PPRuNe Forums

PPRuNe Forums (https://www.pprune.org/)
-   Australia, New Zealand & the Pacific (https://www.pprune.org/australia-new-zealand-pacific-90/)
-   -   Nas End State!!!end It Now!! (https://www.pprune.org/australia-new-zealand-pacific/109892-nas-end-state-end-now.html)

tobzalp 23rd Nov 2003 11:34

Nas End State!!!end It Now!!
 
This is what you are going to end up with at the end of all of this. End this [email protected] before the 27th.

http://www.dotars.gov.au/airspaceref...ryone/long.gif

Remember IFR are separated from IFR in E (ummmm what radar?) and VFR do as they please!

Jet_A_Knight 23rd Nov 2003 12:24

Not to mention that "VFR flights in Class E may be monitoring a different frequency"

Actually, the more you read the education material, the more you realise how dodgy the new system really is. I keep picking up holes in it each few pages.

No wonder the detailed info came out so late - it makes the cessation of this nonsense more time critical.

A gem is in the 'Merging Target Procedure' where:

- ATC may provide mutual traffic informaytion where radar returns merge with minimum vertical separation

-This is a courtesy to pilots





:ouch:

Douglas Mcdonnell 23rd Nov 2003 13:01

Well Done Tobzalp. The grapical demonstration only makes this system look more bizare and dangerous. An interesting asside, a mate of mine talked to the kings on the side at one of the CASA conferences. They expressed concern that while similar to the american system, the lack of radar voided a lot of the " benifits".

A dangerous degradation of the system indeed.

DM

NOtimTAMs 23rd Nov 2003 19:00

J-A-K

Quote

"VFR flights in Class E may be monitoring a different frequency"

So? That happens now, especially where several boundaries merge. And at least after 27/11 they're supposed to have transponders (for those lucky enough to have TCAS).

I've been rather fond of keeping a lookout in E even before NAS rears its head.

Safe Flying:ok:

NOtimTAMs

(PS - not picking on you, just that two recent posts caught my attention on the same day!):O

Keg 24th Nov 2003 05:57

It may happen now in some circumstances NTT but it will soon be happening to heavy metal on descent at speeds of about 300-400 knots TAS. :eek:

THAT increases the risk factor substantially. TCAS is a LAST line of defence, not the first line!

Stick Pusher 24th Nov 2003 11:23

Well all I can say is the cart before the horse! (or is it the other way around?)

Just look at it... The model is based on the US system apparently. When I sat for a PPL I had to do years ago, (another story), over there I seem to remember that rader went down to about 800 ft everywhere and they were more densely populated with a hell of a lot more flight service and control towers (don't even get me started on how an aircraft halfway across the continent can be on the same frequency in Australia!) Now what % of AUS does radar cover to that low level? Buggar all!

The system may perhaps work if they introduce the ADS-B (think that's what it's called) first. It's not radar but it's bloody close from what I hear it's suppose to do. Get the aircraft fitted with it, come up with units that will be affordable and easily fitted to all VH registered aircraft. And put in the 200 base stations, not the token 20 that will only give proper coverage to aircraft above FL300 who are in class A up there anyway!

Put the frequency boundaries back in, I mean not having them is just plain moronic to say the least.

See and be seen? I've had a A330 on TCAS and was looking in the area of sky to pick it up (1000ft above) and it wasn't until it filled our windscreen that I saw it (coming in from my 1-2 o'clock closing at over 500kts) Even with ATC giving info on it didn't pick it up until the last minute, so heaven help seeing something smaller! My point is that there are various reasons that sometimes you just can't pick up an aircraft visually (lighting, angle of closure, background behind the target, the sun, the bugs on the windscreen - whatever, even with TCAS to help and 2 pairs of eyes!) I agree Keg TCAS should be the last line but the way things go on out there especially OCTA, I know I'm glad I've got the extra support from it!

Just plain stupid!

And what ever happened to the customer always being right!

let's just put it off and say as is (even though that has some serious room for improvement!), until the datalink is FULLY in place then impliment the airspace to compliment it. What's the rush?

My 2 cents

SP

C182 Drover 24th Nov 2003 13:06

What is so different here in Australia? It works okay elsewhere. Come on NAS. :ok:

SM4 Pirate 24th Nov 2003 16:09

C182,

Where exactly?

missy 24th Nov 2003 16:18

C182,

And what exatly works elsewhere? We have alphabet airspace now so, all November 27 will bring is a half baked trial. It is a trial because NO-ONE is doing what we are proposing. We sadly go where NO-ONE has gone before. Why do I say that, because the infrastruture is different, the culture is different, the pilot training is different, nothing is EXACTLY the same.

100% N1 24th Nov 2003 20:58

Can someone explain to me why they're 'fixing' a system which was never broken?

tobzalp 24th Nov 2003 21:23

100% NT see sm4 pirates post in the other NAS thread. Backscratching.

WALLEY2 25th Nov 2003 00:20

tobzalp,
Query on your airspace chart. There is an extensive use of E class. I thought for the time being we were getting heaps of G class with IFR-IFR seperation provided?

Looking for the savings often quoted, I then supposed that rather than drastically rolling out E class the Implimentation Group would do some G to E then quote ICAO and stop seperation service for G Class and retrench ATC staff.

I further noted the compusary use of transponders in E class in Aus where it is not required in USA. Made me wonder if we may go for IFR-IFR notification not seperation and achieve more redundancies. ( pure speculation )

Surely the only serious savings can come by this means?


Not trying to be smart just an honest Question.

:hmm:

DickyBaby 25th Nov 2003 03:17

G Separation?
 
Walley2,

G Separation IFR - IFR - don't think so. At the moment we're providing IFR - IFR traffic advice but the ultimate end state is no services in G, which is in accordance with ICAO lettered airspace.

We are required to separate IFR from IFR in E and provide traffic advice on "known" VFR.

It's quite simple, we're improving the service by providing less for more money.

DB

Piper Arrow 25th Nov 2003 04:55

What is all the fuss with NAS we are not living back in the dark ages? :)

Whiskery 25th Nov 2003 05:43

Piper Arrow - you have hit the nail on the head. I will say, in fairness, when I first started operating into LAX I found the airspace "setup" a little disconcerting. That's because I was comparing it to Australian airspace & separation requirements.

Now, thirteen (13) years later, I can only put my original concern down to two things - different & new. NOT unsafe & dangerous.

AS I have stated on another thread, all will go ahead on the 27th and on the 28th, the sun will rise again.

Bart Ifonly 25th Nov 2003 06:41


What is all the fuss with NAS we are not living back in the dark ages?
I think some would have us go back to full reporting. They can't acknowledge that the US system, which has been working for years, has a better safety record than Australia with our unique system.:mad:

tobzalp 25th Nov 2003 07:23

Yeah thats right Bart. In Australia we have Jets get hit by light aircraft stooging around as they see fit so much more than the US. Glad we are going to get less now!

Take 1998 for example!

United States

January 9 - The crew of a Southwest Airlines 737 took evasive action after a TCAS warning advised an imminent collision with two smaller commuter-class planes over Los Angeles. Air traffic controllers reportedly observed all three targets merge at one point. All three aircraft landed safely. FAA officials are investigating.

January 24 - Two American Airlines flights reportedly came in close proximity with two smaller aircraft operating as skydiving taxis in the same airspace near Dallas-Fort Worth International Airport. One airliner received an onboard collision avoidance alert and took evasive action; the other airliner reportedly passed directly over one of the planes. FAA officials are investigating.

February 11 - A National Guard Chinook helicopter collided with a single-engine plane near Morgan Hill, California, killing the pilot of the plane. The Chinook was able to land safely, and no injuries were reported aboard the aircraft. The helicopter was flying in formation with another Chinook at the time of the collision, which occurred at the crest of a hill.

February 22 - Two single-engine planes collided over DeKalb, Illinois, killing both pilots aboard both aircraft. Weather was reported as clear at the time of the crash.

March 20 - All three aboard two light planes were killed after colliding over Corona, California. Wreckage from the aircraft fell on a condominium complex, which along with another residential building was consumed by flames. No injuries were reported on the ground. The collision reportedly occurred as one aircraft circled the Corona Municipal Airport in anticipation of the completion of runway repairs.

April 5 - A Cessna Citation and Cessna 172 collided over Roswell, Georgia, killing all five aboard both aircraft. Preliminary National Transportation Safety Board investigation indicates that the smaller plane did not have its transponder activated before the collision.

April 12 - A Delta Airlines flight came within close proximity of an unidentified aircraft near Reagan Washington National Airport. Both an air traffic controller and the aircraft’s onboard traffic collision avoidance system warned of an imminent collision, and the crew was able to initiate a steep climb. Officials were trying to identify the other aircraft.

May 18 - An unidentified aircraft reportedly nearly collided with a Northwest Airlines DC-9 as the Northwest flight departed Detroit Metropolitan Airport. FAA officials are investigating.

May 30 - A Cessna 172 seaplane collided with a sightseeing helicopter off Juneau, Alaska, killing both aboard the seaplane. The lightly damaged helicopter made a safe landing; five of the six aboard received minor injuries.

August 9 - A twin-engine Cessna and a Delta Airlines flight reportedly passed within 200 feet of each other northeast of Detroit. The Cessna reportedly was not operating with a working transponder, and was not in communication with air traffic controllers. The FAA is investigating the incident.

August 31 - A single-engine and twin-engine Cessna collided over Eau Claire, Wisconsin, killing two. The collision reportedly occurred in clear weather near the Chippewa Valley Regional Airport.

August 31 - A Delta Airlines L-1011 reportedly came within 8 seconds of a collision with an Alaska Airlines MD-80 at 25,000 feet over San Diego. An air traffic controller turned the flights at the last moment. A controller at the Palmdale facility controlling the planes reportedly called supervisors in to help with a staff shortage prior to the incident.

September 18 - A chartered WinAir 727 carrying members of the Brigham Young University football team took evasive action after its onboard collision avoidance system warned of impending collision with another aircraft while on approach to Boise, Idaho. Passengers reportedly saw the shadow of what was believed to be an A-10 Warthog operating out of the Mountain Home Air Force Base as the aircraft made its avoidance dive.

October 5 - Two helicopters operated by Petroleum Helicopters Inc. and Texas Air collided over the Gulf of Mexico off New Orleans, killing one and injuring one. No other details were available.

October 22 - The pilot of a U.S. Air Force F-16 ejected safely before his aircraft crashed northwest of Phoenix. The aircraft reportedly collided with another F-16 before the crash; the second plane reportedly made a safe landing at Luke Air Force Base.

November 12 - Two single-engine planes collided over Yerington, Nevada, killing all three aboard both planes. One plane crashed into the garage of a house, setting the house on fire. No injuries were reported on the ground.

November 21 - Two single-engine planes collided over a golf course in Phoenix, killing both pilots and seriously injuring a passenger. Preliminary investigation suggested a nose-to-tail collision.

December 1 - A Northwest Airlines jet and an Air Ontario flight reportedly passed in close proximity south of Albany, New York. Air traffic controllers saw both radar images merge and warned both flights of impending collision. Officials are investigating the possibility that the aircraft received TCAS instructions which put them into conflict.

December 6 - A British Caledonian L-1011 and a Delta Airlines 767 reportedly nearly collided off Long Island at 33,000 feet. Both flights took evasive action based on Traffic Collision Avoidance alerts. Air traffic controllers attributed the incident to a computer failure at Boston Center.

December 27 - A single-engine plane reportedly came within 30 seconds of colliding with a Continental Airlines jet near the fully-occupied Giants Stadium in East Rutherford, New Jersey. The pilot of the single-engine plane was reportedly disoriented and flying in restricted airspace before recognizing the impending collision and taking evasive action. Air traffic controllers instructed the Continental flight to stop its descent at that time.

(from here http://www.aero-farm.com/asi/98coll.htm)



Australia


?

Piper Arrow 25th Nov 2003 08:13

Bart, The ATSB reports as on the other thread @ http://www.atsb.gov.au/aviation/occu...ail.cfm?ID=490 tells it all about public transport and this under the present system. (It is presently unsafe).

Check out the other reports on the site it is an eye opener.

Come on NAS, we cannot wait for safer skys. :ok:

tobzalp 25th Nov 2003 08:20

Ok then Piper Arrow explain to me exactly how NAS 2b and its following Implementations are safer.

RB63 25th Nov 2003 08:43

Piper Arrow
Are you trying to wind us up? If not, what are you smoking, please share it around! “See and avoid” does not work with large aircraft. Imagine the following scenario: A 737 arriving into Hobart with a Piper Arrow on a recripical track in Class E airspace. The Piper Arrow is maintaining his required 1500M from cloud. With a combined closure speed of roughly 8NM per minute, you do the Maths! 1500M is roughly one mile, so the crew has 7 sec to see the Piper Arrow and take avoiding action. “But TCAS will save you”, I here you say. CRAP! TCAS is a last line of defence. How will the Piper Arrow know if his transponder is working? There is no radar in Tassie below flight levels, consequently no way of verifying the accuracy or operation of the Arrow’s transponder, apart from routine ground maintenance servicings. The aircraft I currently fly does not have TCAS, so I am completely rabbit fu#cked. The “big sky theory” does not work when aircraft are all using the same GPS solution for tracking.
:mad:


All times are GMT. The time now is 00:58.


Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.