Read the forum code of contact
By: - 31st August 2004 at 19:35 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
This has been discussed over and over again.
Nowhere have I seen a satisfactory explanation of the requirement for the information Mode S broadcasts from bimbling aircraft in the Open FIR.
Indeed I believe that a lot of the information will, in fact, be filtered out by ATC to avoid screen clutter.
Come on somebody. If not for charging, what is it for?
Moggy
By: - 22nd September 2004 at 22:47 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Prompted by the NATS staff newspaper I have looked today at the CAA response to the SES charging proposals. It is a well thought out position paper BUT there is no mention whatsoever of General Aviation and the likely impact of the proposals as posed by EUROCONTROL on our side of aviation.
A side on which the airlines depend for their future supply of pilots but one that has no way of reclaiming the added cost of the charges proposed other than by digging deep into taxed income or by increasing the astronomic hourly charge of hiring a club aircraft.
What a dreadful comment that the CAA cannot even mention the impact on us - merely the airlines who enjoy so many advantages in taxation and the low duty on Avtur.
I would just love to be wrong here but I do not think I am.
If you want to make a response then the email address is -
[email]nicola.motley@caaerg.org.uk[/email]
or
[email]anne.muddle@srg.caa.co.uk[/email]
I will refrain from any jest on the surnames of these two, no doubt excellent, ladies who are to field your blitzkreig.
Cheers,
Trapper 69
By: - 23rd September 2004 at 09:41 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
It would be helpful if we could view the CAA response.
Is it posted anywhere that you can give us a link to?
Moggy
By: - 23rd September 2004 at 17:40 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Probably a very good reason why there doesn't seem to be any way of finding out what the CAA response was. Could it be that they haven't figured out what their response is going to be or are they trying to figure out how to word their response without upsetting the airlines?
By: - 23rd September 2004 at 19:44 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
I will dig it out of the maze of the CAA website however the clues are there as they say in that TV programme viewed by couch potatoes in the afternoon.
I will list the http address as I fear the cost of the download on my steam internet.
Cheers,
Trapper 69
By: - 23rd September 2004 at 19:58 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Here is the charging scene CAA position paper. Other aspects are covered in the same series. Hope it helps.
http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/1/DAP_SES_DP6_Charging.pdf
I look forward to any comments that are printable.
Cheers,
Trapper 69
By: - 26th September 2004 at 21:20 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Frankly I hope ALL the GA representative organisations really apply some pressure on the CAA for an explanation as to why our national aviation regulatory body can ignore such a huge number of "stakeholders" in all the varied aspects of GA. It really is appalling.
Cheers,
Trapper 69
By: - 8th October 2004 at 20:39 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Well folks, it looks as if all the efforts may have been worthwhile.
There are unconfirmed reports that the Eurocontrol council of ministers have totally rejected the proposal to levy charges for using the SES concept on VFR flights or on IFR flights in aircraft of less than 2MT. In other words the current situation as has been the case since Eurocontrol started charging back in the 1970's.
I am sure all the efforts put into personal responses either direct or through the GA representative bodies have played their part in forming, or even changing, the opinions of those who control Eurocontrol.
The CAA SES seminar in Manchester on Tuesday next, 12 October, may now be a bit of an anticlimax however there is still the matter of ATS approvals and aerodrome approvals and the impact on UK aerodromes and smaller regional airports. I am certain there will be much of interest there.
If the reports are correct then a huge thank you to all who got off their butts and actually DID something to assist GA fight those who would attempt to make our flying more expensive, more complex and less fun.
Cheers,
Trapper 69
By: - 13th October 2004 at 17:31 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Last week I wrote - "Well folks, it looks as if all the efforts may have been worthwhile. There are unconfirmed reports that the Eurocontrol council of ministers have totally rejected the proposal to levy charges for using the SES concept on VFR flights or on IFR flights in aircraft of less than 2MT. In other words the current situation as has been the case since Eurocontrol started charging back in the 1970's."
After attending the CAA seminar at Manchester it rather looks as though those unconfirmed reports were in error. In fact due to the UK governments refusal to pick up the tag of exempting UK aircraft flying VFR and IFR if under 2MT in terms of paying the ANSP for their costs we will ALL be stuck with EUROCONTROL charges for all of our flying. I suppose there may be some letouts to be announced but do not hold your breath if you fly any GA aircraft, powered or otherwise: heavier or lighter than air.
Hope fully when they look at the complexity of any charging scheme they will back off but I really doubt it.
We tried - we really did.
Commiserations,
Trapper 69
By: - 13th October 2004 at 20:54 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Hopes raised, hopes dashed.
Looks like the moment we all have our Mode S transponders fitted we'll be charged for every flight other than home base to home base. Is that how you read it Skybolt?
Moggy
By: - 14th October 2004 at 09:54 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Moggy,
The technology is out there but until it reduces in price to an affordable figure I will not be fitting one. By affordable I mean on the lines of an ICOM handheld VHF at less than 500GBP. There is a lot of water to flow under this particular bridge and it aint over till the fat lady sings. My own MP and three of my regional MEP's have offered to assist so if you can spare a few minutes to let your own elected representatives know what is going on you may help cosiderably.
Cheers,
Trapper 69
By: - 14th October 2004 at 11:32 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
so if you can spare a few minutes to let your own elected representatives know what is going on you may help cosiderably.
Cheers,
Trapper 69
It would be verging on criminal for any of us not to find the time.
Is there anywhere I can find a template of the arguments on which to base the letter to my MP and MEP?
Rob P
By: - 15th October 2004 at 22:42 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Moggy,
Here is the email I sent to my MP and MEP's. It seems to be having an effect in terms of action but who knows what will emerge. It is well worth a try and also to persuade all your aviation friends to do the same. Apathy simply cannot be allowed to rule this time as it has so often before.
Cheers,
Trapper 69
___________________
Sirs,
As my local MP and MEP's, with the exception of Robert Kilroy-Silk for whom I have no emailing address, I respectfully request your assistance in a matter of great concern to the General Aviation community right across Europe and specifically in the UK.
EUROCONTROL are conducting a consultation exercise on a user charging scheme in conjunction with the Single European Sky air traffic control project currently being developed. It is proposed that all users pay to fly in order to finance the, often unnecessary, air traffic control and navigation aid infrastructure.
Up to now in the UK aircraft weighing less than 2 metric tonnes maximum take off weight have been free of any such charge levied for very many years by EUROCONTROL. This while flying in any airspace - controlled or uncontrolled. The vast majority of General Aviation aircraft fall into this category and probably 70% of them are operated privately with no commercial gain involved.
There is no mandatory requirement in the UK for any aircraft to be equipped with communications radio or any electronic navigation aid. When flying under Visual Flight Rules and by day in good weather such items are a safety enhancement but they are not essential to safe flight. To some motorists the development of in car global positioning navigation systems has proved an aid to getting around but the vast majority of the rest of us still seem to get to our destination without this expensive accessory. The almost universal availability of mobile telephones has enabled us to communicate while driving however this has led to innumerable accidents due to driver distraction resulting in a ban on the use of such devices while in motion. I hope you will see my point here when applied to a more familiar form of transportation.
In my submission to EUROCONTROL I have expressed my concern that the next proposal coming from an EU organisation might well be to charge folk for the air we breathe since EUROCONTROL want to charge us for the same air that we fly in. Perhaps that encapsulates my personal views along with thousands of fellow flyers who use the sky for private, sporting and recreational purposes.
Your support in this matter along with any personal views that you may have would be very much appreciated. If you need any amplification of the attachments do please let me know.
Kind regards,
Barry Tempest MRAeS
Armageddon Aviation
2 Church Walk, Kings Cliffe, Peterborough PE8 6XD, Northamptonshire
01780 470273
PS - Perhaps David Clark would forward this email and attachments to his UKIP colleague Robert Kilroy-Silk along with the request that he publish his email address to enable his constituents to contact him. Everyone else has for which I thank you all.
By: - 18th October 2004 at 22:53 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
There are a few things that everyone can do to try to get Eurocontrol to see reason. If all forum readers could write or email their local MP and regional MEP's it could bring pressure on the UK Department for Transport and the Transport Commissioner in the EU in Brussels to revise their stance in terms of levying SES charges from General Aviation. Although there is a small working group now set up by the DfT with representatives from AOPA, PFA, GASCo and the PPL/IR Network to discuss ways by which the SES charges could be applied to GA the DfT has fully committed itself to making sure GA are to pay what they see as facilities provided even if they are not used by GA. What a dreadful state of affairs.
Why not spend a little time enlisting the aid of your democratically elected representatives in Westminster and Brussels? It just might pay off in applying pressure to the bureaucrats within DfT and in Eurocontrol through the EU parliament.
In sorrow.
Cheers,
Trapper 69
By: - 20th October 2004 at 17:40 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Just had a reply from one of my regional MEP's enclosing a written question he and his colleagues had put to the EU Transport commissioner along with her reply. It was fairly anodyne however Eurocontrol is to make their formal request to the EU early in 2005 and they are considering the final proposal now. The MEP's intend to keep their eye on developments. It certainly is not too late to apply pressure through your own elected parliamentary representatives in Westminster and Brussels.
Cheers,
Trapper 69
By: - 22nd October 2004 at 14:25 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
OK. So how many of us have written?
Find your MP. You do that HERE
MEPs can be found HERE
Then you mail them a letter.
Here's mine, based on Skybolt's. Feel free to use something similar, but if to the same MP I'd be pleased if you really would put it into your own words.
Rt Hon Gillian Shepherd
House of Commons
London SW1A 0AADear Ms Shepherd
Ref: Eurocontrol, proposed charges for light aircraft not using their services.
As my local MP I respectfully request your assistance in a matter of great concern to myself and the rest of the General Aviation community in the UK.
EUROCONTROL are conducting a consultation exercise on a user-charging scheme in conjunction with the Single European Sky air traffic control project. It is proposed that all aircraft users pay in order to finance the air traffic control and navigation aid infrastructure.
The vast majority of General Aviation aircraft fall into the less than 2 metric tonnes maximum take off weight category and about 70% of these are operated privately not for commercial gain.
Most of their flights are for social and recreational purposes and make little or no use of the infrastructure to which it is proposed they contribute. In my own case these are generally local flights from a small grass strip in Suffolk using neither radio, nor navigation aids.
There is no mandatory requirement in the UK for any aircraft to be equipped with communications radio or any electronic navigation aid. When flying under Visual Flight Rules and by day in good weather such items are a safety enhancement but they are not essential to safe flight.
Up to now light aircraft in the UK have been free of the charges levied by EUROCONTROL.
Effectively the proposal is to charge us for the air that the thousands of my fellow private pilots fly in.
Your support in this matter along with any personal views that you may have would be very much appreciated. If you need any amplification of the issue do please let me know.
Kind regards,
No excuses. This will affect you for the rest of your flying life. GA is expensive enough already, if it goes through on the nod you will be paying more. For ever.
Moggy
By: - 22nd October 2004 at 15:53 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Just heard from Lembit Opik the LibDem MP who is a keen PPL and AOPA member (though we all have our cross to bear - joking of course........!!!).
He has written to the Minister for Aviation at the Department for Transport and has also tabled many Parliamentary Written Questions on the subject. Responses are awaited and I will keep the forum informed as to developments.
Keep up the pressure - it is starting to pay off.
Cheers,
Trapper 69
By: - 29th October 2004 at 14:33 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
This from my MP - Gillian Shepherd
I have noted your concern about Eurocontrol and the proposal that all aircraft users should pay in order to finance the air traffic control and navigational aid infrastructure, and will certainly do what I can to help.I have therefore today written on your behalf to the Minister responsible for Aviation at the Department for Transport, asking if she will look into the points you have raised and let me know her response.
As soon as I receive a reply to my letter I will of course write to you again
Moggy
By: - 29th October 2004 at 17:49 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Here are the responses Lembit Opik MP got from the DfT -
Aircraft Transponders
Lembit Öpik: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what exemptions he will be introducing to the mandatory installation of Mode 5 transponders in aircraft; and if he will make a statement. [193032]
Charlotte Atkins: Legislation to require the carriage of Mode S transponders in aircraft will be introduced in 2 phases. The first of these will take effect from 31*March 2005 and will apply only to aircraft with a take off mass of more than 5,700kgs and a maximum cruising true airspeed of more than 250 knots that fly under Instrument Flight Rules. This does not include the majority of General Aviation aircraft. Exemptions to the carriage requirements are permitted for certain technical reasons and for those aircraft that infrequently operate under Instrument Flight Rules. The full details*of the exemption criteria are available on the Eurocontrol website www.eurocontrol.int/mode***s.
The second phase of Mode S introduction is expected to take effect on 31*March 2008. The details of the widened mandate and the associated exemption policy have not yet been decided. The Civil Aviation Authority will conduct a wide-ranging consultation on these issues commencing next year.
Navigation Services
Lembit Öpik: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport (1) what plans he has to charge aircraft flying under visual flight rules for aircraft navigation services; and if he will make a statement; [193031]
(2) what plans he has to provide non-commercial air traffic with air navigation services without charge; and if he will make a statement; [193033]
(3) what plans he has to impose Eurocontrol charges on aircraft with maximum take off weight below 2,000 kilograms; and if he will make a statement; [193035]
(4) what plans he has to impose Eurocontrol charges on (a) gliders, (b) microlight aircraft, (c) hangliders, (d) paragliders and (e) balloons; and if he will make a statement; [193036]
(5) what plans he has to charge for air navigation services in airspace classified as (a) E, (b) F and (c) G; and if he will make a statement. [193037]
Charlotte Atkins: The Single European Sky (SES) Regulations, which came into force on the 20*April 2004, require the development of a transparent common charging scheme for the recovery of the costs of air navigation services provided by the member states. One of the underlying principles of the charging scheme is that air navigation service costs should be recovered according to the 'user pays' principle, that is airspace users should pay for the services they use.
The current draft of the European Commission's Implementing Rules on charging provides for member states to exempt certain categories of airspace users from the charges scheme. The costs for such an exemption would have to met by the state. The text has not been finalised so it impossible to make any decision on whether or not to grant exemptions.
Correspondence
Lembit Öpik: To ask the Secretary of State for***Transport on what date he responded to the communication from the Chief Executive of the Aircraft***Owners and Pilots Association UK, dated 22*September; and if he will make a statement. [193029]
Charlotte Atkins: Martin Robinson wrote to a Department for Transport official on the 22*September 2004. Department for Transport officials met with him on 5*October to discuss the issues raised by his letter and responded to the communication on 13*October 2004.
Its all happening and further pressure is being applied. Why not do YOUR bit to assist.
Cheers,
Trapper 69
By: - 3rd November 2004 at 16:09 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Just heard that Gillian Shepherd, the MP for South West Norfolk, has written to the Department for Transport on this matter so pressure is still being applied.
A delegation from the PFA, PPL/IR Network and the Royal Aero Club along with GASCo is meeting with the DfT in the very near future to ensure they are fully aware of the implications of the SES charging scheme on GA. The DfT along with the CAA are the only means by which the UK aviation position can be promoted at the necessary level within the European agencies now threatening our destiny. It is essential that they take the concerns of GA into those deliberations.
Cheers,
Trapper 69
Posts: 1
By: DM1 - 31st August 2004 at 13:25
Eurocontrol Timebomb for GA? Is Mode S the Enabler?
Is it just me or am I actually in a majority of folk who seem to be the last to know about so-called consultations on legislation that affects GA. Where are they advertised?
For me, it is only when the flying press highlight the fact or I receive an e-mail from a fellow aviator alerting me to the fact that we need to take some affirmative action.
The consultation that has sparked me off this time is the ‘Draft SES Implementing Rule on a Common Charging’ Scheme for Air Navigation Services (issued by Eurocontrol). Essentially, this scheme sets out to charge all aviators for use of ATC services, airways, airspace, VORs, NDBs, etc., where previously VFR traffic and aircraft below 2Tonnes MTOW were exempt. At this stage it is just a draft, but look at the target. GA represents six times the number of aircraft compared to Civil Air Traffic, who currently have to pay Eurocontrol charges – seems a great way to increase funds! Essentially you could be charged each time you took off and landed at another field, in addition to landing fees (which are ridiculous at many airfields in the UK compared with the continent) and the exorbitant tax that GA pay on AVGAS, not to mention the obtuse regulatory fees that we are forced to pay in terms of licensing and certification in the UK for pilots and aircraft.
Earlier in the year I wrote a piece on Mode S (why, when, what are the options, etc.). Mode S is apparently being legislated for safety. Well, I’m not so sure now that safety is the real purpose. In discussions with other pilots it seem to us that the only real benefactors of Mode S are ATC, aircraft equipped with TCAS and potentially Eurocontrol. Mode S gives more info (even at the elementary level) about what you are doing and who you (aircraft and owner) are, then the current height and position of Mode C - So ATC know more about you straight away. With Mode S you could be tracked from start to finish and your height, speed, etc., monitored so that by the time you get home a bill for your flight is winging its way to you.
Perhaps we are being cynical, but I don’t think so. This is yet another proposal to further burden GA. VFR and light aircraft traffic is generally recreational traffic and should remain exempt (as it is today) from such charges.
When the water companies wanted to bill us for usage in preference to water rates (except where it suited them not to) they provided meters. If Mode S is going to be used in the same way, then stop white-washing it under the guise of safety and provide us all with free Mode S Meters rather than forcing us to pay for the meter as well as usage.
What happens if we don’t fit Mode S? Are they going to ground the aircraft? Does the aircraft cease to be airworthy overnight – given that VFR traffic has 3 years (2008) more than IFR traffic (2005) to install Mode S.
Flying for me is about fun, relaxation, going somewhere with friends, freedom. Why is it that GA are constantly targeted by these killjoys?…why?…because we are like motorists, easy targets!