What was That......Yeah! what was that??
Having trawled through the pages of this topic over the past hour or so and re-visiting the NAS website, there are several major concerns that I have, pointedly:
1. Descent:
Quite often we descend form C airspace through G, then E and into G again and then into a CTAF/MBZ for a landing. All this at high groundspeeds (up to 280/300 KTS GS) and descent rates of 1500/2000 fpm. Not to mention the rate of closure speed with any conflicting traffic.
The pilot workload, the FRQ changes, the level changes and the fact that there is “unreported” radar identified VFR traffic on or adjacent to our inbound track and in the circuit, make this an event a random “hit or miss” rather then -see and be seen- (announce and avoid, if you like) profile. I feel that this event at times is already so treacherous that it borders on being unsafe; to further remove DTI exacerbates the problem.
2. Information Transfer:
A Website;
An AIC;
Glossy brochures;
Amendments to an Operational Documentation Publication;
This is just not going to do it fellas!!!
There is no doubt that many professional and inquisitive pilots will be attempting to research the changes and “go with them” but this method of “Information Transfer” does not cover those pilots that are “less than enthusiastic”, the “fly every so often” and “just around the local area” kind of pilot which we/I will be exposed to.
The “system” can not excuse itself from educating and informing theses people, this is where I feel the danger lies. The system at the moment is for an aggressively inquisitive approach rather then the passive observer.
There will need to be a greater reliance on Information Forums and Seminars, and not just in the major cities this will need to be linked by a means of formalising/accrediting this “Information Transfer”.
This will be expensive but necessary regardless of the final implementation profile of the NAS!!!.