Traffic Information NAS S3

[karrank]

From the FAA ATC Handbook:

"Unless an aircraft is operating within Class A airspace or omission is requested by the pilot, issue traffic advisories to all aircraft (IFR or VFR) on your frequency when, in your judgment, their proximity may diminish to less than the applicable separation minima. Where no separation minima applies, such as for VFR aircraft outside of Class B/Class C airspace, or a TRSA, issue traffic advisories to those aircraft on your frequency when in your judgment their proximity warrants it."

Seeing the brain-dead Bikkie Maker is wafting madly about what he was expecting from NAS S2B, but didn't actually get around to implementing I thought I should get in early on this one.

"Characteristic 30 - ENR DTI withdrawn
Directed traffic information services for en-route IFR aircraft will be withdrawn."

Now, can somebody examine the two entries, then tell me how Characteristic 30 is implementing the US system???

[SM4 Pirate]

The critical difference is that in the USA participation is not mandatory.Let's not mention how much class G exists shall we, most of G in the USA is below LSALTS... So really IFRs don't in practice fly in that environment unless they are visual, departing or landing...

[karrank]

Ah! Yes Pirate, but remember Oz can only apparantly be compared to the quieter bits of Alaska...

Back to Marvy's reply, and thanks for making it, it would address my concerns about "duty of care" that if I am aware of traffic I can pass it. If whether to participate or not is a decision of the pilot (as in the northern Great Big CTAF's) then I don't have a huge problem with doing it that way.

I think its a crap idea, but I don't have a huge problem with doing it that way.

Also, its not what the stupid "order from Dick" says:yuk:

[karrank]

"Characteristic 30 - ENR DTI withdrawn is the order from Dick.

[mjbow2]

SM4 Pirate.....


"most of G in the USA is below LSALTS... So really IFRs don't in practice fly in that environment"

Im not quite sure how you come to this conclusion. It is true that there are few occasions where IFR fly in G airspace BUT... airways that penetrate class G airspace (including outside of radar coverage areas) are in fact class E. So there are many, many examples where an airway which starts at 1200ft AGL (class E) with class G surrounding it which extends up to the bottom of the overlying class E at 14500ft MSL.

(all low altitude airways are class E from 1200ft AGL up to 18000ft MSL....few exceptions noted)

It is very misleading to say that G is usually below the LSALT (or more appropriately the MEA) as this is simply not the case. I think it is inacurate and misleading to make such a comparison.

There are literally hundreds of examples where IFR fly 'through' class G airspace on an airway.

[WhatWasThat]

Mjbow.
What you have described is consistent with the US airspace structure as it was explained to us.
However and this is a big however, my sources tell me that the FAA does not deliver anything like the service levels dictated by their Airspace structure.
If you positively separate IFR from VFR in E, and IFR from IFR in G, that's great, but thats not what the books say to do and its not what will happen here.
If we vector or give Control instructions in G we get stood down. If we attempt to positively separate in E we may get stood down depending on who you talk to. We definately will not separate in G - TFC info IFR to IFR only.
As Karrank has stated many times and as many lighty pilots who have flown in the states dont seem to understand - The american system as it actually functions seems to bear little resemblence to what they have in their books. What we will get here is what they have in the books- which unfortunately will be very crap.

[karrank]

Also, there's no guarantees on where (or if) the airways will be. The last I heard the ARG (previous version, not the gutted, nutted, rebutted but coming back for more one) had not identified anywhere where one of these Airways would go.

If you need continous, ground-based navaid coverage to define them there are few black lines on our charts that would qualify.

The end result would be most of the country below FL145 and virtually all (area-wise) below 8,500ft G completely uncontrolled and (if outside radar coverage) unserviced.

[ferris]

Who will you ask?

How will they provide it?

Do you really think they will provide/continue the radio coverage, or the ears to listen for that day when you do ask? Twit. It's why the "Flight Following" available in the US system (you remember the one- it's 'the one' you are getting:hmm: ) is NEVER MENTIONED. What do you think the 'no radio' culture is all about? It's not the US system- it's service reduction. Stealthy, carefully planned, service reduction. Like it or not.

[Ian McKenzie]

Well said ferris. All airspace should be class A (no VFR crap) and all pilots should have to ask for permission before they are allowed to take off. We cant just have pilots flying all over the place willy-nilly.

"Those of us still here, are here for the lifestyle, not the money."

I think Im on your wavelength ferris. ;) Once you get them away from their families the local girls are a lot more accommodating than western women.

[Philthy]

Mjbow2-
There are literally hundreds of examples where IFR fly 'through' class G airspace on an airway.

But you said it yourself - on an airway you're in E, therefore not G.

By the way, Aussie pilots seem very reluctant to ask for avoidance advice. Why is that?

Often, however, on receipt of traffic info they seem happy to rabbit on at length on area arranging their own sep when I could do a much better job with my radar. I've only ever (as I recall) had one pilot ask for suggested avoidance advice in G. Which I happily provided, I might add.

I must also admit to often volunteering to do a radar passing in an opposite-direction-top-one-on-descent scenario, which is sort of Claytons sep.

'Course, it doesn't work where the radar don't go!

[ferris]

Ian, I'm flattered that you created an identity purely to follow me around these forums and post directly after me (anyone can do a 'search all posts by this user'). You are getting a bit monotonous, though. You must be boring your avid fan-base (look up 'masturbation' in the dictionary). Suggest you ask someone a bit more educated for some ideas.

Oh, and ask someone who has actually been to the middle east to help with more relevant comments about the locals.

What's up? When the question get too hard for you pro-NAS people, you just run away or play the man?
IS OR ISN'T FLIGHT FOLLOWING PART OF THE U.S. SYSTEM? I look forward to it's announcement as part of the ausNAS.