Originally Posted by VH-FTS (Post 11288360)

It's actually disgraceful that Airservices can't provide an air traffic service. I'm also surprised the media hasn't caught wind that aircraft are flying through airspace with no air traffic control (not even the level of service that Class G has).

Originally Posted by Stretch06 (Post 11288581)

Heard on the grapevine that a JStar flight SYD-MKY turn back mid flight when suddenly advised of the NOTAM of TIBA. Why Mackay Tower couldnt take responsibliity for the airspace above them (as they have up until very recently) is beyond me.

Originally Posted by das Uber Soldat (Post 11288587)

Seems unlikely. We can fly through tiba provided it's announced after dispatch.

Originally Posted by PoppaJo (Post 11288591)

SYD-MKY not a Star route

Originally Posted by Stretch06 (Post 11288629)

Maybe not SYD then, but a JStar enroute to MKY turned back instead of deal with the TIBA airspace.

Originally Posted by Stretch06 (Post 11288581)

Why Mackay Tower couldnt take responsibliity for the airspace above them (as they have up until very recently) is beyond me.

Originally Posted by aussieflyboy (Post 11288604)

And if you had an RA or worse as you transited through that airspace how do you think the company would react…? How do you think the general public would react to 200 people being killed if you thought “ah she’ll be right, let’s just go through it”

Originally Posted by Lookleft (Post 11288761)

DUS, you might want to aquaint yourself with the OM1 requirements for operating into TIBA. The crew going to MKY obviously did.

Originally Posted by Lookleft (Post 11288761)

DUS, you might want to aquaint yourself with the OM1 requirements for operating into TIBA. The crew going to MKY obviously did.

Originally Posted by das Uber Soldat (Post 11288911)

Had another look, still happy. PIC decision.

edit : Fair point in regard to my first post though, its correct to say a diversion is more likely than not, if you have the fuel. So fair play.

Originally Posted by MickG0105 (Post 11288932)

For those of us up the back in the cheap seats, could I trouble either of you to explain this a bit further please.

Originally Posted by das Uber Soldat (Post 11288933)

I said at the start of the thread that I thought a turn back was unlikely if TIBA airspace was activated whilst already in flight. TIBA being deactivated controlled airspace, essentially class G with no ATS services. Usually the result of staff shortages in ATC.

Our manuals allows us to fly through TIBA if its activated after takeoff, however they do say the PIC should divert it able to avoid it. So my original comment isn't accurate.

Originally Posted by das Uber Soldat (Post 11288723)

Same way they'd react anytime I flew through any other kind of uncontrolled airspace? Which is almost every day?

Or are you telling me you have a habit of flying halfway to Ballina and then turning around? If a crew were to turn around instead of proceed nobody would bat an eye. In my experience with TIBA at the star, most people have forged on. I see no issue with either decision.

Originally Posted by aussieflyboy (Post 11289205)

You don’t honestly think TIBA airspace above 10,000 is the same as Class G do you? Do you understand what the difference is? You are aware that class G has speed requirements, ATC support amongst others things and TIBA does not.

Originally Posted by aussieflyboy (Post 11289205)

It’s significantly safer and more predictable organising separation going into Paraburdoo where you have generally standard radio calls and positions and your doing a speed where you’ll be able to see traffic…

Originally Posted by Lookleft (Post 11289374)

DUS, all good but I know what would happen if I elected to continue, given the option of a turnback, and a TCAS RA occurred in the TIBA airspace. Our management is not known for its grace when the pineapple option is always available.

Originally Posted by Lapon (Post 11289288)

Regardless of whether one can/should operate TIBA, is anyone in Australia paid enough to think 'this airspace is normally required to be controlled, but since ATC are short staffed I'll wear the risk and liability to get the job done'?

No thanks, turn back and let the airlines and airservices squabble over it.
Then again, Im not inclined to go the extra mile at the best of times.

Originally Posted by KRviator (Post 11288574)

Goes to show we don't really need en-route & approach controller's, eh? I mean, if it is safe now without them, even temporarily, then it is still safe without them on a permanent basis, yes? Ain't no such thing as temporary safety, it's like your missus being pregger's, she either is or she isn’t

Originally Posted by DROPS (Post 11303848)

Is anyone listening?

Pilots are concerned about the safety of increased reliance on uncontrolled airspace due to temporary air traffic controller shortages ... the issue was unprecedented, worsening and increasing risks to the point some airlines were delaying flights. AusALPA (& AFAP) president and Qantas Link pilot Captain Louise Pole told The Australian some airlines were delaying flights rather than operate while TIBA was in place. “It (TIBA) means the workload for a pilot is a lot higher and that makes your job harder, and it does create more risk because you are not operating in a normal (situation).” She said in 30 years of flying, she had not flown TIBA until two weeks ago, and had since flown it twice, most recently on Monday. Civil Air Australia president and #airtrafficcontroller Tom McRobert said 120 controllers had taken early retirement under the program, reducing “resilience” to deal with staffing issues. He said the scheme had arguably cut twice as many as was wise and this was the “root cause” of the use of TIBA. “We are seeing more TIBAs in the last six months than I’ve ever seen in my nearly 20 years (in the job)". Airservices Australia #AirServices #trafficcontrol #aviation #ausalpa