Lost - 2000+ airfields
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 100
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Lost - 2000+ airfields
Apologies if this has been posted before but has everyone read H29/17 AERONAUTICAL DATA ORIGINATOR RESPONSIBILITIES?
Airservices has lost the details of who is responsible for some 2000+ airfields currently listed in the ESRA and WAC. If the people reasonable for these airfields don't come forward Air Services will remove these details from the AIP.
You will be surprised at what airfields are on the cull list.
Has something gone wrong here? Are airfield operators boycotting Airservices?
https://aopa.com.au/wp-content/uploa...10/a17-h29.pdf
Airservices has lost the details of who is responsible for some 2000+ airfields currently listed in the ESRA and WAC. If the people reasonable for these airfields don't come forward Air Services will remove these details from the AIP.
You will be surprised at what airfields are on the cull list.
Has something gone wrong here? Are airfield operators boycotting Airservices?
https://aopa.com.au/wp-content/uploa...10/a17-h29.pdf
It's quite extraordinary. There are half a dozen airports in there including a large one licensed all managed by the aviation manager of a government department. That's his title. Not too hard to find.
What is of greater concern is the background to this. Have a read of the form that you as farmer Joe, or publican Joe has to sign to be responsible by law for the veracity of all obstacles, notams etc. if I had a strip that I used and was happy for others to use, no way would sign that form unless I was a paid airfield manager.
So the airfields get deleted from th databases and situational awareness decreases when these no longer pop up on your track on your moving map....
What is of greater concern is the background to this. Have a read of the form that you as farmer Joe, or publican Joe has to sign to be responsible by law for the veracity of all obstacles, notams etc. if I had a strip that I used and was happy for others to use, no way would sign that form unless I was a paid airfield manager.
So the airfields get deleted from th databases and situational awareness decreases when these no longer pop up on your track on your moving map....
Anything for which Airservices cannot charge a fee is being bureaucratised out of Airservices’ in tray. All of those pesky ALAs and NOTAMs about nobodies daring to fly little aircraft to far away places don’t make money for Airservices. The solution? Make it frustratingly time-consuming and difficult to deal with Airservices on these matters. Most give up. Job done so far as Airservices’ ‘brains trust’ is concerned.
Gosh, I don't know if they tried very hard, there's a few Hospitals on there and some in the Territory and such are well known. Surely contacting a Hospital or some of the Charter Companies in the areas concerned or looking up Regos that travel to them to ascertain who uses them wouldn't be terribly difficult?
Places like Apollo Bay, why not try Apollo Bay Aviation? Flinders Naval Depot..hmm, wonder who they could contact about that one?!
This is an absolute disgrace, who did they try and contact about these?!?!
Places like Apollo Bay, why not try Apollo Bay Aviation? Flinders Naval Depot..hmm, wonder who they could contact about that one?!
This is an absolute disgrace, who did they try and contact about these?!?!
There is nobody to “contact them”. That person has been sacked from Airservices. The ‘brains trust’ now has to go through a process to show that it’s everyone else’s problem.
There are a number of these airfields that are privately owned, and which are currently listed as PPR.
In speaking with some of those airfield owners, they don’t want their details listed anywhere because they have had an increase in pilots landing without permission, because the pilot has always wanted to go there, but either doesn’t want to pay landing fees or can’t be arsed going through the rigmarole of ringing up or submitting the paperwork to get permission.
In one case that I know of, old mate pilot turned up to a privately owned airstrip without permission, rolled out his swag under the wing, then tried to help himself to avgas and oil from the scenic flight operator. Did I mention this was a Station that offered accommodation (from tent sites through to four star) for travellers, and that the airstrip was leased to a licensed air charter operator who had the avgas for their company’s use? Some clown coming through on the wrong frequency, flying backwards against circuit direction, and then trying to “borrow” avgas didn’t impress them much - all could have been solved with a quick phone Call to get permission, check the frequency and circuit direction.
Or the hero who turns up and lands, without permission, and admits he thought he was at an airstrip 20nm away. Both airstrips required permission to land, the one he was aiming for never gives out permission to land but he didn’t have permission from either. And admitted it was because he couldn’t be bothered. Bragged about how he was a check & training captain for (insert international airline here).
In speaking with some of those airfield owners, they don’t want their details listed anywhere because they have had an increase in pilots landing without permission, because the pilot has always wanted to go there, but either doesn’t want to pay landing fees or can’t be arsed going through the rigmarole of ringing up or submitting the paperwork to get permission.
In one case that I know of, old mate pilot turned up to a privately owned airstrip without permission, rolled out his swag under the wing, then tried to help himself to avgas and oil from the scenic flight operator. Did I mention this was a Station that offered accommodation (from tent sites through to four star) for travellers, and that the airstrip was leased to a licensed air charter operator who had the avgas for their company’s use? Some clown coming through on the wrong frequency, flying backwards against circuit direction, and then trying to “borrow” avgas didn’t impress them much - all could have been solved with a quick phone Call to get permission, check the frequency and circuit direction.
Or the hero who turns up and lands, without permission, and admits he thought he was at an airstrip 20nm away. Both airstrips required permission to land, the one he was aiming for never gives out permission to land but he didn’t have permission from either. And admitted it was because he couldn’t be bothered. Bragged about how he was a check & training captain for (insert international airline here).
None of which is Airservices’ problem...
Then they should get their details removed from ERSA and AOPA Directory if that's the problem, but that's a totally seperate problem from what we're talking about here.
Folks,
This would be funny if it wasn't so bleeding serious.
In the AIC it uses the words (AICH29/17, para. 2.2) "Airservices has now exhausted all reasonable avenues of enquiry in relation to the identification of the remaining ADOs".
2000+, 80 pages of them !!!
One is Flinders Naval Depot (aka HMAS Cerberus). I wonder did they think of giving the Navy a call? In terms of warm bodies, that is probably the biggest RAN base in Australia.
Far more importantly, the Emergency Services Helipads from a majority of NSW hospitals are on the list, the idea that they will all be expunged from ERSA, GNSS/FMCS, AvMap/OzRunways databases and paper maps, and eventually WACs etc. is just too ridiculous for words.
The other one that really gets me is the airfields with a full listing in ERSA, I wonder did it ever occur to anybody in Airservices to ring the contact number in their own publication. They couldn't find anybody to officially tell them (the duty of an ADO) where the Jindalee (JORN) aerial site strips are?? DST is in Canberra!!
All this is "so Australian bureaucracy", a mindlessly literal and narrow interpretation of a regulation, all in the name of "safety compliance", without regard to the real safety ramifications of the data no longer being available in a publicly available format from an approved source.
One of the missing is Royal Adelaide Hospital, given all the publicity it has had recently, shouldn't have been hard to find, my local hospital, the SAN is missing, most of the hospitals in Perth are missing.
This is the cancellation of many GPS approaches on steroids.
In my opinion, it would be quite reasonable to describe Airservices behavior in this matter as scandalous, given its obvious risk ( safety) ramifications, particularly EMS.
Tootle pip!!
This would be funny if it wasn't so bleeding serious.
In the AIC it uses the words (AICH29/17, para. 2.2) "Airservices has now exhausted all reasonable avenues of enquiry in relation to the identification of the remaining ADOs".
2000+, 80 pages of them !!!
One is Flinders Naval Depot (aka HMAS Cerberus). I wonder did they think of giving the Navy a call? In terms of warm bodies, that is probably the biggest RAN base in Australia.
Far more importantly, the Emergency Services Helipads from a majority of NSW hospitals are on the list, the idea that they will all be expunged from ERSA, GNSS/FMCS, AvMap/OzRunways databases and paper maps, and eventually WACs etc. is just too ridiculous for words.
The other one that really gets me is the airfields with a full listing in ERSA, I wonder did it ever occur to anybody in Airservices to ring the contact number in their own publication. They couldn't find anybody to officially tell them (the duty of an ADO) where the Jindalee (JORN) aerial site strips are?? DST is in Canberra!!
All this is "so Australian bureaucracy", a mindlessly literal and narrow interpretation of a regulation, all in the name of "safety compliance", without regard to the real safety ramifications of the data no longer being available in a publicly available format from an approved source.
One of the missing is Royal Adelaide Hospital, given all the publicity it has had recently, shouldn't have been hard to find, my local hospital, the SAN is missing, most of the hospitals in Perth are missing.
This is the cancellation of many GPS approaches on steroids.
In my opinion, it would be quite reasonable to describe Airservices behavior in this matter as scandalous, given its obvious risk ( safety) ramifications, particularly EMS.
Tootle pip!!
Surely we could get some Journos in on this and a bit of publicity? This seems pretty clear cut that someone hasn't done much work at all and is going to cause endless troubles.
"Apologies Rescue 500, we no longer have that hospital in our Database, could you please take a few of your precious minutes and ours and tell us the Lat and Long for the 10th time this week? Cheers!"
"Apologies Rescue 500, we no longer have that hospital in our Database, could you please take a few of your precious minutes and ours and tell us the Lat and Long for the 10th time this week? Cheers!"
I did hear a rumour that the information has been sent to the last known operator / contact for the airfield, and they have chosen not to return it. For a variety of reasons.
Outnabout,
Interesting so called rumour, what could possibly be the reasons?
The navy deciding to keep HMAS Cerberus top secret?
Take the dozens of hospitals for example, could this be a collective decision by state health services to boycott helicopters EMS to reduce A&E waiting times??
Balgo Hill, perhaps to make it harder to fly in illicit grog?
Lizard Island, a plot to save the Barrier Reef from tourists?
A bunch of council owned airfields in NSW a cunning plot by property developers to hide them from aviation??
Or, just perhaps, Airservices not taking responsibility for publishing aeronautical data that they are obliged to publish under national legislation and international treaty, by claiming that establishing an "ADO" for every spot is the responsibility of somebody else -- hiding behind a suitably self-serving and Airservices budget friendly interpretation of a CASR Part 175 regulated requirement.
Tootle pip!!
Interesting so called rumour, what could possibly be the reasons?
The navy deciding to keep HMAS Cerberus top secret?
Take the dozens of hospitals for example, could this be a collective decision by state health services to boycott helicopters EMS to reduce A&E waiting times??
Balgo Hill, perhaps to make it harder to fly in illicit grog?
Lizard Island, a plot to save the Barrier Reef from tourists?
A bunch of council owned airfields in NSW a cunning plot by property developers to hide them from aviation??
Or, just perhaps, Airservices not taking responsibility for publishing aeronautical data that they are obliged to publish under national legislation and international treaty, by claiming that establishing an "ADO" for every spot is the responsibility of somebody else -- hiding behind a suitably self-serving and Airservices budget friendly interpretation of a CASR Part 175 regulated requirement.
Tootle pip!!
If all these ALA's are removed from the data base would this in any way affect your insurance cover should one have say a prop strike on landing or hit a roo etc. Would the insurance company treat your landing as an irresponsible landing in a paddock somewhere (even if the strip was well maintained)because it was no longer an authorised landing area?
Interesting that the circular states:
And yet Broken Hill is listed as one of the problem facilities. That the RFDS with a large base of operations there cannot provide details of the operator of the BHI aerodrome (or the operator refuses to provide details to AirServices) is interesting.
Makes me think in many cases operators are not responding to requests rather than not being able to be identified. Which is still very concerning.
As part of this effort, assistance was provided by the RFDS and other organisations involved in servicing remote communities, with some success.
Makes me think in many cases operators are not responding to requests rather than not being able to be identified. Which is still very concerning.
Given that the original data made it to and remained in the AIP since Noah played fullback on the Ark, something has changed. Either Airservices has changed the way it does things or all of the operators of the aerodromes in question have changed the way they do things. Which do you reckon is more likely?
I’m guessing that what has really happened is that no one wants to expose themselves to all of the strict liability offences in Part 175. Have a look at Division 175.D.1, in particular, to see bureacracy and criminalisation gone mad.
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: inner suburbia
Posts: 370
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Golly., there are a lot of 'medical/hospital' entries in that AIH !
It seems to me that quite a few of those entries are actually VFR waypoints that (for reasons unclear) still have a 'Y' ICAO prefix,
eg. "Majura Training Area', 'Stag Tanker Mooring Platform', 'Walcott Inlet', 'Roper River Aqua Farm', 'Blenco Falls', 'Beaver Reef', 'North Solitary Island', ...
It seems to me that quite a few of those entries are actually VFR waypoints that (for reasons unclear) still have a 'Y' ICAO prefix,
eg. "Majura Training Area', 'Stag Tanker Mooring Platform', 'Walcott Inlet', 'Roper River Aqua Farm', 'Blenco Falls', 'Beaver Reef', 'North Solitary Island', ...
Folks,
For those of you who haven't, please have a look at what is actually included, it is NOT anything to do with conditions on the ground, liability for prop strikes, or anything else your fertile imagination can dream up, it is a list of geographical positions. And it is NOT just a few private ALAs.
These "official" positions are vital in compiling databases, whether for GPS/GNSS systems, FMCS systems, EFBs (Garmin/AvMap/OzRunways/Jeppesen) or, eventually, paper maps. Publishers are only permitted to publish data from "approved" sources, in Australia Airservices is the only source of such data.
In my opinion, Airservices has an obligation to obtain the information, including providing resources to obtain the information in an accurate and verifiable form, as many of the places listed will not have access to adequately reliable up to date data, nor the specialist expertise to obtain same.
Just imagine a letter turning up to:
The Approved Aeronautical Data Originator,
Upper Kikatinalong Shire Council,
PO Box 1,
GAFFA.
It would probably go straight into File 13 as junk mail
Tootle pip!!
PS: Two on the Victorian list are Tyabb, and Lilydale, not your average idea of an ALA
For those of you who haven't, please have a look at what is actually included, it is NOT anything to do with conditions on the ground, liability for prop strikes, or anything else your fertile imagination can dream up, it is a list of geographical positions. And it is NOT just a few private ALAs.
These "official" positions are vital in compiling databases, whether for GPS/GNSS systems, FMCS systems, EFBs (Garmin/AvMap/OzRunways/Jeppesen) or, eventually, paper maps. Publishers are only permitted to publish data from "approved" sources, in Australia Airservices is the only source of such data.
In my opinion, Airservices has an obligation to obtain the information, including providing resources to obtain the information in an accurate and verifiable form, as many of the places listed will not have access to adequately reliable up to date data, nor the specialist expertise to obtain same.
Just imagine a letter turning up to:
The Approved Aeronautical Data Originator,
Upper Kikatinalong Shire Council,
PO Box 1,
GAFFA.
It would probably go straight into File 13 as junk mail
Tootle pip!!
PS: Two on the Victorian list are Tyabb, and Lilydale, not your average idea of an ALA
I've just emailed the missus who is reasonably senior in NSWHealth to at least get their ones sorted out. Fcuk knows what ASA is playing at with some of those entries though, Westmead & Royal North Shore hospitals?? Sydney Children Hospital?
Hey, if Warnervale is delisted as an airport, does that mean the council will stop charging excessive landing fees as it isn't at an airport anymore?!?
Hey, if Warnervale is delisted as an airport, does that mean the council will stop charging excessive landing fees as it isn't at an airport anymore?!?