View Full Version : NAS meeting today

24th Nov 2003, 07:43
Just seen on channel ten news, that ATC and pilots are meeting today in melbourne.

TED LANG, from ATC says that the airspace is dangerous, that all the ATC's agree as do the pilots and that the reforms should NOT go ahead.

He also states that our current airspace is among the safest in the world and is the envy of many other countries.

Here's hoping common sense will prevail.

Capt Claret
24th Nov 2003, 11:09
I took the opportunity yesterday (Sun 23/11), along with the Effo, to visit a regional Tower during a transit. We didn't have too much spare time.

After the intros, my first question to the friendly (procedural) ATCO was, "How do you feel about next Thursday"?

The ATCO's succinct response; "I'm sh!tting myself!"

I don't think he's Robinson Cruso!!

compressor stall
24th Nov 2003, 13:05
0330 WST on area. A plum voice. Callsign not dissimilar to a small royal dog.

"Centre XXX123 position XX miles NW of perth...request IFR pickup."

Long pause from centre, then "Um, er...IFR pickup not available till the 27th. you are cleared to FL...."



Captain Nomad
24th Nov 2003, 15:26
Has anyone heard any news from the NAS meeting in Melbourne today?

Watched the Channel 7 News this evening and not a word was mentioned - I guess that means that there are no newsworthy implementation backlashes?:confused:

I was hoping for more of a last minute fight!:ooh:

24th Nov 2003, 16:10
Nobody will save those who propagated this when the inevitable happens. I agree with Robin - the blood of accountability shall surely be on their hands - all the way to the slammer.

24th Nov 2003, 17:46

Robins comments were accurate and to the point, I was there today, and Robin had a lot more coherant argument than what was shown. Fortunately the media, 10 & 2 anyway picked up on the important bits.

AOPA still can't work through their own problems let alone work out airspace issues. Time to put your feet up Bill.

25th Nov 2003, 04:16
AOPA still can't work through their own problems let alone work out airspace issues. Time to put your feet up Bill.

as i understand it he no longer has authority to represent aopa on any matter

Piper Arrow
25th Nov 2003, 04:57
The anti-NAS stuff is getting boreing. Lets move onto something more interesting!

Capt Fathom
25th Nov 2003, 05:07
Just wait till then 27th, then you'll wish it was boring!

25th Nov 2003, 05:21
Piper Arrow........would something more interesting be the following headlines:

" Glider takes out a Dash 8"
"Light aircraft causes 767 catastrophe"

I know they sound like "sensational" headlines but there are enough professionals worried about this badly thought out airspace, it could easily happen. :mad:

25th Nov 2003, 05:27
Change is hard for some people to accept. All will go ahead as planned on the 27th November and on the the 28th, the sun will rise again. ;)

Captain Stoobing
25th Nov 2003, 05:32
Piper Arrow,

If you would care to reread your NAS publications I am sure you would not find it boring. I fly daily in the airspace that is being changed and am not confident that the system is going to look after me and provide me with the information that I need to keep my crew and 50+ passengers safe.
I only hope that if this insanity goes ahead we (ATC and Pilots) can keep this on a common sense level and give each other as much info as possible until we can get the government to listen.

A very unhappy Capt Stoobing. :*

25th Nov 2003, 05:33
Sadly I believe that last minute change will only only occur when the guardians of the shareholders' interest suddenly get the idea that intervention is necessary. All this media attention will surely put the frighteners into the heads of regional passengers - read reputation - read money - read also political mileage (loss of).

Airline execs and "other politicians' will be seen on TV in the next few days! There's our geat hope.

Nothing seen thus far from the scuttling one. Good representation by Robin on 9 Today this morning - you are my hero. We need to emphasise the flawed argument regardng suitability of US NAS and limited AUS Radar coverage. This alone shoots down the major agument purported to be in favor of US NAS. It is also easily understood and clear for the person-in-the street. (BTW that's the person who's safety is trusted to be in the hands of CASA and The Honourable........)

BTW are we ready for this - Pilot/ATC education/training? Charts, AIP/MATS amend. and DAP - are they all done?


Piper Arrow
25th Nov 2003, 05:46
What about all the incidents (Traffic infringments) reported on the ATSB web site that are airline related issues, and this is under this old system we now have? I think this present system is broke and needs fixing. :)

Captain Stoobing
25th Nov 2003, 05:58
Piper arrow,

You are right that the current system is not as good as it should be, but and a big BUT...........we need industry consultation to make a new system. In the preamble to the NAS publications I did not notice any airline reps present. I am not saying that private pilots should not be consulted but they are not the most regular users of the airspace. I will be using this airspace everyday and am not happy about my office being in this situation.

Capt Stoobing.

25th Nov 2003, 08:28
What planet are you guys from.

I think some of you should put your feet up and take up Golf.

Itís about time some of you stopped taking from the industry get off of your fat salary arses and help. If you are all so called experts (VOMIT) come up with a better idea. No one is saying that NAS is the best thing since sliced bread but at least itís working towards it. One of the reasons that our airspace has problems today is because of regional demands if you had your own way GA aircraft we be on the ground 15mins before your arrival and remain there until 15mins after your departure. This is from the mouth of Mr. negative (Robin). Really he is so negative I class him as anti matter and he is so full of it, it would be enough to power the enterprise for the next ten years.

You guys have fracture our airspace system to cater purely for your fat arse the fact that its old does not work and sometimes dangerous must escape your peanut minds and you have the ordacity to criticise people that attempt to repair it. Whatever you lot are smoking you better stop and concentrate on flying.

From memory did a glider not almost hit a regional some time ago well lets see if we can link that to NAS now I am sure its possible.

I also fly almost every day I want to go home to see my wife and kids at the end of the day just as some of you do. 27th will make no difference to us I will still monitor the best frequency that will give me the best situational awareness and communicate when necessary.

Shame on civil air for the scare tactics use on the Australian traveling public regionals use CTAF's now and have done for some time. Your ignorance of private pilots abilities astounds me class E still needs to be endorsed in log books before it can be used by new pilots and old pilots should Know better.

BASICALLY put something back to the industry that helped you get where your are or p#ss off.

At least AOPA made a stance and had the guts to post it. Your own dear QANTAS supported it to the minister but did not have the guts to state this in public in fear of union backlash.

Thatís your contribution to the industry how quaint! now go and cry on someone elseís shoulder.


Outback Pilot
25th Nov 2003, 08:57
Anti-NAS just another Union Beat Up! Lets just get on with it...... :ok:

These anti-NAS threads make one tired, heard it all before. It is the same lie from a different angle's.

25th Nov 2003, 10:34
2B1 - (you certainly are) I really hate to respond to the stuff you are obviously so angry about but really I have watched the industry reps and seen both sides argue this in the various forums. One side has much to gain, personally from their input and the other side is as close altruism as I have withnessed and are putting their careers and personal situation at risk. Guess which side supports which - you wouldn't be a private business person would you now? and I suggest that the fat cats are those supporting NAS. The altruists are representing passengers not your pocket.

I am one of those who enjoyed flying and operating in the "Old System" and will continue to support that system of In and Out of CTA albeit significantly modified to reduce the excesses. I am not one who says that everything that used to be was of no value. I don't believe that everything America has done or wants is best for Australia but I am not anti-American (just anti-Americanization and fiercly Australian) We had the best before Alphabet - what we have now is a mess that is getting more and more complicated and reducing safety - purely to pander to one or two individuals. I believe that people like you expect that your costs will be reduced however the reality is that no such gains will be realised. What exactly is the basis of your support for NAS?

I appreciate that safety is a nefarious thing and that resultant safety statistics may not support the end argument however it is risk we are talking about.

I recall a comparison being made to explain risk and statistics - What is the risk to planet Earth when bringing back stuff from another planet. If you only have one earth to lose any risk is unacceptable - are you capable of understanding my analogy?

25th Nov 2003, 10:53
Which frequency will you monitor exactly 2b1? How will you know if it is the same frequency that the big boys are broadcasting on?

"monitoring the most appropriate frequency" is probably the most dangerous thing about this whole silly adventure.

25th Nov 2003, 13:07
WHATWASTHAT UMMMM perhaps the area frequency on the free ERC?

That's really what I personally think would be appropriate frequency so what has exactlly changed re that issue on the 27th?. Risk or reluctance to change? my guess the later. KK Im just a pilot have been flying for 24 years, I stand by my post if you think you can do better come up with a suggestion.

Is it not ironic that every attempt of reform has had this reaction some of these reforms have been led by x jet jocks and experts within the industry in there own right. Tell me are they all wrong and your correct?:ugh:

Just because you work daily in our skies does not make you an authority on safety lets face it most of you are acting on second hand information or if first hand its from your own prospective.


25th Nov 2003, 13:30
The area frequency boundaries have been removed from the ERC Low, replaced by an indication of the outlet location only.
The FIA boundaries are not circles of regular dimension based on the outlet location but polygons drawn to try to ensure that traffic "junctions" are all on the same freq.
At any given point the actual area frequency may not be the outlet to which you are closest. If you just pick the closest outlet and guess wrong, you will not hear the jet on descent rapidly gobbling you up.
Remember, the majority of collisions occur with a faster aircraft hitting slower preceeding traffic.
Got eyes in the back of your head have you?

25th Nov 2003, 13:37

No I have not got eyes in the back of my head but you have only one that is. Call the frequencies what you want but they are in fact the same as the old area frequencies easily transfered onto any VFR map. I suggest you wake up to yourself and talk about something you actually know about instead of this waffle.

25th Nov 2003, 14:17

You seem to like hinting that you have something to do with this NAS rubbish. You yourself state that you will just be writing the frequencies on the VFR maps. Why I ask are they not there in the first place. Asshat.

25th Nov 2003, 15:26
2B1, y'know I have to admire the feelings of mutual respect that radiate from your well-considered opinions. It's not easy to discuss things with somebody who has so obviously started from the point of 100% confidence in their own soap box, but I'll give it a go.

If you put the "green lines" from your old charts on your new ones you will not neccessarily get what you wanted. As WWT well knows, some of the "green lines" move on Thursday. Other places where different frequencies are used at different levels the levels have changed. In other areas Dick's biscuits will show you the G frequency, the E traffic will be on another. The frequencies displayed are only there for contact with ATC, NOT to display the "appropriate" frequency. A complete faith that you know the frequency the aircraft around you are on from the previous chart is misplaced. If you are relying on this for your personal peace of mind, bad luck.

WWT and myself, topzalp and many of the others you are dismissing have now completed their NAS training, have spent days in the classroom, in the simulator and in workshops nutting out the details of what is being implemented. We can see how much the real aeroplanes will be d1cked around to give a minute minority absolute priority in the sky. Your fundamentalist zeal is interesting, but please think about the issues and use both hands on the keyboard next time.

25th Nov 2003, 16:04
Hey Spodman, haven't done the training, cos over here E airspace is considered dangerous (I wonder why) and the powers that be will have none of it. But from my NAS training care of Pprune contradicted all that 2B1ask1 has said, so it is obvious he hasn't even had the decency to read all the threads before he comes on here, and spouts off.

Many of the pilots, including a member of the AOPA board have said that while they will give NAS a try and reserve their judgement till after, have condemned the removal off the frequencys and boundarys from the charts. They labelled it moronic.

25th Nov 2003, 17:43
Aren't we all going to fly with our lights on now???....so whats the big problem;)

25th Nov 2003, 18:01
I have said it before and...

The closest near hit I ever had was caused by a #$#@# regional, and that was 4 years pre NAS. :mad:

Nov 27 changes nuffin, and while I personally might agree about frequencies, that can be fixed with lobbying, fer chr!sts sake, it is just a reprint.

Wishy washy cowardly regional whinging ain't gonna fix nuffin, because unlike the GA pilots you seem to dislike, you regionals ain't got a cohesive lobby group :}


25th Nov 2003, 18:53
Snarek, this may not be news to you, seeing as you are so cock sure about everything, but there's quite a few'professional GA drivers out there who think the proposed system has flaws in the system and in its implementation.

I still find it amazing that the two greatest proponents of the NAS, the two Smiths made brief appearnaces on these forums and when the questions got more than superficial, they disappeared.

25th Nov 2003, 19:04
you regionals ain't got a cohesive lobby group
Well, that's alright then then. I mean, you can only enter this debate if you have some political clout . Follow the lead of that champion of reform, airspace designer extraordinaire, fair player and teller of all truths, Dick.
Too bad about the powerless mugs who have to work in aviation every day.

It's only going to get uglier from here. Good to see you helping the opposing powers face off, Mr Kerans. (BTW- you have a serious case of professional envy).

Dale Harris
27th Nov 2003, 16:44
"Cohesive Lobby Group"......... And that would be?????:hmm: The only 3 near misses I have had have been caused by *&^%%%$( weekend warriors....... also pre NAS. What exactly does that prove???????