England's 1st RNP approach with air-ground
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 7 сен 2024
- In June 2023, Sherburn in Elmet became the first uncontrolled aerodrome in England, with just and air-ground communication service to have RNP approaches approved. I was one of the first pilots to fly them.
A few aerodromes with AFISOs have been granted RNP approaches, but this is the first with an A/G service.
The Flying Reporter is supported by Anglian Flight Centres
www.anglianfli...
This episode is sponsored by AOPA UK. Get a 25% discount off new AOPA UK memberships using my exclusive link here:
www.aopa.co.uk...
My website and social media
The Flying Reporter website: www.jonhunt.net
Facebook: / theflyingreporter
Twitter: / jonhunttv
Instagram: / flyingreporteruk
Never realised that until now none of the UK's uncontrolled aerodromes have an RNP approach. We're really lucky in Australia that most out here do. Great to see this in action, but I do wonder if the pre-approval document that you need to sign, no 'in-air' approval to fly the RNP, AND the fact you have to book a slot to use it will reduce its usage somewhat. But progress nonetheless. Interesting video as always Jon.
Thanks Stefan. I think it's progress of a sort! It may lay the foundations for it to become more widespread and less restrictive in future. Probably need to sort the ATS out first and reduce the cost burden of the process.
@@TheFlyingReporter I didn't know either. Nor did I know you could turn the radio off in Golf and IMC! Thank you, I wouldn't have believed if I'd been told it was possible.
Great news if you need an RNAV approach, have booked a slot time in advance and don’t happen to be arriving on a weekend. And of course give way to circuit traffic 🤯
I think it can be used at the weekend in anger if could base below 1200ft, but yes, a lot of restrictions on it sadly.
Great oaks from little acorns. Once CAA is satisfied that everything is running smoothly, it will start to lift the restrictions. It *does* take its obligation to safety and delegated safety very seriously, especially after the TARFU at Shoreham.
"private, disjointed, uncoordinated" - the most accurate description I've heard, thank you! I find it hard to believe that the CAA, who have IFR uncontrolled traffic seemingly now want an abundance of caution where they've applied zero previously with the widespread class G IFR. I'm based in the US and so spoiled but I'm appalled that a first world country like the UK can have such an awful ATC system.
You are correct but the system works most of the time because of the professional attitude of ATC who operate the system on the face of ignorance from the politicians.
You’ve got to remember the UK is a small country and extremely compact with multiple military and civil airports and airspace. That said The government and larger airports have been very unfriendly towards GA for years now. They just don’t want to deal with GA.
@@jonathanbeattie3410 I'm also a British ex-pat, and for good reason. The insanity is that the infrastructure exists, it just needs to be reorganized into something sane. The almost countrywide class E works exceptionally well here and not all has radar coverage.
There are distinctions here. While the service itself is indeed disjointed and utterly inadequate for GA pilots, the actual controllers themselves are usually extremely good and often outstanding. So we have exemplary staff trying to man a lousy system. Yet another privatised utility in the UK that has proven to be a miserable failure.
One of the reasons for CAA's approach is that it has neither the staff nor the budget to manage GA properly. Instead of attempting to sort out the mess in a half-hearted manner, it has chosen to leave it alone and hope that everyone will stumble along and avoid any disasters by a mixture of skill and good fortune. So long as the Transport Secretary and/or Aviation Minister continue to take an interest, there is hope that we will move towards a much better place, though as with all government things, progress is often painfully slow.
Excellent work Jon and good on Sherburn for getting this sorted.
Thanks Rory.
Right so if I'm getting this right, the CAA are happy to us to do this approach and details can be found on display in the bottom of a locked filing cabinet stuck in a disused lavatory with a sign on the door saying ‘Beware of the Leopard”? Also it can only happen when Mars is in Jupiter, the groundhog can't see its own shadow, and the tea leaves fall in precisely the right configuration... It's a lovely video as ever Jon and good on you for explaining it all so clearly, you just couldn't ask for a better example of where GA traffic fits in the grand scheme of things here in the UK however.
The approaches are published in the AIP, so not that difficult to find.
Ever thought of going into advertising?
heaven forbid if you arrive there and the cloud base is just below VFR and rather than scudding in you feel it more prudent to fly the IAP. You could hold for an hour I suppose for the next slot to become available ... haha
@@evanscm3 ah but you've forgotten you need to book a holding slot to do that and the only way to do that was be in a queue round the back of an unmarked office in Rickmansworth in 1978
How should it work then?
Thank you for your work. Thank you so much for speaking so well (aviation English matters these days). Thank you for sharing your knowledge and experience. This channel contributes to flight safety.
Thank you!
Excellent work and very interesting to see John. One thing I will take away from this is about the short legs and increased cockpit workload - particuarly when doing a T Bar. Excellent work by Sherburn as well!
Seems like a lot going on for that RNP approach :O very informative!
Fantastic that they went to the effort and expense to provide this opportunity. But it’s crazy as a non-Brit that such effort is required for what seems to be something critical for training and maintaining currency.
Don't worry, it's crazy as a Brit too.
A good self de-brief about getting configured early to avoid overload, your second generation GPS & HSI also don’t help . Having flown my first RMP (LVP) in a PA28 without a HSI i found the workload manageable but having now moves to the latest generation of GPS & cockpit display with HSI auto slew the cockpit workload is further reduced and situational awareness increased. Now RMP approaches are my first option .
Well done Sherburn for fighting to get this through. Shouldn't have taken so long..
As someone doign their IRR and finding the workload high, this was a good demonstration as to how even experienced pilots have glitches.
The IRR was the most difficult thing I ever did in flying ( alongside the A320 ground engineers course in difficulty) to expect a 15 hour student to pass a test to IR standards is a big ask and the video shows a de-brief that is superb about workload management. Good luck with the IRR……… after the IRR the full IR is just a bit of practice.
Good video Jon, and as a bonus 4:27 G-FLAV sighted!
Well done for explaining that, Jon. Great video 👌👍
Hi Jon, great video! Thankyou,
One point, you say its a 'standard 3.5° approach'. But it isn't, it's a rather sporty 6.12°. No doubt anyone being briefed will notice that, but you may want to pin a note.
And well done Sherburn (couldn't find an instrument approach on Skydemon or the eAIS for Leeds East/Church Fenton EGMC) for grinding through the long process, lets hope they get cheaper and more numerous.
Hi Neil. It's a 6.12% approach, which is 3.5 degrees.
Percent gradients are not intuitive. Degrees far better understood.
@@TheFlyingReporter every day a school day. Thanks!
I eventually find the Leeds East approaches, they're live in the next release cycle
Another entertaining video, Jon. Pleased to see the new Sherburn/Leeds East RNP up and running. It’s been a long time coming. Hopefully this will help to provide a strong case for more RNP approaches at uncontrolled airfields. 🤞
Sherburn is a fantastic airfield to visit.
it works so well in America, it is about time we had more bits from America
Congratulations EGCJ - always at the forefront. Passed my GFT there under the guidance of 'Jacko' Jackson. Since have multi instrument privileges and have flown parallel approches in Miami, Orlando, etc with Airbus and Boeing aircraft with no problem. Am I allowed to do that in the U.K.? Hell no! Although my license privileges say I can do that in most parts of the world the U.K.is of course higher and mightier than others. Come on CAA, pick up the dropped ball.
🤯 making progress though!
Slowly, slowly!
I am not a pilot but have an interest in planes and flying. My experience of flying in the UK has been into Heathrow on long haul from South Africa (home) or from Frankfurt returning from work in Kazakhstan. I always thought ATC in the UK was top notch and am shocked to hear there is so much uncontrolled airspace and from what it seems no public entity with overall control.
If i have misunderstood, greatful to be corrected. Mike, Johannesburg
Hi. ATC services for commercial air traffic in the airways system, and in/out of the major airports is superb. Outside of controlled airspace, the controllers do their best, but it is a piecemeal service.
@@TheFlyingReporter Hi Jon, many thanks for the reply, and it is reassuring to know ATC for commercial is 'A' ok.
In the UK, CAA is in charge of all aviation except military stuff. Like so many government departments, it does not have the resources to do everything it is required to do, let alone everything it would like to do, so some things miss out,. For obvious reasons, GA is considered less important than commercial traffic.
you forgot to mention the part where the King of England needs to be notified of the RNP approach 6 months in advance.
Eight years to approve and then shackled by limitations. If that is not a damming indictment, I don't know what is. Some years ago, I attended a PPLIR conference in Le Touquet about RNP approvals, where this airfield's application was discussed. I was appalled at the ignorance of the CAA representatives present and the greed of the private consultants which applicants are obliged to use. To give one example, when asked about the use of NDB's in an IA, the guy from the CAA said that "we cannot rely upon satellite guidance". So, there you have it. The UK regulator officially thinks that a notoriously unreliable wartime ground-based navigational aid is better than a constellation of error-corrected, redundant satellites. The presentation by the consultant spoke of the need to ensure that surrounding farmland had "friable fences". This is so that when a 747 overruns Sherburn's runway, it can break through the fence. These people have no idea about GA - they would rather we didn't exist. As one member of the conference put it: "if the CAA doesn't encourage the widespread use of GPS approaches, people will continue to make-up their own". Which is exactly what Garmin has done, in their GTN navigators, which create a synthetic glideslope, though obviously, the pilot should practice this in VFR to ensure adequate obstacle clearance. Absolutely everything about private flying is better in most other countries, with the USA being the best in the World. The airports in most other countries are supported by their national regulator, so that a small, unmanned strip can easily get an GPS IA. The Government in the UK has said it wants to make “the UK the best place for GA in the World”. Nice ambition, but quite preposterous.
Interesting video. Is the word "level" usually used when flying on a QNH? ("report your level QNH 1022")
Great video, but its seems an awful lot of work load. my question could it be more hinder than helpful? Thanks
Great video, very informative. Can I ask how you get the plate overlay on sky demon ?
In the bottom right corner you’ll see Make Approach when you get close. The RNP plates are there. You need to enable the Approach Tools and IFR Features in settings. Give it a go using the Simulate option.
If they can get an RNP approach approved (ignoring the timeline), there's some hope for other airfields...!
Another informative video , as usual ongoing costs will sadly kill this initiative - £100k per procedure for each runway approach every 5 years is ridiculous ,some airfields won't bother to implement the idea as the costs can't be recovered. Typical UK ....
Correct me if i'm wrong but, Sywell had their RNP approved back in 2019?
I don't know the date, but yes, they did have an RNP, or RNAV as it was called then. Video title and description gives the information you need. Title: "England's 1st RNP approach with air-ground". Video description: "England's 1st RNP approach with air-ground".
Sywell does have some control...so not completely, uncontrolled.
@@TheFlyingReporter Jon - at that time Sywell offered an AFIS but subsequently it has been downgraded to an A/G tower. To that end I cannot find any reference to their RNP approach or plates. What a shame! all that effort for nothing. I used to visit a lot before COVID, it was there i did my shortest ever landing/take off on the 603m 05/23 grass runway. Pretty good for a PA-32
What do the numbers 3.5, 3.1, 3.9 etc contained within a pointer mean? They increase on approach to the runway.
I think you're referring to the distances for each of those legs, in nautical miles.
@@TheFlyingReporter that’s what I thought at first but the numbers increase as you get closer to the runway.
Without see ing what you’re referring to I dont know. But the numbers on the legs indicate the length of that leg. Not the distance to the runway
@@TheFlyingReporter I’m confused as well ! More clarification is needed from the Lincolnshire flyer before you can answer that question.
Ha. If you think this is bad, go and fly in New Zealand for a while. Radar service is an unknown thing, and uncontrolled air to air most people are on the wrong frequency. 😊
Jon, shouldn’t u have descending to circling altitude rather than MDA? Gawd-what a rigmarole per the preamble -Nicely encapsulated per edmoorebsc’s comment. 😂😂
Hi. Not sure I understand the question.
@@TheFlyingReporter the minimum descent altitude would be the height you descend to for runway 10 but since u were circling to land to the reciprocal (28) the chart should state the corresponding altitude which is most often (always? ) higher than the MDA. Douglas
@@flyingphobiahelp we were completing the full approach and missed approach for 10 so we weren’t using 10 as a circle to land approach.
@@flyingphobiahelp Circling should not be lower than straight-in, but the charts may contain gotchas - see e.g. EGSC-8-6 (SRA RTR RWY23) from last year, Cat A VM(C) OCA 660ft is below the general OCA 710ft.
The faff required is bonkers. Clearly all the hoops were designed to make them think twice about proceeding to implement it and try to discourage anyone from using it, provided they are on an approved day, hour minute and second and they are wearing the right underpants. It doesn't really work does it? I expect it to become a footnote in short order sadly.
This procedure seems unnecessarily complicated & pointless. I get the impression that the CAA didn’t want to approve it.
It's certainly not pointless, but there are a lot of other airspace users in the vicinity of Sherburn that had to be considered when designing, testing and certifying the approach
CAA is typical civil service - highly averse to carrying responsibility for anything, better to leave things alone than make a bad situation worse,. The way forward is for the GA community to keep talking to them and to keep demonstrating that they are managing and operating the new system effectively.
Good grief UK airspace and procedures for GA is a shemozzle. Can’t believe you guys put up with it! Here in Australia we have our issues with the monopoly government owned Airservices, but nowhere near as ridiculous as what you guys endure.
Great for Sherburn…horrendous for LBA radar now. Especially now this video is out and published 🫣
Why horrendous for Leeds Radar?