Violation of Controlled Airspace

[C-change]

Time for a rant.

What is going on out there with GA pilots? This week alone there has been four VCA's at one little airfield where I work. I'm not talking about 1 or 2 miles either, try 25 Nm transits of airspace without any broadcasts. Most do the right thing but the number of those that have NFI is increasing. Whats going instructors? What are you teaching?

How hard is it to plan your flight prior to your departure? Have a look at a map. Actually study the blue and red lines and levels. Think about where you are going and do you need to get an airways clearance.

If your lost, ask for help. If you think your close to an airspace boundary, call us, don't just blunder in and stooge around. You create a lot more work and put yourself and others in danger. If you here ATC calling, don't ignore us and turn your transponder to standby. We can still see you.

For those that do the right thing, thank you. It is refreshing to hear a competent and professional pilot who calls in a timely fashion, with all their details and can readback a clearance and stay on a cleared route.

Rant over

[rep]

where abouts are you talking about?

the majority of them are probably international students who cant speak engrish

[Capt Fathom]

It's called a Direct-To button.....

You don't need to worry about maps and charts or where you are ? :ugh:

[C-change]

REP, prefer not to say location just yet but you can probably work it out from other posts.

The international students I can deal with. It can take a while but you eventually get there. Its the ones who say nothing and don't respond to calls on any freq's. The ones that really piss me off are those that change direction when you try to call them and then the transponder goes off.

If they make a mistake, thats fine. If your not sure about position or airspace, call. Respond to the call if you hear it and we can keep everyone safe. Most do a good job but the ones who stuff it up seem to be increasing.

4 in two days may not seem a lot but each VCA requires everyone to broadcast, then you don't know where they're going or what level or even if they are in trouble. Then there is traffic and separation issues, all kinds of problems.

If in doubt call.

Capt Fathom, your right. I'm astounded at the number of times I have asked if they have a VTC on board and the response is no. Technology is great until it fails.

[Jabawocky]

I have $2.50 on the RAA guy with no idea what CTA is, and probably all 4 are the same one!

Now of course I would be saying.........if only the low level ADSB mandate and subsidy got up........... but of course those very guilty folk who helped stop it would not see the benefit here.

"drifter 7191, coffs tower, do you require assistance and are you aware you are 5 miles inside Class delta airspace without a clearance?"

ADSB..........could have helped a heap :ugh: Except those too lazy or too ignorant to participate.

I am glad this thread has been started by someone else other than the rest of us like Scurvy, Owen, Enrooter etc etc etc....... because they would get hammered by the usual suspects!

J:*

PS for those that do not know your rego and details are transmitted with ADSB...hence thise worried about being "identified"

[Clearedtoreenter]

If they make a mistake, thats fine. If your not sure about position or airspace, call. Respond to the call if you hear it and we can keep everyone safe. Most do a good job but the ones who stuff it up seem to be increasing.

Yeah, but C Change, the ones who do respond get reported (by folk like you presumably?) to CASA and then get heaps of 'please explain' paperwork from both CASA and now ASA too - and the possibility of prosecution.. Hardly 'that's fine' thanks for owning up!

[Ozzie Mozzie]

What are the penalties for VCAs?

[Lodown]

VTC's??? What are they? Oh, right! They're just a revenue stream for AsA and not required in the cockpit. Who navigates by maps anymore anyway?

(Just to confirm: I'm being facetious.)

[C-change]

Clearedtorenter,

I have no choice, once the aircraft goes beyond navigational tolerances (+/-2Nm below 2 thousand) I have to report it. When an aircraft flys 30Nm right thru the middle of the place, what option do I have?

Isn't it better to own up and maybe get a kick up the bum later on? Is it that hard to put your hand up and admit that you've stuffed up? Maybe some individuals don't deserve the privelege of holding a PPL.

Or do you suggest it is better to continue with your journey, putting yourself and others in danger?

There is an easy solution. Get a map, draw a line on it and look to see if you need an airways clearance and call prior to the boundary.

PPPPPP.

[rep]

C do you really have to report aircraft that break the tolerances? who to? CASA or is it just an ASA report unless the airspace is then broken?

[C-change]

Rep,
In a nutshell, yes. If they run down the airspace boundary and are within nav tolerances, then we just monitor. Its the ones that blast on thru that cause the dramas.

Yes, the report goes to CASA and they decide what to do. Most, we never get a callsign, so nothing happens. If we do get a response we usually get the PIC to give us a call when they land, have a chat about where the stuffed up. That also goes in the report and if CASA are happy, its left at that.

Obviously if there is a separation breakdown or passengers are put at risk, things may get worse but I think that is fair enough.

[Sunfish]

You are skirting around the real emerging problem in my opinion......which is exactly the same as we face on our roads every day.

That is that our Governments have progressively fostered the replacement of all forms of self discipline with a requirement for blind obedience to the law. You can see the result every day on the roads. Provided you obey the law you can do anything stupid and dangerous you like on the roads with complete impunity. Furthermore, once the threat of speed cameras, radars, lasers, etc. is removed, down goes the hammer and stupidity ensues - no self discipline. No self identification with being perhaps a "skilled and responsible driver". The police treat you like an idiot, so you act like an idiot.

In matters aviational this process is also well advanced. You need an ASIC, you must do this, and you can't do that, drug and alcohol testing, locks on aircraft, or else! The more the authorities treat the pilots of small aircraft as irresponsible idiots to be controlled/ prosecuted/ reprimanded/ etc., the more they will act like idiots.

[flog]

When I went to buy my first hand held GPS (6 months ago - lol - still trying to figure out why people rely on them so much) one of the young instructors in the shop showed me with pride the track from his last flight, bang on the Melbourne CTA boundary right around from north to south on the east side at 4500'.

[VH-XXX]

I wouldn't fly over Puckapunyal Restricted Area in a fit! I've been there on the ground in the Army shooting stuff and if you've seen what flies up into the air (particularly at night when we use tracers) you wouldn't come within 20 miles! Last time I was there we had F88's, Minimi's, Tanks and the works banging around all night, particularly if there is some budget left and it's near the end of financial year.

[Deaf]

As a matter of interest what monitoring/capability does ATC have on adjacent frequencies.

A couple of years ago I had a VCA between Toowoomba and Caloundra when I got on the up escalator. As control was limited to wings level and airspeed in the middle of the green; I wasn't going to try and change frequencies on a microair or read VTC/ERSA. Called on the Caloundra freq which covers several fields requesting someone relay to BNE the situation and that I would descend when able (not that I was that keen, updraughts like that probably mean similar downdraughts nearby).

No reply and never heard anything else about it.

[VH-XXX]

"As a matter of interest what monitoring/capability does ATC have on adjacent frequencies."

They don't which can sometimes be a problem. Best bet is for a relay.

I helped out with a relay on the weekend coming out of Avalon, caught be be surprise as I didn't have a pen handy!

ATC said thanks for relay mate, here's the details, "ABC cleared for takeoff Avalon 18L, for an Avalon 1 departure, squawk code 7235, contact Melbourne Departures on 123.45, Qnh 1013.2, climb initial 5,000ft.

Luckily said aircraft received from the ground and I was able to reply with words to the effect of "Yep, got that."

[Bob Murphie]

This snippet... if only the low level ADSB mandate and subsidy got up........... but of course those very guilty folk who helped stop it ... seems out of place here, but unchallenged and some folk need reminding that there was NEVER a "subsidy" only a recommendation by a think tank of "dreamers and enthusiasts" and any push for it's premature introduction at low level WILL need a mandate for it to work to its full potential at considerable cost to GA.

I also fail to see how a 2 seat and 4 seat version of the same Jabiru registered under different regimes would attract a blanket statement that have $2.50 on the RAA guy with no idea what CTA is, and probably all 4 are the same one!

Bloody elitism. What gives you a monopoly on common sense or stupidity. Has it ever occurred to you that some ATPL's may think the same about you.

Of course a PPL has never violated controlled airspace.

[BN APP 125.6]

Sorry, but the RAA guys & gals are not the problem. 90% of the time it is VH registered (and not light sport either).

The RAA do a much better job of educating their membership than the GA community I am both pleased and afraid to observe.

I would say we average 4-5 VCA's a day in my neck of the woods. Most appear to be through bad planning and not having an laternative plan when the WX is not as FCST. (Is it ever?!)

[DBTW]

I wonder if things could be made more simple? Whilst everyone dislikes rule breaking and people who can't navigate, despite this ill discipline there doesn't seem to have been a big increase in mid air collisions, and nobody has mentioned any near misses. Could this be because there is too much controlled airspace around?:eek:

[Jabawocky]

Gooday Bob :ok:

I wonder why you are so defensive about this?

Maybe its the Warbird boys then! :}

My $2.50 bet was not a big one you will notice, not like it was I bet a $1M on it mate so settle petal!

I have to agree with BN APP about the standards of RAA around our neck of the woods. We have very strong and high standards of RAA training around the Brisbane area, and as a rule it would be highly unlikely for them because they are taught to avoid it and know how to. Some GA folk and its interesting to note its not the light end of the spectrum were less guilty (maybe for the same reasons) may be used to flying around a lot and become complacent. This sounds reasonable.

But the thread was started by someone who is very much not in the Brisbane area, and when I have seen and heard many of the things from the RAA folk about what you can do and get away with...........its worth risking my $2.50 on Bob.

So as you are so far superior in all these matters how about you tell us exactly who the repeat offender was on the mid coast of NSW? :)

As for the thoughts on ADSB........I think you have made me change my mind completely on the topic! :}Of course many of your friends would hate to think they were mandated 100% and no subsidy. But to be fair I now think thats what we should have. I bet the ATC folk on this thread would not object one bit!;)


ohh and ........
... seems out of place here, but unchallenged and some folk need reminding that there was NEVER a "subsidy" only a recommendation by a think tank of "dreamers and enthusiasts" and any push for it's premature introduction at low level WILL need a mandate for it to work to its full potential at considerable cost to GA.

you are a bit slow today mate.......... did I not say......if only the low level ADSB mandate and subsidy got up :ugh:...... its only a subsidy when the cash gets handed over, and it never got up.....so that meant the subsidy was a recommendation.......:ugh::ugh::ugh: you really are struggling for stuff to debate!:=

J

PS Has it ever occurred to you that some ATPL's may think the same about you.

Mate maybe they do, but I know a number think worse of the author of the above:ooh:. And I am sure you already knew this, but a very large number of RAA members are in fact current and or recently retired ATPL holders, and they are not the problem. Maybe you do not get to see the problems. Some of these ATPL holders are also very vocal about our fellow aviators and their practices, and I do my damned best to avoid being one who is negligent and ignorant of airmanship. Not saying I am perfect either, but geez some of these folk should take their hobbies a bit more seriously. I could name at least 6 well known ppruners off the top of my head who have shared these same thoughts with me, and some have voiced them here...... just not sure if they want their pprune names listed or not so I will refrain. Go out around the traps with your rose tinted glasses off and see what I mean. Ohh and yes, some VH tails are just as bad just so you think I am not RAA bashing as some form of prejudice. I do have a foot in both camps.

[CaptainMidnight]

one of the young instructors in the shop showed me with pride the track from his last flight, bang on the Melbourne CTA boundary right around from north to south on the east side at 4500'.And that is exactly what results in quite a number of VCAs.

Many don't know exactly what their GPS is telling them their distance is from

Is it
from the DME
from the VOR
from the aerodrome reference point
from the McDonalds joint in the terminal building
or what?

[RR RB211]

A little rhyme I was taught when starting out flying on X country navs out of Moorabbin:

"If you fly through pucka (punyal) you're a dead mutha f**k*r"

Yes I have had a VCA as a brand new PPL and owned up. Wasn't marked as a restricted area on the ERC but I didn't read the NOTAMs properly that day. :\

Filled out the paperwork.

Lesson learned.

[Jabawocky]

DBTW

A very good point, however the original post suggests an isolated and well known tower zone. Its not that hard!!!

Now if you were to talk about a Military zone further to the south and all its restricted areas, and the various bits that may or may not be active....... that is a recipe for VCA's in the super size serve! Again here talking to some widely experienced RAAF/RAF fighter pilots........they agree 100%, but we have had that thread a while back.

Captain Midnight :D
Exactly, and its not just the RAA folk, but the VH folk too who do not ensure they know how to fully operate their units! (See Bob, balance and fairness :))

J

[Hypo]

The availability of VNC charts for costal Queensland might be a help.

[89 steps to heaven]

As a Tower controller, yes we do submit an incident report if there is a VCA. As a proactive measure, if we can identify the aircraft in question, the PIC may receive a questionaire from our Safety Management group.

What we try to achieve is not to be over excited about what happened if all it was was a VCA with no other implications, but we really would like to know why it happened. In one case, the pilot misidentified a visual fix. Nothing we could do about it, but the pilot now is aware of what happened. In other cases it could be lack of maps, insufficient training, misunderstanding, etc. If we can identify the cause and steps can be implemented to reduce the risk of it happening again, then the safety system is working as it should.

Yes, the pilot might get a please explain from CASA, but that is not why we submit an incident report.

If you are going to fly near controlled airspace or a control zone and are unsure of what to do, call the centre / Tower and have a chat. We don't bite (usually :} ).

[Bob Murphie]

Jabawocky;

I imagine RA-Aus aircraft who wish to operate in CTA would need a transponder and the pilot suitably qualified. Can't radar see them now?

Anecdotal stories about law breakers are the exception not the rule. If you feel badly about this sort of thing ring someone who can do something about it. Bleating here won't achieve anything and does nothing to help you and your lot have ADSB mandated. If that's what you wish. If you see someone robbing a bank you ring a policeman don't you?

My "snippet" that you exploited left out a bit.


Now of course I would be saying.........if only the low level ADSB mandate and subsidy got up........... but of course those very guilty folk who helped stop it would not see the benefit here.

If it never existed in the first place, who are those very guilty folk who helped stop it. If you are blaming me I must be more important than I thought. More so that the ABIT mob obviously.

[Jabawocky]

Bob
Yes you are correct, they do operate quite happily with a transponder and appropriate licence etc...... You knew that already, its not a guess!

Anecdotal ......well you may say that, and in some cases yes, but believe me it happens, these guys do not make this **** up! As for ringing someone or emailing.... well on some far more dangerous issues I have and along with a CFI......... funny never even had a thank you or any follow up at all. No seeking clarification nothing. Almost like wasting ones time. Maybe you can correct this?

As for the last bit, I am not blaming you. The folk who bitterly opposed it are a far greater mass than you Bob, and we have discussed this before, it was a sloppy case from ABIT ASA and many others who let the opportunity slip. I think it was you who corrected me on this point once before!

Cheers!

[Clearedtoreenter]

C Change,


Or do you suggest it is better to continue with your journey, putting yourself and others in danger?


Absolutely not... but knowing if they do own up they will experience the CASA 'please explain' and a possiblity of prosecution is not going to encourage some to do the right thing.. More flys with honey than vinegar. Obviously report blatant stupidity but many of these 'VCA's' are for fairly minor tracking errors where a quick call to one of your guys to explain where they went wrong is really all that's needed.

PS We had an ATPL get the paperwork.. easy for anyone to make a minor mistake... It was very minor but and he did own up - Not sure he will if it happens again...

[Grogmonster]

C-change I feeel for you because some people think that they are above the rules and that everyone else should bow down to them. Keep up the good work and please don't think that you are not appreciated because you definitely are.

My My My, The egos are at play again. Here are the simple facts. Ra or GA: You need a clearance to enter contolled airspace. Controlled airspace is clearly marked on the maps. You should know where you are all of the time even if you don't have a GPS. Ask for a clearance on the appropriate frequency at 10 miles prior to the boundry. Don't enter till you get it. How hard is that.

All it requires is a little discipline and if you don't apply that to all aspects of your flying then you should be walking. End of story.

Groggy.

[BN APP 125.6]

Primary Radar will usually pick up unknown traffic.

I say usually, because it is subject to a lot of things - for example, the CG primary radar wasn't working for around 12 months recently, primary radar often picks up all kinds of things that aren't there, and some aircraft have too small a profile or reflective surface to be detected (esp fibreglass / composite).

Also, primary radar only exists around Capital City Primary CTR's.

But it does save a lot of VCA's becoming a whole lot worse.

From my observations around 40% of traffic operating OCTA around the BN area does not use a transponder (whether not fitted or just not switched on). (Having it on even when OCTA has saved a lot of close calls with other aircraft awaiting clearance or leaving CTA on descent over the years)

[Jabawocky]

From my observations around 40% of traffic operating OCTA around the BN area does not use a transponder (whether not fitted or just not switched on).BN APP you are a gem! :ok: Nothing more to say on that.....for now! :D

J:ugh:

And I bet it is not very long before ATSB or CASA start publically raising concerns about the increase in mid airs and the almost mid air prangs :ooh:

[Time Bomb Ted]

Can anyone tell me the last time someone was prosecuted for a VCA that happened accidentally? Or even deliberately for that matter?

Cheers

TBT

[Bob Murphie]

Before ATSB or CASA start making public statements about mid air's they need to update their data so a cost benefit analysis can be sensibly made about electronic collission avoidance devices. Especially listening to the rantings of those who would have it mandated so the few can feel warm and cuddly without having to look out the window.

The last stat's are current to 2003. http://www.atsb.gov.au/publications/2004/pdf/Review_of_midair_col.pdf

They show 37 collisions over a 42 year period.(1.135 per year). 41% in controlled airspace. (were all these VCA's?)

There were 37 midair collisions involving general aviation aircraft in Australia
during the period 1961 to 2003. Since 1968, there was approximately one
midair collision per year in Australia. Most (34) of the midair collisions were
accidents, and a majority (19) of these accidents resulted in fatalities.
• There were no midair collisions involving regular public transport (RPT)
operations in Australia from 1961 to 2003.
• Midair collisions account for about 3 per cent of fatal accidents involving
general aviation aircraft, and 0.4 of a percentage point of all accidents involving general aviation aircraft.
• Most (78 per cent) of the midair collisions that have occurred in Australia since 1961 have occurred in or near the circuit area. This reflects the higher traffic density in this area. A high proportion of the collisions (35 per cent) occurred on final approach or the base-to-final turn.
• A high proportion of the midair collisions (41 per cent) have occurred at the five major general aviation airports (Archerfield, Bankstown, Jandakot, Moorabbin, Parafield). However, the rate of collisions at these airports has decreased since the introduction of General Aviation Aerodrome Procedures in 1980.
• A range of contributing factors were involved in the midair collisions, but there were no dominant factors. Most of the collisions involved one aircraft colliding with another from behind, or both aircraft converging from a similar direction.
• In general, the characteristics and contributing factors of midair collisions in
Australia appear to be similar to those observed in other countries such as the US, France and Canada.
• Australia and the US had a similar rate of midair collisions involving general
aviation aircraft during the period 1981-2003. The US had a higher rate of
general aviation aircraft involved in collisions per flight hour away from the
circuit area, which is consistent with the US having more general aviation flying activity and a higher traffic density.

Table 1: Number of midair collisions in Australia between different types of aircraft between 1961 and 2003 (fatal accidents, non-fatal accidents, and incidents in brackets)

Aircraft types 1961-70 1971-80 1981-90 1991-03 Total
General aviation
Aeroplane-aeroplane 3 (0,3,0) 11 (3,7,1) 7 (4,2,1) 7 (4,2,1) 28 (11,14,3)
Aeroplane-helicopter 1 (1,0,0) 0 0 0 1 (1,0,0)
Aeroplane-ultralight 0 0 0 1 (0,1,0) 1 (0,1,0)
Aeroplane-glider 0 1 (1,0,0) 2 (2,0,0) 4 (4,0,0) 7 (7,0,0)
Total 4 (1,3,0) 12 (4,7,1) 9 (6,2,1) 12 (8,3,1) 37 (19,15,3)
Sports aviation
Glider – glider 1 (1,0,0) 4 (1,2,1) 12 (2,7,3) 5 (3,1,1) 22 (7,10,5)
Balloon – balloon 0 0 2 (1,0,1) 2 (0,0,2) 4 (1,0,3)
3.2
3

[ratso]

Todays students are not made fly in and out of a GAAP ie., archerfield,bankstown,morabin etc. just to look at key vfr points and I dont mean the ones on the VTC map.

By that I mean as an extra sortie taking up an hour or so. Maybe some schools do but I can tell you most dont. It used to be done once upon a time but not now.
You might argue that going to the training area and departing and entering from the x country navs in and out is enough but its not.
Try as an instructor to say this is what your gonna do today Blogs ie., in and ot of the circut area and the higher archy will jump on you telling you its not necessary.
Every time I check on who has had a VCA today its always the same, oh I lost track of where I was or forgot my VTC.
CASA dont care now they have other things to look at. When you learnt to fly in the seventies or eighties you feared the bloke from CASA but not now as you never see him and if you did he is probably ramping some poor charter pilot at a country AD.

[Roger Standby]

Great question, TBT.

Does anyone even know of a case that has led to prosecution or a fine for a VCA?

[Clearedtoreenter]

Does anyone even know of a case that has led to prosecution or a fine for a VCA?

Ahh! So that's why there are so many VCA's... CASA not doing their job, just sending out all those silly forms for the poor CFI's to chase up, take appropriate action and then report back... Far too wishy washy. Time for action. zero tolerance on VCA's - prosecute the lot of 'em. That'll stop it!

(Hopefully a more worthy dunnundra response now!)

Hey Ratso, if a student goes out without a VTC and then does a VCA, no way should (s)he be prosecuted ... but the instructor and the school should!

Makes me wonder what CASA actually get to read when they get those forms back from some schools... Must cause endless amusement.

[Lodown]

We've always had VCA's and we always will. I got "lost" going VFR into Tullamarine many, many years ago. It was only 5 or 6 miles away, but I couldn't see it no matter how hard I looked and ATC eventually had to tell me to make a left 90. When the CTR's were reduced in size some years ago, VCA's became more critical as there is less time for controllers to pick up problems/hazards and make alterations accordingly. I don't agree with the CASA prosecuting VCA offenses per se, but I would like to see them organize a ramp check of the offending pilot and his/her aircraft to check on current documents and qualifications. At present, the CASA doesn't have the resources for anything more than navel gazing.

[5miles]

Also, primary radar only exists around Capital City Primary CTR's.

Good to see you're recognising Cairns as the capital of FNQ.


Ask for a clearance on the appropriate frequency at 10 miles prior to the boundry.

If you're inbound to an Approach controlled aerodrome, I'd suggest you call at least 20 minutes prior to ETA or 5 minutes prior to entering CTA whichever is the earliest. This simply allows us to sequence your arrival in a timely and equitable manner. And it doesn't cost a cent extra.
If you call 10nm prior to the CTZ, and we have a solid sequence for the next X minutes, then expect a delay.

[BN APP 125.6]

Good to see you're recognising Cairns as the capital of FNQ.You mean it isn't? :eek: It always felt like it to me :E

(CG is also the capital of NNSW/Tweed)

[slow n low]

Two words spring to mind here, integrity and airmanship. :cool:
Regardless of the big stick the authority may wield, how can any aircrew justify NOT owning up to an error (as oppossed to a violation) when they know the possible outcome of a VCA? The immediate threat far outwieghs any possible threat from a nastygram from ASA or CASA. There seems to be a lack of both airmanship and integrity. Who gives a sh*t about the paperwork to follow, care enough about your fellow aviators in the short term please. :rolleyes:
And if you do get a slap on the wrist and god forbid can not fly for a few weeks while its sorted, then so be it. Learn from it and move on.
Yep I have made errors here and there, but I owned up and guess what? I am still flying. Its sad when we have to brief to the crew to expect random GA aircraft to have NFI when we get where we are going.

ATC, keep up the good work :ok:

[BMW-Z4]

Sunfish - please don't bring up road behaiour - standards have diminished faster than most would have believed. Rule breaking is the norm on Australian roads today for one reason - reduced enforcement and puny penalties. The consequence is that even getting basics like indicating, speeding, redlight running, crossing solid lines, roundabout rules, even parking on the wrong side of the road is just beyuond the competence of most. Most pilots drive!!!!! Can you see the synergy?

Statistic - I love the people who speak of statistics and cost benefit. Just wait till someone close to you dies or you look at the financial penalty of neglect. To focus on the numbers and not consider the intangibles is a fools-errand. You will never see the big one coming and you will have very little chance of doing anything about it. A few rules and practices may make that big difference - if applied, if complied with. The "free-for-all" concept has not worked - give it up, smart people don't want it.

The VCA problem is not only GA anyway. Lets not forget the MIL and RPT's. For whatever reason at the time - a VCA is a VCA that puts those on board, and others at immediate danger from live airborne ordnance and other airspace users (AVM). TCAS won't protect you from stuff it cannot see. Rant over also. Good subject C CHANGE. I hope it gets through to the few who need the wake up call.

[Bob Murphie]

"Statistics"

Traffic lights are never sited at intersections without a statistical history of accidents. There are some who would argue that they "believe" an accident "could" happen but can't produce the evidence to say what the "probability" of an accident is.

Statistics provide this data.

Because a six pack of enthusiasts believe something "could" happen, the majority are then expected to go along with their theory and spend heaps of money that simply is not justified.

The justification comes with gathering the data to prove there is a better than good "probability" not just a possibility.

A near miss (or hit) in a CTZ or class G, like a VCA, is a failure of proceedure.

One addresses the cause, not the complaint when looking for a remedy.

[Joker 10]

Bob you have become famous, you post here and the rabble answer you on the other web page.

[Bob Murphie]

It was common practice to issue a OCTA licence once. Mostly because the applicant had a bad time of it. There was the opportunity to do a CTR endorsement later if they wished. A lot just learnt to get on with life outside and fly in the other 6 million sq Kilometers of Australia. I suppose the RA-Aus CTR proposal will include this option.

As for radio proceedure, can someone confirm that one needs a licence of some type to operate an airborne radio. Used to be a Flight Radio Operators Licence and Certificate of proficiency. I wonder are mine still current?

The issue of these required one to be proficient in its use. The lack of proficiency would again point to a breakdown in proceedures in either training or regulation.

Joker 10;

I think you mean infamous. Couldn't be bothered looking.

[C-change]

Two words spring to mind here, integrity and airmanship


Slow n low is spot on.

Integrity comes from having the guts to put your hand up and admit that you made a mistake. Its only stays as a mistake if you fail to learn from it.

Airmanship starts back at the planning phase of the flight, ie study a map. Blue lines don't change but the red ones do, so go find some more info before you get airborne. "I didn't know it was active today" is a piss weak excuse for lack of planning.

In regards to letters from CASA etc, I couldn't care less what they do to the PIC of a VCA , if you srcew up, its up to them to decide what happens next. If its a really bad one and you've put people in danger, then maybe prosecution is fair and reasonable. If its minor infringement (error vs violation) then maybe a check flight is all that is warranted. I just have to sort out the crap fight at the time, what happens next is not my area.

But remember, that letter, the check ride or the phone call, may be all that it takes to prevent an accident down the track and make that person a better pilot.

Some advice to any newbies that find it hard to work out restricted areas.

If your not sure, ask centre. If your still not sure and your approaching an airfield, listen to the ATIS (should anyway). If that fails, make a broadcast on the CTAF freq, ATC will tell you if the place is active. Not all of us will bite your head off!

[C-change]

Couldn't find info on the Air Services site for the capital city aerodromes but got some stats for the MIL airfields aroung the place.

These figures are just the last 12 months.
DAR 39
ESL 13
EDN 6
NWA 14
OAK 30
PEA 63
RIC 15
TDL 42
TVL 20
WLM 13

[WannaBeBiggles]

Thanks for the stats c-change, just curious why AMB is not in there? Would have thought they had their fair share given the close proximity to TWB.

[C-change]

Sorry left them out,

AMB 23.


Anyone find any stats for capital cities at all ?

[Jabawocky]

Tindal :eek:

Probably one or two locals ......repeat offenders! :}

That is rather disproportionate I would have thought.

[Deaf]

Used to be a Flight Radio Operators Licence and Certificate of proficiency. I wonder are mine still current?
Didn't have any license for many years On asking for a CPL got

blah blah
Flight Radio Operators Licence Issued 19xx

Assume I still have one although no mention of the sweat blood Morse Code stamp I used to have
.

[Clearedtoreenter]

Interesting stats C Change... but do they really give a good insight into the extent of the problem? Many of those will be the fairly innocent type of mistake of (for example) an inexperienced student on a solo nav poking a wing tip into Richmond when triying to naviagte the BK LOE having encountered a bit of a shower or unexpected low cloud. Others might be the guy who fllys right through the gideslope of 16R when a 747 is flying the ILS.

In risk terms, how bad is this problem? I would hope the vast majority of VCA's are of the first type and its probably not a major risk issue. If the second type is a real risk then our legislators and enforcers are letting society down badly by not completely eliminating that risk. Take the BK LOE or Victor 1 for example, it could take only a relatively minor mistake by an inexperienced or inattentive pilot to create real mayhem within a couple of minutes. Presumably the stats are showing that risk is not an issue. If it is, then the general public are not being served well and there is a major need for some serious systematic risk elimination by CASA and ASA (who I'm confident would not shy away from their responsibility) rather than a lot of form filing and bleating on the world's No 1 aviation whinge site.:)

[Sunfish]

You need a FROL (Flight Radio Operators Licence) and your (in)competency of navigating in and around controlled airspace is tested in your biannual flight review.

I promise I will never, ever, turn up so badly prepared for a flight review ever again.:}

C-change is right about "integrity and airmanship" but that also implies that AsA and CASA must show "integrity and airmanship" in managing the system and enforcing the regulations. If the regulators do not demonstrate the behaviours they expect from pilots, then how can they expect pilots to model better behaviour than they themselves display?

By and large, from my own very limited experience, I think CASA and ATC do model "Integrity and Airmanship" as a student I made my fair share of stupidities and these were treated as "learning experiences' by the authorities. Were they not, then the Tower folk at YMMB would need a second building just to house the mountains of paperwork the endless infractions would generate.

There is a vast difference in my opinion between doing something that is in flagrant and deliberate violation of the rules and doing something that is a less than perfect attempt to comply, people understand that, and people have a sense of fairness and equity as well.

To put it another way, there needs to be a bit of give and take in the system, if that is replaced by a requirement for mindless obedience backed up by mandatory and draconian penalties, then expect the standards of "integrity and airmanship" to disappear, exactly as the automotive equivalents have disappeared from our roads.

[BMW-Z4]

Well put Sunfish.

It is a problem, not insurmountable and a balanced and graduated response is approapriate and will result in optimised, albeit not perfect, results - dependant upon reason or intent from education to deterence (if a penalty is never exercised then it ceases to be a penalty or a deterence). We've discussed this before (although in more confusing and higher charged environment)!;)

[mmhbtower]

Sunfish,

You put it well, I can assure you that if every simple mistake (pilot and atc) was reported at GAAP there would not be a building big enough to house the paper, I'm here to tell you only 5-8% of "reportable matters" are actually reported in the GAAP enviroment. In "C" airspace its about 50%.

Cheers

[amberale]

I agree with most posters here.
50% reporting is probably the norm.
Accidental stuff ups happen on both sides of the mikes.

It is very frustrating though when the pilot of the aircraft involved in a VCA does not reply to on air queries.
Ok, they might be unsure of their position or worried about being "reported" but regularly there is a safety concern.
If you no talkee we don't know if you will descend octa, turn away or turn towards traffic. We don't even know if you are listening on the right frequency.:ugh:
Please, if you are not sure of where you are, just ask.
A simple squawk ident and away you go.
I love the guys and gals who offer their positions if they are in the area and are not sure if it is them even though they are clear. Responsible aviators.:ok:
The ESIR reports are used mainly to decide when it is necessary to run a series of pilot 'education' courses with the training schools. If the stats aren't there there is no need to spend the money.

One of my bug bears is the pilots who find it necessary to use their GPS to run 10 metres outside of the CTA step.
Aren't you supposed to apply VFR nav tolerences to your track and therefore fly well clear of the steps?
Theoretically I can run a 747 right up to the CTA step and Joe Blogs is 10 metres away in their single.
Brisbane was a classic case of this.
The zone is 7nm from either end of the runway. Lots of folk put 7 nm from the ARP into their GPS which means they enter by 1-2 nm.

My most amusing VCA was the aircraft that went through CG, AF and BN CTR then landed at RED.
The Redcliff areoclub CFI wasa gobsmacked when he rang us back to inform us that the aircraft couldnt have responded to our radio transmissions as all four people on board were profoundly DEAF.

Rant over.

AA

[Jabawocky]

amberale

Is that the story in the last crash comic?

And I agree on cruising close to CTA boundaries. I always advise ATC of my intentions as a matter of courtisy, espcially around the Brisbane and Archerfield CTA boundaries. The over water under class C bit which is under the 01 path especially! Was vectored out there once by ATC in class C, now its quite nice to do below C. Floaties on!:ok:

[Deaf]

The Redcliff areoclub CFI wasa gobsmacked when he rang us back to inform us that the aircraft couldnt have responded to our radio transmissions as all four people on board were profoundly DEAF.

I have a volume control

[VH-XXX]

Is it 1 mile from the CTA boundary for day VFR and 3 for NVFR, or 2 perhaps...?

[Bell_Flyer]

Just wondering C-change, on the converse, do you ever, as a controller, think sometimes that CTA boundaries are set way too large? Like YSRI or say, YSNW or even YPDN? Then, when they become active, all the R space around them gets activated as well? Just wondering.

[CaptainMidnight]

It is very frustrating though when the pilot of the aircraft involved in a VCA does not reply to on air queries.Worse - those who in response switch off their transponder. Watch 'em with primary and nail those monkeys.CTA boundaries are set way too largeMost CTR and much CTA was revised a number of years ago, and with respect to CTR now generally they are where the limits of nav tolerance splays are for the various instrument approaches and to contain holding patterns within CTA.

In short, if you fly on the edge of a CTR or its associated CTA steps - or at the LL of a step - you may not be very far away from something within, so be very careful with your nav and altitude :ok:

[amberale]

Quote:
The Redcliff areoclub CFI wasa gobsmacked when he rang us back to inform us that the aircraft couldnt have responded to our radio transmissions as all four people on board were profoundly DEAF.
I have a volume control

Well done sir.
I assume you also have a frequency control and a map or publication to assist in selecting one of the 16 frequencies attempted in contacting the referenced VCA.:)

AA

http://static.pprune.org/images/statusicon/user_offline.gif http://static.pprune.org/images/buttons/report.gif (http://www.pprune.org/report.php?p=4830746) http://static.pprune.org/images/buttons/reply_small.gif (http://www.pprune.org/newreply.php?do=newreply&p=4830746&noquote=1)

[amberale]

Jaba, I'm not sure. I haven't read it yet.
I know Blackcloud was close to tears rcieving the phone call.

AA

[Bell_Flyer]

Most CTR and much CTA was revised a number of years ago, and with respect to CTR now generally they are where the limits of nav tolerance splays are for the various instrument approaches and to contain holding patterns within CTA.

Thanks for your perspective. I am looking at a Sydney VTC. The threshold of runway 34R is 5nm from Victor 1 say, to the south or anywhere along the purple dots. Why is it safe to fly at 500 feet under a A380 or 747 landing on 34R or L (with no clearance or even need to talk to tower) but you need a clearance to fly to within 22nm west or north of YSRI when you do the same? Surely the laws of physics apply to both A380's and say, the Globe Master? Why is the nav tolerance different to need approx 5-6 times the real estate of YSSY?

Also, the same applies to YSNW. Why are ALL Romeo airspace activated when they are active? I can't see why you would need 20 miles of real estate north of the airfield (used to be far bigger)? What type of aircraft would need this distance to do an IFR approach?

Would appreciate an angle on this.

[aditya104]

VH-XXX said
Is it 1 mile from the CTA boundary for day VFR and 3 for NVFR, or 2 perhaps...?



AVOIDING CONTROLLED AIRSPACE (AIP ENR 1.1)
When operating VFR in E or G airspace, the following tolerances should be
applied to the planned tracks in order to avoid controlled airspace.

0-2000ftAGL +-1nm(day) +-2nm(night)
2001-5000AGL +-2nm +-3nm
5001-10000AGL +-4nm +-5nm
From 10001 to FL200 all acft VFR should apply +-8nm

i think these numbers are increasing with height because the accuracy of pin-pointing the position on the map decreases with increase in height. IS that the reason or something else contributes to these numbers?

[DBTW]

Bell_Flyer I reckon you are asking pertinent questions. It's a fact though that we simply love to be regulated!

There have been several threads discussing how large controlled airpsace is in Australia, and the huge size of restricted areas in our big wide (empty) land. The answers usually come back about how frightened you would be if you saw an F18 or a helicopter nearby because the sky is black with them in those special places. That is, of course, simply not true.

I think the answer is more about our desire to be told what to do than anything else. Somebody esle can therefore be responsible for what happens. Cue the horrified hoards who "like things the way they are and I am not bothered by all the airspace restrictions which make flying much harder than it needs to be."

No, Richmond doesn't need such a big zone, and Nowra does not need to be protected by such large restricted areas. The rate of flying that goes on in the airspace you have identified is very low. For the airpsace size to be reduced (at best) or released more frequently (at worst) would only be a benefit to everyone and a burden to none.

Yes, there would be fewer violations if airspace usage wasn't so regulated. In such a big country with such vast airspace available, the number of near misses and collisions wouldn't go up either...

[Bell_Flyer]

Thanks DBTW.

I wonder if there is a study somewhere by the old CAA or CASA or ASA or NTSB that co-relates size of CTA to VCA.

I looked carefully at the Jeppersen NDB approaches. At YSRI as an example, the NDB final approach course of the extended centreline is the 10nm arc but look at how much real estate they have taken east and west!!

If I were a very low time 152 or R22 pilot, my first instinct would be to avoid the airspace by way of skirting around it. But the space is so large I can see how easy it would be to incur into it accidentally.

Guess the uniforms will just say "Safety Requirement" and that's the end of the discussion. Kinda like ASICs at Thargomindah or Birdsville or Oodnadatta - it's all about the safety of Australia.

[CaptainMidnight]

Its clear to me now you are referring to restricted areas and military CTR rather than civil CTR/CTA. Entirely different activities can take place therein of course.

Mil CTR & restricted areas usually surround major bases and so in addition to containing instrument approaches and circling areas etc. can encompass other activities, which on their own might justify restricted areas if the CTR and restricted areas weren't there eg. firing ranges, ordinance disposal, approach to bombing range, heli training area etc.

It is a Defence issue to explain & justify military airspace lateral and vertical limits.

[Jabawocky]

Like Aero's in a Bou..... which I got to watch +/- 2000' from my level one day. Thanks for the clearance AMB!MIL CTR is excessive and in some cases excessively complicated. You would be surprised how Airline drivers with local and international experience give up on fathoming CTRin some places (threads previous). Sure if you take half an hour and a highlighter pen you can get them all sorted, by then its all changed!J

[C-change]

Just wondering C-change, on the converse, do you ever, as a controller, think sometimes that CTA boundaries are set way too large?

Bell flyer, yes and no. This will sound like a sitting on the fence answer but it depends on what is flying and what they are doing. In regards to MIL flying, you may be on freq and hear nothing but there could be several aircraft on freq doing all kinds of weird stuff. Slow and quick stuff, not talking (deliberately), doing the "war"ie stuff. As for capital city, I think it could be bigger. Seen too many clowns over the years getting too close to RPT etc. Stuffing up sequences etc, resulting in pissed off pax, crew etc, the list goes on.

I guess my original post was aimed at some unprofessional and lazy pilots (not you) that I had to deal with in one particular week. They just pissed me off. I have no problem with students etc making an error, a late call, that sort of thing but overflying an active airfeild without making a call, then landing and parking in front of the hangar, is a bit much.

At the end of the day I just keep em apart so they can all do their thing, whatever that may be. So long as they don't end up a smokin hole in the ground, I've had a good day.
Some of them out their make a good day a little bit harder to acheive.

[Bell_Flyer]

Thank-you C-change. On the "yes" part of your answer, would it be possible for controllers like yourself and your colleagues to raise at forums in your profession on why size ought to matter when it comes to VCA. The larger a MIL or civilian CTA area, the smaller the OCTA area for a pilot wanting to avoid CTR - hence they might intrude into “your” space. If you look at a Sydney VTC, the YSNW (and to an extent the YSRI area) space is not only disproportionate to the size of the map but IMHO, ridiculously large. Their practice of grabbing R space unnecessarily whenever CTR is active is also odious. On the "no" part of your answer, perhaps suggest Victor air spaces, education & literature, and finally fines for repeat wrong doings?

If a low time, interstate or overseas pilot flying a meandering route from say YPEC to YMRY to take in the beauty of the place, like Kangaroo Valley, Hawkesbury, Warragambah, etc there is a disproportionate lot of R and CTR that can cause problems for the inexperienced.

It is a Defence issue to explain & justify military airspace lateral and vertical limits.

A corollary to your sentence would be "It is a civilian issue to approve Defence's actions". DSD and the Chiefs stomping on the head of Joel Fitzgibbon is an anomaly. Thru Australia’s history the uniforms are always controlled by the civilian. However, you might see it differently.

The issue at hand then becomes, C-change, is how we can overcome a situation where a group of unreasonable people using the 'safety and defence of the realm is at stake' argument is overcome by a group of reasonable people in streamlining and harmonising CTA airspace to further reduce VCA.

[Clearedtoreenter]

If a low time, interstate or overseas pilot flying a meandering route from say YPEC to YMRY to take in the beauty of the place, like Kangaroo Valley, Hawkesbury, Warragambah, etc there is a disproportionate lot of R and CTR that can cause problems for the inexperienced.


I agree these areas are far too large and complicated to navigate around easily but I've rarely found it difficult to get a clearance to transit either Richmond or Nowra. Williamtown can be a bit stroppy. Getting a clearance is great way to aviod a VCA.:)

[werbil]

It's not just the boundaries that cause problems its also the operating hours of the part time towers and lack of ATIS on VHF.

YBHM is a classic example. The tower hours change everytime the airlines change their schedules. The tower closes for lunch, and sometimes for a second break during the day. The only ATIS is on the VOR frequency, yet nearly half the local commerical aircraft that are the most frequent users of the zone don't have a NAV receiver. When the tower is closed a different frequency is used for the CTAF. The AFRU is not triggered in a number of sectors until you are well in the area that the zone covers. Reading NOTAMS in the morning is no guarantee either - on occassions the tower stays open if there are a number of jets holding due weather.

If I can't check the ATIS I try and call the tower a couple of times before entering the zone even if I expect it to be closed - this has saved me from a couple of VCA's. Even the majors have been caught out entering the runway without a clearance.

[C-change]

Bell Flyer,
You ask good questions and I'll attempt to answer them.

I can see your point about the size of R and CTR airspace but I can't agree on reducing them. I used to believe that R airspace was too big when I learn't to fly out of YHOX many years ago, prior to ATC. I couldn't see why they needed so much airspace to train but when I got into ATC years later, both Mil and civil, I changed my opinion. Not because I was brainwashed, I was just seeing the whole picture for the first time. 20Nm may seem a lot of room but for an Approach controller with a sequence of a BE76 with C130 etc, add a LJ35 or an F18 and the room runs out real quick. I have to keep 3 nm between them and some days with closing speeds of 100-250 kts. Thats just an arrival sequence, add to that a few departures, a couple of local instrument aircraft, plus the training areas and there isn't a lot left over. Again you may only hear two or three aircraft but could actually have a lot more operating on silent freq's nocom etc. Yes, there will also be days when you may transit and your it. Too many factors to list, WX, serviceablity, squadron delpoyed, etc etc. I hope I have made sense.

On the vistor on a joy flight, go for it. If they get a good brief, plan properly and do the right thing they will have a lovely time. If all else fails they can ask for help. I've had heaps of vistors do just this. Some have called way early because the have been unsure. No problem at all. Even had one last week who called just inside the boundary and said they were unfamiliar with the place. We vectored them to the place they wanted to be and let them continue with their joy flight. I can't speak for all units but it is very rare that a clearance is not available. If it isn't, its only because of safety, ie bombing, live firing etc.

You mentioned Victor 1 but that type of lane wouldn't work too well at the majority of places because the airspace within R is cut up into smaller training areas. It may be parachuting, low level nax ex, live firing, fast jets etc. Most military training involves low level ops who like to (or must) remain IFR. It becames a nightmare to even try to seperate. Also, having additional lanes etc adds to cockpit workload during the sortie. Its just another thing to make it more complex.

You mentioned forums and yes it does get discussed but we don't have a lot of say in the end. It's the pilots that tell us what they need and we have to make it happen. Thats a simple version but I think you'll understand.

One point you made was education and thats were things can improve. I'm not sure what is taught these days but I was lucky enough to have a very experienced instructor that got the message across about how important planning was. He made me sit down with a map and check every bit of R airspace plus CTA and then go away and read each rest area for activation times. That was before I rang briefing. I thought some days he was just being anal but I had a great airspace picture in my head before each departure. Technology, used properly, can make it even easier today.

So I hope I have answered your questions well enough, whilst writing only one copy of war and peace.

[Bell_Flyer]

C-change, your post is good and gives the ATC viewpoint. Now I’d like to give you a pilot’s perspective borne of about 2,000 take-offs and landings within the YSRI and YSNW CTA space, over a long period of time.

However, before we start, can we first agree that we will always separate facts from bureaucracy. For example, a fact is say, a regular joy flight hot air balloon taking paying passengers at the northern edge of the entire Sydney basin. A bureaucracy is for example, the need to scramble 2xF-18’s or the police Squirrels or Citation to intercept this “fast” moving balloon during APEC.

Let’s begin with 3 small examples so I don’t infringe on your Leo Tolstoy concerns with posts.

On a CAVOK day when a Sea King (Very slow, large, ugly and easily spottable from the air) helicopter is practicing IFR at YSNW with NO OTHER Mil traffic (because I phoned them and asked), why do they have to activate ALL R airspace in excess of 25-40 miles away from the airstrip? In fact, I know that whenever YSNW is active ALL R space is active regardless of traffic or whether bona fide mil spook exercises are going on. Why? Who gives them this right?

On a YSRI CAVOK day (when there are NO other traffic), when an oil drenched Caribou or a Globe Master is 15nm west and landing on runway 10 why is traffic which is 13 miles east and wanting to land at 11 miles east kept holding? What kind of aircraft needs a 28-mile separation for safety? Remember my earlier posts where pilots regularly fly under A380 and B747 at 500 AGL on V1 regardless of duty runway dir at YSSY with no communications to TOWER, Approach or Syd Terminal. The laws of physics is the same – uniform or no uniform. To add insult to injury, look at their own military spec’d 10nm arc for their extended centreline for NDB final approach course. I fly in the USA and point out to you that B-52's and C-5 Galaxies take less real estate than what our uniforms need.

Lastly, a dead soldier is flown from one of our battlefields in Afghanistan or Iraq into YSRI on a weekend. The only traffic is the funeral plane landing (I know this because YSRI told me). Why is R space activated along with CTA? Remember, in this discussion, I ask for a separation of facts versus bureaucracy.

C-change, if a police patrol car follows you for 500 miles on the road there’s a good chance you will get a traffic infringement ticket. When CTA and R space is so big, a low time pilot or visitor will one day run into it. Pure and simple. We need a discipline to control size of Mil CTA and their practice of grabbing unreasonably R space. For this to work we need civilian control over our uniforms.

Oh oh, I’ve gone into Anna Karenina as well as finishing War and Peace – but they are both worthwhile readings – especially your last post.

[CaptainMidnight]

why do they have to activate ALL R airspace in excess of 25-40 miles away from the airstrip? On the assumption you are referring to the restricted airspace east of NW, those areas are activated for Navy activity including firing and shore gunnery.

There may or may not be aircraft involved in the exercises - often not. NW ATC are usually not involved with those restricted areas, they are managed by Maritime HQ in SY.

[C-change]

BF,
I'll try again but I feel that you already have your veiws and they are rock solid and not about to change. Thats fine, we're all entitled to our opinions.


why do they have to activate ALL R airspace in excess of 25-40 miles away from the airstrip?


In regards to NW, as Capt Midnight pointed out, the airspace east of NW is controlled by Navy and ATC has nothing to do with it, including activation, control or separation. The same thing happens west of TVL and that airspace is controlled by Army, not ATC. There are other examples around the country also and these are all primarily weapons ranges.

In regards to RI, I cannot help on that one, I have never worked there as an ATC. Some of the others you have mentioned do exactly what you are describing ie only the CTR is activated for a departure or an arrival. This practice is usually only done on weekends or for out of hours moves. The reason that all R airsapce is activated say, Mon - Fri 0800-2300, is because ATC cannot project the flying and airspace requirements of the local squadrons. It is impossible. If we activated it bit by bit, it would be constantly changing. Too many variables. Taking your seaking example, it may have had several test flights in the circuit before being released as serviceable, to go and conduct the ILS. If I had to activate that extra airspace based on the servicability of the aircraft, it would be on and off, all day and thats only one aircraft. How can others expect to have any idea of what airspace is active or not. That would increase VCA's even more and make airspace even more complex.

Another point on airspace again, there are large portions of AMB and NWA R areas that are not activated very often at all, based on exactly what you're saying. The old A4 airspace South of NWA (R422) is hardly ever activated. The airspace above NWA FL130 to FL300 is released every day to Melb centre. The same happens West of AMB between 43 Nm to 120 Nm, F130-F600. It is there if required but rather than have fast areas active, they are deactivated or released every day.

On Victor 1, it works because the IFR aircraft arriving from the East of Syd are not at 1000', IFR and travelling at 350kts all the way home. The arrivals into Syd fly the same profile every day and the blue lines marking CTA are always active. Why, because AsA cannot possibly predict traffic to the point were they can reduce, deactivate airspace, based on traffic density.


if a police patrol car follows you for 500 miles on the road there’s a good chance you will get a traffic infringement ticket

Only if you break the law.

We need a discipline to control size of Mil CTA and their practice of grabbing unreasonably R space. For this to work we need civilian control over our uniforms.


We already do. The elected Govn. of the day has full control over the Military. The minister tells the Chief and he tells the troops what to do. At the end of the day, in regards to airspcae, it is the pilots of the nation that determine airspace, not ATC.

You may not think so, but I can see your point of view, I just don't agree on all your points. I guess we will have to "agree to disagree" but I hope I have provided some answers anyway.

[topdrop]

Must be the weekend for them. I've submitted ESIRs for 3 VCAs in two shifts. :mad::mad::mad:

[LeadSled]

Bell Flyer,
You can answer some of your own questions about size of "CTA" by looking at some US or UK (just as two examples) of military zones. You will be surprised how small they are, compared to Australia --- generally 5sm (US) or 5nm (RAF/NATO) radiuus, with an extension to 10 miles (dogbone) around an instrument approach, height to 3000ft, or 1500/3000 for the dogbone.

Likewise for civil CTA like YSSY. Download a copy of the London TMA, and see how small London EGLL or EGKK is compared to the CTA around YSSY.

Last time I looked, there were something like eight airfields around Los Angeles KLAX, in an area roughly comparable to the YSSY zone. Several of them, including on only aboy 1.5 nm from the threshold of KLAX 25L, have an ILS.

Further, outside Australia, various "controlled airspace) boundaries at low level tend to be regular shapes, making navigation around much easier, all this ignoring the fact that most places I fly outside Australia, particularly US and Canada, "flying around the edges" simply doesn't happen, as clearances are readily available, if needed at all. In fact, in US there is very little G airspace, most airspace outside terminal areas, up to 18,000, is E - transparent to VFR. Class D towers operate as true ICAO Class D, with VFR GA equal rights with everybody else, not the quasi/semi C with IFR preference, as in Australia,

In places like KLAX, there are simple lanes and procedures for VFR to fly right over the top. Excepting the occassional space launch from the Cape, or Vandenberg, Homeland Security limitations etc., you can fly VFR with no clearance, the length of the US east or west coast, H24/365, --without a clearance--, not something you can do in Australia.

Given our massive military aviation activity, compared to US or UK, I guess we need such huge areas. Last time I looked, there was more R airspace attached to Willi and Nowra, than the whole of the US.

Indeed, a summary of the military approach here, as quoted to me by a then senior RAAF officer was: "We won WW11, it all belongs to us". Sadly the legislation supports this, unlike the US/UK and many other western countries, where civil gets priority or it is even Stevens.

Bottom line, does this make midairs in Oz more unlikely ---- Sadly, an examination of like with like shows a slightly higher incidence of midairs and near hits here, than US.

Incidently, it is over ten years since Australia agreed to comply with sundry international treaties, and cease "publishing" purported R and P areas in international airspace, and convert them the the conventional/ ICAO compliant "warning" areas, but Australia has never complied.

Tootle pip!!

[Jabawocky]

Lead Sled :D

DBTW and I have discussed this exact problem of R in places like Willy on another thread.

I even recall much abuse on here some 4 or 5 years ago with the NAS and the issue of VFR lanes up and down the US coast.

Why are we so backward then? What does it take to change it?

[C-change]

Why are we so backward then?


Who is this question directed at, Willy ATC or Defence ATC as whole?



Well done to those that turned a thread about incompetent GA pilots into one about Mil airspace. :D

[bushy]

Has anyone bothered to discover who is likely to do this, and why they do?
Is any attempt made to make boudaries follow roads, rivers or other things that are easily visible?
If the airspace and procedures are user friendly there may not be so many VCA's.
Civil non airline aircraft outnumber all the others and yet the major part of the airspace is reserved for the others. And with our complex, ever changing system it is not surprising that there are some VCA's.The real problem is one of attitude. VFR aircraft (you know, the hundreds of light aircraft that keep our inland areas going) are considered an incompetent nuisance. Our regulators live on the coast, so will never understand or care. Their job is to ensure that our government is never sucessfully sued for squillions of dollars after an airline prang.
There is a way to solve the oversized airspace problem. Just make anyone who wants exclusive use of airspace pay for the priviledge according to the size and the time it is restricted. If it is the military the money should come out of the military budget.
Maybe ASA should pay for the use of the airspace they earn money from.
I bet we would see some changes then.

[Jabawocky]

C-Change

Sorry for thread drifting your thread:ouch:

Who was it directed at ..... anyone who cared to comment. And no it was not a shot at Willy ATC but the airpsace system overall.