Frans wrote:
However, I’ve heard from a source within the inner DFS ‘circle’, that they think their FIS approach (VFR separated from IFR) is superior and should be an example for other countries as well. I dearly hope, it won’t.
Well, one thing I appreciate is the fact that I have joined up radar coverage over the whole of the country, means I can head north to south, east to west without coming into an area of controlled airspace where the local controllers treat their class D as “restricted” and refuse you transits, then squeeze you down corridors where you believe you’re in Indian country because there’s so many Cherokees around…..
I’m talking about, of course, UK. Offered the chance, I’d take Germany over UK FIS any day of the week and twice on Sunday….
On sunny weekends in Germany I often just avoid to contact FIS with all the chatter rendering them almost useless and cruise just below airspace charlie, since there’s barely flying anyone up there. OTOH it’s easy to just avoid the “TMAs” around the big airports and also the associated TMZs in Germany.
In other countries (I think Sweden is one of them) the TMAs also around smaller airports are pretty big, so that you need a clearance to cross and thus have to talk to “someone”, ideally ATC which is able to issue that clearance straight away. But then again – how much VFR traffic is in Sweden compared to Germany…
Interesting to hear your thoughts! Although I’ve flown only two trips in Sweden so far, my experience with Sweden Control was both times pretty good. Perhaps not as good as Polaris or Copenhagen, as Sweden Control might indeed lack a bit of proactive action, but still very decent. I’m however unable to report from regular experiences.
German ATC is great as well, but when it comes down to FIS, it really depends on the FISO. Mostly the girls in Langen do their job very professional, but that doesn’t count for all the boys working there. German FIS frequencies feel often like a sandbox, also because some of the pilots think it’s a nice ‘chat’ facility, instead of a professional service, which requires radio discipline. Maybe the problem is the fact that the DFS tries to make FIS accessible to even the most afraid and untrained pilot, which results into a lack of professionalism on frequency. And as a result of that lack, I can imagine Lufthansa pilots are not interested on having all that chatter on the same frequency. In order to still have the possibility to talk with all VFR pilots, this TMZ construct has been taken into the next dimension: Listen and squawk at all times (within a TMZ), but do not speak, unless you’re spoken to! (And for anything else, there is FIS as playground for everyone…)
Frans wrote:
What does German FIS better compared to Sweden ATC? Special information requests, like weather or so?
They seem more proactive, which is not surprising given that providing FIS to VFR is all they do. Also it reduces frequency congestion. In the Swedish context, I prefer that ATC is doing FIS as we have lots of class G airspace with IFR. In Germany that’s not the case.
Airborne_Again wrote:
Although ATC in Sweden is excellent I must say that from a VFR point of view, the service provided by German FIS is superior.What does German FIS better compared to Sweden ATC? Special information requests, like weather or so?
boscomantico wrote:
As mentioned above, the German TMZs are actually more like TMZ/RMZs.
But not quite, as an RMZ requires the pilot to establish radio contact, and DFS does specifically want pilots NOT to contact ATC in a TMZ (monitor only).
This is a Contradictio in terminis IMHO….
Frans wrote:
However, I’ve heard from a source within the inner DFS ‘circle’, that they think their FIS approach (VFR separated from IFR) is superior and should be an example for other countries as well. I dearly hope, it won’t.
There are both pros and cons. Sweden (with few exceptions such as AFIS) does not have separate FIS. ATC also provides FIS. Although ATC in Sweden is excellent I must say that from a VFR point of view, the service provided by German FIS is superior. On the other hand, there is a point talking the the actual ATC all along if you’re going to cross class B/C/D airspace.
I’m afraid you’re right about that.
It will never happen. Lufthansa does not want all those D-Mxxx in their C42s flying Mainz to Worms on the same frequency as them. That will prevent it.
It’s always good to have someone keeping an eye on you. Skyguide does also have a radar screen on their FIS positions. Anything can happen underway. That is not a reason to transfer any responsibility – obviously – but I see it as an additional tool for flight safety. My credo is: Use all tools as far as you can.
The next report thing is obvious within high mountain terrain, where radar coverage is pretty limited. Germany has radar coverage almost anywhere, so they can provide a kind of “flight following”. That’s also a reason why this new TMZ rule is madness, as you’re already in contact with someone, including XPDR-code. The DFS needs to overthink their strict separation policy between IFR and VFR traffic on en-route frequencies, which now causes this chaos at TMZ zones. I think Germany needs a kind of Danish or French approach on FIS and ATC. However, I’ve heard from a source within the inner DFS ‘circle’, that they think their FIS approach (VFR separated from IFR) is superior and should be an example for other countries as well. I dearly hope, it won’t.
