Questions about the US from Australia
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Darraweit Guim, Victoria
Age: 65
Posts: 509
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Questions about the US from Australia
Like the US, many years ago we took our old airspace and picked ICAO letters to describe it, changing nothing. So everything looks the same here, but is completely different. We are now actually commencing a process of changing what we do to emulate the US system, but I (for one) are not convinced those driving the changes understand all the issues.
Either do I.
If you are interested in detail, check out THE PROPOSED CHANGES
Question 1. I was reading in "Flight" the FAA is recomending GA aircraft encountering GPS interference climb to 5,000ft, thus putting themselves within range of at least one VOR, and they will retain enuf VOR in the future to provide this back-up to GPS. Does this really give an indication of the VOR coverage in the US or am I being misled?
Question 2. This reference in AIH (Chapter 4. IFR Section 1. NAVAID Use Limitations ) seems to indicate that I can't clear a AC50 between, say, YMIA (VOR) and YHSM (Class H RBN 146NM away & outside radar coverage) unless the flight is RNAV equipped. Is this the case? Our rules only require a positive fix every 2 hours, which we separate with by assuming a maximum cross track tolerance of 30nm. It would also be entirely considered a pilot problem and ignored as a factor in clearance issue. Is this sort of restriction actually imposed?
Either do I.
If you are interested in detail, check out THE PROPOSED CHANGES
Question 1. I was reading in "Flight" the FAA is recomending GA aircraft encountering GPS interference climb to 5,000ft, thus putting themselves within range of at least one VOR, and they will retain enuf VOR in the future to provide this back-up to GPS. Does this really give an indication of the VOR coverage in the US or am I being misled?
Question 2. This reference in AIH (Chapter 4. IFR Section 1. NAVAID Use Limitations ) seems to indicate that I can't clear a AC50 between, say, YMIA (VOR) and YHSM (Class H RBN 146NM away & outside radar coverage) unless the flight is RNAV equipped. Is this the case? Our rules only require a positive fix every 2 hours, which we separate with by assuming a maximum cross track tolerance of 30nm. It would also be entirely considered a pilot problem and ignored as a factor in clearance issue. Is this sort of restriction actually imposed?
Moderator
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 802
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Kandahar Afghanistan
Posts: 539
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Questions about the US from Australia
Spodman,
Yes the VOR coverage in the US is that good with minor exceptions in some remote areas.
As for giving direct, we do it all the time if the acft is RNAV, GPS, or FMS equiped.
For an aircraft that is only A (alpha) equipped, I use the following rule. I will give direct to a fix outside of my airspace IF the acft can receive and navigate direct to the fix before it leaves my airspace. If the acft can not receive and navigate direct to the fix on its' own before leaving my airspace I am required to verbally coodinate the issued heading with the next facility and that the acft is direct when able.
In a non-radar situation we put acft on the airways or jetways, right altitude for direction of flight, and require position reports.
Mike
FWA
Yes the VOR coverage in the US is that good with minor exceptions in some remote areas.
As for giving direct, we do it all the time if the acft is RNAV, GPS, or FMS equiped.
For an aircraft that is only A (alpha) equipped, I use the following rule. I will give direct to a fix outside of my airspace IF the acft can receive and navigate direct to the fix before it leaves my airspace. If the acft can not receive and navigate direct to the fix on its' own before leaving my airspace I am required to verbally coodinate the issued heading with the next facility and that the acft is direct when able.
In a non-radar situation we put acft on the airways or jetways, right altitude for direction of flight, and require position reports.
Mike
FWA
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Darraweit Guim, Victoria
Age: 65
Posts: 509
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes Weasil, you had detected my slightly immoral multiple posting. Sorry.
Thanks for the info Mike. I take it your last comment means my situation just won't arise there because of navaid coverage?
Thanks for the info Mike. I take it your last comment means my situation just won't arise there because of navaid coverage?
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Kandahar Afghanistan
Posts: 539
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Spodman,
Because of occassional radar outages we do encounter some non radar situations so we put the acft regardless of equipment suffix on airways and we use position reports to keep track of them and to determine when to call the next facility with a non radar handoff. Granted GPS or RNAV equiped acft can give us better positions reports but we still utilize the airways during non radar situations.
When all the approach controls get STARS we will be able to mosiac from up to 12 different radar sites so non radar situations should occur a lot less.
We have several airports with 15 NM of our boundry that we descend arrivals to 5000' and many times the En Route center can't see the arrival so we will terminate radar service at our boundry and switch comm to the center. The center controller will block the airspace from 5000' on down until the acft cancels his IFR.
If you ever get the chance you really need to visit the US and come and see an En Route center, and Radar Approach Control to get a good idea how we operate here.
Mike
Because of occassional radar outages we do encounter some non radar situations so we put the acft regardless of equipment suffix on airways and we use position reports to keep track of them and to determine when to call the next facility with a non radar handoff. Granted GPS or RNAV equiped acft can give us better positions reports but we still utilize the airways during non radar situations.
When all the approach controls get STARS we will be able to mosiac from up to 12 different radar sites so non radar situations should occur a lot less.
We have several airports with 15 NM of our boundry that we descend arrivals to 5000' and many times the En Route center can't see the arrival so we will terminate radar service at our boundry and switch comm to the center. The center controller will block the airspace from 5000' on down until the acft cancels his IFR.
If you ever get the chance you really need to visit the US and come and see an En Route center, and Radar Approach Control to get a good idea how we operate here.
Mike
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Darraweit Guim, Victoria
Age: 65
Posts: 509
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Would love to, was there looking at old aircraft over a decade ago, but I see in the magazines theres lots more to see. Oshkosh one day.....
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Kandahar Afghanistan
Posts: 539
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Spodman,
I've worked at OSH for the past 3 years as a volunteer controller and I'm always awed by the vast number of aircraft that fly into OSH.
When the EAA and CAP volunteers counted the aircraft Tuesday night before the show on Wednesday they reported that we had 12,268 airplanes parked at OSH. All general aviation and camping parking was full, so airplanes were diverted to FLD, ATW, and MKE.
You just can't imagine what 12,268 airplanes parked at the same airport looks like until you actually see it. All I can say is save up your money and come and see OSH for yourselfs, it will be an experience of a live time that will make you the envy of your friends and future grand kids.
Next years show is going to celebrate the 100th aniversary of Flight. It is being billed that it will be the greatest gathering of acft ever!
Mike
I've worked at OSH for the past 3 years as a volunteer controller and I'm always awed by the vast number of aircraft that fly into OSH.
When the EAA and CAP volunteers counted the aircraft Tuesday night before the show on Wednesday they reported that we had 12,268 airplanes parked at OSH. All general aviation and camping parking was full, so airplanes were diverted to FLD, ATW, and MKE.
You just can't imagine what 12,268 airplanes parked at the same airport looks like until you actually see it. All I can say is save up your money and come and see OSH for yourselfs, it will be an experience of a live time that will make you the envy of your friends and future grand kids.
Next years show is going to celebrate the 100th aniversary of Flight. It is being billed that it will be the greatest gathering of acft ever!
Mike
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Desert
Posts: 22
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Spodman,
I moved over to the US in April after a fair amount of flying in Australia, and am still coming to grips with the differences. While my knowledge of the US system is obviously no where near as good as FWAs some things which may cause some 'hiccups' when Oz changes. Firstly is the amount of radar coverage. Apart from the coast and some isolated areas inland, I did not get much radar service back home. Over here I have not encountered a time when some one has not been watching me. This has probably made be a little lazier in my nav techniques! Although not sure about the rules, the company I fly for will not plan to fly out of coverage of a navaid. At times I have been told to track direct to a navaid which I can't pick up, but then all I have done is requested a vector until the aid comes in.
I have not been following the proposed changes back home. I hope it doesn't end up like the last one!!!
I moved over to the US in April after a fair amount of flying in Australia, and am still coming to grips with the differences. While my knowledge of the US system is obviously no where near as good as FWAs some things which may cause some 'hiccups' when Oz changes. Firstly is the amount of radar coverage. Apart from the coast and some isolated areas inland, I did not get much radar service back home. Over here I have not encountered a time when some one has not been watching me. This has probably made be a little lazier in my nav techniques! Although not sure about the rules, the company I fly for will not plan to fly out of coverage of a navaid. At times I have been told to track direct to a navaid which I can't pick up, but then all I have done is requested a vector until the aid comes in.
I have not been following the proposed changes back home. I hope it doesn't end up like the last one!!!
Moderator
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 802
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think you have made some good points.
In the USA most of the country is Class E Airspace from 1200' agl up to 17999' and then Class A above that.
This means that for most people every single IFR flight can be done without ever leaving controlled airspace, except for maybe the last 700 feet before landing at your destination.
In Australia there is more uncontrolled airspace then not.
There are thousands of VOR's over here, although GPS coverage will probably alleviate that difference in the future.
The amount of Radar coverage over here is a great deal more then in Oz also. I also have had more then one occasion where a vector has made up for not being able to receive a VOR yet.
It makes life very easy.
Weasil
In the USA most of the country is Class E Airspace from 1200' agl up to 17999' and then Class A above that.
This means that for most people every single IFR flight can be done without ever leaving controlled airspace, except for maybe the last 700 feet before landing at your destination.
In Australia there is more uncontrolled airspace then not.
There are thousands of VOR's over here, although GPS coverage will probably alleviate that difference in the future.
The amount of Radar coverage over here is a great deal more then in Oz also. I also have had more then one occasion where a vector has made up for not being able to receive a VOR yet.
It makes life very easy.
Weasil
