Originally Posted by
Dick Smith
Which “ existing system”
Do you mean the one where CASA insist that circuit calls at nonmapped airports be on the ATC area frequency.?
Or the one that most of the RAPACs wanted? That is that calls on such airports be on the 126.7 Multicom?
For me, in practical terms, either.
I haven't noticed problems with people making calls at ALAs on area (mostly because they don't - which makes sense if the ALA has low usage - usually there is no need to tell the world you are turning base at Dragatinalong station, on the rare occasions they need to then the increase in chatter is negligible).
If they changed that to be 126.7 then I wouldn't say that is the end of the world either. So long as people applied common sense and know and follow the procedure.
Changing CTAF boundaries to be 20 nm and having people using the same airspace confused about which frequency to monitor or broadcast on is a different kettle though.
Like I said that is my 2c. In the same area - listen on the same frequency, in high congestion points dedicated frequencies, avoid unnecessary calls, listen more than talk, use common sense, be able to easily find the appropriate frequency and be able to easily find references to the appropriate phraseology.
Originally Posted by
Dick Smith
Jonkstor. What would be the problem with harmonising with the simple proven FAA system?
if it works and we have similar equipment/infrastructure ability to be able to physically implement it, nothing (from my point of view).
Basically I just want to avoid change that in the attempt to simplify actually makes it more complicated. Whatever change (or no change) - measure it by first principles - does it encourage clear, easily followed communication with people that need to know what is going on (and remembering listening is a big part of communicating).