Gentleman,

Please take heart and RELAX. There is no need for an investigation by BASI and no need for disquiet about the NAS.

Boyd is on the job and has spoken to the lighty pilot involved and he said there was no risk.

Boyd said this is a beat-up and as the president of the ASA one can only assume he is totally impartial. He would therefore let natural justice occur and let a properly qualified and appointed investigation team determine the cause(s) of the incident, but in this case he has conducted a quick investigation and is totally satisfied. So lets stop quibbling.

As an occasional reader of PPRune I was sufficiently appalled by the posting from Boyd Munro regarding the "airmiss" that I registered in order to respond. I cannot believe that someone who uses the title President AIR SAFETY AUSTRALIA decides on the basis of having 'spoken' to one of the pilots involved that the event was no of consequence. I wish that my air safety investigations could be resolved so easily and so quickly. Does Mr Munro have any formal training as an investigator - in any capacity? I suggest that he leaves the investigation to the professionals and reserves his comments and opinions until the outcome is determined. I doubt that any Australian genuinely concerned with air safety would agree that 200FT separation between a RPT aircraft and a bug smasher in the circumstances described in the incident should be considered acceptable.

I am disappointed that pro-NAS members have yet to present a case that shows how the NAS does not reduce safety.

I have a genuine interest; not being the burning bush, maybe I have missed something and I await to be enlightened.

Personally, I believe the whole thing has a few too many holes, and relies on the wrong thing, including the big sky and luck. The instigators figure that if they stay quiet, then the dissent wil go away (typuical of this current government).

Also, the attitude of many (but not all, thankfully) of the recreational/casual users of Australian airspace has been absolutely appalling - too lazy to learn the procedures and use them properly, and hence expecting the rest of us to 'dumb it down' to an unsafe level. Yet there is no answers to proper questions except accusations of fear of change and of being 'luddites'. It's a pity that envy can be so prevalent.

Also, why are the airlines so quiet about it? Scared to scare off business? If the pilots are so against the new system, what are they doing WITHIN THEIR OWN ORGAnISATION to bring some pressure to bear that the companies make a full and proper representation to the minister/public?

My biggest worry is that it will take the loss of an airliner to nake the problem 'obvious'.

Winstun - the MAN!
 

Natit - Winstun burst onto this forum some time ago in a blaze of glory with no less than 7 throbbing 12 inch APTLs hanging between his legs and testicles that had a degree in 'Combat Surgery'. He seems to have a similar psycological profile as everyone's good buddy - 411a.

He is also best friends with Kaptin M !!!! :=

Sorry Kaptin, couldn't resist :E

Winstun,
Can you answer my question, when was the last time you were delayed or refused a clearance by ATC, and what do you base your judgement of air traffic controllers in australia on. Some specifics would be nice rather than just sprouting some drival about what a slack bunch we are.

Dear Bob the Builder, Licences alone do not make one a Professional.

No

You are right. professional is an attitude, not displayed by the majority of '4 barrers' and ATC on here. Give Boyd a break and tackle the issue, people might listen then.

I have over the last 5 days flown some 20 hours in 'questionable' VFR weather on the Qld East Coast, VFR, mostly on top, and nearly all the way in E.

I monitored Center. I asked Center for 'non-standard' levels to get over some Cu. I got them. Very helpful and professional.

I moved around where necessary to avoid RPT. I got 'alerted see and avoid' on multiple targets and in every case saw them pass.

I got weather from center and passing traffic and the odd comment on NAS (all on the very quiet 'center' frequency). Very professional.

I got assistance finding the centerline in 'special' VFR and got where I wanted to, in E, very safely, aided all the way by very professional ATC and fellow pilots.

I guess you lot all work in Victoria hey :E

Pat

Pat

Question

1.Why did you need to ask ATC for non standard levels if you were VFR in E - you were not subject to a clearance.

2. if the weather was "questionable" is it not IFR weather? How do you expect people in high speed jetc to see you if you are dodging clouds?

3. What do you do in non radar e where you will NOT get radar advisories, alerted see and avoid - which I might add you got despite NAS because you are encouraged NOT to speak on centre frequencies.

And finally - what are the safery benefits to ALL users of the airspace of NAS?

Pat

You said

"I moved around where necessary to avoid RPT. I got 'alerted see and avoid' on multiple targets and in every case saw them pass."

Question
How did ATC alert you to traffic?

Answer
They used their radar of course.

Thats fine Pat, please stay in radar coverage, because when I leave 10 thousand on descent into LT, HB or AS, ATC aren't able to help as to traffic, as we are outside of radar coverage, nor can the towers at these fields provide traffic unless VFR traffic have called up and reported their position and intentions.

When (note when not if) the crunch of metal occurrs, it will be interesting to see how the Minister, CASA and Airservices will justify the their safety case in court. Hopefully it will only be few lives lost in a lightie and not 130 pax and crew in a 73.

Dog
 

My prediction is that when the crunch occurs, the pilots concerned will be villified for failing to See and AVOID :mad:

DirectAnywhere-my hero
 

Well spoken. Just heard something on ABC news this morning about looking incidents involving failure of equipment (transponders?) or incorrect use thereof. Comment was also relating to "appropriate" use of ALL equipment on aircraft. Could this also mean using TCAS as the primary means of separating rather than a last line of defence? I wait with baited breath, but don't hold out much luck. There is always much activity but not much productivity when it comes to NAS investigations- something about making the report fit the required conclusion I think. Oh how I hate myself for being so cynical
:yuk: