Onward 2030 Work Package 2: What do developers need to know about Instrument Flight Procedures (IFPs)?

What are the Onward 2030 Work Packages?

Onward 2030 has been founded to ensure that up to 20GW of new onshore wind, as set out in the Onshore Wind Sector Deal for Scotland, can coexist with existing aviation constraints. There have been five work packages undertaken in order to improve the process for developers. Pager Power completed a review of the final version of Work Package 2 (WP2) to Onward 2030.

WP2 has been put together to support developers and aviation stakeholders who have onshore wind related IFP constraints. The emphasis of this particular Work Package is on giving developers an easily digestible introduction to the rules, as opposed to making changes to the rules surrounding these constraints. The UK has international obligations to ICAO, which sets rules regarding the safeguarding of aviation operations through guidance, including PANS-OPS and Annex 14 to the Chicago Convention; the emphasis of WP2 is on ensuring that the required onshore wind development can happen while safely coexisting with aviation operations.

How is WP2 structured?

The Work Package is split into easily digestible sections. The information contained is not exhaustive, but it should be sufficient to allow developers to understand the process, the obligations of aviation stakeholders, and the communications they receive from them. The key sections are as follows:

• Section 3. Acronym List contains a list of acronyms commonly used by aviation stakeholders when discussing aviation considerations such as IFPs, CNS and radar concerns. The acronyms cover procedures, equipment, stakeholders and chart markings.

• Section 4 and Annex A. Regulatory Framework give details of the various UK and International authorities, their roles, and the guidance documents that are relevant when developing in the vicinity of IFPs.

• Section 5. Roles and Responsibilities outlines the roles and responsibilities of stakeholders who could be directly involved in the development of an onshore wind project in the UK. In Pager Power’s experience, most of the consultation developers engage in will typically happen with aerodromes in the vicinity of the proposed development, and the Ministry of Defence (MOD), as the MOD is a statutory consultee. The Department for Transport (DfT) and Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) have a role in setting regulations and offering oversight – the CAA, for instance, were consulted on the development of WP2. They are, however, less likely to be involved in an individual project.

• Section 6. Outline Process gives a summary of the IFP design and consultation process in FAQ form. Information is given on preliminary checks that can be undertaken with regard to proximity to the aerodrome and position relative to the ATCSMAC. These checks are important as they can provide a ready reckoner as to whether a site should be excluded from consideration before too much work is undertaken, or whether it should be explored further. More general details are given about the IFP assessment process, including the typical scoping and lead times of IFP assessments.

• Section 7. Flowchart sets out a recommended process for determining whether an IFP issue exists. The first stages consist of establishing the position of the development relative to the airport and the ATCSMAC. Depending on the answers obtained during these stages, IFP assessments might need to be undertaken, and discussions about the size of the development and any possible airspace changes might need to happen. It is important to note that the relevant processes, including the steps on this flowchart, must be undertaken for each airport in the vicinity of the proposed wind development.

• Section 8. Range of Outcomes and Implications from IFP Studies provides an illustration of various outcomes which could arise with respect to IFP constraints for an aerodrome. Lists of scenarios which would and would not result in CAP 1616 being triggered are given. Similar information is given about when CAP 777 becomes relevant, and questions on what happens when each of these documents is looked at are answered.

• Annex D. Safeguarded Aerodromes contains a list of all officially safeguarded aerodromes in England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland. 
  • Aerodromes in England and Wales are safeguarded in accordance with CAP 738 and the Town and Country Planning (Safeguarded Aerodromes, Technical Sites and Military Explosives Storage Areas) direction 2002; 
  • Aerodromes in Scotland are safeguarded in accordance with CAP 738 and the Planning Circular 2/2003: Town and Country Planning (Safeguarded Aerodromes, Technical Sites and Military Explosives Storage Areas) (Scotland) Direction 2003 and
  • Aerodromes in Northern Ireland are safeguarded in accordance with Best Practice Guidance to PPS 18 ‘Renewable Energy’.

What are CAP 1616 and CAP 777?

CAP 1616 and CAP 777 are CAA guidance documents which can become relevant in later stages of IFP assessments.

CAP 1616 sets out the process for airspace change in the UK. This includes:

• Defining what needs changing, and working out the expected level of impact on aircraft operations;
• Consulting with appropriate stakeholders including airport operators, air navigation service providers (ANSPs) and community groups;
• Revisions being made to the planned change, as necessary;
• The CAA making the decision;
• Any change being implemented, and 
• Post Implementation Review (PIR).

CAP 777 provides rules on the purpose, design principles, approval and review of Surveillance Minimum Altitude Area (SMAA) and Final Approach Vectoring Area (FAVA) charts. Whilst aircraft are in an SMAA, they are subject to a minimum altitude for the purpose of visibility to the Primary Surveillance Radar (PSR). A clearance of 1000 feet needs to be available between the lowest SMAA altitude within 5 nautical miles, and the altitude of the proposed development.

What upcoming rule changes do developers need to be aware of?

There will be changes to ICAO Annex 14 and the rules surrounding Obstacle Limitation Surfaces (OLS), with these changes expected to become applicable in 2030. The aim of these changes is to better align the OLS with constraints, including IFP. This will be of particular interest to developers with sites within 20km of an aerodrome; more information about this change can be found here.

There was a consultation made last year regarding changes to CAP 1616. Proposed changes include the standardisation of airspace design principles, the simplification of metrics used in the airspace change options appraisal, and the removal of the current PIR. The full list can be found in CAP 3157, which gives an overview of this consultation.

This will all be strengthened with the creation of a single body that will oversee future airspace changes, the UK Airspace Design Service (UKADS). This will be provided by NATS (En Route) plc.

How can Pager Power Help?

Pager Power has been assisting wind developers overcome complex aviation issues for almost 25 years. Pager Power can assess proposed wind developments, both the existing and future OLS, and can give advice to developers on where their site is located relative to nearby aerodromes, offering a ready reckoner of any IFP issues to maximise chances of success when a project is submitted to an approved IFP designer (APDO) for review.

For more information about what we do, please get in touch.

References

[1] Onward 2030 WP2 IFP Guidance

[2] CAA. CAP 777. Air traffic control surveillance minimum altitude chart. Fourth edition February 2017.

[3] CAA. CAP 1616 version 5.1. Airspace Change Process. September 2025.

[4] CAA. CAP 3157. First published September 2025.

[5] ICAO State Letter AN 4/1.2.31-25/23. Adoption of Amendment 18 to Annex 14,Volume I. April 2025.

Image accreditation: Yux Xiang (April 2020) from Unsplash.com. Last accessed on 10 July 2026. Available at: https://unsplash.com/photos/wind-turbines-under-blue-sky-during-daytime-zMc8-5DlRgU