Preventing mid-air collisions.

[Mr.Buzzy]

What a terrific document!

Just received mine in the mail and I'll be sure to carry it about in my nav-bag. So many pearls of wisdom in these pages. I'm so glad the big issues are really being grabbed by our regulator and condensed into such a valuable and well presented document!

I feel safer already!

Now when I fly about with my "anti-collision light" on and this terrific CASA document in my possession, I'll feel like there is a powerful force-shield protecting me from the very people that think it's a great idea to allow jet RPT traffic into 3rd world aerodromes at night.

bbbbbbbzzzzzzzzzz...bexplease!...zzzzzzzbbbbbbbzzzzzzzzz

[tmpffisch]

Well...at least they're trying I guess. I read over it once...turn on transponder, turn on lights, keep a look out. Thanks.

At the very least, it made me think about mid-air collisions for a few moments. No doubt the money had to be spent, but it could have been directed in a more effective manner.

CASA workign on reducing traffic congestion, being more strigent on circuit size, and DVD on situational awareness and procedures, would help.

[Horatio Leafblower]

I certainly do not wish to turn this into a race-based thread, but....

What percentage of those mid-airs and near misses involved air crew from a non-English speaking background?

What percentage had, as a contributing factor, non-standard or otherwise inadequate RT?

In my area the radio calls made by some of the students (foreign and local, VH and RAAus) do little more than alert you there is another aircraft.... somewhere. :ugh:

[Jabawocky]

And training standards.

[Widewoodenwingswork]

I thought exactly the same Horatio. I believe CASA should be targeting the groups who seem to be having most of these accidents. Put on seminars at training schools re: when to broadcast, using clear and concise language, having confidence on the radio etc. Even an interactive web based program in the form of an animated aeroplane would have more of an impact than the little cards that ended up being filed in the bin. This response is typical of CASA's bureaucratic approach to these matters. The drug and alcohol testing posters comes to mind (although they do make good cardboard templates). Surely these people can come up with something a bit smarter than this.

[D-J]

In my area the radio calls made by some of the students (foreign and local, VH and RAAus) do little more than alert you there is another aircraft.... somewhere.

Not YCNK or YMND by anychance....often hearing that lovely deafing squeal of 2 transmissions in at once because some clown wasn't listening... :ugh::ugh::ugh:

Wouldn't it be nice if casa could come up with a DVD or do something useful to try & get everyone speaking the same lauguage on the radio, christ it's not that hard but so many pilots some experience & some not so can't get it right or even come close

Don't even get me started on the training standards of some schools around the area :oh:

[tmpffisch]

The departure call for GAAP's changed last month in the AIP's, 95% of the calls that I now hear are incorrect. (Picky I know :rolleyes:, but correct & clear radio calls are a sign of professionalism).

[bentleg]

The departure call for GAAP's changed last month in the AIP's


I can't spot it - point me to reference please

[tmpffisch]

ENR 30.2 or the list of GAAP radiotelephony procedures

(Big black line down the margin indicates new changes in the print version)

[bentleg]

OK thanks. What is written currently sounds right. Not having the old page I cant discern what has actually changed! What is the changed requirement?

[tmpffisch]

The order of the call now reflects the order in C or D airspace.

The call now is "Moorabbin Tower, Arrow Alpha Bravo Charlie, Dual, Recieved November, For Circuits, Ready runway 17 Right"

It used to be "Moorabbin Tower, Arrow Alpha Bravo Charlie, is ready at runway 17 Right for circuits, recieved november, dual"

I haven't heard anyone else do it this way yet, aside myself. I keep wondering if I'm the one that's wrong....the only other format I hear is the new student, flicking between the _____ to english dictionary at the same time. That, I feel is the fault of the instructor. They should only be allowed to make radio calls once they've proved theirselves competent to do so, otherwise it is a safety issue. The live airways is no place to be practicing when some one-on-one roleplaying would make it safer.

[Arm out the window]

I know ongoing revision can be good, but (probably a sign of me getting older) I'm getting a bit sick of periodic changes to R/T for little practical gain.

That's got to be a prime cause for non-standard calls - they change all the time, or so it seems.

Surely there's a case for not changing things unless they're safety critical, rather than because whoever's writing the rules this month thinks something's not quite right.

[Mcambo]

Hopefully it isn't like the calender CASA sent out a couple of months back that was missing the whole of March for 2010. A calender with only 11 months. Whoever proof read that should now be unemployed.

[bentleg]

The order of the call now reflects the order in C or D airspace.

The call now is "Moorabbin Tower, Arrow Alpha Bravo Charlie, Dual, Recieved November, For Circuits, Ready runway 17 Right"

It used to be "Moorabbin Tower, Arrow Alpha Bravo Charlie, is ready at runway 17 Right for circuits, recieved november, dual"



It sounds to me like a cosmetic change. I would call "Camden Tower, Cessna Alpha Bravo Charlie dual ready zero six for circuits with Alpha" and haven't been chipped by anyone so far.

If the required data is in the call, I dont think the sequence matters. Can one of the ATCers frequenting PPrune convince me otherwise?

Surely there's a case for not changing things unless they're safety critical, rather than because whoever's writing the rules this month thinks something's not quite right.

I agree

[b_sta]

Yeah, that change seems awfully pointless to me - no additions or subtractions from the call at all. What was wrong with the old format?

[Staticport]

If only our licenses looked as nice and flashy as todays mail...and we pay $25 for the damn thing!

[tmpffisch]

Haha absolutely StaticPort. And you can't even use the bloody licence as ID in a CPL/ATPL exam....(the black and white photo is unacceptable).

[Barkly1992]

Mid-air collisions are very rare - they normally happen in the circuit and when they do also in controlled airspace.

What does that say?
:confused:

[D-J]

Mid-air collisions are very rare - they normally happen in the circuit and when they do also in controlled airspace.

What does that say?

That CASA & Airservices are in talks to have the whole regs rewritten to make sure they've covered their asses :rolleyes:

[le Pingouin]

Mid-air collisions are very rare - they normally happen in the circuit and when they do also in controlled airspace.

What does that say?

Traffic density perchance?

[blueloo]

Traffic density perchance?

Density is relative isn't it?








(After all the airspace becomes pretty dense when 2 planes are in very close proximity doesn't it?)

[mostlytossas]

Don't you love the way CASA is protecting the system "status Quo".
I mean the last couple of mid airs at Bankstown and Moorabbin have occured due to and/or just outside the GAAP CTR at or approaching the inbound approach point, and not the responsibility of ATC.
It is the system that is flawed as was the subject of much debate on Pprune some months ago. To chanel everyone to one or two points at the same altitude without the guidance of ATC is madness.
We should do it like elsewhere in the world where you approach direct to the field at different altitudes and tracks and only descend when you have the assitance of the Tower under positive separation.
But ofcourse this will entail the regulator and ATC taking responsibility and being accountable not to mention up to speed like anywhere else in the modern world.

[le Pingouin]

Density is relative isn't it?

(After all the airspace becomes pretty dense when 2 planes are in very close proximity doesn't it?)No. Density is an average over a given volume. You've changed the volume to encapsulate a transient event. Doesn't really tell you anything useful like how likely such events are.

[blueloo]

Thanks. I was being sarcastic.

[Gear-down]

What a waste of money on a few bits of paper. My wife laughed when she saw it, like that's going to help! - rather than telling us how to fly an aircraft, would the money not be better spent on providing better services - radar separation for instance... remember flight following??? :D

From a risk management point of view when looking at the heirachy of control, administrative controls is right down there with PPE, being one of the least effective controls, but unfortunately most commonly used! Next time CASA, send me a hat - it would more useful! Better still, write to me telling me how you have improved a service! :ok:

Rather than build a hospital at the bottom of a cliff, put a fence at the top! :ugh:

[ReverseFlight]

A complete review of the use of VFR entry points to GAAPs is needed.

Recently I was reporting inbound into Carrum when I heard another 2 aircraft reporting inbound from Brighton. I then heard a 4th aircraft reporting inbound at Carrum at 1500', exactly where I was ! I strained my neck and rolled from side to side to see if he was immediately above or below me but to no avail. It subsequently transpired that the 4th was actually inbound from Brighton, and his erroneous radio calls could easily have put the other 2 aircraft at risk of collision.

I report inbound at GMH when I am directly above its saw-tooth roof (creates situational awareness for others) but on countless occasions I have witnessed other pilots report inbound at GMH when they were actually miles ahead, behind or off-track. :ugh:

[eeper23]

I read over mine, and then it went straight in the bin. :bored:

[FFG 02]

Yep placed mine in the recycling bin.
A couple of hours later, a tenant in another apartment had taken it!
Make of that what you will!

[gutso-blundo]

Rather than build a hospital at the bottom of a cliff, put a fence at the top!

Ahh but they can charge you for the use of the hospital...

And you can sue them if their fence didn't do its job of protecting you from falling. Better to have no fence and say it's your responsibility to stay away from the edge - that way its all back on you! :}

[PlankBlender]

A couple of hours later, a tenant in another apartment had taken it!
Make of that what you will!

Dob him in if you don't like him, he's got Mary Jane at his place :}

[Frank Arouet]

The little poem below was published in a "crash comic" some years back. I think this is what you are quoting from. As gutso-blundo notes today it has legal applications;

And you can sue them if their fence didn't do its job of protecting you from falling. Better to have no fence and say it's your responsibility to stay away from the edge - that way its all back on you!



The Ambulance in the Valley

'Twas a dangerous cliff, as they freely confessed,
Though to walk near its crest was so pleasant;
But over its terrible edge there had slipped
A duke, and full many a peasant.
The people said something would have to be done,
But their projects did not at all tally.
Some said 'Put a fence 'round the edge of the cliff,'
Some, 'An ambulance down in the valley.'

The lament of the crowd was profound and was loud,
As their tears overflowed with their pity;
But the cry for the ambulance carried the day
As it spread through the neighbouring city.
A collection was made, to accumulate aid
And the dwellers in highway and alley
Gave dollars or cents - not to furnish a fence -
But an ambulance down in the valley.

'For the cliff is all right if you're careful,' they said;
'And if folks ever slip and are dropping,
It isn't the slipping that hurts them so much
As the shock down below - when they're stopping.'
So for years (we have heard), as these mishaps occurred
Quick forth would the rescuers sally,
To pick up the victims who fell from the cliff,
With the ambulance down in the valley.

Said one, to his pleas, 'It's marvel to me
That you'd give so much greater attention
To repairing results than to curing the cause;
You had much better aim at prevention.
For the mischief, of course, should be stopped at its source;
Come, neighbours and friends, let us rally.
It is far better sense to rely on a fence
Than an ambulance down in the valley.'

'He is wrong in his head,' the majority said;
'He would end all our earnest endeavour.
He's a man who would shirk this responsible work,
But we will support it forever.
Aren't we picking up all, just as fast as they fall,
And giving them care liberally?
A superfluous fence is of no consequence,
If the ambulance works in the valley.'

The story looks queer as we've written it here,
But things oft occur that are stranger
More humane, we assert, than to succour the hurt
Is the plan of removing the danger.
The best possible course is to safeguard the source
By attending to things rationally.
Yes, build up the fence and let us dispense
With the ambulance down in the valley.

Joseph Malins 1895