... poligies' for the delay in reply
.
Dick Smith said on the 18th December 2007, 10:00
LT is one of the only D regionals with PRIM and SSR Radar to surface
Why then isn’t the radar used in an effective way?
.
It is! … I have explained a bit about this to you …. and am happy to delve further i.e. we are ‘currently’ limited to using the display for SA, in other words confirmation of the procedural plan and execution. Now it is fact that we can actually move traffic more efficiently using procedural standards (close in), regional D controllers will confirm this, and we have been for years trying to have rules introduced that enable us to use the tool even more effectively. Suffice to say, many of the action items drawn from many Tower Manager conferences on this subject have been followed up by the TM experts, and little beyond that. The onsite experts have done their bit, as for the follow on ….. well I will not attempt to defend the indefensible!! …perhaps you might ask CB management who was following up, and where they are now!
In relation to the Secondary Surveillance Radar, the aircraft are forced by law to be on your tower frequency, and I understand that you and the other tower controllers are not rated to use radar.
I personally have held radar ratings, do I currently? no, WHY? … again ask why field controllers have been denied said ratings, and why the data path/s to regional towers has not been certified for said use, also whilst you are about it, ask why the latest upgrades to TSAD (with some TAAATS functionality) has not been rolled out (last I heard it was suppose to happen about 2 years ago)
If the airspace followed the North American system – and as far as I know the system in every other modern aviation country in the world – the radar covered airspace is controlled by air traffic controllers who are in the Centre or TRACON and are radar rated. It sounds sensible, doesn’t it?
…. Yup …. At least double the number of ATC positions to do the same TMA areas currently done by regional tower/app combined
It has the advantage that when the tower closes down at night (or due to staffing problems) the Centre would keep providing a full radar separation service to the lowest level of radar coverage.
…. Staffing problems
…. Staffing enroute sectors as it is is apparently too hard …. and you want remote (centre) radar TMA’s at regionals as well????
.
….. at night, IMHO it would be smarter (read efficient) to have the tower/app assume low level enroute (below FL250) … enabling the wide area enroute controllers the ability to concentrate on the vast areas of enroute above FL250 … in fact, it could be argued that FL150 and below should stay with the TWR/APP unit 24/7 with additional staff (APP) during heavy traffic daylight hours!
The fact that the tower “owns” the airspace to 8,500 feet (or is it 12,500 feet?)
A085!
is a hangover from the old pre-radar days.
…. Pre-radar has nothing to do with it!
It is a bit like the FSOs keeping their airspace for many years after radar was introduced – and therefore unintentionally lowering safety.
…. Or reducing services to IFR and VFR outside the surveillance veil (G) and arguably increasing loading on the ATC sectors above?!
To anyone with an open mind who is reading this, in other modern aviation countries Class D airspace changes to Class E when the tower closes and a full separation service is still provided to IFR aircraft from the Centre. In Australia, airline pilots are forced to change off the radar frequency to a “calling in the blind” CTAF frequency – even when in good radar coverage.
… I say again, who is gunna provide the ‘surveillance' (cost), the class E service (cost and resources) and how is that justifiable when D or better could be provided for the same or less cost (factoring IFR delays with remote E)???
It is all about resistance to change – i.e. “This is the way we used to operate it in the 1950s – no one must ever change it.”
… resistance to change? Or resistance to changing an entrenched position despite reasoned argument? …… pot calling kettle, pot calling kettle … over
Scurvy, by the way, there won’t be much data on non-transponder VCAs in non-radar Class C airspace as no one would know the aircraft was there!
unless they saw them or TCAS went ballistic!!!!?
Surely you must understand this. In many cases the only way you would know the aircraft was there would be because of a collision.
….. and the data on said OZ VCA collisons/NMAC’s is?????