CASA Class G Discussion Paper
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Melbourne
Age: 72
Posts: 774
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Having just phoned CENSAR, in your example CENSAR will first try phoning the pilot. If no contact CENSAR will phone the tower. If the TWR confirms the aircraft is on the ground, the SARTIME can’t be cancelled as it must be done by the pilot.
Thread Starter
Wow. So the aircraft is clearly parked on the ground. Fujii. Are you informing us that the people at AusSar have to then attempt to contact the pilot?
Who pays for this wasted time? I am sure you know in NZ the pilot pays!
Who pays for this wasted time? I am sure you know in NZ the pilot pays!
Last edited by Dick Smith; 7th Jan 2018 at 04:42.
You still haven't been able to explain what you actually want, Dick. You've just said that it's too complicated to explain here, which suggests to me that either what you want doesn't stand up to critical examination from people with different perspectives, or it's too convoluted to be practical. If this isn't the case, can you tell me what it is?
(Ideally without using the phrase 'half-wound back', which is up there with 'jobs and growth', and 'tough on crime' as a sound-bite repeated so often as to have lost all meaning.)
(Ideally without using the phrase 'half-wound back', which is up there with 'jobs and growth', and 'tough on crime' as a sound-bite repeated so often as to have lost all meaning.)
In any event, it seems strange that in the ‘old’ system it was OK that a SARWATCH was cancelled ‘automatically’ when you landed at a destination aerodrome that happened to be a controlled aerodrome, but it’s not OK now.
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: Abeam Alice Springs
Posts: 1,109
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If I recall correctly, in the old 'FS' days if your destination was an aerodrome with a Tower, your SARTIME was held by the Tower.... AMMBZT in FS/ATC speak of those days before the Y codes came in! At some locations depending on local procedures it was in fact held by the briefing office. At remote locations the SARTIME was held by the FS unit responsible for that area. At some locations ATC did not believe it was part of their job and would strive to have FS hold the details. But yes, times have changed.
At the end of the day how the SARTIME is managed should be transparent to the pilot. He just needs to submit it, and cancel at the appropriate time, and for search action to be commenced if he does not.
At the end of the day how the SARTIME is managed should be transparent to the pilot. He just needs to submit it, and cancel at the appropriate time, and for search action to be commenced if he does not.
Thread Starter
De fliegler. Have a good read of post 596. Can’t be much clearer! However any further info you require will be provided in a positive way. Just ask! I will try and not use the factual statement “ half wound back” more than three or four times.
Triadic. There is of course a chance that the system has been made more labour intensive as that makes more jobs and more penalty rate time!
Triadic. There is of course a chance that the system has been made more labour intensive as that makes more jobs and more penalty rate time!
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: Abeam Alice Springs
Posts: 1,109
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Triadic. There is of course a chance that the system has been made more labour intensive as that makes more jobs and more penalty rate time!
Any flight plan or notification with a SARTIME should go via the AFTN to CENSAR who then monitor it. Any ATS unit accepting an amendment or cancellation should then advise CENSAR via whatever means they have in their procedures.
If it is not cancelled then the holder of the SARTIME, in this case CENSAR should contact the relevant ATS unit for further information. It used to be that at SARTIME plus 30 min a Uncertainty SAR phase would be declared which would up the anti and formalise the process. If no info was forthcoming, then the phase would usually be upgraded at fuel exhaustion time or on receipt of other info. A simple process - at least it was. As for now, who knows?
Triadic. There is of course a chance that the system has been made more labour intensive as that makes more jobs and more penalty rate time!
It appears they have to continually chase Sar times that are not cancelled but keep the problem secret as it employs lots of people .
Who pays for this wasted time? I am sure you know in NZ the pilot pays!
I suspect Airservices would dearly like to divest itself of SARTIME responsibility but probably can't, and no-one in private industry would take it on without charging.
Something else that isn't rocket science; set an alarm on your phone to alert you to cancel the SARTIME. Sheesh ...
SARTIME | Airservices
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Melbourne
Age: 72
Posts: 774
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
De fliegler. Have a good read of post 596. Can’t be much clearer! However any further info you require will be provided in a positive way. Just ask! I will try and not use the factual statement “ half wound back” more than three or four times.
Triadic. There is of course a chance that the system has been made more labour intensive as that makes more jobs and more penalty rate time!
Triadic. There is of course a chance that the system has been made more labour intensive as that makes more jobs and more penalty rate time!
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Melbourne
Age: 72
Posts: 774
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thread Starter
So why havnt they issued even one public statement about the obvious waste involved?
More importantly is the “ cry wolf “ situation I mentioned on the other thread.
Something disfunctional here I would reckon.
More importantly is the “ cry wolf “ situation I mentioned on the other thread.
Something disfunctional here I would reckon.
In case it is helpful, the UK does it differently (better?!).
It is the pilot's obligation to have a 'responsible person' follow their flight (friend, parent, office colleague). If an aircraft doesn't arrive, they're to call the police who will set SAR in motion. In practice this means no need to close flight plans (!), and more importantly, no unnecessary searching at all. None.
The ONLY time there is any effort expended is when an aircraft really is overdue/missing.
I personally think this should be the standard.
I say this as someone who has been called out in the middle of the night to 'rescue' someone who simply forgot to call in their safe landing (not in the UK).
It is the pilot's obligation to have a 'responsible person' follow their flight (friend, parent, office colleague). If an aircraft doesn't arrive, they're to call the police who will set SAR in motion. In practice this means no need to close flight plans (!), and more importantly, no unnecessary searching at all. None.
The ONLY time there is any effort expended is when an aircraft really is overdue/missing.
I personally think this should be the standard.
I say this as someone who has been called out in the middle of the night to 'rescue' someone who simply forgot to call in their safe landing (not in the UK).
So why havnt they issued even one public statement about the obvious waste involved?
More importantly is the “ cry wolf “ situation I mentioned on the other thread.
Something disfunctional here I would reckon.
More importantly is the “ cry wolf “ situation I mentioned on the other thread.
Something disfunctional here I would reckon.
The problem of overlooked SARTIMEs has been raised from time to time over the years by Airservices, CASA and AMSA via RAPAC, crash comic, forums etc. Think I recall seeing an AIC about it.
In Arnhem Land back in the day, the VFR charters were FULLSAR and multiple short hops. The pilot would call taxiing with his details for that particular hop, as he usually didn't know what that job would be until he got there. Come the revolution and VFR FULLSAR was abolished, the architects of the new system assumed responsibility for holding the SARTIME would devolve back to the charter companies, ie the "responsible person", thus saving money and those make work jobs. Instead, those cunning charter pilots just nominated a SARTIME for the end of that hop to the same FS unit that previously would have held the FULLSAR details. So nothing really changed except the colour of the Flight Progress Strip.
Bloggs:
I am in furious agreement about talking. What I am concerned about is that the various camps are not interested in understanding other peoples positions.
There are too many axes being ground.
I have no problems with talking to RPT when approaching a CTAF and arranging separation. I also usually alter my arrival to defer to the larger aircraft as well since his costs are higher than mine. I also believe that you cannot have too much situational awareness hence I monitor area frequency always. That has saved me from having to make transmissions many times when ATC answers a question for someone else that I was just about to ask. What I do not like is the idea of being prevented from communicating with anyone or being refused information that might be critical to my safety just because I am driving a VFR bug smasher.
Sunfish, I normally enjoy reading your well thought-out and reasoned posts, so on this occasion I assume you have had too many reds!
Anyways, if you did mean everything you wrote, if I was in my 172, I couldn't give two hoots about any of this stuff. I'd just get in and go for a fly. No CTAF, no transponder, no calls. I am a realist. I do know that there is a good chance I could avoid another lighty even if I only did pick him up at the last minute.
The reality is though that the more people you kill, the more unpopular you become. So yes, I am a bit more interested about keeping myself away from others, by finding out where they are before I get there. And the 100+ punters sitting behind me have as much right to be in the same piece of sky as you. Safely. So don't start this Arthur (sorry John) and Martha rubbish about "Free In G and the rest can jump in the lake", the epitome of this being an A380 dodging Dick in his bugsmasher in Class E because that's his right.
Oh, and another thing. Hitting me in my wonderjet will cause you just as much grief whether I have a full load of punters or I'm empty. I still can't see out of it very well, I'm not very manoeuverable, and I have a lot to do internally to get thing safely on the ground which reduces my lookout. So it is your interest to know where I am and where I am going, so that you can look after your butt, by talking.
Anyways, if you did mean everything you wrote, if I was in my 172, I couldn't give two hoots about any of this stuff. I'd just get in and go for a fly. No CTAF, no transponder, no calls. I am a realist. I do know that there is a good chance I could avoid another lighty even if I only did pick him up at the last minute.
The reality is though that the more people you kill, the more unpopular you become. So yes, I am a bit more interested about keeping myself away from others, by finding out where they are before I get there. And the 100+ punters sitting behind me have as much right to be in the same piece of sky as you. Safely. So don't start this Arthur (sorry John) and Martha rubbish about "Free In G and the rest can jump in the lake", the epitome of this being an A380 dodging Dick in his bugsmasher in Class E because that's his right.
Oh, and another thing. Hitting me in my wonderjet will cause you just as much grief whether I have a full load of punters or I'm empty. I still can't see out of it very well, I'm not very manoeuverable, and I have a lot to do internally to get thing safely on the ground which reduces my lookout. So it is your interest to know where I am and where I am going, so that you can look after your butt, by talking.
There are too many axes being ground.
I have no problems with talking to RPT when approaching a CTAF and arranging separation. I also usually alter my arrival to defer to the larger aircraft as well since his costs are higher than mine. I also believe that you cannot have too much situational awareness hence I monitor area frequency always. That has saved me from having to make transmissions many times when ATC answers a question for someone else that I was just about to ask. What I do not like is the idea of being prevented from communicating with anyone or being refused information that might be critical to my safety just because I am driving a VFR bug smasher.
