The MULTICOM has been in existence for over a decade and was part of NAS when introduced. It now has been changed by nameless officers in CASA who obviously don't know the history (like yourself) and the reasons for its establishment.
Actually, I do know the gory and intimate details of, and the reasons for, all of the half-baked, poorly-implemented changes inflicted on aviation in Australia in the last couple of decades. Funny thing is that I've been using the same frequency and broadcast procedures for around the last decade, and numerous biennial/aeroplane flight reviews (or whatever they are called). Funnier still is that all the pilots I know use the same procedures.
Re notams: you try and get a NOTAM issued for farmer Joe's strip and it will turn up in the FIR bulletin which does not have a lot of readers in the GA world.
You do seem to be changing your tune a little on this issue. Now it's that the NOTAM can be published, but no one in the GA world will read it.
GA pilots thank you for the insult.
I'll say it again: If the standard of airmanship has deteriorated to the point at which pilots aren't reading NOTAMs, trivia like frequency and broadcast rules are the least of Australia's aviation problems.
One of the reasons for the MULTICOM is that it kept things simple and standardised - viz 126.7 unless a promulgated CTAF (like in North America). No need to worry about FIA boundaries or being on the correct area freq, especially near a boundary.
Great.
But that's not the system currently in place in Australia, and it was only ever in place for a very short time. (I remember the reason for 'Dick's Biscuits' being put on charts. Do you?)
You have to remember that in real world calls on area should be directed to the controller, or be relevant to other traffic, ie change of level or descent etc. With retransmission in some cases up to 8 frequencies are linked together. The last thing we need is b'casts that are not relevant, especially when there are many low level dead spots that are not heard by the controller, but are by the high flyers.
Poor dears. It must be incredibly disruptive and throw high flying cockpits into complete disarray when they hear a broadcast that is not relevant.
This "problem" is based on a
complete fiction: That there is lots of aviation activity going on at places in Australia that aren't marked on aeronautical charts.
Australia isn't the USA. There's lots more of nothing happening at lots more places in Australia.
Another funny thing is that almost all of the broadcasts I hear on any frequency are "not relevant" .... to me. But I continue to figure that the system not
just about
me.
What we do need is better education on the use of radio, and not to believe that hitting the PTT will solve everything!! Something that those that operate in stealth mode discovered a long time ago!
I agree.
Sadly, not everything that CASA does is about safety and this is one such example. It's more about power & ego or protecting their legal backside... Especially when thy don't understand what they are making decisions about. Like I said, a ship without a rudder and many holes..... Heaven help GA if this behaviour continues.
How does broadcasting on area reduce CASA's exposure? I thought the risk of this "change" is that there'll be ATC meltdown and crashing RPTs.
The case here is simple. CASA got it wrong! Now how do you fix that??
Easy: You get a job in CASA, and fix it.
The funny thing - no, the hilarious thing - is that whatever changes you made, there'd be a bunch of loudmouths telling you that you don't understand what you are making decisions about and you got it wrong!