Search results
547
filtered / sorted
results
(showing
471
to
480
of
547)
Furthermore, questions were raised as to why CAP 725 was being used as opposed to CAP 1616,
which has superseded CAP 725 in recent years.
Last updated: 24 November 2021
Furthermore, questions were raised as to why CAP 725 was being used as opposed to CAP 1616,
which has superseded CAP 725 in recent years.
Last updated: 24 November 2021
The
total number of movements is subject to a cap, which is part of a Section 106 planning
agreement.
Last updated: 24 November 2021
The project commenced in 2016,
and the designs were the subject of a Public Consultation that ran from 4th January 2018 until
29th March 2018 in accordance with the process set out in Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) Civil
Aviation Publication (CAP) 725 “Airspace Change Guidance Document”1.
Last updated: 24 November 2021
They also consider that the proposal was hastily
prepared to avoid CAP 1616 and should be resubmitted under the new CAP 1616
guidelines.
Last updated: 24 November 2021
Full details of the process remain available online, but the
document and the process itself was superseded by CAP 1616 in January 2018.
Last updated: 24 November 2021
Cynical and rushed use of CAP 725 to avoid more stringent engagement requirements of CAP 1616
The quality and timing of the BZN consultation was viewed as a ploy to maximise the chances of the ACP succeeding
through CAP 725 which was soon to be superseded by requirements for greater transparency, and enhanced consultation,
justification and reasoning under CAP 1616.
Last updated: 24 November 2021
Process − LOA should completely restart the ACP
process under CAP 1616
Last updated: 24 November 2021
• The incorrect process had been used to undertake the consultation phase
of LOA’s ACP due to the CAA’s transition from CAP 725 to CAP 1616
[Reference 6].
Last updated: 24 November 2021
Incorrect use of CAP 725 for the airspace change proposal
Commencing the consultation in December 2017 by reference to CAP 725 when the CAA was in the process of transition to
CAP 1616 was viewed as an attempt to rush through the process to avoid the greater transparency and enhanced level of
stakeholder engagement that would be required by the CAP 1616 airspace change process.
Last updated: 24 November 2021
