Benalla six dead and $5,000 VOR reward
We all realise that the present system has many problems
I believe I can safely say that the widespread industry view here is that any airspace and related problems are the direct result of implementing changes of questionable benefit - cost and safety - that were unsupported, unpopular and forced upon it.
and all that we need to do to seal this deal with Dick Smith and the regulators
And well said, Quokka - spot on.
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 626
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Quokka
I do believe much of what you have said I commented on about 18 months ago.............and I was shouted down
ADSB if implimented properly and with decent staff levels (which we dont seem to have anyway) should be financially viable and provide better levels of coverage and safety.
I can see it, several others here can see it, so what do we need to do to sell the concept to those who need convincing? Maybe Quokka and HH and myslef can get together and make something happen apart from posting here for the next few years...
J
I do believe much of what you have said I commented on about 18 months ago.............and I was shouted down
ADSB if implimented properly and with decent staff levels (which we dont seem to have anyway) should be financially viable and provide better levels of coverage and safety.
I can see it, several others here can see it, so what do we need to do to sell the concept to those who need convincing? Maybe Quokka and HH and myslef can get together and make something happen apart from posting here for the next few years...
J
I'm in one of those moods
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: SFC to A085
Posts: 759
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
.. wheat from chaff
.
J .... the silent majority see it .. as do the those who 'own' the decisions .. the pollies do not want others running the agenda though ... it is particularly galling for them when they appear petty and bereft of effective solutions!
.. motherhood statements do not cut it any more with the general populous! .. the information age has ensured that anyone with an interest in a particular matter has all the info and resources they need at their keyboard finger tips to become informed, voice an opinion and influence change! …. tis true that opinions are like political election promises, plenty of them, most could be described as ‘non-core’ and never materialise post poll … the ones that do, generally involve political expediency and/or no defendable reason not to adopt policy X ... the latter is not so easy for pollies though, often the WBP proposals that have been publicly scrutinised through wide peer review, come not from them, but from within an industry! … don’t they hate not coming up with the goods on their own!
… governments cannot stomach others being able to collectively think for themselves in a ‘true’ democracy … no .. that would give rise to empowering people to use ‘considered’ free speech more often! 
.
Thankfully, there are many grass roots individuals and groups prepared to have open discussions when decisions are afoot! …. once bitten twice shy would seem to be a widely held view amongst our community when it comes to received wisdom from those with a dubious track record of decision making! …motherhood statements do not cut it any more with the general populous! … nor do repeats of the same discussion! … people know what is fact and what is self interested grand standing .. repeating garbage over and over again just further clarifies and galvanises the opinions of interested parties ... I guess that’s why pollies, and dare I say it some of the ‘traditional media’ are also uncomfortable with ‘two way’ discussions like these …no more one way received wisdom!
.
..on the subject ... 2c
.
.. a variance to ICAO and allow class D procedures (where surveillance exists and traffic warrants) in regional terminal and enroute airspace above A045 (or higher where WamLAT/ADS-B, terrain and approach commencement altitudes warrant) up to A105??
.
.. a variance to ICAO that enables VFR to cross/enter D once in receipt of either an airways clearance OR an acknowledgement from ATC … in other words, all that VFR need do is say ‘I’m here, going there, climbing/descending/maintaining X’ .. and unless they hear no reply or ‘remain OCTA’ they continue as intended or cleared.
.
- IFR/IFR Separation (defined minimum separation standards)
- IFR/VFR Segregation (traffic information or ‘separation’ as necessary dependant on traffic disposition and frequency loading)
- IFR have ATC protection from VFR
- VFR have ATC assistance for segregation and traffic information (workload permitting)
- ATC have an ability to manage VFR traffic levels for IFR and VFR protection
- Free for VFR
- Transponder mandatory in CTA above A045 (same as E)
.
.. best of all:-
.
- Maps need only define CTA and OCTA!
- CTA areas need only include line boundaries with the appropriate ATC freq to monitor (OCTA) or call (CTA) with a simple (S) after the freq to denote surveillance services, therefore removing pilot confusion surrounding Centre/Tower procedural and surveillance service provision differences
- VFR will (in all CTA cases) receive either separation, segregation or traffic information as appropriate (as determined by ATC at the time) .. so all they need to do in CTA is listen for traffic info and look for other VFR!
- IFR will receive separation OR segregation with traffic information on VFR .. so all they need to do is comply with the clearance and listen for traffic information!
- CTA airspace classification becomes transparent to pilots dramatically reducing the need to define, educate and understand different classes of CTA service to both IFR and VFR! …. Simplicity!
.
.. the only difference between this arrangement and the sort of utopia Dick describes is VFR using a radio in a very basic way. By doing so, giving ATC the ability to provide an appropriate service to ALL in CTA?
.
… in areas where CTA is warranted ... is it too much to expect VFR to be able to use a radio for the benefit of themselves, their pax, the IFR and their pax and the population centres on the surface below them?
..
In the not so distant future … CTA and OCTA will become much more comfortable for all with ADS-B (… as long as all traffic is on the same wavelength so to speak with no pun intended
)!
.
… so go on:-
- tell us why it won’t work
- tell us why it is not compatible with WBP
.
…and if so:-
- tell us why ‘ICAO’ E is safer, more cost effective and VFR friendly!
.
… it might be time for some to dust off their exit strategy’s! ….. signal spoofing has already been done unsuccessfully … so don’t use that one again Plse! 
.
J .... the silent majority see it .. as do the those who 'own' the decisions .. the pollies do not want others running the agenda though ... it is particularly galling for them when they appear petty and bereft of effective solutions!
.. motherhood statements do not cut it any more with the general populous! .. the information age has ensured that anyone with an interest in a particular matter has all the info and resources they need at their keyboard finger tips to become informed, voice an opinion and influence change! …. tis true that opinions are like political election promises, plenty of them, most could be described as ‘non-core’ and never materialise post poll … the ones that do, generally involve political expediency and/or no defendable reason not to adopt policy X ... the latter is not so easy for pollies though, often the WBP proposals that have been publicly scrutinised through wide peer review, come not from them, but from within an industry! … don’t they hate not coming up with the goods on their own!
… governments cannot stomach others being able to collectively think for themselves in a ‘true’ democracy … no .. that would give rise to empowering people to use ‘considered’ free speech more often! .
Thankfully, there are many grass roots individuals and groups prepared to have open discussions when decisions are afoot! …. once bitten twice shy would seem to be a widely held view amongst our community when it comes to received wisdom from those with a dubious track record of decision making! …motherhood statements do not cut it any more with the general populous! … nor do repeats of the same discussion! … people know what is fact and what is self interested grand standing .. repeating garbage over and over again just further clarifies and galvanises the opinions of interested parties ... I guess that’s why pollies, and dare I say it some of the ‘traditional media’ are also uncomfortable with ‘two way’ discussions like these …no more one way received wisdom!
.
..on the subject ... 2c
.
.. a variance to ICAO and allow class D procedures (where surveillance exists and traffic warrants) in regional terminal and enroute airspace above A045 (or higher where WamLAT/ADS-B, terrain and approach commencement altitudes warrant) up to A105??
.
.. a variance to ICAO that enables VFR to cross/enter D once in receipt of either an airways clearance OR an acknowledgement from ATC … in other words, all that VFR need do is say ‘I’m here, going there, climbing/descending/maintaining X’ .. and unless they hear no reply or ‘remain OCTA’ they continue as intended or cleared.
.
- IFR/IFR Separation (defined minimum separation standards)
- IFR/VFR Segregation (traffic information or ‘separation’ as necessary dependant on traffic disposition and frequency loading)
- IFR have ATC protection from VFR
- VFR have ATC assistance for segregation and traffic information (workload permitting)
- ATC have an ability to manage VFR traffic levels for IFR and VFR protection
- Free for VFR
- Transponder mandatory in CTA above A045 (same as E)
.
.. best of all:-
.
- Maps need only define CTA and OCTA!
- CTA areas need only include line boundaries with the appropriate ATC freq to monitor (OCTA) or call (CTA) with a simple (S) after the freq to denote surveillance services, therefore removing pilot confusion surrounding Centre/Tower procedural and surveillance service provision differences
- VFR will (in all CTA cases) receive either separation, segregation or traffic information as appropriate (as determined by ATC at the time) .. so all they need to do in CTA is listen for traffic info and look for other VFR!
- IFR will receive separation OR segregation with traffic information on VFR .. so all they need to do is comply with the clearance and listen for traffic information!
- CTA airspace classification becomes transparent to pilots dramatically reducing the need to define, educate and understand different classes of CTA service to both IFR and VFR! …. Simplicity!
.
.. the only difference between this arrangement and the sort of utopia Dick describes is VFR using a radio in a very basic way. By doing so, giving ATC the ability to provide an appropriate service to ALL in CTA?
.
… in areas where CTA is warranted ... is it too much to expect VFR to be able to use a radio for the benefit of themselves, their pax, the IFR and their pax and the population centres on the surface below them?
..
In the not so distant future … CTA and OCTA will become much more comfortable for all with ADS-B (… as long as all traffic is on the same wavelength so to speak with no pun intended
)! .
… so go on:-
- tell us why it won’t work
- tell us why it is not compatible with WBP
.
…and if so:-
- tell us why ‘ICAO’ E is safer, more cost effective and VFR friendly!
.
… it might be time for some to dust off their exit strategy’s! ….. signal spoofing has already been done unsuccessfully … so don’t use that one again Plse!
Ohcirrej
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: This is the internet FFS.........
Posts: 2,921
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
One more time for the people down the back 
Originally Posted by Scurvy
motherhood statements do not cut it any more with the general populous!
