Flying IFR in the UK using an IMC Rating

[Speedbird744]

Heres the situation:
I want to fly IFR from Elstree to Newcastle using an IMC rating (I have an FAA IR but will be flying a G Reg aircraft).
Firstly, Elstree and other airfields are noted on the Jepp Low Altitude Enroute chart, so how do you know where to start your routing?
With an IMC rating, can I then fly on the airways? If not then would I have to fly direct to each VOR?
Where do all the clearances come in? Would you have to leave Elstree VFR and then ..? Would you get one simple transponder code throughout the route and be handed off to radar controllers?
I would appreciate a reply as I've only flown IFR in the states.
Thanks

[FlyingForFun]

Speedbird,

First of all, the legalities. If you have an FAA IR, you may automatically fly in IMC outside of controlled airspace in the UK. This is not the same as having an IMC rating. You may also automatically apply to have an IMC rating put on your UK, or your UK-issued JAR, PPL, assuming you have one. If you do this, you will be entitled to fly in IMC in Class D and below (i.e. it adds the privilege of flying in Class D and Class E to what you already have).

Next, practicalities. Flying in IMC outside controlled airspace is, I think, very different to anything you've done in the US. I'd suggest getting a couple of hours dual with an IMC instructor first, so you can understand what's involved.

However, here's what you would do in practice:

You can leave Elstree IFR, and you can remain IFR the whole time you're in Class G if you want. Get a map which shows the area of coverage of LARS (Lower Airspace Radar Service) facilities - there's one in the front of Pooleys, amongst other places - and try to stay within the area they cover if possible. There is no requirement to speak to anyone if you're IFR outside of controlled airspace, but if you stay within range of a LARS facility you should ask for a Radar Information Service, which will give you traffic information for any known traffic, and traffic avoidance advice on request. You will get a transponder code if you get this service, but you will not keep it as you move from one unit to another. You may or may not be handed from one unit to the next, depending how busy they are, and they can refuse you the service if they are too busy.

As for navigation, you can use any method you see fit. Unlike airways flying, there is no "specified" method of navigation. You don't have to fly direct from VOR to VOR - you can fly a direct track if you want, using VOR/DME information, or any other information, to ensure you are on track. Without charts in front of me, I wouldn't know what to suggest for your route, but I do know that the area around Elstree is particularly tight as far as airspace is concerned, so that would be my main area of concern. You would not normally use an airways chart for a flight like this - the 1/2-million VFR chart contains all the information you need.

Hope that's a help - but I really would try to get some dual before you try this.

FFF
-------------

[Field In Sight]

Find an N-Registered aircraft and use that instead. You then can use your full FAA-IR privileges.

The IMC rating effectively allows you to fly in IMC but only
i. outside of controlled airspace (no clearances required or available). Radar cover is obviously sensible, but is not required or sometimes available.

ii. In class D airspace (clearance must be obtained before transiting each zone or approaching an airfield within it).

My IMC rating is based on my FAA IR and would only really use it to climb on top if required.

I haven't used it in anger due my worries about not being able to avoid other aircraft when the RAF go home for tea and switch off their nice radar antennas.
Unfortunately my lack of bottle doesn't let me subscribe to the "Big sky" theory.

If you seach on "big sky imc" you will find lots of discussion about it.

FIS

[Speedbird744]

So if I found an N Reg aircraft, and so using a full instrument rating, would I then be required to use the airways chart and everthing would be different?
As I can go in any class of airspace with that, where do I pick up the IFR clearance? Surely with this, everything is made easier?
Thanks

[FlyingForFun]

You wouldn't be required to use the airways if you flew an N-registered aircraft, but you would be able to. And it would be much easier.

Not 100% sure about the clearance, since I don't have the rating to be able to do this myself, but I think you would either contact your nearest LARS facility, or, if you're not within range of one, contact London Information, who will issue you with the clearance. I'm sure someone will correct me if I'm wrong, though.

FFF
-------------

[bookworm]

So if I found an N Reg aircraft, and so using a full instrument rating, would I then be required to use the airways chart and everthing would be different?

It would be closer to what you're used to in the US, but still with some substantial differences.

1) The flight plan format is different and an IFR FPL has to go through flow control -- you may get a slot.

2) You don't get a clearance with void time on the ground. You'd get airborne and talk to Luton, who would give you your onward airways clearance.

3) The airways tend to have high bases (MEAs) further north, for air traffic reasons rather than terrain or reception. FL110 is typical. You may find that you don't want to be in the airway, and I'd always recommend having a half-mil (sectional) chart available.

As I can go in any class of airspace with that, where do I pick up the IFR clearance? Surely with this, everything is made easier?

Bear in mind that outside controlled airspace, no separation is offered and no clearance is required. thus you only need a clearance for the segments of your route within controlled airspace. For a typical off-airways flight from Elstree to Newcastle, that may only be the crossing of the class D Luton zone. For the remainder of the route in class G, you can usually get a radar information or advisory service from participating LARS units.

[Aim Far]

Speedbird

I am in the same position as you (FAA IR and IMC that I'm confused about using). I have been reading up on this over the last two or three weeks to try to get a handle on the differences. I have also booked time with an instructor this weekend to get some experience.

If it helps, I found the IMC confuser quite useful as a quick guide to the regs, also www.pplir.com and most things written on the subject by about 7 or 8 people on this forum. Its also worth comparing anything you read with the equivalent version in the US to get an idea of the differences; I am guessing there's not that much difference in the rules, its just that you use different sections of the rules (eg rules for class G instead of E, procedural instead of radar-vectored).

I don't speak with any authority but it looks like you kind of have to forget much of what was normal in the states. There, being IFR makes it easy - same squawk, all clearances and handovers automatic, tower enroute clearances, preferred routes, MEAs that made sense, vectors to final approach fix. Here, we manage to make life difficult for ourselves as usual!

[Chilli Monster]

Nothing to add what to what others have said, but I will re-iterate FFF's point. If you've not flown IFR in the U.K off airways (or even in airways, there are differences to the states) then you'll possibly be like a fish out of water. I would strongly advise you find someone experienced in this sort of flying to do this trip with you and learn from them how they go about it.

[WorkingHard]

Does this not illustrate the absolute idiocy of some of our rules? Why should the registration of the a/c make any difference to competence or safety? If you have an IR then it should be useable whatever the country of registration of the a/c. What happens when say an AA crew ferry a BA 747 to Heathrow? Are they to be prosecuted for not being licenced?

[FlyingForFun]

Couldn't agree more, WorkingHard. (To answer your question, the AA crew could not fly a BA 747 to Heathrow legally unless either they had JAR licenses with an IR and a 747 rating, or the BA aircraft was on the N-register for some reason.)

What I think is even more ridiculous, though, is this: Speedbird is experienced at flying airways, and, I assume, competent at doing so. Yet our authorities will quite happilly let him fly in our Class G, with no further training - something which I doubt he's spent more than a couple of minutes at a time doing in America, if he's done it at all - but won't let him do what he's familiar with, which is fly airways. :confused:

FFF
-------------

[WorkingHard]

FFF - precicely, so what can the aviation world (in the UK that is) do about it? Surely we must have some way of getting the CAA to change the sheer stupidity of some of the rules. In the past such actions depended on a variety of different things but now with the internet and emails can someone (with far better knowledge than me) suggest a way of "pressurising" for change. At the very least we must get the CAA to give valid reasons for such stupidity.They are no longer in an ivory tower out of reach, remember that everyone.

[2Donkeys]

This is all very interesting and you may feel that the CAA is stupid.

On the other hand try and set that aside. On the basis of the questions being asked by Speedbird744 at the top of this thread, would you really want him operating IFR inside or outside controlled airspace in the UK until he has at least received some additional training.

You can argue about the costs, but not surely, the need.

This is not an attack on Speedbird744 by the way. It is good to ask the question ahead to trying to gain the experience. I am local to you BAW744 and would be happy to help. Give me a PM.

2D

[IO540]

The reason a pilot needs one license/rating/aircraft registration for a given type of use in one country, and another in another country but flying the same way in the same airspace, is solely the result of each country wishing to maintain its's own political oversight of aviation in its airspace.

Why an FAA PPL/IR can fly UK airways in an N-reg but not in a G-reg (one of many examples) cannot be connected with safety.

There is no need to look for charitable explanations - the whole world is run by politicians after all; some of us even vote for them every few years, and they are all over the news every day :O

The UK CAA is also self-financing; translating this into English, it means it makes money by selling bits of paper with "CAA" rubber stamps on them, and by charging out its inspectors by the hour.

The salaries, mortgages, pensions of tens of thousands of people around the world depend on the maintenance of these regulations, and turkeys will never vote for xmas.

Some might be suprised the original person who has an FAA IR doesn't know how to fly IFR in the UK, but a JAR IR won't know anything about the U.S. airspace system either.

[2Donkeys]

but a JAR IR won't know anything about the U.S. airspace system either.

Whilst the thrust of your argument is undoubtedly true, it is the UK and its airspace that is the odd man out.

Flying IFR in the US is not appreciably different to flying IFR in France, Germany, Iceland or anywhere else for that matter... except the UK.

By accommodating the IMC rating with it curious ability to permit flight outside the "airways" system (for want of a better description), we introduce a whole type of uncontrolled flight that is unparalleled almost anywhere else in the world.

This is neither bad nor good, but it does mean that an ICAO IR faces unique challenges trying to come to terms with our system, that he would not face in most other places.

Speedbird744 is a great case in point.

[DFC]

I'm with 2Donkeys on this one -

Well done to the person for recognising that they need some help and asking the important questions.

From the post, there makes little difference if the flight is on or off airways - this pilot has never operated IFR in Europe and thus needs some advice as to the requirements.

One could simply say that the AIP provides all the required information for a qualified pilot to use and indeed it does, but there is nothing better than an experienced instructor explaining the simple ways to operate which comply with the requriements.

As to the regulator and the regulations - The CAA allows N reg aircraft flown by pilots with FAA IRs to fly on airways because under international treaty it must. The FAA provides the same privilege to UK pilots flying G reg aircraft in return. If the CAA can show that on the whole, FAA IR holders are not fully capable to operate within the airway system then the CAA can take a case up with ICAO and the FAA - not with the individual pilot.

Personally, I feel that it is a mistake to automatically allow ICAO IR holders to automatically obtain an IMC since the IMC by definition places many ICAO IR holders in a situation for which they are not fully trained.

Perhaps this is another area where "differences training" could be deemed appropriate by the CAA.

Regards,

DFC

[IO540]

DFC

I feel that it is a mistake to automatically allow ICAO IR holders to automatically obtain an IMC since the IMC by definition places many ICAO IR holders in a situation for which they are not fully trained

Could you please explain why you think this is a problem?

I am not an IR and have never flown airways, but it seems to me that if you have passed the FAA IR test and fly airways, you are equally capable of IFR flight off airways. Flying IFR around the UK in Class G or D is really pretty simple.

[2Donkeys]

IO540

You would be better off addressing your question to Speedbird744. He is just such a case in point.


There is quite an art to flying IFR off airways and in and out of controlled airspace, in the way expected of an IMC-rating holder. The lack of positive control, and the need to negotiate transit clearances, RIS/RAS arrangements and so forth places quite a workload on one who is used to the relative ease of airways flying.

Not least, the workload of having to navigate your way around controlled airspace in IMC, having been declined a transit clearance can be surprisingly high.

[FlyingForFun]

2Donks beat me to it - Speedbird's first post illustrates perfectly why an ICAO IR does not prepare anyone for flying IFR in our Class G. The biggest giveaway is that he refers to the "Jepp Low Altitude Enroute chart". How many IMC-rated pilots have even seen one of these, I wonder? It's a completely different world to airways. Hardly Speedbird's fault - his training simply didn't prepare him for this.

It does make me wonder how foreign airline crews manage when they arrive at some of the UK's smaller airports. Exeter, for example, is a Class G airport, and I presume would require crews to negotiate a RAS for themselves as they leave the airways. And there are quite a few airports which are bigger than Exeter, possibly in Class D airspace, but with no controlled airspace joining their CTR/CTZ to the airways. I wonder if the crews are required to undergo any special training, or only allowed to visit these airports with another pilots who's been there before?

FFF
-----------

[Chilli Monster]

It does make me wonder how foreign airline crews manage when they arrive at some of the UK's smaller airports.

Arriving's fine - departure's are where the problems normally occur.

You have to lead them by the hand and be very careful with clearance's and departure instructions. More often than not you give an airways joining clearance, which they think is also how they are expected to depart. Then, due to local traffic considerations you may have to give them an intermediate departure instruction (straight ahead 3000 to maintain for example). There have been a few occasions when they've got to the initial level given on the instruction and because the "to maintain" has been missed they've carried on to the airways joining point, climbing to the joining level.

That's when the job becomes interesting ;)

[2Donkeys]

Exeter, for example, is a Class G airport, and I presume would require crews to negotiate a RAS for themselves as they leave the airways. And there are quite a few airports which are bigger than Exeter, possibly in Class D airspace, but with no controlled airspace joining their CTR/CTZ to the airways. I wonder if the crews are required to undergo any special training, or only allowed to visit these airports with another pilots who's been there before?

This is not as bad as it first seems, and once again, is not an unusual situation abroad either. Not every French airfield is connected to controlled airspace in the British sense.

When an "airways" IFR flight flies into Exeter, there comes a point where the airways controller will identify the flight to Exeter's approach radar controller and a handover will occur (same squawk). If descended outside controlled airspace, the flight will normally be offered a RAS (RIS minimum) and vectored in the ordinary way for an approach. The Terms RAS and RIS are British inventions so perhaps the only room for confusion is over the actual nature of the service being offered. Procedurally, there is nothing there that a foreign crew should not cope with.

Arriving at a field that lies outside controlled airspace and lacks a radar controller is also not too unfamiliar to foreign crews. The airways controller will typically finish by pointing the crew at the appropriate IAF and clearing them to leave controlled airspace by descent. Once within shouting distance of the target airfield, the crew will be handed to the Approach frequency at the airfield in question and put under a procedural "approach control service". Once again, this is the same procedure as is employed abroad, only the terminology is slightly different.


The issue occasionally comes when a crew is leaving a small field under IFR. This is particularly true if IFR departures are relatively rare. Often the only clearance the crew will receive is to "remain outside controlled airspace" and to contact London Information for an IFR clearance once airborne. This leaves the crew of the Gulfstream or Citation with the unenviable task of using Jepp airways charts to fly effectively VFR outside controlled airspace for the 5-10 minutes it can take to arrange an IFR joining clearance via London. Old hands will be familiar with ways that this process can be shortcut, but it still catches many crews out. In this respect, the UK is rather different from most other "developed" countries and offers a somewhat lower level of service.

2D

Phew! Glad we agreed with one another CM :D

[IO540]

2D

I never knew flying airways was supposed to be that easy :O

Not least, the workload of having to navigate your way around controlled airspace in IMC, having been declined a transit clearance can be surprisingly high.

Yes, I have come across this (e.g. Brize refusing transit) and the simple answer is to have a decent moving map GPS which shows the airspace boundaries. Those without have a lot of work to do.

[2Donkeys]

Those without have a lot of work to do.

It is not more than a few years ago that we were all without. By eck! Men were men in those days, and the sheep were glad of it :D

[englishal]

Perhaps this is another area where "differences training" could be deemed appropriate by the CAA.
Again more compulsory training? :D There's too much of that already.

I was in the same situation as Speedbird, an FAA IR holder with an IMC rating on the back of it. The FAA IR holder is trainied to fly "proper IFR" in airways, and I feel the safest course of action would be for the CAA to allow an ICAO IR holder into the airways in a G reg with say a couple of hours difference training.

Myself, I hired an instructor and bashed around a bit IMCr IFR, crossing zones, picking up clearances, filing flight plans, picking up RIS outside CAS. My conclusion, is that its not rocket science, its all fairly easy. Slight quirks which could catch you out are the fact that you could get a zone entry refusal. Imagine you're now in hard IMC, trying to remain outside Class A airspace, and now you're refused a zone entry...This is a very high workload scenario, trying to re-route yourself around the zone. Having said that, I have never been refused to date. You're also not guaranteed any sort of radar service, which can be a bit disconcerting, though the phrase "IFR IMC" in the call to the ATCU seems to help (never been refused a Radar service when IFR, only VFR).

I think its worth remembering that an FAA IR holder is far more qualified and probably more capable to control an aircraft in IMC than a fresh IMC holder, the actual flying in IMC should present no problem. (I make this sweeping statement becasue during my IR training, after 15 hours I looked back and thought to myself, that there was no way I was safe to act as PIC of an aircraft in IMC:D). Its the way of doing things which present the challenge.

Cheers
EA:D

[2Donkeys]

The FAA clearly agrees with the thrust of Englishal's point.

ICAO IR holders presenting their licences for recognition in the US are required only to sit the Instrument Pilot Foreign written exam, prior to having their IR endorsed over onto their FAA licence.

The Instrument Pilot Foreign exam consists of 50 questions drawn selectively from the FAA IR questionbank with a focus on amongst other things, airspace, flight rules and weather.

Something similar would be a smart move here, but would of course blow a big hole in the market for native JAA IRs.


It is worth remembering though that US ATPs flying their 777s into LHR have sat through rather more than just the FAA IR.

Unlike JAA-land, the US has an actual ATP flight test and this is executed substantially on instruments to much tighter tolerances than either the FAA or JAA IR.

The JAA IR and the standards it sets lies somewhat between the FAA IR and the FAA ATP, but will be the only true instrument flight test that a JAA-licensed pilot will ever take.

That gap needs to be bridged before JAA land *really* accepts FAA IRs as being on a par with the JAA example.


2D

[Aim Far]

Slightly off topic I know but how do the CAA get away with setting our airways levels so high?

The MEA for an airway is supposed to be the minimum required to guarantee IFR terrain clearance plus navigation reception but this is surely not the criteria the CAA use if we have airways starting up at FL80 and above in the UK.

[2Donkeys]

Have you ever met the GA lobby? :D

Because our airways are (for the most part) class A, and therefore inaccessible to the vast majority of private pilots, the pressure is on the CAA not to hog lower levels without strong justification.

The pressure on N866 between SAM and ORTAC (base FL35) from the GA lobby is enormous.

If our airways were class E/D like elsewhere, they could start a lot lower.

2D

[baldwim]

What class are the airways in places like USA and France? Particularly at the lower levels that may be applicable to GA.

Mark

[owenlars]

Don't know about the States but in France all airspace below FL195 is open to everyone. Separation VFR from IFR is achieved by the Semicircular + 500 rule which is mandatory in France. (VFR cruisng levels are Odd + 500 feet for 000-180 and even +500 for 180-360) This link explains more .

http://www.higher.flyer.co.uk/html/fairways.html

So you can cruise at any level you want VFR as long as you are below FL195 and at the right semicircular rule level for your heading, in an airway or not as the case may be

IFR of course you fly the assigned level and heading. France also very often route you direct so you spend a lot of time outside airways even IFR

[2Donkeys]

In the US airways below 18000 feet (the transition) are Class E, which means that they are open to VFR traffic without a clearance.

I wrote the article which owenlars points us to, but in the interests of clarity a minor clarification or two is needed

Below FL195, airspace in France is in principle open to all, EXCEPT that airways (to answer the particular question) are class E below FL115, and class D above. This means that in practical terms an ATC clearance is required to transit France above FL115 since you can't go far without crossing an airway. It is somewhat unusual to receive such a clearance however unless you are on a legitimate IFR flight plan, so you should probably regard FL115 as the ceiling of easily-navigable VFR airspace in France.

Into this block between the surface and FL115 are placed a number of TMAs and control zones, the majority of which are Class E or D, and a truly alarming number of Danger and Restricted Areas.

It is these "d" and "r" areas that represent the biggest flight planning issue in performing transits of France under VFR, and not the airways.

[DFC]

I can definitely say that on airways IFR is far easier than off airways.

The biggest thing for an IR holder off airwas is making sure one does not enter one without a clearance - extra things to look out for. Personally, I am happy to fly IFR off airways in the UK - but I prefer to be VMC on top for the route.

With regard to the Japp IFR charts - do not use them as sole means of navigation off airways. The reason is that the Jepps specify the minimum cruising level and this may be several thousands of feet above the airway base!!! - Use 1:500000 for airspace info.

As for commercial flights from places like exeter etc - most crews who do not reguluarly use the airfield don't know what class of airspace they are in at any time. The only time many comercial crews wake up and listen is when some controller says "Radar service terminated, Flight information available from XYZ on 123.45 Goodbye" :D

That is why one can oftern hear the following;

London ABC123 request direct XYZ.
ABC123 London that will take you out side controlled airspace
OK London, we will stay on our present plan then.

The crew were not aware of the airspace until it was pointed out by the ATCO.

As for training - why not require ICAO IR holders to complete the IMC written exam before obtaining the rating. we know that they can fly the aircraft in IMC. What they neeed help with is the planning and execution of a flight under IFR in Class G.


2 Donkeys -

JAA requires a Skill Test for the grant of an ATPL.

I think you may have confused the JAA with the UK which had some system whereby pilots who had never been in a multi-pilot aircraft could obtain an ATPL.

Regards,

DFC

[2Donkeys]

2 Donkeys -

JAA requires a Skill Test for the grant of an ATPL.

I made my point badly. My point was that whereas the FAA system has a built-in second level of IFR proficiency in the form of the ATP flight test, the JAA system does not. The instrument flight standards tested in the FAA ATP flight test are not mirrored by the JAA ATPL skils test.

2D

[IO540]

owenlars / 2D

It is mentioned that one can fly VFR without ATC clearance below FL115. I have a French chart here showing a mass of airways down to FL065. Can these really be crossed without ATC clearance?

What is the situation in Spain? Much of that is either Class D or restricted. I have flown above the restricted bits, sometimes at FL140, but on Sundays one can get a clearance through them. Is it better to get a clearance through the Class D airways?

Back to France, normally I would be in radio contact, not least because of all the Class D/E for which one needs a transit clearance. But a lot of the time there is nobody on the frequency or there is an announcement giving some frequencies to call and calling each of them in turn does not yield a response! Especially on Sundays. Often a am transferred from one ATCU to another and upon getting no response I go back and he just says "keep trying". In that situation, class D/E is out.

The problem is highly variable; on some trips the service is brilliant; on others a lot of the frequencies are unmanned.

As 2D says, the military/restricted/TRA stuff is the hardest and basically this means one either needs to be a damn good map reader or use a decent GPS. There are some parts e.g. down near LFBZ where the gaps between the mil airspace are so narrow, the place is not safely navigable without a GPS; presumably the locals either avoid whole areas or they know which exact ground features to follow.

I am not suggesting relying on an airspace feature as depicted on the GPS; one uses a chart for that but a GPS with the Jepp database will show enough of the airspace to make it easy to see where one is on the chart. Some airspace features are missing or improperly depicted on the Jepp GPS database (e.g. Class A airways) so the GPS can't be relied on solely. But with a chart it works a treat for navigating between/around airspace.

[Chilli Monster]

It is mentioned that one can fly VFR without ATC clearance below FL115. I have a French chart here showing a mass of airways down to FL065. Can these really be crossed without ATC clearance? Unless they're classified as 'D' (which they probably won't be) then the answer is - yes

Go back to your original airlaw that you did for the PPL - types pf airspace. Class 'E' is class 'E' and as such it is perfectly legal to operate VFR without speaking to anybody - whereas if you're IFR you require a clearance. USA is the same (where class 'E' often starts at 1200' agl over most of the country).

Just because airways are marked, doesn't mean that they're automatically class 'A' like they are in the UK. In Europe they are just routeings recognised by the IFPS computer for the benefit of IFR flight - nothing more until you get above FL115 where they become Class 'D' and FL195 where they finally become Class 'A'.

Back to France, normally I would be in radio contact, not least because of all the Class D/E for which one needs a transit clearance. For Class 'D' - yes, but for Class 'E' you're wrong, you don't if you're VFR - see answer above.

As 2D says, the military/restricted/TRA stuff is the hardest and basically this means one either needs to be a damn good map reader or use a decent GPS. There are some parts e.g. down near LFBZ where the gaps between the mil airspace are so narrow, the place is not safely navigable without a GPS

The answer here is planning. Not all of the areas are active at the time of your flight. Not all of them stretch from ground level to infinity. Restricted Airspace in France is 4 dimensional - measured laterally, logditudinally, vertically, and by time. Bottlang section 4 for each country it covers gives operating agencies for restricted airspace as well as activity times and frequencies - it's not as daunting as it looks. You just have to give it a bit of time and attention before getting in the aircraft.

[DFC]

Indeed in France, airways up to FL115 are class E. Many CTA's and CTRs are also class E.

Three important points regarding VFR along or across airways in France -

1. The flight must be flown at a VFR cruising level appropriate to track. Odd+500 eastbound, Even+500 westbound.

2. Where a restricted area is designated as "flights on airway XXX can cross without clearance" - this applies to IFR flights on the airway only. If you are cruising along the airway VFR then a clearance request must be made if the restricted area is active. (For IFR flights, ATC will know about the flight and coordinate the crossing).

3. Where the airway is designated as even flight levels in a particular direction e.g. south east bound but Even levels specified. Or where the airway is designated as one way. These requirements only apply to IFR flights and VFR flights must operate in the normal way.

As CM says, at first, France appears to be almost covered in restricted airspace until one checks the timings and finds that many are only active at night and many others are only very low level. My advice - plan the route as direct as you wish to fly and then draw a list of restricted areas to check if they will be active at the time of your flight.

In France, the airspace from FL115 to FL195 is class D.
However, there is a NOTAM that has been around for years saying that due to the high level of IFR traffic loading at those levels, VFR clearances will not be issued.

I'm not that up to speed on Spain's airspace but the AIP is on line for anyone interested. Can't remember the address but Eurocontrol AIS has a link.

However, these later questions regarding France and Spain do show that the average pilot can be slightly behind the curve even when operating in a country which is next door!! (be that VFR or IFR) - Very few of us could quote the French low flying regs without looking up the AIP.

But isn't that the whole rationalle of ICAO Standards and AIPs - we know the average requirements and simply check the AIP for differences? The only problem being that many of us learn to consider the local differences as normal making transition more difficult. i.e. people who learn their IR in the US consider the US system the norm and are not shown just how much that system varies from the ICAO one so that the AIP can be used as intended.

Regards,

DFC

[Fly Stimulator]

I'm not that up to speed on Spain's airspace but the AIP is on line for anyone interested. Can't remember the address but Eurocontrol AIS has a link.
In the hope that the location of the Spanish AIP isn't too much of a diversion for a thread that was about flying IFR in the UK, I offer this. (http://ais.aena.es/aipeng/Hoja_presentacion_AipEng.htm)

[tmmorris]

What's the official reason given in the UK that we can't have class E airways here at low level - or even class D? Is it really to keep NATS workload down (i.e. those with IR's are more likely to be over 2 tonnes and hence paying)? From the safety point of view the only consideration I suppose is that any IFR flights in VMC in class E need to be looking where they are going - but it would considerably improve safety for GA IFR flights. Class C or D would create extra workload for controllers keeping VFR separated from IFR, but in class E the only extra work would be low-level IFR flights, and I can't believe it would be very many (perhaps I'm naive).

Tim

[FlyingForFun]

However, these later questions regarding France and Spain do show that the average pilot can be slightly behind the curve even when operating in a country which is next doorThe key, as always, is planning - and, IMHO, there is no excuse for being "behind the curve". All of the information which is required is out there - it's either printed on the charts, or in the Jeppesen guides. It's just a matter of taking the time to read it before you go!

You give the specific example of French low-flying rules. You are correct, I can't quote them off the top of my head. A minimum height above built up areas, the height dependant on the size of the built up area (which you can determine from its colour on the chart), if I remember correctly. The heights are printed on the French charts, but I can't remember what they are. However, if I were to plan a trip to France, I'd have the chart in front of me when I did my planning. I'd choose a height which fitted in with the rules, I'd write the height down on my Plog, and I'd fly it. If there was a chance that the weather might prevent me from flying at such a height, then I'd note the minimum legal height on my Plog so that I knew I'd have to divert if necessary. There is no need (thankfully!) to commit to memory the rules in every European country!

As for French restricted areas, I agree with CM that planning, in my limited experience, enabled me to find a route through a huge mass of red areas (including a frequency to call to cross one of those red areas, and an alternative route if the crossing clearance was denied). The hardest part was actually interpreting the charts! There are so many overlapping areas, with different heights or altitudes and different times of activities, that anywhere on the charts where two red lines cross you need to be particularly careful to figure out which line goes which way. At least, that was what I found. I "augmented" the relevant section of my chart so that I could clearly see the boundaries of each of the separate areas, and once I'd done that, it became much easier. Definitely not something I could have done in the air, though - although I don't know if it gets easier if you have a few hundred hours of reading French charts to help you out.

FFF
---------------

[IO540]

Chilli Monster

Certainly I do plan it all beforehand and as you say many of the areas one can go under or over; that's obvious because it says so on the chart! My drift (no pun) was that amazingly accurate navigation is required in places. I never had the slightest problem doing it but a typical visitor in his spamcan would need to avoid a lot of places.

However a lot of the restricted airspace has no phone # attached and no published hours (I have asked); one has to make a call when in the air. It turns out that much of it is inactive on a Sunday (e.g. R31A1) but is active Mon-Fri; I've never been there on a Saturday so don't know. One can give a list of the restricted areas to one's first radio contact after crossing the channel and they will happily telephone Cazaux or whatever and find out.

Thanks for the Class E info - I forgot, not having any around here.

There is indeed a collection of AIPs on the Eurocontrol website but I found it unusable. The client side Java stuff is around 20MB and the PC crashed too often when browsing it.

The Q re Spain was really how easy is it to get VFR clearance through their Class D airways where the MSA is perhaps FL100.

[bluskis]

DFC

Thanks for mentioning the Notam stating 'no VFR clearances above FL 115. I had always considered that was the VFR limit, but had been unaware why.

[Fly Stimulator]

There is indeed a collection of AIPs on the Eurocontrol website but I found it unusable.
I agree, the Eurocontrol web site is pretty dreadful, though useful information is buried there if you can stand the interface and poor performance long enough to uncover it.

If you're after French information it's much easier to go to the SIA site. (http://www.sia.aviation-civile.gouv.fr/default_uk.htm)

For details of all the various bits of French restricted areas (hours, who to contact etc.) buy the set of SIA charts. They come with a VFR Guide booklet which lists the lot.

The charts, although they're for VFR flight, show the airways too.

You can buy the set in the UK, or online from France for less in Euros than it costs in pounds here.

This is what I'm talking about...

http://www.doyousoft.net/dys-sites/pbdys045/boutique/images_produits/02-01-007-TJ_2.jpg

[Field In Sight]

You could start to use the Jeppeson VFR charts for the UK and whenever you fly to the continent use the Jeppeson VFR charts for wherever you go.

Then you won't have to interpret the new symbols.

I am thinking of buying them from now on as they are 4 quid per chart cheaper.

FIS

[DFC]

Yes £4 per chart cheaper.

But -

1. More charts are required; and

2. There has been a few cases recently where a Jeppesen chart has been produced just before a major airspace change which had been notifed some months prior. The ICAO charts were revised and up to date but the Jeppesen charts took more than 6 months for an update.

3. Topographical information is very poor when one is familiar with the UK layer tinting and heights being in regular increments of feet. For this, have a look at the Welsh borders on the UK chart and compare the info provided on the Jepp VFR chart. While doing that, read the big long disclaimer on the jepp chart regarding heights.

4. While talking about France - the Jepp charts don't show the airways. OK for VFR, the airspace is class E and one does not need a clearance to enter. But I would still like to know where to expect the airways traffic even if it is VMC.

Personally, having tried the Jeppesen VFR charts, if there is an ICAO chart available, I'll use it for VFR flying. If not then I'll get a Jeppesen one since some form of info is better than none at all.

Regards,

DFC