Airborne_Again wrote:
Well, since airlines do IAPs in IMC in class G and have doing so for decades without incidents, can’t you consider the possibility that it isn’t nearly as dangerous as you think?
With two-way radio communication, transponders turned on and TCAS which is huge difference compared to what I wrote and you quoted.
Noe wrote:
Then how to you find the runway
I didn’t want to repeat myself but in one of the previous posts I wrote:I can’t imagine flying instrument approach and looking ouside except looking for runway when approaching minima.
Lydd are great giving transits via the overhead or via the beacon, so if you are coming back from France why would you not just have the courtesy to give them a call
But if everyone tried to call up every piece of airspace they fly near but they had no intention to enter, would it overload the system very quickly?
The class of airspace tells the pilot whether two-way comms is required?
Would you fly through an ATZ without asking?
No because it’s a violation of Rules of the Air Regulations 3 – 11 (3).
James_Chan wrote:
But if everyone tried to call up every piece of airspace they fly near but they had no intention to enter, would it overload the system very quickly?
The class of airspace tells the pilot whether two-way comms is required?
But very few have approaches, and the ones that do are clearly marked.
James_Chan wrote:
No because it’s a violation of Rules of the Air Regulations 3 – 11 (3).
Perhaps the ATZ should be increased in size for those that do. Most, if not all, would only need the stub type arrangement of MATZs to protect the approaches. You could call and ask if the stubs were active. (in other words there was active instrument traffic).
Hmmm, looked at the charts on AIP of the “new” ENGK GA airfield in Norway. According to the AIP is has LPV approaches (from sometime this summer I guess?). It is in very close vicinity to ENCN, an airport with commercial airline traffic. ENCN is in D CTR, while ENGK is in G. Looking at the area chart, they also have done changes to the TMA of ENCN, it’s lowered in the vicinity of the approach to ENGK coming from NE. ENGK itself has received a TIZ.
So the airspace around ENGK is now G (TIZ) up to 2500’ where the TMA of ENCN starts (C airspace). This means that both IFR approaches to ENGK starts in C, then go directly into the TIZ in G. ENGK is not manned AFAIK, and this means, since it is inside a TIZ, that blind reports on the radio are mandatory. Effectively this means this new airfield in G, has grabbed a substantial chunk of “free” G airspace, changing it to G RMZ to be able to have IFR approaches, even though it’s still all in G. In addition, a snippet of C airspace (ENCN TMA) is lowered from 4500’ to 2500’, to be able to have the start of the IFR approach on runway 23 also inside the TMA of ENCN, like the approach on the other side, 05.
Obviously the Norwegian way of “fixing” similar problems is using more restrictive airspace. Not all that more restrictive actually, but still. On the other hand, flying in C/D VFR is a normal thing if you want to go somewhere, at least along the coast. You cannot do that in A. Thus the practical consequence is hardly something to whine about. New GA airfields doesn’t pop up very often.
LeSving wrote:
New GA airfields doesn’t pop up very often.
No, but hopefully new approaches pop up more often, especially with the drastic reduction in costs.
LeSving wrote:
ENGK is not manned AFAIK, and this means, since it is inside a TIZ, that blind reports on the radio are mandatory. Effectively this means this new airfield in G, has grabbed a substantial chunk of “free” G airspace, changing it to G RMZ to be able to have IFR approaches, even though it’s still all in G.
According to NOTAMs the RMZ is suspended, as are the IFR approaches, until Arendal AFIS is available again.
Noe wrote:
No, but hopefully new approaches pop up more often, especially with the drastic reduction in costs.
Maybe, if there is a demand for it. I wonder how that would work in Norway though, at places with no existing TMA or TIA. It’s my understanding that a overlaying TMA or TIA is necessary, but I could be wrong.
Airborne_Again wrote:
According to NOTAMs the RMZ is suspended, as are the IFR approaches, until Arendal AFIS is available again.
Hmm, run out of money maybe? There has never been an Arendal EFIS either. Previously it was just a gravel short strip.
Got another one today.
Flying the RNAV 20 at Shoreham, I saw a TCAS return, 300ft below, apparently following the approach path from NITEN. This was IMC, though he may have been VMC.
Eventually at/after the FAF I got visual. It looked like a DA40, flying off somewhere to the west. I reported it to ATC. Apparently he was talking to Farnborough but they didn’t advise him of another aircraft (me) being very close.
Nothing one can do. PPLs aren’t trained to be approach-path aware. But at least he was Mode C, whereas much GA today has non-TXP due to this.
