Tinstaafl. Congratulations. Simply the best post on prune so far this year. I am really glad people from the Ministers office read all of this.
Firstly you say , as a pilot with experience in the Australian system, that the US NAS is
" sooo much easier than Oz "
Then you say you would prefer that they change their system and place the ATC frequency boundaries on the charts.
Of course, as a pilot that's what I would prefer too, but it's not going to happen. I have discussed this with the FAA experts and they state the obvious- it's a liability issue.
If you show the frequency of the Controller responsible for the airspace and then you mandate VFR monitoring that frequency it clearly ends up with a duty of care situation for Controllers to protect you against collisions in all but high ATC workload situations.
That is the Controller has a responsibility to attempt to call you if you are near another VFR paint. It happens all the time in Australia , mainly in low traffic density airspace. I have even been called by ATC when flying east of Griffith to advise on another VFR aircraft.
The first mid air collision between VFR aircraft in survailance covered AsA airspace will result in a major liability case against the controllers involved and Airservices. In will most likely result in a huge payout by Airservices similar to the Bankstown mid air of the 13th March 1974.where the government and controllers were held partially responsible because the aircraft were on mandatory ATC frequencies.
And the whole problem was generated by the totally incompetent management at Airservices who started the NAS wind back by printing the frequency boundary charts and sending them out without CASA approval.
Yes these charts were sent out at the emotive request of many pilots like Bloggs . All the Airservices management had to advise Bloggs at the time was that he was looking for an ICAO class D traffic service and that Airservices would provide class D with the 700 extra controllers at a reasonable cost where required.
I am amazed that the ATC Union Civil Air allowed this to happen, they have really let down thir members on this one. All they had to tell the minister that no other country in the world had such a system.
Remember in the USA there is no radio requirement for VFR in E and G airspace . They are ICAO compliant with the clear message to pilots and leech lawyers that Class D , properly manned by ATC, is where you get a service to VFR. US controllers don't attempt to call VFR aircraft in E and G and advise they are near another VFR- they cant believe the Australian system when I explain it. Reckon I must be mistaken.
Last edited by Dick Smith; 10th Apr 2016 at 04:09.