Separation issue involving Boeing 737, VH-VXH, and Airbus A320, VH-VGV, near Darwin
Perhaps RAAF resources have been diverted to this project Deployable Air Traffic Solutions
Perhaps 452 Squadron isn't operating with a full complement of personnel.
Perhaps 452 Squadron isn't operating with a full complement of personnel.
The following users liked this post:
Except that it was a military airport first, and always has been. Maybe the Civvies should move to a civil airport if they are that concerned with the way it's run...........Oh wait.
DCA.
And….
It’s either Commonwealth owned or it’s … Commonwealth owned.
Playing pass-the-risk-parcel between Commonwealth entities for risks in Commonwealth airspace and on Commonwealth-owned airports is so very Australian.
It’s either Commonwealth owned or it’s … Commonwealth owned.
Playing pass-the-risk-parcel between Commonwealth entities for risks in Commonwealth airspace and on Commonwealth-owned airports is so very Australian.
If they won’t relinquish control then drop the ongoing Restricted Area nonsense and declare it a permanent CTAF after hours.
The following users liked this post:
Yes and no. DCA took over air traffic control responsibility at Darwin's military aerodrome from the RAAF when civil operations moved there during the 1950's (from the nearby Parap Aerodrome).
DCA.
DCA.
96% of movements at YPDN are non-military. I’m sure they’d cope with an Airservices tower. Whilst AA may have issues in enroute centres at least they can keep their 24/7 towers actually open 24/7.
If they won’t relinquish control then drop the ongoing Restricted Area nonsense and declare it a permanent CTAF after hours.
If they won’t relinquish control then drop the ongoing Restricted Area nonsense and declare it a permanent CTAF after hours.
Control services or completely GTFO and have a pure ctaf not this half baked BS
The following users liked this post:
And if `YPDN was a CTAF at night between 1230 and 2030 who would you like to provide the IFR traffic info, etc?
RAAF DN or BN Centre?
and what service would that be?
- like MNG CTAF,
- Ballina.SFIS
- like RAAF Darwin Flightwatch as per TRA
- None of the above…feel free to nominate service desired
RAAF DN or BN Centre?
and what service would that be?
- like MNG CTAF,
- Ballina.SFIS
- like RAAF Darwin Flightwatch as per TRA
- None of the above…feel free to nominate service desired
GF, either RAAF DN or BN Centre, however BN CTR would be preferable given the poor standard of Flight Information Service+DTI provided by the RAAFie (assuming she was RAAF) on the night in question.
The service would be the same as that provided at hundreds of other standard Class G+ plus CTAFs we have in Aus.
But as I said before, I suspect that Internationals can't/won't operate into Class G/CTAFs (International JQ was inbound just after this non-event) so the powers that be had to come up with something else (that ended up being more convoluted).
The service would be the same as that provided at hundreds of other standard Class G+ plus CTAFs we have in Aus.
But as I said before, I suspect that Internationals can't/won't operate into Class G/CTAFs (International JQ was inbound just after this non-event) so the powers that be had to come up with something else (that ended up being more convoluted).
The following users liked this post:
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: I prefer to remain north of a direct line BNE-ADL
Age: 48
Posts: 1,286
Likes: 0
Received 33 Likes
on
10 Posts
Oztronauts can whinge all they like here but the fact was it’s F,ing Class G, there is no f’ing separation requirements, so it’s a non issue, ATSB should not be investigating loss of separation as it was Class G, unless there was a TCAS event. It is that simple….
Oztronauts can whinge all they like here but the fact was it’s F,ing Class G, there is no f’ing separation requirements, so it’s a non issue, ATSB should not be investigating loss of separation as it was Class G, unless there was a TCAS event. It is that simple….
sunnySA is correct. It’s not G. It’s a Romeo.
Since when did anyone need an ‘approval’ or ‘authority’ or the ‘c’ word to enter class G? I’ve heard the ‘c’ word used when an aircraft is going to temporarily leave G then return to controlled airspace, but never to merely enter G. Who is required to be equipped with TCAS in G?
There are plenty of places that are advertised as being G outside TWR HRS. This isn’t one of those places.
Your question: “What the hell is it then?”, points up part of the problem, albeit inadvertently I suspect.
Since when did anyone need an ‘approval’ or ‘authority’ or the ‘c’ word to enter class G? I’ve heard the ‘c’ word used when an aircraft is going to temporarily leave G then return to controlled airspace, but never to merely enter G. Who is required to be equipped with TCAS in G?
There are plenty of places that are advertised as being G outside TWR HRS. This isn’t one of those places.
Your question: “What the hell is it then?”, points up part of the problem, albeit inadvertently I suspect.
Originally Posted by AoA
Oztronauts can whinge all they like
The following users liked this post:
Interesting, what is the performance "standard"?
I've listened to 30 minutes or so around the "occurrence" and then another 30 minutes from a couple of nights later, and the R/T of FLIGHTWATCH is very different, as is the R/T of a number of the flight crew.
If we applied LOSA and NOSS to TRA operations (impossible I know), then I'm sure we'd discover vast differences in the way individual pilots, and Flightwatchers operate.
LOSA
NOSS
LOSA and NOSS are both based on the Threat and Error Management (TEM) framework.
What are the threats? What are the errors?
Has an Australian airline conducted LOSA on the flight into DRW? Has RAAF (or AsA) conducted NOSS for airspaces operating TIBA?
I've listened to 30 minutes or so around the "occurrence" and then another 30 minutes from a couple of nights later, and the R/T of FLIGHTWATCH is very different, as is the R/T of a number of the flight crew.
If we applied LOSA and NOSS to TRA operations (impossible I know), then I'm sure we'd discover vast differences in the way individual pilots, and Flightwatchers operate.
LOSA
NOSS
LOSA and NOSS are both based on the Threat and Error Management (TEM) framework.
What are the threats? What are the errors?
Has an Australian airline conducted LOSA on the flight into DRW? Has RAAF (or AsA) conducted NOSS for airspaces operating TIBA?
Interesting, what is the performance "standard"?
Originally Posted by MIssy
I've listened to 30 minutes or so around the "occurrence" and then another 30 minutes from a couple of nights later, and the R/T of FLIGHTWATCH is very different
I doubt that LOSA would apply here; I understand LOSA is more of a systemic assessment of the overall operation of a company, not a individual incident investigation. That said, it should have been risk-assessed and procedures published (as Iccy has mentioned).
What are the standards used by RAAF Flightwatch? There's no such thing in the civil sphere anymore.
Flight Information service is a service provided for the purpose of giving advice and information useful for the safe and efficient conduct of flights.
(ICAO Annex 11: Air Traffic Services)
A flight information service may be provided on its own or in conjunction with an air traffic control service.
Flight information service includes the provision of pertinent:
-SIGMET and AIRMET information;
-Information concerning pre-eruption volcanic activity, volcanic eruptions and volcanic ash clouds;
-Information concerning the release into the atmosphere of radioactive materials or toxic chemicals;
-Information on changes in the serviceability of navigation aids;
-Information on changes in condition of aerodromes and associated facilities, including information on the state of the aerodrome movement areas when they are affected by snow, ice or significant depth of water;
-Information on unmanned free balloons; and,
-Any other information likely to affect safety.
as well as information concerning:
-Weather conditions reported or forecast at departure, destination and alternate aerodromes;
-Collision hazards, to aircraft operating in airspace Classes C, D, E, F and G;
-For flight over water areas, in so far as practicable and when requested by a pilot, any available information such as radio call sign, position, true track, speed, etc., of surface vessels in the area.
So, the relevant ones appear to be "in conjunction with an air traffic control service, "any other information likely to affect safety" and "collision hazards, to aircraft operating in airspace Classes C, D, E, F and G".
I'm not sure we (collective we) have established the class of airspace, G plus TCAS?
More likely the individual differences in technique, experience, interpretation, projection, prioritisation, judgement.
DASA
But DASA is responsible for enhancing and promoting the safety of military aviation. This is achieved through a Defence Aviation Safety Program (DASP), which supports compliance with statutory safety obligations and assures the effective management of aviation-safety risks. (my bolding)
