Merged: New UNICOMS – how are they going?
 

The Airservices Australia provided UNICOM at Wagga has now commenced and I understand that the Dubbo UNICOM will commence shortly.

Does anyone have any experience operating into these airports with the UNICOMs? Most importantly, are the UNICOMs actually giving a worthwhile traffic information service?

Also, does anyone know what the UNICOM operator is being paid, and how much the cost is per day or per week for the service?

I know the word is that these guys are being hidden away in offices .. so they can't see the runways!

I can't see them providing too much added value ... other than repeating what pilots have already said on the CTAF(R)

A Dubbo UNICOM. Well, I never. Only took 17 years to replace the FSU...

Pay is about $25 per hour and they have limited hours per day so they are not being paid very much at all.

I guess some local retired FSO's are reliving the good ol'days.

heh, heh. Many moons ago in a remote Flight Service Unit in WA I noticed a significant number of pilots reporting arrival (ie. clear of the runways) while still within the runway strip, and on the odd occasion while backtracking! I collected some instances over a week or two and put them into a memo to the unit boss. The sole feedback I got from above was a very terse phone call from the standardisation & licencing drone who (very directly) informed me my job was to listen to the radio and look at the strips. It was not my job to look out the window, and this was the reason 'new' FSU (still building back then) all had windows facing the car park rather than the runways.

'Glad' to hear the tradition continues...

Back to the thread though, would also like to hear how it is going. I do amateur CAGRO/UNICOM myself and really don't have much idea of how much use the service is from the users point of view.

I've operated in to Wagga. A totally superfluous service. Waste of time, money and airwaves. Professional aircrews are (generally) perfectly capable of working it out themselves. Unicom is simply repeating information already passed by ATC or other aircraft.

Not serving any purpose, IMHO, than getting in the way.


Inbound.

Thanks Inbound I was about to say:

ATC: RXA667 IFR traffic, EA2136 Dash8, 10 miles behind same track as yourself, also WA267 taxiing Wagga for Finley.

RXA667: RXA667 switching CTAF talk to ya on the ground.

RXA667: Wagga Wagga traffic RXA667 IFR Saab 20 miles to the north east.............

WG CAGRO: RXA667 IFR traffic EA2136 Dash8........

RXA667: Thinking........No sh!t sherlock

:D

En-rooter,

To be fair ... first, it's a Unicom, not CAGRO ... there's a big difference.

Secondly, their real reason for being is to tell your Rex friend about bugsmashers that, obviously, Centre has no idea about.

Having said that, I still don't think they can add any REAL value ... unless they can see the runways.

The cynical amongst us might think that Airservices is setting them up to fail:ugh:

What's in it for Airservices? Bugger all, your Honour ...

Unicoms
 

G'day "Jump...."

Pls ch yr pm's........:ok::ok:

UNICOM, Flight Service and uncontrolled aerodromes.
 

There are a number of these in Oz and Godzone and listening to comments I can only conclude that many users are less than enthused about them though there is, admittedly, a significant group of supporters too!

What is everyone's thoughts on these?

Peuce,

Oops! (about the CAGRO/UNICOM)

And got sick of typing so didn't mention the VFR's ATC give traffic on! Radar coverage taken into account of course.

En-Rooter,

So, say at Wagga, you guys give traffic on IFRs into and out of the aerodrome and all VFRs (that you can see on radar).

It follows that the only parts of the traffic jigsaw missing are the VFRs at low level, i.e. more or less the circuit area ... which is the bit that the Unicoms aren't allowed to see.... where's the value?

I like the one at AYE who mumbles so much that they had to put out a notam saying the unicom freq was hard to hear and good only on short range.

nig not nog

I like the one at AYE who mumbles so much that they had to put out a notam saying the unicom freq was hard to hear and good only on short range
Ning and nong...how the hell you get that from the Notam is beyond reasoning

No recycling!
 

Dick. Are you trying to build your credentials for another leap into the aviation limelight? Your posts are popping up all too regularly of late! Considering that many of the ailments plaguing the provision of ATC services and regulation in Australia were started by you, surely it is time for you to continue keeping right out of the control room!? We need completely 'new blood' at the top of the Govt. Aviation Departments. I hope the new Minister doesn't fall for your latest attempt at becoming 'relevant'. Aviators beware!

Been into ardmore a few times in the past, and it all seems to come down to which bugger is on watch at the time. Ardmores Uniscum is based in the old tower so they can see everything, all it seems to do is add to congestion by letting every bloody private pilot within 100 miles do a radio check on the discreet freq!

One other thing I noticed that I didn't like, is that if Unicom jumped in to let traffic know there had been 'two at once' they would often then tell one of the a/c to go ahead first - usually some dick asking for a radio check. Never mind the bloke on short final with a cherokee lining up in front of him, and what if it had been a mayday/pan call from the unheard a/c?

I know it serves a purpose, and is ideal to have someone available to push the panic button at busy ad's but you do just wish they'd shut up sometimes.

As the ground bit of an air-ground network, if you hear the squealie noise of two-in-together, and just announce "two in together", in the majority of occasions it is followed by another sqealie noise. If you can pick anything out of one of the transmissions (hopefully the first to start) you tell THAT one to go ahead, or standby if you think it is a radio check. It seems rather touching that pilots over there have an interest in whether their radios work or not, nobody here seems to give a bugger

Diseaseal, there are automatic systems available that would avoid most of those issues and leave the aerodrome frequency to the aircraft but where could one spark the interest in to making a change?

Dubbo Unicom
 

I flew into Dubbo on Tuesday evening and to my inbound call got "Dubbo Unicom" - just like an AFRU. Weather information was obtained from VOR frequency. Rex and a Navajo followed me 5 mins later and arranged their own separation. When I departed 30 mins later Unicom had gone home. I saw no value add from Unicom.

No doubt when Airservices complete their trials it will be deemed to be a success - its in their interest for it to be seen as such. From most reports the unicom service is NOT what is required to address traffic congestion at regional airports and that's no surprise given the restrictions of MOS part 139 - it was never going to work at busy aerodromes. The few pilots that like the service might change their mind when they find out that they will have to pay for it after the trials are completed.

What bothers me is that CASA have been very quiet on this issue - they are still the regulator of airspace aren't they ? !!! Isn't it CASA who should be conducting an independent survey into the success or otherwise of unicom services ? Airservices are no different than any other private business enterprise and their own internal "surveys" will be meaningless given their vested interest in making unicom a profitable business venture.