Menu Sign In Contact FAQ
Banner
Welcome to our forums

What is the point of an ATZ inside a Class D CTR?

Airborne_Again wrote:

So you suggest that Special VFR should either be possible in all controlled airspace or not at all?

I hadn’t actually ever considered that Special VFR could or would be used outside of controlled airspace.

I do detect that in Europe (at least in the UK) Class D airspace is considered daunting and difficult, perhaps because of the way it’s implemented. In the US, Class D is what you have at any and all airports that are just big enough to require any form of ATC, and is no big deal. Maybe that’s why I don’t see it as an issue.

I do detect that in Europe (at least in the UK) Class D airspace is considered daunting and difficult,

Recalling my PPL (2000-2001) the whole concept of CAS was presented in a manner designed to scare the student.

The word “airways” in particular (mostly Class A in the UK) would conjure images of crucifixion at the CAA HQ

The USA has the (ICAO non-compliant) scheme whereby a two-way radio contact gives you automatic transit through Class D. Europe has nothing like this. France operates it ambiguously, the UK operates it absolutely strictly. Germany I guess is somewhere in between.

But for whatever collection of reasons US PPLs are much more capable for A-to-B than Europeans when they collect their bit of paper.

Administrator
Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom

Silvaire wrote:

I hadn’t actually ever considered that Special VFR could or would be used outside of controlled airspace.

I am thoroughly confused now. I have never said anything of the kind.

What I am saying is that according to current rules — both in the US and according to ICAO — Special VFR is possible in specified parts of controlled airspace. This is orthogonal to the airspace classification. The airspace classification is not enough to determine whether or not Special VFR is possible — not in the US either.

So if you say the the airspace classification is – or should be – enough, that implies that the rules must change so that Special VFR is either possible in all controlled airspace of given class/classes (e.g. D) or not possible at all.

ESKC (Uppsala/Sundbro), Sweden

Special VFR in the US is available (as I said before) in any kind of controlled airspace that extends to the ground and is associated with an airport. It’s a very simple situation.

Silvaire wrote:

I do detect that in Europe (at least in the UK) Class D airspace is considered daunting and difficult, perhaps because of the way it’s implemented.

I don’t know why, it’s neither daunting nor difficult. The biggest operational difference between class D in the UK and class D in the US is that you actually need a clearance to enter rather than mere 2 way radio contact. But other than that, there’s nothing to it. You pass your details and they’ll typically give you a clearance.

The other operational difference is class D is used in the UK where class B or C would be used in the US, so some class D airspace can be busy. Plenty of low time pilots in the US are daunted by class C airspace – it’s not a national thing, it’s a newbie pilot thing. I think a lot of people worry about sounding a fool on the radio, or that ATC bite, or the slightest mistake and they’ll get that terrifying “Call the tower on this number when you land”.

Last Edited by alioth at 24 May 16:04
Andreas IOM

@alioth, I meant only to explain what you said in another way, that Class D in the US is not always associated with busy airports (although it can be) so the existence of Class D controlled airspace in the US is not the same as the UK version that’s handled more like Class C or B in the US.

Inexperienced pilots in any place are intimidated by Class D and up, agreed, although I think it’s worth adding that there a lot of very good pilots who don’t go in controlled airspace or talk to ATC much, because they don’t have to do so to get around. Flying and talking on the radio are two separate things, sometimes related.

Silvaire wrote:

Flying and talking on the radio are two separate things, sometimes related

More like walking and chewing a gum … The reality is that all these airspaces (A-G) aren’t really such a clever thing. Do we really need anything expect controlled and not controlled? I can’t sea any real reasons.

The elephant is the circulation
ENVA ENOP ENMO, Norway

There was a proposal for just two airspace classes.

Didn’t get anywhere AFAIK.

It would make sense because nobody can remember all the different separation requirements OCAS, and in CAS it doesn’t matter because you are under radar control so the type of CAS is irrelevant.

Administrator
Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom
The reality is that all these airspaces (A-G) aren’t really such a clever thing.

My country showed wisdom – for once – by using only a few: all is either D or G – at least where I fly. High up, there seems to be some class A, too.

I think very few countries, if any, use all 7 classes – France and Italy might perhaps come closest.

Last Edited by at 24 May 20:01
EBZH Kiewit, Belgium

Peter wrote:

There was a proposal for just two airspace classes.

Actually (if we are talking about the same thing) the recommendation was for three airspace classes, K (Known), U (Unknown), and N (Intended), see http://skybrary.aero/bookshelf/books/236.pdf Annex 2A, page 2-11

[ local copy ]

LGMT (Mytilene, Lesvos, Greece), Greece
Sign in to add your message

Back to Top