boscomantico wrote:
near misses with all sorts of aircraft operating legally, in class E, non-radio and non transponder in the approach / departure sectors.
Should it also be TMZ/RMZ?
Germany does not really have the same airspace structure as the US because in the US class D and class C do not require explicit clearance, only radio contact (and then of course they can tell you what to do, but only if they need to).
Frankfurt would probably have Class B, perhaps also Munich and Berlin.
It seems the IAA hired the wrong guy from the CAA 
or they asked a 6 yo to draw the charts.
These are like Bravo airspaces, without the inverse wedding cake. Crazy !
I don’t see the larger CAS as a problem in itself, the FPL requirement for transit is the root cause to me.
I don’t know any country which has a unique aviation representation.
Maybe the US system works because Mode C is mandatory above 10k feet or 30NM from class B airports. It could be done in Europe.
Bluebeard wrote:
Large amounts of additional controlled airspace would not concern me too much if transits were freely given through the largely unused CAS outside Dublin. But the Irish AIP makes it clear that air filing of FPLs is not normally available. This appears to me to conflict with GM1 SERA.4001 and 4005(a). I made this observation in my own submission to the IAA, and the response I got was just “Noted”. So I am looking for who to complain to in EASA?
Does the Irish ANSP really require a filed flight plan? There’s a lot of misunderstandings in the pilot community of what a flight plan is. If you call ATC on the frequency for a zone transit and provide your callsign, flight rules, aircraft type, POB, requested route and level, then you have given a flight plan. Not a filed flight plan, certainly.
Should it also be TMZ/RMZ?
That is what Germany is doing in some places (Weeze, for example) to mitigate the problem, but in others like Luebeck, they so far don‘t.
What they did in places like Weeze is install TMZs. Deep in the German only regulations published, it is also mentioned that there is an obligation to monitor a radar frequency when in the TMZ. So, it‘s almost like TMZ/RMZ, through the backdoor.
In any case, due to all these measures, the German ICAO chart, which was always admired by everywhere for its clarity, is slowly becoming a mess these days. The reason being that simple class E does not solve the VFR/ IFR collision problem (which must be solved, though).
Germany does not really have the same airspace structure as the US because in the US class D and class C do not require explicit clearance, only radio contact
That is a minor difference in procedures, not a difference in airspace structure.
But they are identical in that some airliners have to transition through a certain amount of class E between takeoff from a CTR (class D) and entry into the „general“ class C/A airspace (FL100 in Germany, 18000 feet in the US).
Airborne_Again wrote:
Does the Irish ANSP really require a filed flight plan? There’s a lot of misunderstandings in the pilot community of what a flight plan is. If you call ATC on the frequency for a zone transit and provide your callsign, flight rules, aircraft type, POB, requested route and level, then you have given a flight plan. Not a filed flight plan, certainly.
AIP says air filing should only be used when no other means of filing is practicable.
zuutroy wrote:
AIP says air filing should only be used when no other means of filing is practicable.
What I’m talking about is not “air filing”. “Air filing” means submitting, over radio, a complete flight plan with all the items on the flight plan form, including equipment etc. The flight plan is then processed and distributed just like a prefiled flight plan. I’m talking about submitting directly to the concerned controlled the bare minimum need for a transit. (Ref. GM1 SERA.4005(a) Abbreviated flight plan.)
So, does the Irish ANSP really require a filed flight plan for a zone transit? That would be rather unique.
EASA really need to do something about what renaming a Filed FPL an AFIL and and an abbreviated flight plan. It causes all sorts of confusion, not least by the time the regulations are translated into French.
Airborne_Again wrote:
So, does the Irish ANSP really require a filed flight plan for a zone transit? That would be rather unique.
Just digging into the regulations a bit and it appears to be word-for-word the compliant with SERA. As you say maybe this isn’t widely understood and that’s why people are up-in-arms about the additional CAS.
