|
Wonder who is going to maintain it? Airservices normally maintain navaids. Also, if they are going to charge you $55 a time to use it, how will they know if you used it or not, or will it be assumed that if you are on an IFR plan and approach from the "Adelaide end" you used it (even if you did not)?
|
GBAS isn't a practical option for most non heavy jet operators but SBAS is and I believe it is belatedly on its way to this part of the world. Not before time.
|
Wrong way round or upside down!
|
Easy lads, break out at 200' with a 40 knot westerly, visual circuit at 200', and bingo land 27. :hmm:
|
The article states users will be charged $55 every time they make an “ILS landing”.... whatever one of those is. I’m trying to get my head around how they will know that their prized new ILS is being “used”. Does this mean you only get charged if met. conditions are below non precision minima? Or does an inbound call now have to include reading out your credit card number to allow someone to turn on the GP transmitter? And what if you do a missed approach and come back for another one do you get charged $110 for using it twice? Do training aircraft who make multiple practise ILS approaches with GAs and never actually land on 27 get to use it for free?
Conundrums of The Swamp. |
Maybe they just want to do lots of LOC backcourse training.
|
Originally Posted by lucille
(Post 10850479)
The article states users will be charged $55 every time they make an “ILS landing”.... whatever one of those is. I’m trying to get my head around how they will know that their prized new ILS is being “used”. Does this mean you only get charged if met. conditions are below non precision minima? Or does an inbound call now have to include reading out your credit card number to allow someone to turn on the GP transmitter? And what if you do a missed approach and come back for another one do you get charged $110 for using it twice? Do training aircraft who make multiple practise ILS approaches with GAs and never actually land on 27 get to use it for free?
Conundrums of The Swamp. |
I predict advances in location technology and autopilot logic will make ILS and the whole panoply of IFR operations redundant in a few years. Assuming straight forward design of the approach, any experimental bug smasher will have the capability-whether CASA and Airservices approves it or not. This phenomenon is called “being overtaken by disruptive technology”.
Anecdotally I’m told that some in the RV community already toy with IMC conditions without any approvals. |
Originally Posted by Ex FSO GRIFFO
(Post 10850095)
'History' repeating itself......... It reminds me of 'de good ole days' when the FSU that USED to be there was built......
Apparently, during construction, the foreman or whoever, got his N mixed up with his S, or L with R, or whatever, and the pad for the building was installed - the wrong way around. So they simply finished the construction, including the internal fit- out, and the MET had had the nice look out over the RWYS, whilst the FSO viewed the carpark and the lawn where the 'Stevenson Screen' was.! (Yeah, I am acutely aware that 'we' were not supposed to look out of the window anyway - but in locations where 'we' could, it certainly assisted in the occasional emergency... e.g. Dubbo (Upstairs) Derby (Upstairs), KAL - ground floor but BIG window installed especially....) Cheeerrrrssss (?):eek: Hi Griffo. Yep the view of the stevenson screen was truly a magnificent sight but my wife (not an FSO) and i enjoyed a great six years there. And for what its worth based on my time there RWY 27 was used significantly more than RWY 09. Fly safe and play hard (when you can) Cheers Hoss 58 |
Anecdotally I’m told that some in the RV community already toy with IMC conditions without any approvals. |
Originally Posted by megan
(Post 10850329)
Easy lads, break out at 200' with a 40 knot westerly, visual circuit at 200', and bingo land 27. :hmm:
|
Paying for a practice ILS is nothing new. I vaguely remember Essendon and Avalon charging GA aircraft for practice ILS's about 15 years ago (probably still the case now). Of course it's much easier to track who's doing the ILS when operating in CTA and charge them accordingly. I'd imagine in class G, you'd have someone listening on the CTAF frequency for inbound calls with a cash register till beside them.
|
Originally Posted by VH DSJ
(Post 10850574)
Paying for a practice ILS is nothing new. I vaguely remember Essendon and Avalon charging GA aircraft for practice ILS's about 15 years ago (probably still the case now). Of course it's much easier to track who's doing the ILS when operating in CTA and charge them accordingly. I'd imagine in class G, you'd have someone listening on the CTAF frequency for inbound calls with a cash register till beside them.
|
Originally Posted by George Glass
(Post 10850015)
GBAS , GLS and RNP are the future. Training new pilots to fly an ILS only is as useful as an NDB approach.
But , of course , this is Australia. Sigh............ |
Originally Posted by Alpine Flyer
(Post 10850647)
They are If only because you don’t need transmitter hardware to publish new approaches but ILS isn’t going to disappear anytime soon and needs to be trained. I fly around Europe and have a single Alpine airport where RNP is required for the approach.
If you had the choice why would you spend money on an ILS ? |
Mildura doesn't need an ILS. Qantas and Virgin proved that! :E
|
I slight drift here but anybody tell me what the approach was at NZQN pre RNP?
Copy of a chart would be of interest |
Don’t have a chart but from memory it was a VOR/DME with a 5.4% gradient and a stupidly high minima. Not for the faint hearted.
|
GLS in a Boeing is almost identical to an ILS with almost no training differences, except that it is a whole lot better . No beam interference and one station covers up to 30nm radius . And Cat III will be certified soon . Cost might be an issue now but I’ll bet there will be cheap MMRs for GA aircraft sooner rather than later. If you had the choice why would you spend money on an ILS ? |
The fact that Cat III doesn’t exist in Australia and that Cat II has only been introduced in the last couple of years has nothing to do with technology and everything to do with bureaucratic inertia and stupidity. The argument from AirServices and CASA for twenty years was that weather and traffic didn’t justify Cat II in Sydney and Melbourne. Until it did. We never lead. We are never proactive. Would be nice if just once we did something innovative. Do a google search and you’ll find that the anticipated market for MMRs is huge. Just not in Australia........
|
| All times are GMT. The time now is 15:35. |
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.