Thought this was interesting:

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-21195765

 

With Heathrow, Gatwick, Stansted, Luton and City it's obviously a very crowded airspace.

 

Are there any comparable ATC areas elsewhere in the world, or does the London area take top prize?

 

Ian

The air spaces around New York and Los Angeles are pretty crowded...

 

Henri

New York, Chicago, Los Angeles, Tokyo... There are some.

New York, San Francisco, Chicago and LA

 

 

Remy Mermelstein

[email protected]

777-300 FS Pilot

New York, San Francisco, Chicago and LA

 

 

Remy Mermelstein

[email protected]

777-300 FS Pilot

 

But he makes the point that Chicago "has nothing around it for 300 miles (482km)." I know other big cities will have busy airspaces, but I was wondering if there is anywhere comparable to London, where you have FIVE airports in close proximity.

 

I'm assuming that London is unique in that respect.

Comparable to London, where you have FIVE airports in close proximity.

Don't know how crowded the respective airspaces really are, but Moscow comes to my mind (three major airports: Domodedovo, Sheremetyevo, Vnukovo, plus some smaller airports and a military field) and also Paris has three major airports (CDG, Orly, LeBourget) and some smaller ones, which also look as if they're capable of handling regional flights.

But probably the airspaces around those two cities aren't as filled as they are in Southern England, though Paris might well be in the influence of the heavy traffic to and from London.

Newark, LaGuardia, Kennedy, Teterboro, White Plains, Stewart Int'l, Morristown's GA traffic, the NYC airspace is incredibly busy... Not to mention NY Center is IMMENSE!

Yeah it would be hard to separate them.

 

Remember London also has some smaller busy airports too, like NY. London has Biggin Hill, Farnborough, Blackbushe and Oxford, and a couple of others.

 

Farnborough might not be in London but its close and teterboro like busy.

London is by far the busiest airspace, NY is next, not as chaotic though, although the lack of standard phraseology is a pain. Chicago's airspace isn't bad, I don't know what others were saying.

 

I don't remember LAX being bad airspace for flying through, but never flew there often when it was one of our destinations. Milan can get tricky at times.

 

Of course the worst airspace in the world by a long shot has to be Spain, and in particular Madrid. You'd be better off with a UNICOM system there... :rolleyes: :mad:

 

Regards,

Ró.

JFK has LGA, HPN, EWR for major airports around it and then tons of other small heliports, and airports. A family friend of ours has a retrofitted Piper Malibu at HPN and I go fly with him alot. A couple of weeks ago we flew down and around the NJ and NY Coast to see the damage from Sandy and then we landed at teterboro and it was much more difficult just because of the amount of aircraft around us. You dont really think about it but all those airports combined process hundreds of aircraft every day even thousands and even though you cant see them all from the ground, there are alot out there and the ATC is giving out alot of information. It is not an easy place to fly around.

 

~Remy

I would imagine Beijing, Seoul, and Tokyo in the East and London and New York in the West.

But he makes the point that Chicago "has nothing around it for 300 miles (482km)." I know other big cities will have busy airspaces, but I was wondering if there is anywhere comparable to London, where you have FIVE airports in close proximity.

 

I'm assuming that London is unique in that respect.

But he makes the point that Chicago "has nothing around it for 300 miles (482km)." I know other big cities will have busy airspaces, but I was wondering if there is anywhere comparable to London, where you have FIVE airports in close proximity.

 

I'm assuming that London is unique in that respect.

 

Chicago-land just fly the South Side in Gary West or up Lake Michigan if you want to head north. Chicago is easy to avoid by air or vehicle.

I don't remember LAX being bad airspace for flying through, but never flew there often when it was one of our destinations. Milan can get tricky at times.

 

It's not as busy as you'd think. It's the GA VFR & IFR traffic that makes it more busy within and around the Class Bravo. There's quite a lot of Class Delta airports under the Bravo and just outside. I think every time I fly now there's been tense moments for a collision possibility! Scary but great experience, it's like being thrown into the deep end at the start flying around here lol. LAX use parallel approaches also, so they're not as restricted as say Heathrow or Gatwick.

 

I've heard when things go to plan at Heathrow, it's not as bad as it may look on a radar once you have a nice flow. The way they do it is incredibly smart and nothing but utmost respect for the guys controlling the London TMA. That's one place I wouldn't mind doing ATC at.

 

You must fly into there a fair bit Ronan? A few friends of mine based out the UK actually dislike it at times - simply because of the restrictions on altitude & speed. Not mentioning how stressful it is for both crew and ATC to get things right!

I've heard when things go to plan at Heathrow, it's not as bad as it may look on a radar once you have a nice flow. The way they do it is incredibly smart and nothing but utmost respect for the guys controlling the London TMA. That's one place I wouldn't mind doing ATC at.

 

You must fly into there a fair bit Ronan? A few friends of mine based out the UK actually dislike it at times - simply because of the restrictions on altitude & speed. Not mentioning how stressful it is for both crew and ATC to get things right!

Indeed on occasion. I've been doing a fair bit to LHR of late as it's one of the primary training routes for new crews, throw them in at the deep end and all that. It's typically a junior route though when no one's being trained in due to the fact the sector length is so short and you're going between two busy TMAs, so I wouldn't tend to fly it unless on training duties.

 

It can at times give the illusion of running very smoothly, but one screw up and everything's all over the place all of a sudden. Fog in particular results in many a headache. Have to be very careful not to get lost in the spew of transmissions and keep a very careful ear out. 160 till 4 can also give a bit of a headache at LHR or 170 till 5 at LGW if you are new to the fields.

 

Regards,

Ró.