View Full Version : HOBART AIRSPACE
mgahan
31st Aug 2016, 09:02
Wonder who did the peer review/QA check on this? Or is the call for comments meant to flush out all the errors and false assumptions.
https://www.casa.gov.au/files/aeronauticalstudyofhobart2016pdf
Quick check with the owners of Cambridge - they are wondering why the runway lights were ignored. Seems the authors missed the runway lights in their brief visit and review of the survey questions.
What else is missing?
MJG
Mt Gahan, Great initiative to " quick check " with the owners!
A "Quick check" of you on linkedin shows obviously where your ambition comes from.........................
A consultant - will tell you the time using your watch......................
Advance
2nd Sep 2016, 03:05
Hey FPDO,
I DO know Mr Gahan and I DO know a great many in the relevant area in CASA and I assure you there are precisely three within CASA who would come within a bull's roar of Mr Gahan's expertise - and they were not involved with the referenced document. MJG has been a competent consultant for a very long time now so instead of firing off cheap shots why not address some specific subject matter where you believe you have greater expertise?
mgahan
3rd Sep 2016, 14:20
Thank Advance,
Guess he also missed the fact that I've been working overseas for the past 5 years.
Now, for the rest of you: as a past national airspace regulator I take a critical look at all airspace dcuments published byCASA.
MJG
Stationair8
6th Sep 2016, 01:10
What is the importance or significance of runway lights at Cambridge, certainly won't be high on the list for Qantas and Virgin during the airspace review?
The Terry Towelling Hat Brigade need something to whinge about in their small space..........................
Mr Gahan why dont you use the 30 day period to supply feedback?
I have used it in the past , works well !!!
swells
8th Sep 2016, 05:45
how about the fact that the cost to "fix" TASWAM isn't included - only to do a fully fledged radar system - why was TASWAM was installed with several issues outstanding as this report identifies which doesn't allow it to be used as was directed by the minister at the time?
The Cambridge aerodrome lights issue will be raised, within MY reply.
mgahan
8th Sep 2016, 08:49
Swells raises an interesting issue.
Wonder if the report drafters had the benefit of reading the results of CASA project 09/372: Consultancy to quantify the Safety benefit of surveillance in airspace.
MJG
not a typo, it's a cut and paste from the RFQ back in the days when CASA used an initial capital for the word safety.
MGahan,
Hows progress on the response to CASA going? you know, getting in touch with CASA to raise constructive points about what you think is not correct about the Hobart Review?
Seems you have plenty of time to doodle around with silly wind up posts..oh correction........pushing your published reports from when you were in the big world.......
Anyhow Ill let you get back to glueing the canopy on your Airfix 72nd scale Stuka Dive Bomber....................
Hey FPDO,
I DO know Mr Gahan and I DO know a great many in the relevant area in CASA and I assure you there are precisely three within CASA who would come within a bull's roar of Mr Gahan's expertise - and they were not involved with the referenced document. MJG has been a competent consultant for a very long time now so instead of firing off cheap shots why not address some specific subject matter where you believe you have greater expertise?
Advance, how do you measure a Bulls Roar?
Statute or Nautical?
mgahan Seems you have nothing more productive to offer than deliberate hook baiting, you should move on to a fishing site..........................
swells
21st Sep 2016, 05:53
good to see things aren't been taken personally FPDO
You weren't the one who did the previous paper saying TASWAM would be going to ground level are you?
https://www.casa.gov.au/sites/g/files/net351/f/_assets/main/oar/papers/hobart_cambridge_review.pdf
With the introduction of the TASWAM, it is projected that coverage in the Hobart terminal area will extend to as low as 100 to 200 ft AGL (and possibly to ground level) providing ATC with a full approach and departure monitoring capability. The TASWAM will also provide limited redundancy to the Launceston radar coverage above 5,000 ft AMSL pending removal of the Launceston radar. After this time, TASWAM will be permanent solution for surveillance coverage over Tasmania.
I mean after all, it was only just a ministerial directive at the time...
swells you are so far off track it seems you have got yourself unstuck flying into cloud with just a VFR rating..........
Hoo Roo
swells
23rd Sep 2016, 03:17
swells you are so far off track it seems you have got yourself unstuck flying into cloud with just a VFR rating..........
Hoo Roo
Ha yep .... have a look at the RAPAC meetings and let's see who is off track, I can't be bothered quoting them to someone with a psydonum and a deranged agenda
Best of luck to you
Wow Deranged Agenda ! a tad harsh there ole chap!
Thanks for the best wishes re luck, but I make my own luck :D
You should give people a chance and get to know people a little better, turn that frown upside down....
Safe landings and dont forget your PUFF checks.