LeSving wrote:
- but are inside the CTR of a controlled aerodrome, no?
Yes, but that still doesn’t necessarily mean that they themselves are controlled. ESKC isn’t. (Look below the picture of me to see how I know.) The “satellite airport” in the FAA reg explicitly didn’t have a tower.
Cttime wrote:
How did this work before mobile phones?
Just ask the “Flugleiter” at the uncontrolled field to call the tower ;-) ;-) ;-)
Airborne_Again wrote:
Yes, but that still doesn’t necessarily mean that they themselves are controlled
All aerodrome traffic around a controlled aerodrome is controlled. It makes no difference if the traffic is normal circuit traffic, traffic passing by, or traffic at other fields “in the vicinity” (in the CTR). However, the relevant ANSP, may prescribe special procedures regarding communication (SERA 8035). IMO this is what SERA say. IME this is also how stuff works.
There are no special and general rules for “satellite airfields”. The relevant ANSP will prescribe any special procedure themselves. At ENVA there is a part of the old runway, used until 20 years ago or so. Today it is inside the military side (inside fences), and is not used or mentioned as a runway. However, it s more than good enough for GA (about 800-1000 m), and has been used for GA at a few occasions. You have to have permission from the owner to use it (the military in this case). The tower cannot clear you to land or take off from that field, the only clearance you will get is clear to operate within that area.
There is also lots of hang/para gliding activity from, and around, the mountain just north of the field (inside the CTR). These guys have no radio, and the way it works is they radio/phone the tower when the activity starts and when it ends. This activity is also part of the ATIS. At ENOL, 20 minutes flight from here, there are 3 strips inside the CTR. If the field is within radio contact, then no problem. If it is not within radio contact, then some other arrangement has to be made. In Norway any stretch of land that can be used as a runway “becomes a runway” when used as such. The rest is simply a question about the quality of the runway, and very much irrelevant for the ATC.
Maybe in the US a satellite airport has a special definition?
LeSving wrote:
All aerodrome traffic around a controlled aerodrome is controlled.
Indeed. The question is if aerodrome traffic around an uncontrolled airport inside a CTR is also aerodrome traffic for the controlled airport.
Airborne_Again wrote:
The question is if aerodrome traffic around an uncontrolled airport inside a CTR is also aerodrome traffic for the controlled airport.
I would say, of course. What should the alternative be? I think this is mainly an attitude thing. The ATC could have an attitude of “welcome, what can we do for you”, or they could have an attitude of “You are a PITA! Get your aircraft out here ASAP”.
Airborne_Again wrote:
The question is if aerodrome traffic around an uncontrolled airport inside a CTR is also aerodrome traffic for the controlled airport.
Legally this might be a valid question (and I assume the answer is: “yes” – see below), but practically it is not that relevant for pilots.
The exception allowed by SERA for such traffic is made for the ANSP – not for the pilot. Therefore there can be a regulation (published in the AIP) that not prior contact is necessary if you follow a certain procedure and the required clearance is automatically granted. We had this at my home field for some time (before the sector of the CTR has been converted into a RMZ.
From a pilot POV the situation is much easier – and not depending on whether it is aerodrome traffic or not: To fly in a CTR one needs a clearance – even if one gets airborne in the CTR. If the AIP does not state that under certain conditions this clearance is automatically granted, one needs to contact the tower to get one.
Malibuflyer wrote:
Legally this might be a valid question (and I assume the answer is: “yes” – see below), but practically it is not that relevant for pilots.
In the case of ESKC which is located inside ESCM CTR, I know that is not the interpretation of ESCM ATC. It has practical consequences as aerodrome traffic at their airport can be separated by visual observation from the tower cab. However, they’ve told us that they can’t separate ESKC and ESCM traffic that way as ESKC traffic is not their aerodrome traffic,
Thank you all for the answers.
LeSving wrote:
I would say, of course.
I agree. It does become a controlled aerodrome. From SERA Article 2:
controlled aerodrome’ means an aerodrome at which air traffic control service is provided to
aerodrome traffic regardless whether or not a control zone exists;
Then the question is, is ATC service provided to traffic at the non-towered aerodrome. We are discussing an aerodrome where it is class C from the surface up so SERA.6001 applies:
Class C. IFR and VFR flights are permitted. All flights are provided with air traffic control
service and IFR flights are separated from other IFR flights and from VFR flights.
What is interesting is that as AA points out the satellite airport traffic might not be in sight of the tower and that tower might not have radar. How can they provide ATC service?
Cttime wrote:
I agree. It does become a controlled aerodrome. From SERA Article 2:controlled aerodrome’ means an aerodrome at which air traffic control service is provided to
aerodrome traffic regardless whether or not a control zone exists;
But “aerodrome traffic” according to SERA article 2 includes traffic on the manoeuvring area! In the ESKC case which started this discussion, ATC is not provided to traffic on the manoeuvring area – no taxi, take-off or landing clearances are given. The airport is uncontrolled.
Then the question is, is ATC service provided to traffic at the non-towered aerodrome. We are discussing an aerodrome where it is class C from the surface up so SERA.6001 applies:
Class C. IFR and VFR flights are permitted. All flights are provided with air traffic control
service and IFR flights are separated from other IFR flights and from VFR flights.
What is interesting is that as AA points out the satellite airport traffic might not be in sight of the tower and that tower might not have radar. How can they provide ATC service?
The question should rather be, “how can they provide separation”, and the answer is: procedurally. (In the ESKC case, ESCM TWR does have radar.)
PS. @Cttime, if you intend to visit Sundbro, I’d be happy to brief you on local procedures.
Airborne_Again wrote:
But “aerodrome traffic” according to SERA article 2 includes traffic on the manoeuvring area!
But only on the maneuvering area of the aerodrome which the CTR belongs to. Lots of other stuff also usually exist within the confinements of the CTR; roads, trains, pedestrians, harbors, cities. The list goes on and on and on 
Another runway or airport is no different in this respect. What is different with another airport, are aircraft taking off and entering the controlled airspace of the main aerodrome.
