Creampuff, here's a few we used that weren't on the WACs:
Mammadewere, Gudjektbinj, Marlwan, Gummaringbang, Mumeka, Nonni, Gamagarwan, Marlgowa
I’ve just opened the charts published by a publisher approved for the purposes of CAR 233(1)(h), and what do I see on the charts?
- Mamadawerre (YMMA). There’s also one coded YGMD near a property called Mamadawerre
- Mumeka (YMUM)
- YGTJ
- YMRN
- YGUB
- YNAM
You see Ix, like Trent972 previously, you answered a question I didn’t ask.
I didn’t ask you to nominate airstrips that aren’t marked on a 30 year old paper WAC. I asked you to nominate airstrips that aren’t marked on a chart – that is, the things the ‘
latest editions of which’ the law requires pilots to have available in the cockpit.
These ‘discussions’ generally lead nowhere because they are rarely based on ‘facts’ and are almost invariably based on confusion about the rules.
They are usually based on someone’s strongly-held opinion, untroubled by the whole of the facts, unhindered by a knowledge of the rules, and heavily influenced by industrial relations and political biases.
For example, I’m all for Dick’s airspace model, provided it comes with
all of the attributes of the model on which it is based, not just the bits he likes and lacking the bits he doesn’t like or isn’t aware of.
Please understand how the ‘multicom’ system works. In the multicom system, the equivalent of area frequency in G is the multicom frequency. However, and critically importantly, the equivalent of the ‘default’ CTAF – that is, the frequency to be used for any strip marked on a chart that doesn’t have a published discrete frequency – is a
different frequency to the multicom frequency.
I will repeat that:
The multicom frequency is a different frequency to the default CTAF.
Dick and triadic’s bright idea seems to be that both frequencies should be the same: 126.7.
You can stick that where the sun don’t shine.