HC Deb 18 April 1983 vol 41 c20W
Mr. Higgins

asked the Minister for Trade if he is satisfied that the law provides adequate powers to control night flying by aircraft over built-up areas below controlled airspace; and at what height controlled airspace is normally set in such areas.

Mr. Sproat

[pursuant to the reply, 11 April 1983, c. 288–9]: I am satisfied that the law provides adequate powers for the Secretary of State to prohibit or restrict flying for any reason affecting the public interest. Power to prohibit or restrict flying is given in article 66 of the Air Navigation Order 1980.

Controlled airspace is designated in areas, and on routes, where the volume of air traffic requires the protection afforded by an air traffic control service. The lower limit of controlled airspace varies considerably, since it must contain the flight paths of aircraft climbing, descending and en route, which require the safety protection which an air traffic control service affords. Near many airports, such controlled airspace begins at ground level to accommodate aircraft taking off and landing. Further away from airports the lower limit is likely to become progressively higher.

Outside controlled airspace, the Rules of the Air and Air Traffic Control Regulations 1981 provide such measures as have been deemed necessary to protect aircraft, and to avoid danger to persons and property on the ground. It is significant as an indication of the correction of these measures that available records show that, since 1945, there have been no collisions at night between aircraft flying outside controlled airspace in the United Kingdom.

In fact, few civil aircraft cruise at the lower altitudes below controlled airspace at night, and those that do are mainly small ones, and for safety are equipped with identification lights which enable them to be seen by any other aircraft in the immediate vicinity. Furthermore, these aircraft are also provided with an information service by the national air traffic control service which can include details of known traffic. I do not think any further powers to restrict such movements would be justified on noise or safety grounds.

Back to