Australia, New Zealand & the Pacific Airline and RPT Rumours & News in Australia, enZed and the Pacific

The NAS, facts and fantasies

Old 30th Sep 2003, 23:53
  #21 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Think of a happy place. Think of a happy place. Think of a happy place
Posts: 279
SNAREK

One guess where the Flat Earth Society Headquarters is?......

The Alan Woods Building, Canberra.


Keep up the good work Andrew.

TBT
Time Bomb Ted is offline  
Old 1st Oct 2003, 06:16
  #22 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Emerald, Vic, Aust
Posts: 183
I've got the message, just had a number of key players including an aviation mag editor wanting to understand its meaning B
brianh is offline  
Old 1st Oct 2003, 09:41
  #23 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: sydney
Posts: 54
Snarek , once again I find myself in agreement with you, my goodness, what is happening to me.

Keep up the good work.

Bart
Bart Ifonly is offline  
Old 1st Oct 2003, 10:49
  #24 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: WA
Posts: 61
snarek for next AOPA President

Keep up the good work there...................
C182 Drover is offline  
Old 1st Oct 2003, 10:56
  #25 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: FNQ
Posts: 429
No way!!!

I ain't smart enuf.

Besides, we got a [email protected]@dy good team now.

AK
snarek is offline  
Old 1st Oct 2003, 14:32
  #26 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: sydney
Posts: 62
Angel SM4 Pirate

Well I think you did say in the posts re-Dick Smith that you have had some input to NAS if you were at the workshop? then you know what you are saying is not entirely true. Every step of the implementation was looked at by a wide range of representatives and Hazards were identified and in some cases mitigated correctly to ALARP ie the risk was as low as reasonably possible.
where this was not the case implementation has been delayed for example the new CTAF procedures and the removal of MBZ,s
Personally I feel the process is being handled very well particularly when Dick is not present.

The last workshop was a workshop to examine all the parts that were non compliant with the US system which would make your comments correct but not the first 4 days of part 2b. I kind of think we probably are on the same side here I support NAS 100% but will continue to examine the fine details of each stage raise appropriate hazard concerns and help if possible mitigate them. I do accept some industry concerns but believe they are in most cases not valid and more a case of reluctance to change. As for the scare munger tactics on the Australian public I find it truly hard to believe that they would stoop so low to lie to the Australian public what a sad day for aviation it makes me wonder why I love aviation at times, I think they have forgotten what flying realy is and its not about being a bus driver they are a minority but have such a large voice how sad!. They are using the end state example from the hand out to pilots to scare the public, that picture is an example only and has never been discussed as a final model and never will be untill suitable technology such as ADSB has been put in place.
2B1ASK1 is offline  
Old 2nd Oct 2003, 11:32
  #27 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Emerald, Vic, Aust
Posts: 183
AOPA AND AGAF IN TEAM MODE

Nice to see that Andrew K has also posted on agaf and enlisting further support via that group.
Andrew's balanced approach makes such things possible and I commend him for his people skills in enlarging the debating team.

I was interested to debate the NAS with a flying instructor yesterday and I concluded that those who don't know much about it accept the scaremongering of the media driven by those with vested interests, yet those who do know something about it are - like 2B1 - prepared to work their way through accepting and fine tuning the NAS. So far the NAS education has been mainly within aviation, perhaps there is a need for a media strategy from the NAS people to get the facts to the journos and passenger public.
Brian H
brianh is offline  
Old 2nd Oct 2003, 17:16
  #28 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Dunnunda & Godzone
Age: 70
Posts: 4,275
The NAS, facts and fantasies

Have at it here guys.

Woomeri
Woomera is offline  
Old 2nd Oct 2003, 20:04
  #29 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Australia
Posts: 169
Who the hell is AOPA?
jakethemuss is offline  
Old 2nd Oct 2003, 20:47
  #30 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Planet Plazbot
Posts: 1,003
more to the point is who cares
tobzalp is offline  
Old 3rd Oct 2003, 07:06
  #31 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 570
Snarek,

All of the domestic RPT guys that i have spoken to on this topic are in total agreement - NAS is going to produce problems.

The removal of DTI causes us much concern as does the frequency separation of IFR and VFR in E airspace.

To be honest I am not sure of what is going on anymore because the plot has changed so many times and the consultation/education process is abysmal.

I have been to many meetings where AsA said you can have anything you want as long as you are prepared to pay for it.

We say great we want DTI, and they say you can't have DTI, BUT you can have anything you want if you are prepared to pay for it!

It is a circular arguement - we want what they don't want to give and it stops there.

The first time that one of your AOPA guys frightens themselves stupid with a windscreen full of 737 or Dash-8 or SAAB - the AOPA position will change and it will be too late.

What we have currently works - there is not going to be any demonstrable cost benefit from NAS so WHY CHANGE??????

Change for change sake is hardly a smart way to go....

By the way I do agree that ADS-B will be of great benefit, but to get it into the heavy end of town is going to be very expensive and there needs to be a cost benefit - which will not be easy to prove.
Dehavillanddriver is offline  
Old 3rd Oct 2003, 07:19
  #32 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 329
New NAS catch phrases

IFR pilot

"But I didn't know it was E airspace....!"

VFR pilot

"But I thought it was E airspace....!"

CG
Chief galah is offline  
Old 3rd Oct 2003, 07:23
  #33 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: FNQ
Posts: 429
Dehav

AOPA (and I am speaking for the organisation now) believes the key is education, lots more of it than we are getting now. AOPA is lobbying NASIG re education and will be actively involved to make the flow of our 'bugsmaher' members and the Regionals smoother.

We also believe that ADSB will knock the rough edges off a lot of your concerns and we are interested in listening to any genuine concerns that do not run off the backs of scaremongering unions.

The Board have debated a lot of pertinent facts presented by the more sane posters here (like Chief Galah) and Board member Ron Bertram is very active at the workshops.

It is sad when we turn against each other, but in my view it is CivilAir and AFAP that must shoulder a lot of responsibility for that! Their recent actions personally disgusted me!!!

AOPA is lobbying hard for ADSB with CDTI for the whole GA fleet. When we have that we will have a world class airspace system where (almost) everyone knows where the other is. ADSB will eventually, I hope, expand Class A to cover most of the country making transitions in lower D and E even safer for everyone.

There will be little side issues (like non-radio aircraft and ultralights ... and I own one of the former), these again will be education issues between our members, CASA and the AUF. I for instance have never had an issue or problem with any RPT, I carry a handheld, I listen and I get out of the circuit and out of the way when I hear them approaching. Common sense really.

Together (and I mean that) we can make this work.

Andrew Kerans
snarek is offline  
Old 3rd Oct 2003, 07:25
  #34 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: On a Ship Near You
Posts: 787
2b1

Well I think you did say in the posts re-Dick Smith that you have had some input to NAS if you were at the workshop?
Never been to a workshop, but there are many ways to in the weeds of this project.
…and Hazards were identified and in some cases mitigated correctly to ALARP ie the risk was as low as reasonably possible.
This is why I have problems, many characteristics which are not compliant with the US model, (7 out of 10); 5 that matter have Hazards that are not mitigated to ALARP. The possibility is still low that the ultimate consequence will occur, but it is a greater probability than what we have today; I say why, it doesn’t save money, it does increase risk – that’s my point; nobody is addressing my point… This is not the USA model because of the differences 5 of 10 changes for this next stage are not compliant to a point where it matters.
where this was not the case implementation has been delayed for example the new CTAF procedures and the removal of MBZ,s Personally I feel the process is being handled very well particularly when Dick is not present.
The MBZ issue will probably be a show stopper, that’s why it got pushed back; two things will happen, it will get pushed back again or stage 2b will be the final model; yuk! I agree keep Dick out of it.
I do accept some industry concerns but believe they are in most cases not valid and more a case of reluctance to change.
The reluctance is due to there being no clearly identified benefit. No benefit, don’t do it. If my mechanic suggested I get Michelin tyres because he doesn’t like Dunlop’s I don’t by them unless there is a reason, not because he doesn’t like them; where is the cost benefit. If however he proves extra safety I will consider changing; if he proves that low safety exists I'll definitely buy new tyres.
…they are a minority but have such a large voice how sad!.
They have a large voice because the consequence of one of their airframes being lost is massive
They are using the end state example from the hand out to pilots to scare the public, that picture is an example only and has never been discussed as a final model and never will be untill suitable technology such as ADSB has been put in place.
2B1, if you really believe that then you and I are talking on the same side of the argument; there is nothing in any documentation linking further rollouts to new technology.

ADSB is not going to be ‘operational’ until 2008 (or there abouts). We were supposed to have completed training in December 2002; it’s still not able to go onto the TAAATS platform. Then when it does, it will give some low level coverage, but the sites are chosen to give ‘complete’ coverage above FL350 over continental Australia. ADSB will not provide ‘radar’ like coverage at low levels unless it gets a commitment from the government (probably) to do so; massive expense, even though it is cheaper than radar. Cost is still the problem; $300K per site (initially 20 sites, full coverage 55 sites comes to mind); $5K or more per aircraft, who funds it.

ADSB is the ‘great white hope’; Larry Holmes almost killed him… remember that.

My issue is mostly about trying to get the message about NAS is not the US model; stop saying it is.

Stop rejecting logical well thought out alternatives on the basis that they also are not compliant; safer options, no extra costs, bring them on.

Bottle of Rum
SM4 Pirate is offline  
Old 3rd Oct 2003, 20:49
  #35 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Australia
Posts: 13
Exclamation

snarek

Firstly AOPA is a big aero club

Secondly a lot of its members are also members of the AIPA and the AFAP. People who like flying and aeroplanes. People who have a respect for the fragility of safety. Its a very fine line between a good days flying and an absolutely disastrous day

The AFAP has participated in one joint press release yet you focuss in on the AFAP, whats your beef

snarek, get a life
Bonzer is offline  
Old 3rd Oct 2003, 21:22
  #36 (permalink)  

Don Quixote Impersonator
 
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Australia
Age: 73
Posts: 3,404
Beauty Bonzer mate.

Firstly AOPA is a big aero club
is a good way to demean and alienate a good proportion of the punters to your argument.

The AFAP and to a much lesser extent the AIPA have now almost totally marginalised themselves by their joining with Civil Airs unprofessional and totally irresponsible scaremongering.

I am proud to number more than a few ATCOs and Airline Pilots amongst my friends, they are consumate professionals and are a little bewildered by the actions of their representatives. They may have some reservations about this 'n that, but "scaring the horses" just to make a point is not in their repertoire.

There has been much made about the "spin" alleged against NASIG.
The "spin" allowed by Civil Air et al recently borders on french farce.
How professional are they when they have the "public" jamming switchboards around the country and provoking declaiming from idiot shock jocks, asking Air Services, CASA et al, whether it is still safe for granny to fly to see her grandys, based on mischievous disinformation. It is the height of irresponsibility.
And this from most responsible professions.

I'm confused.
gaunty is offline  
Old 4th Oct 2003, 12:49
  #37 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Adrift upon the tides of fate
Posts: 1,837
I continue to be stunned by some of the responses here.

Civil Air has grabbed some media attention. This NAS juggernaut may now face some opposition, or at least cause those that make decisions to pause and think. We've had 12 months or more of Dick's lies (and he is a master of the media grab), backed up by the professional liers in Canberra, yet there are howls of (adopting plummy accent) "it's just not cricket, Civil Air".

Please, continue to occupy that high moral ground. Naivety at it's best.
ferris is offline  
Old 4th Oct 2003, 17:10
  #38 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: On the Beach
Posts: 169
Snarek - the title of this thread is Facts and fantasies.Which aspect are you coming from with your comments in repsect of what ADS-B is going to do - especially relating to your comments on Class A airspace?

This by the way has nothing to do with the aspects of NAS that are being challenged by those who work with and in our airspace every day - 24/7.

In the previous incarnation of this thread I posed the question of how NAS was going to allow you to do things that you can't do now - i.e. where exactly are there efficiencies and expediencies to be gained - especially in view of the AirServices CEO dismissing the Willoughby reports projections of saving $70M outright. Bottom line - what operational or safety outcome makes this change imperative and worth the cost?

I , like the AFAP/CivilAir etc. are waiting for a coherent answer on this from anyone competent to answer - the silence is eery.

(edited for spelling and a big red wine spill)

Last edited by Shitsu-Tonka; 4th Oct 2003 at 17:23.
Shitsu-Tonka is offline  
Old 4th Oct 2003, 19:11
  #39 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Australia
Posts: 294
I wonder if the NAS in places like BUD might actually change the balance of power a bit. When (say) you are coming up from the south to overfly and join crosswind for 32 but some super professional expert is doing a downwind takeoff to save their esteemed employer a couple of dollars. You are requested (read told) to remain to west until they finish their interesting little circuit busting manouver. When they things like this, it must be really reassurring to know that they have TCAS and everyone is obliged to use their radio. Now, wouldn't that mess up things if there could be someone around in that G airspace, joining at 45 degrees on downwind for 32, without a radio or a transponder. But then again, that could be happening already..... Might be worth at least considering going round the same way as everybody else then.
Wheeler is offline  
Old 4th Oct 2003, 21:35
  #40 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Planet Plazbot
Posts: 1,003
Gaunty and the rest of the misguided. The Civil Air line is base 100% on the NAS. Not 2b but the NAS end state.

Hopefully you realise also that AK's ramblings about the superdoopper airborne radar run from the phone network (ADSB)installed in every plane at tax payers expense is just never EVER GUNNA HAPPEN!!!!


Lets think of this reasonably.

The government says that they are going to give a $5000 piece of equipment FREE!!!! to a person who can afford to buy their own plane just to make an usafe system safer (but less safe than 4/10/03)......


Ahahahahahahah


Hohohohohohohoho


We have people PEOPLE WHO VOTE IN GREATER NUMBERS THAN THE AOPA FLYING CLUB OF POCKET PROTECTORS AND COMB OVERS 4000 odd membership that have jack shiat. No car, rent assistance and no bulk billing. Your little gang is not quite the force that you think. A private aircraft is not a necessity. Health care is. Tax cuts are. Do you really think that after 1 report on A Current Affair ( a program that has been well and truely against your pin up boy) and a 15 second snipit on the news intro that the battlers that both sides of the fence want to see have a better standard of living will side with you? Pffft, sif.

Now is the time for you to stop trying to stop trying to get involved with things that you are not qualified to have input into. Please, the adults are talking, go back to the other room.


Delude your self some more AK, you will get the machinery, for free, and I hand you the flat earth society tag.....

rookie.
tobzalp is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.