![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Fri, 13 Oct 2017 22:05:33 -0700, tom wrote:
Whether this is what privatization looks like, or if it's just the way Europe does it, I don't know. As far as I know air traffic management in the UK is run by a non- government company and has been since the end of WW2. There was a massive airspace grab by the airlines in the late 40s/early 50s but that got fought off and controlled airspace pushed back to reasonable sizes. The only real issues since I've been flying have been the temporary Olympic airspace extension over London and the attempted landgrabs by TAG at Farnborough (still ongoing) and some regional airports with vastly inflated ideas of their traffic (Norwich, I'm looking at you). Generally, UK airspace management works fairly well. My club operates from an ex-RAF bomber field 11 nm west of Cambridge and 22 nm north of Stanstead. This puts us just 2 nm inside the outer layer of the Stanstead CTR - not a problem as at this distance we're under the outer layer of the 'inverted wedding cake', with its lower boundary at 5500 ft. This isn't usually an issue because its a pretty good day if we can get that high. Put it this way: I can only remember three flights in 17 years when I've been at 5000 and climbing over our field. Cambridge (Marshals) has 23,000 movements a year or thereabouts and seems happy with a standard sized ATZ plus a pair of ILS feathers (we add a margin to both and stay out of it) and RAF Lakenheath, a bit NE of Cambridge, has a standard military MATZ. We talk to both if we're passing within 5nm, they talk to each other and I frequently hear Cambridge Appproach warning their GA and bizjet traffic about gliders if its a good day. I believe Cambridge has a FLARM receiver in their tower, and their combination of radar and airband DF seems able to localise anybody talking to them. We have good relations with both airfields, getting regular visits from the USAF at Lakenheath and invitations to tour the tower and workshops at Marshals. IME there's no problem with with the UK's 'privatised' ATC, only with a few greedy airport operators who are getting a lot of pushback via the mandatory consultation process for airspace alteration. -- martin@ | Martin Gregorie gregorie. | Essex, UK org | |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
AOPA and ATC Privatization | Chip Jones | Instrument Flight Rules | 139 | November 12th 03 08:26 PM |
AOPA and ATC Privatization | Chip Jones | Piloting | 133 | November 12th 03 08:26 PM |
More about ATC privatization | Casey Wilson | Piloting | 1 | November 5th 03 03:20 PM |
What Don Young, R-AK says about ATC privatization | Chip Jones | Instrument Flight Rules | 2 | September 19th 03 05:10 AM |
What Don Young, R-AK says about ATC privatization | Chip Jones | Piloting | 2 | September 19th 03 05:10 AM |