LHRT,
You state
'So wouldn't turning the RAM alarm off for IFR flights OCTA reduce your work load, why does ATC even care about RAM OCTA ?.
I thought the whole premise to Dicks argument, and by default yours, was that if we have the radar coverage AND the ability to alert pilots that this is what we should be doing. Whether it is CTA or OCTA. Dick, goes on to state that he would like to see a FS type function WITH Radar.
I thought you were talking about a duty of care scenario?
From the first page.
One of the reasons NAS was high on the agenda is that we do not use the radar properly in the enroute airspace below 8,500 feet. I could see lives were going to be lost. Already six lives have been lost at Benalla and I would imagine we will end up with an airline accident with possibly 100 plus deaths at a place like Proserpine. Remember we still have the old flight service non radar procedures below 8,500 feet even where we have good radar coverage Dick.
If you are flying on an IFR flight plan in this area (radar coverage) be it any class of airspace, say "G" (OCTA), and you descend below the LSALT, MSA or MVA, wouldn't it be great if the RADAR system recognised you were below this safe altitude, alerted the Flight Watch, Centre operator that your were doing so.LHRT
A reason we may care about RAM, might have to do with an ability to give unverified traffic OCTA i.e. a FIS .
e.g. aircraft has control services terminated. RAM alert inhibits on leaving CTA, aircraft deviates from planned track, aircraft cleans up other traffic that previously wasn't an issue.
LHRT what you are trying to achieve will enhance safety, but at a financial cost. As ATCs have been saying from the outset, happy to provide this additional service if resourced for it.
We signed on for this, but I hope you can empathise with what an ATC feels when involved in something like Benalla. Its not till you see up-close and personal the anguish that people feel even if the incident didn't involve a loss of life. Not sooking, but if this is not resourced PROPERLY, we will still have these incidents. For a pilot it would be like getting behind in the Approach , not in front of it, and still be required to carry out the landing, we wouldn't have the Go-Around option.
Last edited by max1; 5th Oct 2008 at 14:27.