Sunshine Coast Airport Jetstar Mess
If, however, JQ says they do not want to have the tower on duty because (in the Australian system) they have to pay for it,
Interesting incident. As others have highlighted, an operating Class D tower would have solved the problem.
Anyone that's thinks they would never find themselves potentially in a similar set of circumstances is a fool. Ctafs are problematic as anyone who has ever had the misfortune of trying to de-conflict in a high performance aeroplane.
j3
Anyone that's thinks they would never find themselves potentially in a similar set of circumstances is a fool. Ctafs are problematic as anyone who has ever had the misfortune of trying to de-conflict in a high performance aeroplane.
j3
Join Date: Sep 2019
Location: yorkshire
Posts: 7
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
use technology
Sooo for CTAFs with RPTs why not have a single Australia wide virtual tower that can look after all these smaller fields at once. I understand workload could increase simultaneously at many, in which prioritise the airliners and have the others stay outside the zone until the controller can deal with it.
G
Single visual tower that can look after all these smaller fields at once. Can't see any issues, now which radio do I use for which field, which handset do I use for which field, or are you suggesting just a single frequency? Data transfer latency issues might be a bit of a problem.
Shows how highly skilled those aviators in WA are. How do they manage to successfully (mostly) separate each other in those dangerous CTAFs that are dotted around the Pilbara.
The folks piloting those 737, F100 and 717s are true skygods...
Some would call them brave... others would call them cowboys... I think we all agree they are simply hero’s of the sky...
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Australia
Age: 68
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sky gods! Please. Try flogging around the Pilbara in an F28 in the middle of the wet at night, doing a NDB letdown. Landing at Broome, 1500m , during a cyclone,acontaminated... ask the Black Ant.
bob
bob
Sky gods! Please. Try flogging around the Pilbara in an F28 in the middle of the wet at night, doing a NDB letdown. Landing at Broome, 1500m , during a cyclone,acontaminated... ask the Black Ant.
bob
bob
Flying RPT jets into CTAF's is f@cking bull****. That should have been the ATSB summary.
Last edited by neville_nobody; 13th Jun 2020 at 02:29.
The WA CTAFs are predominantly in the Pilbara, and the traffic is predominantly North-South bound jets, so not as difficult to mix with vs the likes of MCY where you have every aircraft type arriving and departing in every direction.
Throw in centre calling on one frequency while local traffic is simultaneously broadcasting on the other frequency then missing calls somewhere at somepoint is inevitable.
Agreed, but too to realistic to expect any change.
Throw in centre calling on one frequency while local traffic is simultaneously broadcasting on the other frequency then missing calls somewhere at somepoint is inevitable.
Flying RPT jets into CTAF's is f@cking bull****.
That should have been the ATSB summary.
That should have been the ATSB summary.
I’m sure it’s still the same now, but a few years ago it wasn’t unusual in the Pilbara on a Tuesday morning to have double digit numbers of 737/A320/Fokkers lobbing in and out of half a dozen airfields all within 50NM of each other, all uncontrolled. Throw in a few passing through charter or survey lighties, and it becomes a very busy and risky area to operate in.
ORIENTATION MAP - PILBARA MINE AREA, WESTERN AUSTRALIA
What a mess!
ORIENTATION MAP - PILBARA MINE AREA, WESTERN AUSTRALIA
What a mess!
Originally Posted by Lapon
Throw in centre calling on one frequency while local traffic is simultaneously broadcasting on the other frequency then missing calls somewhere at somepoint is inevitable.
When taxiing, I've always thought calling on the CTAF first, then Centre second is a bad idea.
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 751
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Shows how highly skilled those aviators in WA are. How do they manage to successfully (mostly) separate each other in those dangerous CTAFs that are dotted around the Pilbara.
I’m sure it’s still the same now, but a few years ago it wasn’t unusual in the Pilbara on a Tuesday morning to have double digit numbers of 737/A320/Fokkers lobbing in and out of half a dozen airfields all within 50NM of each other, all uncontrolled. Throw in a few passing through charter or survey lighties, and it becomes a very busy and risky area to operate in.
The Centre frequency is the same for VFRs and IFRs in E, just as it is in any other class of airspace.
And the fact that an aerodrome’s CTAF is different from the ‘surrounding’ Centre frequency will remain a fact while ever the CTAF concept exists, irrespective of the class of the ‘surrounding’ airspace.
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Melbourne
Age: 68
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Round and round we go.
This and other threads such as the Mangalore accident thread can be summed up simply.
Non radar CTAFS are inherently dangerous.
The risk is acceptable when traffic volumes are low.
The risks are NOT acceptable for high capacity RPT jet traffic.
The Mola mola’s of this world are the problem, not the solution.
Remember , manned towers were REMOVED under the nut job DS regime at this and other airports.
Can we get real and move into the 21st century ?
This and other threads such as the Mangalore accident thread can be summed up simply.
Non radar CTAFS are inherently dangerous.
The risk is acceptable when traffic volumes are low.
The risks are NOT acceptable for high capacity RPT jet traffic.
The Mola mola’s of this world are the problem, not the solution.
Remember , manned towers were REMOVED under the nut job DS regime at this and other airports.
Can we get real and move into the 21st century ?
Round and round we go.
This and other threads such as the Mangalore accident thread can be summed up simply.
Non radar CTAFS are inherently dangerous.
The risk is acceptable when traffic volumes are low.
The risks are NOT acceptable for high capacity RPT jet traffic.
The Mola mola’s of this world are the problem, not the solution.
Remember , manned towers were REMOVED under the nut job DS regime at this and other airports.
Can we get real and move into the 21st century ?
This and other threads such as the Mangalore accident thread can be summed up simply.
Non radar CTAFS are inherently dangerous.
The risk is acceptable when traffic volumes are low.
The risks are NOT acceptable for high capacity RPT jet traffic.
The Mola mola’s of this world are the problem, not the solution.
Remember , manned towers were REMOVED under the nut job DS regime at this and other airports.
Can we get real and move into the 21st century ?
In any event, assuming the decision to remove them was the wrong one, why have they not been reinstated? The “nut job” regime has been gone for decades.
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Melbourne
Age: 68
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Subsequent regimes have been incompetent.