Firstly there is obviously some confusion on what MULTICOM was designed to do and there is obviously a lack of corporate history and knowledge within CASA on the background and purpose of the MULTICOM, hence the misguided changes that they have pushed thru over the past year.
It was o so simple and what’s more it worked, but as I said earlier, the education at the time (10+years ago) was for some reason poor and as a result, I suspect that many did not even know it existed (and this thread seems to prove that!).
As Dick says, (and he is correct on this one) it was only ever designed for locations where there was no published CTAF and back then there was no mention of if it was on the charts or not! The en-route area frequency in Class G is now operated by the respective Centres and the procedures were never designed to cater for a/a chat - as in other countries all calls should be made thru Centre. The MULTICOM was only there to take the chat off the area Class G frequency as specific CTAF frequencies do - not to just cruise along and listen to it, tho' I believe many pilots do as they don't wish to listen to the Jets above! Call MAYDAY on 126.7 and see how many will answer…. you might be surprised?
Back in the days of FS, many aero clubs at rural locations used 119.1 as a local frequency, which might have been the MULTICOM of the ‘60’s and ‘70’s(??) – for exactly the same reason as it was introduced more than a decade ago – to get the LOCAL chat off the area frequency! Particularly when the area frequency is now operated by ATC.
The discussion above on having a NOTAM for farmer Joe's fly-in is not something that is practical as NOTAMs are only issued against promulgated locations and navaids and such NOTAMs will only be published in the FIR list (not against any nearby locations), which is, I suggest, not something that the average GA flyer would check very often as there is usually a bucket load in the list and it is very difficult to find something on the list that might be relevant. A subject of much discussion at the RAPACs over the years, but NOTAMs have very strict guidelines in accordance with ICAO recommended standards etc.
Surely we have enough frequencies left over for each aerodrome to have its own discrete frequency rather than a big multicom?
Actually we don't! The frequency spectrum is one of the most polluted part of our environment and there are often technical reasons why some air band frequencies cannot be used in some locations.
How come we have a never ending list of CTAF frequencies in Oz when in North America there is perhaps less than half a dozen?? The reason here, I suggest, is that our procedures encourage us to talk far too much! Again, something that the folk at CASA don’t appear to understand.
One can live in hope that those in CASA that pushed this change thru so poorly might see the light (!!) and review this mess. I would be also interested to know how they got ASA to agree to this change? Or were they just bullied in the name of safety?? CASA know best... actually they don't!
I suspect that our Controller friends might have something to say on this in due course.
