PPRuNe Forums - View Single Post - NAS rears its head again
View Single Post
Old 4th Jun 2010, 01:42
  #1046 (permalink)  
mjbow2
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Sand Pit
Posts: 343
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
CaptainMidnight

Class E not permitted for Control Zones (ICAO).
Like The United States, we do not need ICAO permission to do anything.

By the way, when a tower closes at night or at a non towered airport, its called a CTAF not a control zone.

Capn Bloggs

You state
Why on earth would anybody want E over an airfield if there wasn't enough traffic to justify D?
Because it provides IFR-IFR protection in IMC conditions. Its fascinating that you cannot see this simple fact.

You NAStronauts have nothing credible to base your arguments on except "that's the way they do it in the US".
Finally you admit that the US example is credible. It is credible because airspace classifications are assigned on scientifically validated data from tens of millions of flights across all airports. From the busiest to the least busy CTAF.

I find it amazing that you pass blind judgment on an airspace system that you have obviously never had the benefit of using. You clearly are absolutely clueless on how class E would work when arriving into a CTAF despite being told repeatedly.

You state the same garbage again...

IFR stuck with procedural separation on the ATC freq whilst self-segregating with VFR on the CTAF.
And again I will tell you that situation does not exist. If it is VMC you can conduct a visual approach from 30 nm out. You will never be cleared into the airport vicinity if other IFR aircraft are still present. You will not be given the same kind of ridiculous close in procedural separation you get at places like Launy or Maroochidore. You will be separated (from other IFR) well in advance of your arrival into the CTAF area if it is a non radar environment. DO YOU UNDERSTAND THIS?


I understand that you might think there is no way around the unique Australian tracking and altitude requirement for a visual approach but regardless, we should copy the United States, Canada and New Zealand etc and allow a pilot to track however they see fit, once cleared for a visual approach (unless the visual approach clearance is given with a restriction... ie follow xyz aircraft, No 2).

mjbow2
NASTRONAUT

Last edited by mjbow2; 4th Jun 2010 at 02:03.
mjbow2 is offline