbag.

But some of it (e.g. the structuring of FISO v. ATCO v. radar qualified ATCO) is ICAO stuff.

Administrator
Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom

Yes Dave. Radar services are required because CAT wants a known environment and large chunks of airspace closed off to non-commercial users. If they want that, they can pay for it.

Thankfully, the thinking that makes policy at the moment appears to closer to ours than yours. Light GA doesn't pay at the point of use for ATC (we pay duty on our fuel, unlike CAT), and if it were introduced, you can bet your bottom dollar that takeup would be zero. Then we'd start infringing, you'd start squealing, and we'd be back where we started.

The unionisation and 1970s working practices that stop London Info FISOs looking at a radar screen need to be dismantled. Every aspect of aviation seems to be 30 years behind the real world. If it wasn't serious, it'd be hilarious.

EGLM & EGTN

Yes Dave so are most of us, SO if CAT wish to have large volumes of airspace effectively denied to others then they should pay BY VOLUME for that exclusivity. Surely that would be fair since they recoup all there costs and a bit more besides from fare paying passengers. GA on the other hand by and large pays its own way, including the fees and taxes heaped upon it.

UK, United Kingdom
36 Posts
Sign in to add your message

Back to Top