Does the airline get a say in whether the TWR is open or not? I would have thought that those Terminal Nav costs (for a A320 at YBSU approx $1k = approx $5 a seat) would be passed on to the passenger. Be very interesting to see if a standard ticket is more expensive during the hours of operation of the TWR vs outside the hours. If it is the same, either JQ is absorbing the cost in the first instance (unlikely), or pocketing the difference in the second instance (more likely). The Firies are open early and the pax pay for that, and JQ would collect and pass it on via their nav fees.

Interesting incident. As others have highlighted, an operating Class D tower would have solved the problem.

Anyone that's thinks they would never find themselves potentially in a similar set of circumstances is a fool. Ctafs are problematic as anyone who has ever had the misfortune of trying to de-conflict in a high performance aeroplane.

j3

Flying RPT jets into CTAF's is f@cking bull****.

That should have been the ATSB summary.

use technology
 

there are loads of smaller airports with hardly any traffic, and there are loads of virtual towers now, where the controller is sat in a room looking at CCTV and radar screens miles away from the airport.

Sooo for CTAFs with RPTs why not have a single Australia wide virtual tower that can look after all these smaller fields at once. I understand workload could increase simultaneously at many, in which prioritise the airliners and have the others stay outside the zone until the controller can deal with it.

G

Single visual tower that can look after all these smaller fields at once. Can't see any issues, now which radio do I use for which field, which handset do I use for which field, or are you suggesting just a single frequency? Data transfer latency issues might be a bit of a problem.

Missy, +1. Tiddles, rediculous. Do you even know what we do in Australia?

Shows how highly skilled those aviators in WA are. How do they manage to successfully (mostly) separate each other in those dangerous CTAFs that are dotted around the Pilbara.

The folks piloting those 737, F100 and 717s are true skygods...

Some would call them brave... others would call them cowboys... I think we all agree they are simply hero’s of the sky...

Sky gods! Please. Try flogging around the Pilbara in an F28 in the middle of the wet at night, doing a NDB letdown. Landing at Broome, 1500m , during a cyclone,acontaminated... ask the Black Ant.
bob

With the next aircraft 400 miles away?? So all you had to focus on is flying the instrument approach accurately?? The workload has increased notably just because of the sheer volume of traffic. How many Jet operators were in Perth or Brisbane 20 years ago? How many 737/F100s went into CTAFS 3-4 times a day??

There is some truth to this and it really depends on the traffic mix. If most of the operators are professionals then I think you can get away with no ATC. However when you have large mix of aircraft types and a combination of Airwork/Medivac/Private/Rotory and Jet RPT the they need to bring in ATC.

The WA CTAFs are predominantly in the Pilbara, and the traffic is predominantly North-South bound jets, so not as difficult to mix with vs the likes of MCY where you have every aircraft type arriving and departing in every direction.

Throw in centre calling on one frequency while local traffic is simultaneously broadcasting on the other frequency then missing calls somewhere at somepoint is inevitable.

Agreed, but too to realistic to expect any change.

I’m sure it’s still the same now, but a few years ago it wasn’t unusual in the Pilbara on a Tuesday morning to have double digit numbers of 737/A320/Fokkers lobbing in and out of half a dozen airfields all within 50NM of each other, all uncontrolled. Throw in a few passing through charter or survey lighties, and it becomes a very busy and risky area to operate in.

ORIENTATION MAP - PILBARA MINE AREA, WESTERN AUSTRALIA

What a mess!

Now that IS a sight for sore eyes! :D

Would that be GM? You're being a bit harsh, IMO.

My point, over many years, exactly. And that is exactly what E airspace is all about. Two separate worlds operating in the same place and at the same time.

When taxiing, I've always thought calling on the CTAF first, then Centre second is a bad idea.

The sarcasm is noted but whenever I've done that type of flying it's usually only been two sectors, out and back to Perth, coming off rest and feeling reasonably refreshed before commencing those flights.

And that's a major difference. These guys were flying into a CTAF at night, possibly their 4th sector at the end of a long day. Fatigue would most likely be a contributing factor.

I genuinely struggle to understand the points you try to make, Cap’n, as I am very aware of how much experience you have.

The Centre frequency is the same for VFRs and IFRs in E, just as it is in any other class of airspace.

And the fact that an aerodrome’s CTAF is different from the ‘surrounding’ Centre frequency will remain a fact while ever the CTAF concept exists, irrespective of the class of the ‘surrounding’ airspace.

Round and round we go.

This and other threads such as the Mangalore accident thread can be summed up simply.
Non radar CTAFS are inherently dangerous.
The risk is acceptable when traffic volumes are low.
The risks are NOT acceptable for high capacity RPT jet traffic.
The Mola mola’s of this world are the problem, not the solution.
Remember , manned towers were REMOVED under the nut job DS regime at this and other airports.

Can we get real and move into the 21st century ?

LMAO! Very clever!!! :ok:

The “nut job DS regime” removed them in the context of the then-prevailing circumstances.

In any event, assuming the decision to remove them was the wrong one, why have they not been reinstated? The “nut job” regime has been gone for decades.

Quite so.....

Subsequent regimes have been incompetent.