NAS rears its head again
Grandpa Aerotart
Read what I said again - I don't fly in US airspace - nor African. Africa is virtually all TIBA.
Been a while since you flew over India/Pakistan clearly - chances of meeting a light aircraft VFR no details over either country? Cannot happen. That is not to say you cannot die in that airspace, thank god for TCAS, but that is a matter of underfunded and terminally overloaded ATC system - India is a joke. I flew over India enroute Jeddah - home just a few days ago - utter nightmare, as is Saudi airspace. But there is no one airborne and unknown to the system - whether the system can find their details is a different thing.
Apparently one of our crews had a TCAS RA over India/Bangladesh/Burma (cant remember which) recently. That was because the system is underfunded/understaffed/broken and someone, NOT our crew, made a mistake - not a design feature as you would have in Australian airspace.
The ONLY complaints I hear about Oz ATC from international pilots are;
AsA PAY ATTENTION!!!
1/. Occasional 'Non standard' phraseology (Usually from Brits and what they usually mean is different to UK - who have their own differences from ICAO but that is ok)
2/. Overly complex departure clearances. Its simply bizarre that Australia doesn't have stop heights on SID charts like so many other countries. Clearance from LHR as an example would be "ABC cleared to XYZ, Dover 5 Golf, squawk 1234" rather than the complex, long winded nausea we get in Oz.
3/. Occasional TIBA airspace - simply no excuse.
4/. Being jumped on from a great height for being 2nm off track (say going around a CB without asking for a clearance in the middle of the GAFA) when the airway you're on is 20nm wide.
5/. The utterly bizarre cock up that is the BN STAR charts.
It is utterly incomprehensible to me that anyone could think a 2, 4 or 6 seat light aircraft should have right of way over a jet aircraft full of passengers but that is what E over D/around C actually is. The same volume of airspace being 'controlled' for IFR and uncontrolled for VFR is a nonsense. Its like being a little bit pregnant - a nonsense concept. The fact of unknown aircraft being in the same volume of airspace means the airspace is uncontrolled.
If the workload for an ATCer in a D tower/where ever is too high for C/D then that IS NOT and indication of a failure in airspace classification but of its management - it needs more eyes NOT 'ignoring' that fact by making some of the traffic invisible. That is exactly like a 5 yr old sticking his fingers in his ears and yelling lalalalalalalal.
It costs money to have the extra eyes I hear you say?
Well woohoo hand the man a lollipop
Its a sad fact of modern life that EVERY section of Govt/public service is overburdened with 'management' at the expense of competent service/coal face staff. Yes Minister was a documentary not a fictional comedy.
The industry DOES NOT exist to create non operational management positions at AsA.
E airspace is a 'get out of jail free card' for less than optimum human resources management. If having an A380 with 500 pax descending through airspace relying on TCAS to point out unknown light aircraft crisscrossing in front of that aircraft (why do I get a mental picture of a blind man crossing a freeway with a white cane?) and talking to no one is an example of 'worlds best practice' WTF is an example of worlds worst practice?
Clearly in the view of Dick et al having the A380/B737 in C airspace and the towelling hat brigade filing flight plans or being denied access to that airspace volume
Been a while since you flew over India/Pakistan clearly - chances of meeting a light aircraft VFR no details over either country? Cannot happen. That is not to say you cannot die in that airspace, thank god for TCAS, but that is a matter of underfunded and terminally overloaded ATC system - India is a joke. I flew over India enroute Jeddah - home just a few days ago - utter nightmare, as is Saudi airspace. But there is no one airborne and unknown to the system - whether the system can find their details is a different thing.
Apparently one of our crews had a TCAS RA over India/Bangladesh/Burma (cant remember which) recently. That was because the system is underfunded/understaffed/broken and someone, NOT our crew, made a mistake - not a design feature as you would have in Australian airspace.
The ONLY complaints I hear about Oz ATC from international pilots are;
AsA PAY ATTENTION!!!
1/. Occasional 'Non standard' phraseology (Usually from Brits and what they usually mean is different to UK - who have their own differences from ICAO but that is ok)
2/. Overly complex departure clearances. Its simply bizarre that Australia doesn't have stop heights on SID charts like so many other countries. Clearance from LHR as an example would be "ABC cleared to XYZ, Dover 5 Golf, squawk 1234" rather than the complex, long winded nausea we get in Oz.
3/. Occasional TIBA airspace - simply no excuse.
4/. Being jumped on from a great height for being 2nm off track (say going around a CB without asking for a clearance in the middle of the GAFA) when the airway you're on is 20nm wide.
5/. The utterly bizarre cock up that is the BN STAR charts.
It is utterly incomprehensible to me that anyone could think a 2, 4 or 6 seat light aircraft should have right of way over a jet aircraft full of passengers but that is what E over D/around C actually is. The same volume of airspace being 'controlled' for IFR and uncontrolled for VFR is a nonsense. Its like being a little bit pregnant - a nonsense concept. The fact of unknown aircraft being in the same volume of airspace means the airspace is uncontrolled.
If the workload for an ATCer in a D tower/where ever is too high for C/D then that IS NOT and indication of a failure in airspace classification but of its management - it needs more eyes NOT 'ignoring' that fact by making some of the traffic invisible. That is exactly like a 5 yr old sticking his fingers in his ears and yelling lalalalalalalal.
It costs money to have the extra eyes I hear you say?
Well woohoo hand the man a lollipop
Its a sad fact of modern life that EVERY section of Govt/public service is overburdened with 'management' at the expense of competent service/coal face staff. Yes Minister was a documentary not a fictional comedy.
The industry DOES NOT exist to create non operational management positions at AsA.
E airspace is a 'get out of jail free card' for less than optimum human resources management. If having an A380 with 500 pax descending through airspace relying on TCAS to point out unknown light aircraft crisscrossing in front of that aircraft (why do I get a mental picture of a blind man crossing a freeway with a white cane?) and talking to no one is an example of 'worlds best practice' WTF is an example of worlds worst practice?
Clearly in the view of Dick et al having the A380/B737 in C airspace and the towelling hat brigade filing flight plans or being denied access to that airspace volume
Last edited by Chimbu chuckles; 10th Apr 2010 at 08:27.
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: various areas
Posts: 225
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RotorB,
Exactly.
The disturbing part of all of this is that those who know jack all [the three amigo's] about the realities are 'apparently' leaning very heavily on faceless office types who are sometimes those that have never held a pilots licence, or flown in this type of airspace, let alone held an ATC licence, or provided the types of ATS services [knowing the practicalities and legalities] being discussed.
RotorB, Ozbus and like minded others, keep the factual content coming. People that count [decision makers] are watching, and listening
Exactly.
The disturbing part of all of this is that those who know jack all [the three amigo's] about the realities are 'apparently' leaning very heavily on faceless office types who are sometimes those that have never held a pilots licence, or flown in this type of airspace, let alone held an ATC licence, or provided the types of ATS services [knowing the practicalities and legalities] being discussed.
RotorB, Ozbus and like minded others, keep the factual content coming. People that count [decision makers] are watching, and listening
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: NT
Posts: 710
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
OZ and the rest of you (post 381), as I pointed out previously, from my perspective that is the end game. The pro-NAS boys are deliberately keeping quiet on this one because they think they've got a cunning plan and, if they can just keep quiet for a while, universal E over US D at all those other places will fall into their laps with little/no effort.
From where I stand there's an admirable degree of ratsh*t cunning with this plan that goes like this:
"We are getting E over D at BME and KTA. The directive is already out to convert GAAP to E over US D, and AV will be the same without any additional pot-stirring or lobbying on our part. Do not rock the boat at this stage - no need.
"Once we have these changes locked down, we then go into lobby mode. We point out that we now have a 'totally confusing' system, whereby we now have two completely different sets of procedures and airspace types operating across the 'non-major' airports. At BME, KTA, AV and all the ex-GAAPs, we have, 'safe,' 'proven' US airspace. Yet at places like AY, LT, HB, TW, AS, etc, etc we have 'unique' Australian, 'Galapagos' D with overlying C. Surely this is at the very least confusing and non-standardised, and at the very worst, dangerous.
"The obvious solution Minister (sucker), is to reclassify all those other ports as E over US D for 'standardisation.' Otherwise, the confusion will generate incidents/accidents and, Minister, 'you'll have blood on your hands,' or something equally dramatic - there's a certain amount of form here going back to NAS. The pressure will also be applied via the media, who don't know any better, and the gullible couch potato that is well-informed through his reading of the Tele and seeing 'aviation experts' on A Current Affair.
Believe me boys and girls, who drive the regionals and the heavy metal going into places like Coffs, Albury, Alice, Hobart, Launy and all those others, you're in the gun-sights and are about to be comprehensively snookered unless you get it in a pile right now.
If you don't, you'll be mixing it with uncontrolled VFR traffic to all of those 'country' destinations to which you fly.
As I said, in my opinion an 'admirable degree of ratsh*t cunning,' I dips my lid. But don't wake up one morning and claim you didn't see it coming - it will be too late!
Care to comment on my interpretation Lead?
From where I stand there's an admirable degree of ratsh*t cunning with this plan that goes like this:
"We are getting E over D at BME and KTA. The directive is already out to convert GAAP to E over US D, and AV will be the same without any additional pot-stirring or lobbying on our part. Do not rock the boat at this stage - no need.
"Once we have these changes locked down, we then go into lobby mode. We point out that we now have a 'totally confusing' system, whereby we now have two completely different sets of procedures and airspace types operating across the 'non-major' airports. At BME, KTA, AV and all the ex-GAAPs, we have, 'safe,' 'proven' US airspace. Yet at places like AY, LT, HB, TW, AS, etc, etc we have 'unique' Australian, 'Galapagos' D with overlying C. Surely this is at the very least confusing and non-standardised, and at the very worst, dangerous.
"The obvious solution Minister (sucker), is to reclassify all those other ports as E over US D for 'standardisation.' Otherwise, the confusion will generate incidents/accidents and, Minister, 'you'll have blood on your hands,' or something equally dramatic - there's a certain amount of form here going back to NAS. The pressure will also be applied via the media, who don't know any better, and the gullible couch potato that is well-informed through his reading of the Tele and seeing 'aviation experts' on A Current Affair.
Believe me boys and girls, who drive the regionals and the heavy metal going into places like Coffs, Albury, Alice, Hobart, Launy and all those others, you're in the gun-sights and are about to be comprehensively snookered unless you get it in a pile right now.
If you don't, you'll be mixing it with uncontrolled VFR traffic to all of those 'country' destinations to which you fly.
As I said, in my opinion an 'admirable degree of ratsh*t cunning,' I dips my lid. But don't wake up one morning and claim you didn't see it coming - it will be too late!
Care to comment on my interpretation Lead?
Folks,
See above, AIM Section 2, Controlled Airspace, Fig. 3-2-1, and explain to an obviously misinformed poor bloody RPT Captain how I transition from Class B (or maybe Class C, to upper airspace A, without transiting E???
Owen, if you have calmed down, maybe you can have a go.
Some of you who seem to think Karratha and Broome are some "thin edge of the wedge", congratulations, of course it is, another go at implementation of Government policy, as reflected in the White Paper, the Airspace Act 2007, the Airspace Regulations.
Whether you like it or not, that is Government policy, this Government have seen fit to continue with the policy of the previous Government, because it makes sense, because it is risk based, rather than "the traditional Australian controlled and uncontrolled".
Despite heavy lobbying, this Government has not seen fit to remove the radar requirement from C airspace, either, accepting the proposition that C should primarily be terminal airspace, not en-route airspace. That is, en-route airspace should be primarily A or E.
Owen, et al, you can jump up and down to your heart's content, but that's the what it is.
Will all this last minute furor change the outcomes at Karratha or Broome ---- I don't know, and won't know until the final decisions are made --- and I await the final outcome with great interest.
Will CASA OAR stick to the legislation or succumb to sectional pressure ----- Watch this space.
Tootle pip!!
See above, AIM Section 2, Controlled Airspace, Fig. 3-2-1, and explain to an obviously misinformed poor bloody RPT Captain how I transition from Class B (or maybe Class C, to upper airspace A, without transiting E???
Owen, if you have calmed down, maybe you can have a go.
Some of you who seem to think Karratha and Broome are some "thin edge of the wedge", congratulations, of course it is, another go at implementation of Government policy, as reflected in the White Paper, the Airspace Act 2007, the Airspace Regulations.
Whether you like it or not, that is Government policy, this Government have seen fit to continue with the policy of the previous Government, because it makes sense, because it is risk based, rather than "the traditional Australian controlled and uncontrolled".
Despite heavy lobbying, this Government has not seen fit to remove the radar requirement from C airspace, either, accepting the proposition that C should primarily be terminal airspace, not en-route airspace. That is, en-route airspace should be primarily A or E.
Owen, et al, you can jump up and down to your heart's content, but that's the what it is.
Will all this last minute furor change the outcomes at Karratha or Broome ---- I don't know, and won't know until the final decisions are made --- and I await the final outcome with great interest.
Will CASA OAR stick to the legislation or succumb to sectional pressure ----- Watch this space.
Tootle pip!!
Grandpa Aerotart
Whether you like it or not, that is Government policy, this Government have seen fit to continue with the policy of the previous Government, because it makes sense, because it is risk based, rather than "the traditional Australian controlled and uncontrolled".
"Well Minister what we are going to implement is a system where jet aircraft carrying lots of passengers at very high speeds will be climbing and descending in airspace where light aircraft being flown by pilots of unknown experience/standards with equipment of unknown serviceability will also be flying. They won't be talking to anyone and we wont even be sure they are on the correct frequency let alone whether their transponder is switched on or indeed accurate. Hell we wont even REALLY know if they are there at all. Think of it like a large blind man crossing a busy road in the middle of nowhere with his white cane tapping out in front of him - that is called TCAS. Its quite wonderful and it will save money"
"Excellent - Lets make it govt policy!!!!"
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Australia
Posts: 743
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Its interesting to note that one can fly up A461 and be out of radar VHF coverage by 200 DME DN, yet, once across the border, you are in both VHF and radar coverage to Honkers
Perhaps it about time the Government stopped throwing money away on useless whims, and got serious. Australia airspace designed to ICAO standards by Australian professionals would have cost a lot less to tax payers than this current fiasco.
The concrete mind set that says E is safer than procedural C shows a complete lack of knowledge how modern air transport operates.
Have to agree with the aerotart, that the whole concept is a complete nonsense.
Perhaps it about time the Government stopped throwing money away on useless whims, and got serious. Australia airspace designed to ICAO standards by Australian professionals would have cost a lot less to tax payers than this current fiasco.
The concrete mind set that says E is safer than procedural C shows a complete lack of knowledge how modern air transport operates.
Have to agree with the aerotart, that the whole concept is a complete nonsense.
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: various areas
Posts: 225
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
LeadSled
Oh no it is not. Government policy 'requires' proper process. That includes proper risk and CBA assessments.
That you and Mr Smith think you can blame the 'bureaucrats' after the fact is naively wrong. The whole saga is being well documented.
The Government is smart enough to know when plausible deniability no longer applies.
Last minute furor
not even close
Lets see if the patsy wakes up in time
another go at implementation of Government policy, as reflected in the White Paper, the Airspace Act 2007, the Airspace Regulations.
Whether you like it or not, that is Government policy
Whether you like it or not, that is Government policy
That you and Mr Smith think you can blame the 'bureaucrats' after the fact is naively wrong. The whole saga is being well documented.
The Government is smart enough to know when plausible deniability no longer applies.
Last minute furor
not even close Lets see if the patsy wakes up in time
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: NT
Posts: 710
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Apologies Lead, missed this on the first quick scan:
Thanks for the admission that there's a wider agenda.
As I said before boys and girls, don't say you didn't see it coming! (Post 386)
Some of you who seem to think Karratha and Broome are some "thin edge of the wedge", congratulations, of course it is, another go at implementation of Government policy, as reflected in the White Paper, the Airspace Act 2007, the Airspace Regulations.
As I said before boys and girls, don't say you didn't see it coming! (Post 386)
light aircraft being flown by pilots of unknown experience/standards with equipment of unknown serviceability will also be flying.
What is on the horizon? VLJs. Should get really interesting with little jets flying around VFR in E/G.
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: various areas
Posts: 225
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
LeadSled
Quote of the day 
Definition - 'sectional pressure' = media adverse politicians, and an ill-informed media tart.
Who would have thought we would agree on anything
Will CASA OAR stick to the legislation or succumb to sectional pressure ----- Watch this space
Definition - 'sectional pressure' = media adverse politicians, and an ill-informed media tart.
Who would have thought we would agree on anything
Join Date: May 2002
Location: australia
Posts: 606
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SOMEONE keeps going on that the problems occur close to the airport and that we should 'free' controllers up to deal with these problems closer in, by not distracting them by dealing with problems further away.
From a controllers point of view the reason that these problems occur closer to the airport or holding pattern is probably because they haven't been subject to positive control and dealt with further out.
As a general rule, if I don't have Plan A/B/ and C ready for my arriving jet, or turbo, sequence BEFORE top of descent I will be playing catch up.
In the same vein it could be argued that overruns are not because the PIC was not on a stable approach at Xft or X miles (or what ever the company mandates) but because he was too high or fast as he crossed the airport fence. In that case the pilot should assess his approach as he passes the airport fence and apply their judgement at that point.
In this case we should be putting our resources into arrestor hooks and netting as this is where the overruns occur.
I am not actually serious in case the 'triumvirate' decide to latch on and push this barrow with the Minister.
From a controllers point of view the reason that these problems occur closer to the airport or holding pattern is probably because they haven't been subject to positive control and dealt with further out.
As a general rule, if I don't have Plan A/B/ and C ready for my arriving jet, or turbo, sequence BEFORE top of descent I will be playing catch up.
In the same vein it could be argued that overruns are not because the PIC was not on a stable approach at Xft or X miles (or what ever the company mandates) but because he was too high or fast as he crossed the airport fence. In that case the pilot should assess his approach as he passes the airport fence and apply their judgement at that point.
In this case we should be putting our resources into arrestor hooks and netting as this is where the overruns occur.
I am not actually serious in case the 'triumvirate' decide to latch on and push this barrow with the Minister.
another go at implementation of Government policy, as reflected in the White Paper, the Airspace Act 2007, the Airspace Regulations.
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: NT
Posts: 710
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well, Bloggs, I agree with your views, but unless the guys in the eastern regionals, and those that operate into current C over D, get it in a pile, it will be 'all over red rover' (see post 386).
I know you carry the torch in the west, but this is going to be lost, comprehensively, if the likes of the RAAA don't start using a bit of muscle now in the east. Also AIPA, and a bunch of others, RFN.
The writing is on the wall guys and the clock is ticking. At the risk of boring you, go back to posts 386 and 394. Also Leads's admission that E over US D is the universal end-state (post 388).
If that doesn't put the breeze up you, nothing will, and you'll be staring out of limited vis cockpits, with 100+ punters down the back, looking for that Tobago north of Launy (that you don't actually know about!).
I know you carry the torch in the west, but this is going to be lost, comprehensively, if the likes of the RAAA don't start using a bit of muscle now in the east. Also AIPA, and a bunch of others, RFN.
The writing is on the wall guys and the clock is ticking. At the risk of boring you, go back to posts 386 and 394. Also Leads's admission that E over US D is the universal end-state (post 388).
If that doesn't put the breeze up you, nothing will, and you'll be staring out of limited vis cockpits, with 100+ punters down the back, looking for that Tobago north of Launy (that you don't actually know about!).
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: various areas
Posts: 225
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
LeadSled
It has been done to death before, however, lets do it again for the dummies:-
- US Class B is up to A080 or higher [few if any VFR in TRACON Radar E above that]
- US Class C is up to 4,500AGL [all VFR in TRACON E above are in radar covered Approach and Departures Terminal area airspace]
The Southwest Airlines 737 was within the Burbank/SOCAL [radar Approach and Departures] TRACON E airspace above the class C at the time of the accident
An awfully strong smell of blood in the water this evening [Australian Eastern Standard Time]
AIM Section 2, Controlled Airspace, Fig. 3-2-1, and explain to an obviously misinformed poor bloody RPT Captain how I transition from Class B (or maybe Class C, to upper airspace A, without transiting E???
- US Class B is up to A080 or higher [few if any VFR in TRACON Radar E above that]
- US Class C is up to 4,500AGL [all VFR in TRACON E above are in radar covered Approach and Departures Terminal area airspace]
The Southwest Airlines 737 was within the Burbank/SOCAL [radar Approach and Departures] TRACON E airspace above the class C at the time of the accident
An awfully strong smell of blood in the water this evening [Australian Eastern Standard Time]
Last edited by ARFOR; 10th Apr 2010 at 11:14.
Government policy includes the risk is to be as low as reasonably practical (ALARP).
E over D or C is not as low a risk as C over D or C and since it costs no more to have C than E, there is no point in having E at all.
E over D or C is not as low a risk as C over D or C and since it costs no more to have C than E, there is no point in having E at all.
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: NT
Posts: 710
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
topdrop,
Government policy also demands a rigorous cost/benefit study, but let's not complicate the issue.
If we can ignore those pesky requirements, we will. After all, what we want is 'proven' US airspace - what's a couple of GA/RPT MACs between friends?
The odds have to be 'vanishingly small' of similar occurrences here - I am sure you will agree.
Government policy also demands a rigorous cost/benefit study, but let's not complicate the issue.
If we can ignore those pesky requirements, we will. After all, what we want is 'proven' US airspace - what's a couple of GA/RPT MACs between friends?
The odds have to be 'vanishingly small' of similar occurrences here - I am sure you will agree.
Grandpa Aerotart
I remember Dick proudly announcing during the NAS Debates of several years ago that E=G (VFR) & C(IFR) as if that all made perfect sense.
I am sorry but that is the sort of logic I came to expect from my daughter when she was 13 and the hormones were just kicking into gear
I'll tell you, Dick, the same thing I told her. "Go to your room and don't come out until you have something sensible to say!!"
At least she would emerge from her room later and give me a big hug, tell me she loved me, and apologise. I don't want a hug Dick nor an assurance that you love me - just an apology and a promise you will be better behaved when you learn to cope with the hormone rush.
I am sorry but that is the sort of logic I came to expect from my daughter when she was 13 and the hormones were just kicking into gear
I'll tell you, Dick, the same thing I told her. "Go to your room and don't come out until you have something sensible to say!!"
At least she would emerge from her room later and give me a big hug, tell me she loved me, and apologise. I don't want a hug Dick nor an assurance that you love me - just an apology and a promise you will be better behaved when you learn to cope with the hormone rush.
