****su tonka I think I've been on here for a while voicing a pilot's concern over this debacle
As stated above, pilots have only recieved, until the last 36 hours, small piecemeal snippets of 'education' on NAS. I recieved mine last Monday and have been reading it off and on since.
Let me first say the education package is truly impressive...oh that we had been given it three months ago. But then I suspect the result would have been more informed opposition to those aspects which are not terribly well thought out. Hardly what NASIG would have wanted!!
Big shame the effort hasn't been put into education on a airspace system which is inclusive of ALL airspace users and one that the majority of regular users believe is an improvement on what we had.
It's fairly obvious that the BIG winners in NAS is the VFR end of the industry, and if you read the education package from that narrow perspective it's all good news.
As an aircraft owner who frequently flies VFR I can see that being able to overfly class D at 4500 is kinda cool. But then I used to happily do that anyway...all it took was "Maroochy Tower, ABC, Moffet Head, 2500, tracking coastal north bound, request airways clearance"
Class C was/is no more dramatic, I just file a flightplan before leaving home...takes several minutes...big f**king deal!!!
We're told that NAS means a massive increase in Controlled airspace with it's attendant 'increased' levels of service. Well maybe but when is CTA not CTA. From VFR pilot's point of view it's a massive decrease in CTA with an attendant decrease in service.
I drew rye satisfaction from the "Let's Go Flying-Case Study". Having told us ad-nauseum that VFR should avoid IFR routes they actually managed to find two points not joined by an IFR route, I wonder how long that took. Two points among a spider web of IFR routes...man I just hope none of the pilots at Armidale or Gunnedah want to fly to Narrabri, Quirindi, Tamworth etc.
And on page 45 the picture of the single engine aircraft superimposed on the TAC/ERC under the heading how to use them...wandering northbound miles to the east of the IFR Route.
No real probems with the little 'frequency bubbles'..I'm used to that using Jepps on International flying...but then I'm not worried about looking outside at FL370 while I search half the chart to find the next frequency I need...and usually trying more than one to get two way comms!
TCAS has now been elevated from last ditch collision avoidance to, along with looking out the window, a primary self seperation tool. What a shame that a significant % of IFR aircraft aren't fitted. But that's OK affordable safety means that B717 etc don't hit anything....must be deemed affordable if a B200/C441/B58 etc clean up a non reported VFR, with his head down searching for the frequency 'good airmanship' now dictates he should be monitoring.
TCAS WAS NEVER DESIGNED AS A PRIMARY SEPARATION TOOL!!
VFR pilot's seem to now require, on top of WACs etc, a set of IFR charts and approach plates...not that they will be allowed to access the information therein to enhance the safety levels of their own operation...just so they can stay away from airspace which encompasses approaches used by IFR traffic.
Now I carry my Jepps on every flight, because I'm Instrument rated and may need them/do use them, but they're not cheap...do we really believe the average VFR pilot will be flying with current IAL information? Given the continued rhetoric from AOPA about they're not paying for this and that I hardly think so.
From an IFR pilot's point of view, particularly High Capacity RPT pilots, Australian airspace is about to become a scarier place.
So many gains for VFR users, who pay (virtually) nothing towards the systems upkeep. No gains but, arguably, less safety for IFR users who do pay.
Looks to me as though Professor Reason's Swiss cheese slices are lining up just a little better
Chuck.