NAS on the skids?
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 107
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The "truth" is out there
Snarek,
Ragarding the "truth" which has been revealed from the well-respected and experienced aviation writer:
Yep, don't disagree. What is not pointed out is that neither Coffs nor Dubbo (in the examples you provided) have the radar coverage (and RK has SSR only so you need a transponder) to see that aircraft over the top. LAX can see anything that's airborne and moving. Notice a slight difference?
Once again, handy when you have RADAR (or if you're lucky enough to have TCAS). Let's not forget the rollout of E across the continent, much of where RADAR surveillance is not avialable.
Ummm ... sure, don't disagree. 
But let's look where ADS-B implementation is currently. Training was supposed to start LAST december. The project has been continuously delayed (for several reasons) which means that presently the operational TRIAL hasn't even started (i.e. ADS-B equipped aircraft cannot yet be seen at the console). Then talk about the rest of the rollout of the other 20 sites across the country, equipping all aircraft with the enhanced Mode-S transponders (which does NOT mean they will have the traffic picture in the cockpit - that bit of kit will be an expensive optional extra) and we are still talking years away. i.e. we don't have it yet.
When we have RADAR-like surveillance across the country, many of these concerns will be allayed (not to say there will be none).
Bindik,
Ragarding the "truth" which has been revealed from the well-respected and experienced aviation writer:
3.. Un-notified aircraft complying with quadrantal rules will be able to use the airspace above (for example) Coffs harbour, Rockhampton and Dubbo, just as they are now, slap bang over Los Angeles International.
6.. The perceived problems could be resolved in the nearer term by requiring that aircraft in the relevant airspace carry and operate transponders.
7.. The perceived problems will cease to exist altogether when ADS-B is implemented in low level air space.
But let's look where ADS-B implementation is currently. Training was supposed to start LAST december. The project has been continuously delayed (for several reasons) which means that presently the operational TRIAL hasn't even started (i.e. ADS-B equipped aircraft cannot yet be seen at the console). Then talk about the rest of the rollout of the other 20 sites across the country, equipping all aircraft with the enhanced Mode-S transponders (which does NOT mean they will have the traffic picture in the cockpit - that bit of kit will be an expensive optional extra) and we are still talking years away. i.e. we don't have it yet.When we have RADAR-like surveillance across the country, many of these concerns will be allayed (not to say there will be none).
Bindik,
Grandpa Aerotart
Just a few quotes from Mr. Keirens.
‘Well, I support NAS!! (Didn't used to until I read some of the anti-GA stuff emanating from some 'professional' pilots on here, which made me decide their opinions were worth merde)’.
Great reason to support NAS!!
‘The 'shameless hype' from the flat earth societies, AFAP and CivilAir, has had a good result’.
When you start using that language you really are exposing yourself as bereft of cogent argument.
‘I am an unashamed 'bugsmaher' pilot. I fly my way, I fly about 10 hours a week 'commuting', I occasionally fly IFR (but don't like it in a SE a/c) I have a transponder, I keep it serviced to give IFR people nice accurate TCAS (even though I don't actually need it). I even change track to make it easy for the Dunk-Cairns guys to get in and out. What I am saying is, "we are all in this together".
‘You fly your way huh? Well sorry to cramp your style but I’m sure you can imagine the results if everyone took your stance!
’But, I too am sick of "remain OCTA" because there is one Dash-8 in the Maroochy airspace mish-mash. And unless someone invents a VTOL 747 I don’t see why I can't cross straight over Cairns at 1500 feet (through a lane of course) avoiding the approach and departure run ins (sort of a high Victor
One).’
Well take a look at the missed approach path for rwy 15 and then tell us where your 1500’ V one is going! Missed approaches happen in VFR weather too and given the terrain around CNS I would suggest what you ask for is problematic....unless we only apply your “I want” principle.
‘Yeah, but hardly ever go to MB. How can I be so???’
MB has procedures that are unique...or can’t you read?
’Perhaps that is not a good example, but in places like Cairns where traffic comes in and out on one runway I don’t see why we can't have an E corridor right over the top.’
See above and have a look at the CNS approach/ departure plates...it’s not that simple.
’I also still fail to see the reason for C at Coffs, Maroochy, Hamilton Is etc. The 'Whitsunday' airspace is an embuggarance to all who fly it and just isn't necessary’.
Because jets on RPT fly in there and as the Yank NAS cheer squad said they’d have them in the US too!
AOPA claims to represent 4000 pilots yet 6000 have signed the letter that voices concerns over the implantation of NAS. Somewhere else on the various NAS threads I read ‘33000 active pilots in Australia’...you seem to represent a minority.
On the latest post we see a list of concerns that have been voiced by the professional ‘alphabet groups’...not one says scrap NAS, and the requests are perfectly logical from an aviation safety point of view.
AK AOPA needs to admit that the professional groups that oppose much of the proposed changes do so because the actually understand how the airspace works in its entirety, and as a result, how your wish list will impact.
You and AOPA continually display;
1/. Lack of understanding of how complex airspace is around CTR and the protected airspace required for jets...and that without all the added burden of noise abatement procedures imposed on various airports by scumbags who bought cheap houses and now want increased capital gain.
2/. Inability/lack of motivation to actually make yourself aware of how the system we have can actually work for you, in its current form, to give you what you want. Hell why study and understand what we have when you can change it to a system which you seem to believe won’t require study/understanding.
Your arguments, AOPA, and those of Bindook, sound more and more like a spoilt 12 year old....”Me, me, me, I want”.
It should be obvious to a moron that we are not getting the US system as it functions there...so what are we getting?
Chuck.
‘Well, I support NAS!! (Didn't used to until I read some of the anti-GA stuff emanating from some 'professional' pilots on here, which made me decide their opinions were worth merde)’.
Great reason to support NAS!!
‘The 'shameless hype' from the flat earth societies, AFAP and CivilAir, has had a good result’.
When you start using that language you really are exposing yourself as bereft of cogent argument.
‘I am an unashamed 'bugsmaher' pilot. I fly my way, I fly about 10 hours a week 'commuting', I occasionally fly IFR (but don't like it in a SE a/c) I have a transponder, I keep it serviced to give IFR people nice accurate TCAS (even though I don't actually need it). I even change track to make it easy for the Dunk-Cairns guys to get in and out. What I am saying is, "we are all in this together".
‘You fly your way huh? Well sorry to cramp your style but I’m sure you can imagine the results if everyone took your stance!
’But, I too am sick of "remain OCTA" because there is one Dash-8 in the Maroochy airspace mish-mash. And unless someone invents a VTOL 747 I don’t see why I can't cross straight over Cairns at 1500 feet (through a lane of course) avoiding the approach and departure run ins (sort of a high Victor
One).’
Well take a look at the missed approach path for rwy 15 and then tell us where your 1500’ V one is going! Missed approaches happen in VFR weather too and given the terrain around CNS I would suggest what you ask for is problematic....unless we only apply your “I want” principle.
‘Yeah, but hardly ever go to MB. How can I be so???’
MB has procedures that are unique...or can’t you read?
’Perhaps that is not a good example, but in places like Cairns where traffic comes in and out on one runway I don’t see why we can't have an E corridor right over the top.’
See above and have a look at the CNS approach/ departure plates...it’s not that simple.
’I also still fail to see the reason for C at Coffs, Maroochy, Hamilton Is etc. The 'Whitsunday' airspace is an embuggarance to all who fly it and just isn't necessary’.
Because jets on RPT fly in there and as the Yank NAS cheer squad said they’d have them in the US too!
AOPA claims to represent 4000 pilots yet 6000 have signed the letter that voices concerns over the implantation of NAS. Somewhere else on the various NAS threads I read ‘33000 active pilots in Australia’...you seem to represent a minority.
On the latest post we see a list of concerns that have been voiced by the professional ‘alphabet groups’...not one says scrap NAS, and the requests are perfectly logical from an aviation safety point of view.
AK AOPA needs to admit that the professional groups that oppose much of the proposed changes do so because the actually understand how the airspace works in its entirety, and as a result, how your wish list will impact.
You and AOPA continually display;
1/. Lack of understanding of how complex airspace is around CTR and the protected airspace required for jets...and that without all the added burden of noise abatement procedures imposed on various airports by scumbags who bought cheap houses and now want increased capital gain.
2/. Inability/lack of motivation to actually make yourself aware of how the system we have can actually work for you, in its current form, to give you what you want. Hell why study and understand what we have when you can change it to a system which you seem to believe won’t require study/understanding.
Your arguments, AOPA, and those of Bindook, sound more and more like a spoilt 12 year old....”Me, me, me, I want”.
It should be obvious to a moron that we are not getting the US system as it functions there...so what are we getting?
Chuck.
