Addendum
.
Just goes to show, these discussions (no matter the tenor) are useful for everyone’s level of awareness.
.
werbil
.
Yesterday evening whilst working on some paperwork for an upcoming airshow, I had a flick though GEN (having reflected on our exchange ) and noticed a small but apparently very important change made to AIP in the
June 7 amendment.
.
It is in the context of Unicom services, and changes the intent of Unicom. It is therefore appropriate to revisit the statement made by me to you i.e.
D airspace is the currently the first airspace which has any VFR involvement with a third party for traffic purposes (except CA/GRS or UNICOM).
… Unicom is
not a function that is involved in ‘third party traffic services’ .. other than that, absolutely correct
…. AIP GEN 3.4 3 3.3.3 (h) has been added which now says
h. basic information on traffic
The wording seems to have been carefully chosen i.e.
not ‘Traffic Information’ as defined in AIP ‘Flight Information Service’ GEN 3.3 2 2.15 (specifically 2.15.9)
.
…. I wonder what the intended difference is? ... if there is any?? …. Hmmm …
... in any event, I have noted the correction in red in the above post
.
Interestingly, given the CA/GRS is a ‘certified’ role, and Unicom is not (the difference was always based on training and knowledge required to manage ‘interference’ on the G/CTAF frequency), this change would seem an excursion into the unknown. .. why I hear you ask
.
The little ‘gotcha’ ( 3.3.3 (h) above) is relevant when tagged to the other bits in AIP UNICOM i.e.
.
- GEN 3.4 3 3.3
3.3.1 Unicom (Universal Communications) is a non-ATS communications service provided to enhance the value of information normally available about a non-towered aerodrome.
.
3.3.2 The primary function of the frequency used for UNICOM services where the Unicom is the CTAF is to provide pilots with the means to make standard positional broadcasts when operating in the vicinity of an aerodrome. Participation in Unicom services must not inhibit the transmission of standard positional broadcasts.
my bolding
.
Now, tie that in with:-
3.3.6 The Unicom operator is solely responsible for the accuracy of any information passed to aircraft, while the use of the information obtained from a Unicom is at the discretion of the pilot in command.
my bolding
.
Subtle to read, but as a whole, adding ‘basic information on traffic’ changes dramatically the role picture/expectation for those participating in or providing Unicom services.
.
Folks would be well advised to give very careful consideration to their liability coverage, and; for pilots, the same consideration if they choose to rely on the Unicom info or loose SA due Unicom frequency interference.
.
The glaring difference between CA/GRS and Unicom is the services provided and the fact that a CA/GRS
is trained and ‘certified’ to do so, not so for a Unicom operator thus the ‘solely responsible’ caveat. ….. hmmm
.
I do not know (as yet) how this jem slipped in … would anyone in the know (CASA) care to comment.
.
At first glance, it may also raise ‘serious liability issues’ for those of us (ATC’s) that volunteer at CTAF airshows and fly-ins!
.
On a different note.
.
Having re-read the latest exchange/s, it was perhaps (on reflection) unfair of me to have assumed you (Mr/Mrs werbil) were deliberately throwing in curve balls to distract/detract from the discussion. If you are genuine in your beliefs, and not being obtuse, then I apologise for the tone of my responses.
.
Raising awareness of tech issues without the ‘carrier waves’ is a long and frustrating process. Genuine discussion and explanation (where sort) is what many of us are trying to achieve. No one 'expects' consensus, but in its absence, calm reasoning and explaination of the contrary view ... perceptions of motherhood statements are like Avgas near a naked flame in this place.
.
Unfortunately, there have been a number of those ‘deliberate misinformer’ types over the last number of years, which probably works to amplify the reactions (of some of us) when people appear to be attempting same.
.
Again, if that was not your intent, I apologise
.
Scurv