Jetstar and Ballina again
Maybe when writing to these heads/bodies, an extra line should be added "I will be archiving your response to my raising of this issue for any future inquiry or coroner investigation, regards xxx"
While I don't disagree that a tower may be warranted at Ballina, the cost of operating there will increase. Secondly the access to the airport will be curbed significantly, especially in the case of IFR training, I assume RPT flights would be given priority meaning private and training flights will be restricted in what they can do around those arrival times. One thing that class D does not do is increase efficiency of the airspace, especially non radar, so do not expect an increase in traffic handling as a result, most likely the opposite.
Then the 'way forward' is clear: Put every airport in Class G, to reduce costs and increase convenience.
News.com.au have picked up on the Jetstar v Jab report. Doesn't say much beyond what we already know and no commentary about the lack of a Tower, but it's 'out there' at least...
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 265
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
While I don't disagree that a tower may be warranted at Ballina, the cost of operating there will increase. Secondly the access to the airport will be curbed significantly, especially in the case of IFR training, I assume RPT flights would be given priority meaning private and training flights will be restricted in what they can do around those arrival times. One thing that class D does not do is increase efficiency of the airspace, especially non radar, so do not expect an increase in traffic handling as a result, most likely the opposite.
If introducing class D would decrease the capacity or efficiency of the airport, then it most certainly should not be class G, because by definition, that would mean that the class G is currently operating with less than appropriate separation standards.
News.com.au have picked up on the Jetstar v Jab report. Doesn't say much beyond what we already know and no commentary about the lack of a Tower, but it's 'out there' at least...
Previously, the airspace around Ballina was “non-controlled”, meaning aircraft were required to fly by “see-and-avoid principles” – meaning they watch for other traffic and monitor radios to stop collisions.
The article also says this, in quotes:Vacuous piffle. If ATSB said that, ATSB is busted.
I assume RPT flights would be given priority meaning private and training flights will be restricted in what they can do around those arrival times.
Of course, in Australia, few people will utter the airspace classification that dare not speak its name: E
Then the 'way forward' is clear: Put every airport in Class G, to reduce costs and increase convenience.
Maybe your suggestion has merit, but the reality is that controlled airspace is supposed to coordinate the traffic, not curb the amount, it's just our current systems make it extremely inefficient due to cost cutting mostly. If the class Ds had the facilities and staff to coordinate the traffic it would almost work. However the airservices version of a class D 'service' is one controller, no radar and some silly stars and sids that make no sense and nobody uses.
Isn't Air Services the world's best air navigation services provider? Or is it second best?
Also the other point I was alluding to is nothing is stopping the local operators from getting together and forming some agreements with the airlines. Ie, not to do training in RPT arrival times, run an awareness program with locals to avoid peak times, where not to fly and so on. Why?, because if the locals can sort out some sort of sharing of the airspace and coordinate it's capacity it may ensure they don't end up with an enforced restrictive system that bludgeons GA out of the airspace when RPT is near. Its not always the sole responsibility of the powers that be to dictate what has to be done, which inevitably will not favor private or training flights.
Isn't Air Services the world's best air navigation services provider? Or is it second best?
Of course the rest of the world recognises ASA as the second best, you know the punchline!
Last edited by tossbag; 29th Mar 2022 at 14:57.
Originally Posted by Tossbag
It would become like any other Class D Metro, bookings required for airwork, VFR's will get ****** over.
Ever operated frequently into the real Class D towers, Tossbag, to see if this actually happens? Or are you speculating?
The VFR's get absolutely shafted in this country when it comes to Class D in particular (although the one I'm flying most into recently is doing a good job, probably because prior to the covid lockdowns coming off they pretty much only dealt with lighties). 'Have you got a plan in the system?' Ask any VFR how often they've got a clearance over the top of Melbourne, Sydney or Brisbane, in particular prior to covid.
There was a report done on an accident that killed two people in the not too distant past, I doubt it will see the light of day, it was scathing on the part two officers played in denying a clearance.
And I reckon we swap logbooks if you want? I'll bet I've flown into more Class D, real ones, and whatever other ones you're suggesting exist. I can also supply my log in for the airwork bookings if you like?
I have raised the issue of CTAFs before with said bodies and the replies are much the same, if people follow the rules, communicate, have trans on, then then what’s the problem. In a perfect world I get the point, however CTAF is largely full of training or low hour pilots. No criticism to them, I was one of those many years ago. However my problems in recent times are things like old mate in the circuit who is not maintaining said height for his class of aircraft and is moving into my territory. Turning base at Ballina I was cut off by someone first solo with no radio call, turning final oh shit there he is in front for me for now number 1. I lost patience and we got out of the place and starting holding until they could sort themselves out. Having an argument with another pilot on the CTAF on why they want the the whole circuit with his students to use the tailwind direction, with 80T me wanting into the wind. People in the training area who turn the volume down whilst they conduct all sorts of air work with me asking questions and no reply. The list goes on and on. My hair gets less and less.
Needless to say we brief like the shit is always going to hit the fan before we enter these areas.
Needless to say we brief like the shit is always going to hit the fan before we enter these areas.
Thank f*#k they’ve buggered off.
I had a question from a RA machine once whilst on final for 06, ‘Are you exiting at Bravo, we are wanting to do a touch and go’. No I said, we are a Airbus A320 180 seat Jet 70T we will require full length and backtrack.
Backtracking and having them continue approach to see if I can get off in time. I told them I was exiting off Alpha, I was concerned that they could potentially clip me at the rear if I hadn’t cleared the runway completely if we went off B. Needless to say I lodged a report over that one. Nothing came from that, I guess legally nobody did anything wrong, just people pushing boundaries which is a no go in my book, and my training department also.
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: Abeam Alice Springs
Posts: 1,110
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The Ballina problem is not about to go away anytime soon as the politics within both Airservices and CASA (not to mention the Department of Transport) are not addressing the real problem for reasons that I believe are cost and ego related. (certainly not safety)
The clear answer is a Class D tower, with appropriate surrounding airspace. It is said that the tower at Broome cost around $4M, but you might expect some of that would be location related. The tower with the lowest traffic numbers when I last looked was Hamilton Island. Many locations are down due to Covid which is to be expected. The traffic issues at these D locations may well be related to the fact that there is no parallel taxiway, and the tower is needed to control runway access more than perhaps keep aircraft separated in the vicinity(?) – all part of the job.
Under the present Act only ASA can provide ATC services. There is no provision for private contractor/s to be able to provide services such as for a class D tower. Many suggest that if this was so, then the service could be provided somewhat cheaper. Obviously, this is where politics and the Dept get involved as without any recommendations from the Dept the pollies will do nothing. They don’t seem to know much about the subject anyway?
As many would be aware, the Office of Airspace Regulation (OAR) was formed within CASA by the Airspace Act 2007. There were many changes that resulted from that time where previously airspace was managed by ASA. The initial years of the OAR were a bit rough as those within tried to change the way of the world. Changes to the way it worked have occurred over the past few years, but it seems that some senior managers in CASA (outside the OAR) have their own idea on how things should work and are perhaps sympatric to ASA not wanting to spend the money and build a tower at Ballina, or anywhere else for that matter.
It is understood that the OAR spent some time at Ballina in recent months to observe traffic etc, but the results of that mission seem to be buried in the bowls of CASA. One must ask if the CEO is even aware of what is going on in this regard? Has the Dept been made aware of the true situation?
There have been discussions since the formation of the OAR that it should be within the Dept of Transport as the obvious filtering of ideas and information within CASA do not appear to be contributing to what CASA is allegedly all about – SAFETY.
ASA, I understand have three or four portable towers, which have been used at Parafield and at Mangalore amongst other locations. Backdoor discussions re an ASA tower at Ballina suggest that ASA have said it would take four years to set up and commission. One of their portable towers should be able to be up and running within maybe four months. Airspace redesign in the area could be kept simple with a small CTR and Class E above. I am sure the users and industry would be happy to be consulted about that.
ASA need to be TOLD by CASA that is what is required before there is a smoking hole in the ground. Nothing less should be acceptable.
Maybe this is the time to push for a change to the Act to allow for organisations/s other that ASA to provide an ATC service.
The clear answer is a Class D tower, with appropriate surrounding airspace. It is said that the tower at Broome cost around $4M, but you might expect some of that would be location related. The tower with the lowest traffic numbers when I last looked was Hamilton Island. Many locations are down due to Covid which is to be expected. The traffic issues at these D locations may well be related to the fact that there is no parallel taxiway, and the tower is needed to control runway access more than perhaps keep aircraft separated in the vicinity(?) – all part of the job.
Under the present Act only ASA can provide ATC services. There is no provision for private contractor/s to be able to provide services such as for a class D tower. Many suggest that if this was so, then the service could be provided somewhat cheaper. Obviously, this is where politics and the Dept get involved as without any recommendations from the Dept the pollies will do nothing. They don’t seem to know much about the subject anyway?
As many would be aware, the Office of Airspace Regulation (OAR) was formed within CASA by the Airspace Act 2007. There were many changes that resulted from that time where previously airspace was managed by ASA. The initial years of the OAR were a bit rough as those within tried to change the way of the world. Changes to the way it worked have occurred over the past few years, but it seems that some senior managers in CASA (outside the OAR) have their own idea on how things should work and are perhaps sympatric to ASA not wanting to spend the money and build a tower at Ballina, or anywhere else for that matter.
It is understood that the OAR spent some time at Ballina in recent months to observe traffic etc, but the results of that mission seem to be buried in the bowls of CASA. One must ask if the CEO is even aware of what is going on in this regard? Has the Dept been made aware of the true situation?
There have been discussions since the formation of the OAR that it should be within the Dept of Transport as the obvious filtering of ideas and information within CASA do not appear to be contributing to what CASA is allegedly all about – SAFETY.
ASA, I understand have three or four portable towers, which have been used at Parafield and at Mangalore amongst other locations. Backdoor discussions re an ASA tower at Ballina suggest that ASA have said it would take four years to set up and commission. One of their portable towers should be able to be up and running within maybe four months. Airspace redesign in the area could be kept simple with a small CTR and Class E above. I am sure the users and industry would be happy to be consulted about that.
ASA need to be TOLD by CASA that is what is required before there is a smoking hole in the ground. Nothing less should be acceptable.
Maybe this is the time to push for a change to the Act to allow for organisations/s other that ASA to provide an ATC service.
