Is that a positive or negative input?
sms777, my "it begins" is simply that the thread will shortly revert to entrenched positions and the discussion Jabawocky is trying to draw out will get hijacked.
Two individuals come up in a rather polite weekend exchange and comment on some trouble they have around Amberly and Willy. The abuse, whilst ever so politely put, has started.
Thanks RAAFSA for a good response. Your plea for openness and discussion about how rules, regulations and procedures are applied around military controlled airspace is well made. Your point that you and many others are simply doing the best you can is appreciated.
Back to you sms777, you are obviously talking about an occassional military airspace transit clearance? With that in mind, your responses are also in context and respectful
Having raised the topic with Jabawocky off line, I think the discussion needs to be more about our Australian airspace and how we use it. Hopefully, no-one will argue that we have the best flying conditions in the world? With that accepted, why do we have such draconian rules, regulations and procedures? The "it's all about safety" cry does not stand up to scrutiny. Despite our desire to win at everything, in the sport of life our aviation safety record is at least as likely to relate to excellent flying conditions as it does to rules, regulations and procedures.
We have several large volumes of rules and regulations applying to pilot's/airspace users committing aviation in Australia.
My point is that the system has become over complicated.
This complication does not make aviation safer or easier. The application of the rules of the air should be something inherently simple and easy to remember.
The message is simple. Several other countries (by no means all) apply their rules and regulations in a way that is much more inclusive of all airpace users than we do in Australia. Our ATC, both civil and military, may well be doing the best they can, but we still need an unemotive debate about airspace management without everyone falling on their knives?
This is not about how easy it is to fly up a transit lane through the Willy restricted area, or how long you may or may not be held whilst an F111 does a tactical join at Amberly. It is about why the best radar operators in the country controlling the most manoeuvrable aircraft in the country need exlusive use of such a large chunk of airspace? No-one seems to want to take responsibility for look out anymore, or for the provision of such services as flight and radar information, or radar advisory traffic avoidance.
Up and down the east coast of Australia in particular we have superb radar coverage. Why don't radar agencies simply provide information or advisory services based on verbal agreements with the pilots whether inside or outside controlled airspace. I have occassionally seen and heard it done west of Sydney, so it must be possible. The ATC obligation to actual separation could be less, but all pilots would receive better information and a broader picture instead of just the few who actually want to be controlled.
A few revised procedures, and a little less misplaced anxiety would make for a lot more freedom of the air. There is a huge amount to discuss. Maybe our separation standards are too high? Maybe most unarmed aerial combat training could be taken out of a restricted area and get done OCTA (like they do in the UK)? Maybe RPT could be more constrained within specific narrow airways for their protection and the size of their receiving airport control zones could be shrunk (like they do in Europe)?
All just thoughts based on my point that our system has become over complicated. I am not saying anyone else is necessarily better, just that we could do what we want better because we have the best flying conditions in the world. Personally, I think the restricted areas and controlled airspace in Australia are way bigger than they really need to be, especially up the eastern seaboard.