Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Chris Pawley

active 2019-01-03 Agreements in TC North East

Recommended Posts

Chris Pawley

Effective 03 January 2019

Due to the implimentation of the TC VATON airspace on VATSIM - our current sectors and agreements do not allow the full flexibility of the airspace to be exploited by TC North East. We therefore have changes some agreements between sectors.

image.png.916d149a9ad0202d82f8780439e34759.png

 

Currently, two agreements exist in the South-West corner of this sector which can cause problems for the controller of TC North East.

  • AC Worthing->TC North East : Essex inbounds are routing VATON->BPK descending FL140 level BPK
  • TC South East -> AC Worthing : Gatwick outbounds are on a heading West of LAM, towards HEMEL climbing FL130 to FL190 (unknown to TC North East) - FL130 must be achieved by the TC South East/TC North East boundary.

We considered changing the boundary between AC Worthing and TC North East here, but found it would limit the controller further (especially when climbing Heathrow outbounds via Brookman's Park)

New Agreements

  • Essex inbounds will be handed from AC Worthing to TC North East descending FL160 (no level by point, but approx VATON)

This agreement will be shown with a down arrow to indicating descending, no level by

image.png.1c13284cf7d3f4970e58f97b6eba52dd.png

  • TC South East-> AC Worthing : Agreement does not change, traffic needs to climb such that it crosses the TC South East/TC North East boundary at or FL130 (as currently)
  • AC Worthing will ensure this traffic climbs FL155 or higher before a line parrallel to the North edge of the London CTA and hand to AC Daventry climbing FL190.

See below a schematic for the relative positions and level by points:

 

image.png.6419b77597401217911820125c0b7ea6.png

We have implimented the new agreement in the UK Sector File and will provide new agreed level diagrams as soon as is practicable.

 

Thanks to @Harry Sugden for preparing the graphics for these changes.

Edited by Chris Pawley

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

  • Similar Content

    • Chris Pawley
      By Chris Pawley
      Effective 21 May 2020
       
      The Heathrow RMA is revised in the vicinity of the OCK area, now the outer boundary of the RMA is on a track OCK-BIG (rather than OCK-EPM-BIG) and traffic may be descended below MSL by Heathrow when North of the DET SID track.

       
      Documentation revisions to reflect this change will follow, the 2020/06 version of the sector file has these changes already applied.
       
      Thanks to @Sebastian Rekdal for the graphics
    • Chris Pawley
      By Chris Pawley
      Effective 2020-05-21
       
      Agreements between Antrim and Scottish TMA are amended as follows:
       
      Traffic inbound to EGPK:- Descend to FL80 and coordinate with EGPK_APP
      Traffic inbound to EGPF:- Descend to FL150 level GIRVA and transfer to Scottish TMA
      Traffic inbound to EGPH:- Descend to FL170 level TUNSO and transfer to Scottish TMA
       
      The Agreed levels diagrams will be updated in the next cycle and published in 2020/07, the Sector File has these changes from 2020/06 onwards.
    • Chris Pawley
      By Chris Pawley
      Effective 21 May 2020
       
      The runway at London/Luton is redesignated 07/25 with magnetic headings of 075/255 - with all SIDs being redesignated to reflect the change of departure runway.
       
      No fundemental change of procedures is required, simply references to runway 08/26 should be transcribed.
       
      These changes are added to the Sector File from 2020/06
    • Chris Pawley
      By Chris Pawley
      Effective 6th April 2020
       
      As of 6th April, Heathrow has adjusted the noise alleviation scheme for local residents in light of the significantly reduced demand on the aerodrome. This scheme affords many local residents a respite from the noise and disruption from living near to the airport.
       
      The new arrangements see the airport utilising one runway for a week at time.
       
      Already in the last two days we have seen conflicts and complications applying these procedures. We see the opportunity to do something different as interesting, but this comes with some caveats and guidance. The VATSIM situation could not be any more different to the real situation - we're busier than ever - therefore :-
       
      It is the sole discretion of the Tower controller to determine whether to use single or dual runway(s). The choice of runway should be informed by the alternation plan for the respective option. Traffic levels are the primary consideration for a choice of mode - for example, there is no need for inbound to hold or departing traffic to recieve unnecessary delay while one totally servicable and usable runway is available. Runways should not be opened and closed excessively. Ideally controllers will decide a mode to operate in for the duration of their session. During training, members should be especially considerate to ensure the training process is not impacted and that students are supported as much as possible.  
      If the inter-member conflicts continue and operations continue to be impacted, we will revert to the dual runway alternation programme as published in December 2019.
       
       
×
×
  • Create New...