NAS Chart simplification! why, why, WHY?
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 70
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sadly very very true Lowdown!
I must admit however that I like the choice of colours one now has in VTCs.
For those who like the traditional look we have the blue ocean, red R & D areas, brown Class E, yellow built up areas, white base background and barely readable frequencies. For those who are more adventurous you can choose the option of the purple ocean, purple R & D areas, Purple/brown Class E, baby sh!t orange built up areas, grey background and unreadable frequencies (just to name a few).
I now see where the savings in NAS are. Quality Control!
What a disgrace!!!
I must admit however that I like the choice of colours one now has in VTCs.
For those who like the traditional look we have the blue ocean, red R & D areas, brown Class E, yellow built up areas, white base background and barely readable frequencies. For those who are more adventurous you can choose the option of the purple ocean, purple R & D areas, Purple/brown Class E, baby sh!t orange built up areas, grey background and unreadable frequencies (just to name a few).
I now see where the savings in NAS are. Quality Control!
What a disgrace!!!
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 81
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthr...0&pagenumber=6
LeadSled
I've only made a few posts so I don't feel the need to order a Personal Title and help support PPRuNe
posted 27th October 2003 17:49
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
All,
Have a good look at Australian FLYING magazine for November/December.
There is a whole supplement on the NAS 2b procedures and recommendations for NOV 27 and on, and it all looks pretty simple and straightforward to me. As simple as flying in US.
There has been a lot of angst about timetables for getting Training and Educational packages out, but here is the guts of it, in the magazines.
Flying folks are starting to receive the chart package in the mail now, I'm told there is lots more on the way, but the info. in FLYING Nov/Dec issue really illustrates that there is no great hurdle to jump, to cope with life in the new world order.
I guess that we will all learn to live with the demise of the "fly by mouth" system of aviating, again !! ( in joke only inderstood by geriatric Qf types)
Tootle pip!!
LeadSled
I've only made a few posts so I don't feel the need to order a Personal Title and help support PPRuNe
posted 27th October 2003 17:49
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
All,
Have a good look at Australian FLYING magazine for November/December.
There is a whole supplement on the NAS 2b procedures and recommendations for NOV 27 and on, and it all looks pretty simple and straightforward to me. As simple as flying in US.
There has been a lot of angst about timetables for getting Training and Educational packages out, but here is the guts of it, in the magazines.
Flying folks are starting to receive the chart package in the mail now, I'm told there is lots more on the way, but the info. in FLYING Nov/Dec issue really illustrates that there is no great hurdle to jump, to cope with life in the new world order.
I guess that we will all learn to live with the demise of the "fly by mouth" system of aviating, again !! ( in joke only inderstood by geriatric Qf types)
Tootle pip!!
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Emerald, Vic, Aust
Posts: 183
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'M HAPPY WITH THE NEW CHARTS
I have no complaint with the new charts.
The ERC has the detail I need for monitoring any area frequencies.
AirServices intends to add useful tips like the Kilmore AWIS on the next chart VTC release so you know there is an AWIS at the critical location and can use it to ensure you can get thru.
They are also considering putting a biscuit box with the correct freq near Wilsons Prom and Cape Otway for those over water crossing sked arrangements noted in the ERSA.
They will also be cross referencing the AERIS and AWIS sections of the ERSA to assist VFR pilots to get their enroute met themselves.
Sorry to non-Victorians who don't know the area but the above message is that the charts may actually be more helpful downstream.
We spent the weekend in N/E Victoria - lovely wine - and never called on the area freq coming or going. No reason to. Had a listen on the area freq but otherwise checked Benalla to make sure the gliders and us were separated, Yarrawonga CTAF as we had 7 aircraft over the Lake and wanted to keep clear of the 2 operating at Yarrawonga, and also Yarra Valley CTAF that was quite active before I dropped in to Lilydale. Same messag as NASIG - the activity was concentrated around the CTAFs. Then the CTAF again at my home base so I didn't have one of the parachutists use the Airvan as a set of airbrakes.
As far as remote areas is concerned, I am happy to take personal responsibility for what survival gear I carry on ANY flight. I don't need some bureaucrat to tell me that a line on the map takes me from safe to unsafe or vice versa. Much of Victoria is more dangerous for a forced landing than much of the Outback and i treat it accordingly with or without a DRA listing.
I have put a number of suggestions to NASIG and AirServices and had excellent feedback and results. Hopefully they are monitoring these forums but if anyone has a constructive suggestion I suggest they email them - not just the problem but the suggested fix!
Roll on the NAS - it is another step to AOPA's "Freedom to Fly - Responsibly".
Cheers
Brian H
The ERC has the detail I need for monitoring any area frequencies.
AirServices intends to add useful tips like the Kilmore AWIS on the next chart VTC release so you know there is an AWIS at the critical location and can use it to ensure you can get thru.
They are also considering putting a biscuit box with the correct freq near Wilsons Prom and Cape Otway for those over water crossing sked arrangements noted in the ERSA.
They will also be cross referencing the AERIS and AWIS sections of the ERSA to assist VFR pilots to get their enroute met themselves.
Sorry to non-Victorians who don't know the area but the above message is that the charts may actually be more helpful downstream.
We spent the weekend in N/E Victoria - lovely wine - and never called on the area freq coming or going. No reason to. Had a listen on the area freq but otherwise checked Benalla to make sure the gliders and us were separated, Yarrawonga CTAF as we had 7 aircraft over the Lake and wanted to keep clear of the 2 operating at Yarrawonga, and also Yarra Valley CTAF that was quite active before I dropped in to Lilydale. Same messag as NASIG - the activity was concentrated around the CTAFs. Then the CTAF again at my home base so I didn't have one of the parachutists use the Airvan as a set of airbrakes.
As far as remote areas is concerned, I am happy to take personal responsibility for what survival gear I carry on ANY flight. I don't need some bureaucrat to tell me that a line on the map takes me from safe to unsafe or vice versa. Much of Victoria is more dangerous for a forced landing than much of the Outback and i treat it accordingly with or without a DRA listing.
I have put a number of suggestions to NASIG and AirServices and had excellent feedback and results. Hopefully they are monitoring these forums but if anyone has a constructive suggestion I suggest they email them - not just the problem but the suggested fix!
Roll on the NAS - it is another step to AOPA's "Freedom to Fly - Responsibly".
Cheers
Brian H
Thread Starter
brianh
Yes I agree completely about what gear I carry with me, however IMHO having the DRA lines on the charts may just help increase those famous words situational awareness with the area in which they exist.
Unfortunately I can't say I have had the same results. I sent an email 3 weeks ago with some general questions and feedback, I'm still waiting for a response.
I must say that I'm not against change, I'm all for making things simpler for the average GA bugsmasher. I just can't understand the need to remove some of those things I mentioned in the original post, it gets back to what I said, I don't see the benefit of removing these things.
I read somewhere that it reduces clutter, but I don't think the charts were cluttered to begin with!
Well it's all too late really anyway, it seems to be chugging along at full steam ahead. I'll just watch with interest to see what happens!
I am happy to take personal responsibility for what survival gear I carry on ANY flight. I don't need some bureaucrat to tell me that a line on the map takes me from safe to unsafe or vice versa
I have put a number of suggestions to NASIG and AirServices and had excellent feedback and results
I must say that I'm not against change, I'm all for making things simpler for the average GA bugsmasher. I just can't understand the need to remove some of those things I mentioned in the original post, it gets back to what I said, I don't see the benefit of removing these things.
I read somewhere that it reduces clutter, but I don't think the charts were cluttered to begin with!
Well it's all too late really anyway, it seems to be chugging along at full steam ahead. I'll just watch with interest to see what happens!
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Emerald, Vic, Aust
Posts: 183
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
WE CLING TO STABILITY
Guys
Having worked at change in the corporate world, I understand that we cling to "no change" as a comfort to our perceptions. That is why unions are so successful in campaigns by pushing for the status quo. And, before any snipes, I have also held a position in the union movement.
Yes, I did the flight in the present. And yes, remember there was resistance to removing the guy who used to walk in front of the horseless carriage with the red flag - come to think of it, the way Victoria is now gestapoe'd over driving, it may well return - and boy wouldn't that both cut the road toll and create a climate where people wanted to fly - let's do it!
Ignoring the holes, what about the cheese. The NAS brings a higher level of safety to CTAF operations. Is anyone really going to argue in support of the high % of Oz that is Military/Restricted airspace - say one military aircraft per 10000 square kilometres? I will also be quite happy to buzz over melbourne at 3000' - although I hope I am still flying when that comes about.
OK, lines on the map may remind people of DRA. But my point is that what CASA designates as DRA may be inappropriate in reality. If you come down in the sandhills at Moonlight Tank in Victoria (not in a DRA) you may perish just as dead as in a DRA.
I remember being at a Safety Seminar when the trogs belittled the Oz move to ICAO phraseology and readbacks. Who knows, might have saved a few lives since?
The one issue of concern I have with the NAS is whether it will once again be watered down to suit a few vocal vested interests, so that we get some but not all of the benefits. I would prefer it be rolled in as is.
I have noticed a few posts critical of VFR pilots in this NAS debate (not referring to the last 2 posters). Oh venerable IFR and RPT gentlemen, please don't throw rocks at rubber walls - I might start bouncing back with a few cowboy things I have seen and heard. Those of us who fly VFR and attempt to always act by the letter of the law are not motivated to your cause by such ill intentioned divisive comment.
PS The weekend trip was great and the Airvan is great to fly but if anyone is going bush in one, take some padding for the seats and don't try and fit anyone over 5'6'' in the seats immediately behind the pilot/co-pilot or numb bums and cramp will rule the day!
PPS If NAS have not responded to that email - and I know they have been busy with the current rollout - send them a reminder and I am sure Brendan will get back to you with the answers.
Cheers
Brian H
Having worked at change in the corporate world, I understand that we cling to "no change" as a comfort to our perceptions. That is why unions are so successful in campaigns by pushing for the status quo. And, before any snipes, I have also held a position in the union movement.
Yes, I did the flight in the present. And yes, remember there was resistance to removing the guy who used to walk in front of the horseless carriage with the red flag - come to think of it, the way Victoria is now gestapoe'd over driving, it may well return - and boy wouldn't that both cut the road toll and create a climate where people wanted to fly - let's do it!
Ignoring the holes, what about the cheese. The NAS brings a higher level of safety to CTAF operations. Is anyone really going to argue in support of the high % of Oz that is Military/Restricted airspace - say one military aircraft per 10000 square kilometres? I will also be quite happy to buzz over melbourne at 3000' - although I hope I am still flying when that comes about.
OK, lines on the map may remind people of DRA. But my point is that what CASA designates as DRA may be inappropriate in reality. If you come down in the sandhills at Moonlight Tank in Victoria (not in a DRA) you may perish just as dead as in a DRA.
I remember being at a Safety Seminar when the trogs belittled the Oz move to ICAO phraseology and readbacks. Who knows, might have saved a few lives since?
The one issue of concern I have with the NAS is whether it will once again be watered down to suit a few vocal vested interests, so that we get some but not all of the benefits. I would prefer it be rolled in as is.
I have noticed a few posts critical of VFR pilots in this NAS debate (not referring to the last 2 posters). Oh venerable IFR and RPT gentlemen, please don't throw rocks at rubber walls - I might start bouncing back with a few cowboy things I have seen and heard. Those of us who fly VFR and attempt to always act by the letter of the law are not motivated to your cause by such ill intentioned divisive comment.
PS The weekend trip was great and the Airvan is great to fly but if anyone is going bush in one, take some padding for the seats and don't try and fit anyone over 5'6'' in the seats immediately behind the pilot/co-pilot or numb bums and cramp will rule the day!
PPS If NAS have not responded to that email - and I know they have been busy with the current rollout - send them a reminder and I am sure Brendan will get back to you with the answers.
Cheers
Brian H
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: 24 27 45.66N 54 22 42.28E
Posts: 987
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
High percent of Australia being Military/Restricted Airspace????
I hope you're joking. If you read your NOTAM's the majority of this airspace is deactivated for all but a few weeks each year and makes up a very small percentage of Australian Territory.
As long as the boys in their CTAFS are ok, and can wander wherever they like, then thats all that matters Brian, isn't it. Safety of the travelling public isn't nearly as important as your weekend jollys.
The reason the Unions are against this change is because it is less safe than the current preocedures. Full stop. Nothing to do with being resistant to change. Controllers especially have been involved in constant change for the last 8 years, New ATC system, No flight service, New name, RVSM implementation, DTI implementation, Centre Consolidation, Countless management restructures, Overstaffing resulting in redundancys, closely followed by Shortstaffing resulting in wild recruiting.
One thing that the Controllers union is not afraid of is change, what they are afraid of is there members will have to sit idly by and watch one of their RPT aircraft disappear from their screen cos it hit the non-squawking, not on control frequency, non-broadcasting VFR sitting just below the cloud. But as I said see and avoid is ok for you so it should be ok for everyone else, even the guys descending 4,000 ft a minute through cloud.
As long as the boys in their CTAFS are ok, and can wander wherever they like, then thats all that matters Brian, isn't it. Safety of the travelling public isn't nearly as important as your weekend jollys.
The reason the Unions are against this change is because it is less safe than the current preocedures. Full stop. Nothing to do with being resistant to change. Controllers especially have been involved in constant change for the last 8 years, New ATC system, No flight service, New name, RVSM implementation, DTI implementation, Centre Consolidation, Countless management restructures, Overstaffing resulting in redundancys, closely followed by Shortstaffing resulting in wild recruiting.
One thing that the Controllers union is not afraid of is change, what they are afraid of is there members will have to sit idly by and watch one of their RPT aircraft disappear from their screen cos it hit the non-squawking, not on control frequency, non-broadcasting VFR sitting just below the cloud. But as I said see and avoid is ok for you so it should be ok for everyone else, even the guys descending 4,000 ft a minute through cloud.
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Perth, Western Australia
Posts: 19
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And where are the VHF outlets?
The charts certainly do not seem to enhance safety, I agree!
I was chatting to my ATSB mate about it at the beginning of the week and pointed aout a few things to him.
No boundaries mean you don't know what frequency to use where - but, says Air Services, we name the VHF outlet. Are any of them anything you have ever heard of?
My ATSB friend said "surely they are under the frequency blobby?" - We quickly resolved tha this was not the answer as Kalamunda was not under it's 'blobby'. That we did know!
Suffice it to say I left him saying " I'm going downstairs to sort this out, this is ridiculous!". I just wish I had time to ask where downstairs was before he purpousefully dashed off.
We still may make a difference. THIS airspace was stopped once when Trick Dicky was in power. Now he is again and the only way left to do something about it is go to www.australis.biz/nascomment and have your say. I am pretty sure I CAN get something done! ;-)
See you there!
I was chatting to my ATSB mate about it at the beginning of the week and pointed aout a few things to him.
No boundaries mean you don't know what frequency to use where - but, says Air Services, we name the VHF outlet. Are any of them anything you have ever heard of?
My ATSB friend said "surely they are under the frequency blobby?" - We quickly resolved tha this was not the answer as Kalamunda was not under it's 'blobby'. That we did know!
Suffice it to say I left him saying " I'm going downstairs to sort this out, this is ridiculous!". I just wish I had time to ask where downstairs was before he purpousefully dashed off.
We still may make a difference. THIS airspace was stopped once when Trick Dicky was in power. Now he is again and the only way left to do something about it is go to www.australis.biz/nascomment and have your say. I am pretty sure I CAN get something done! ;-)
See you there!
Bugsmasherdriverandjediknite
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Bai, mi go long hap na kisim sampla samting.
Posts: 2,849
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
just got my free ERCL and note with interest that the DME and lower limits on the CTR are now just a yellow smudge (class E??).
I thought these were a handy thing to have on a chart. now I have to get another map to make sure I dont bust CTR. dunno about that being more efficiant. used to be able to march into YPJT and use the DME and lower limits to arrange A/W clearances or stay out of trouble, now I have to get another map to look at (VTC's wern't required to get in if you were local and you could get by with a ERC)
I thought these were a handy thing to have on a chart. now I have to get another map to make sure I dont bust CTR. dunno about that being more efficiant. used to be able to march into YPJT and use the DME and lower limits to arrange A/W clearances or stay out of trouble, now I have to get another map to look at (VTC's wern't required to get in if you were local and you could get by with a ERC)
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Perth, Western Australia
Posts: 19
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
PS...
PS: You should have heard what my sister at TEN News said! And what she's going to say when the VCA and Breakdown Of Separation stats I researched for her hit her desk on Monday.
How many disasters are averted by the present system annually - over 150. Now, the system will have less capacity to avert these disasters under NAS.
My sister thinks the public should know this!
Get to www.australis.biz/nascomment and add your voice too! (She's logging the posts there too!)
;-)
How many disasters are averted by the present system annually - over 150. Now, the system will have less capacity to avert these disasters under NAS.
My sister thinks the public should know this!
Get to www.australis.biz/nascomment and add your voice too! (She's logging the posts there too!)
;-)
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Emerald, Vic, Aust
Posts: 183
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
NAME CHANGE TO AIRNOLOGICAUSTRALIA
AirNoServicesAustralia
I really admire the mix of emotion and disconnected facts but in terms of the four paras of your reply, as 1 - 4 below:-
1. And are East Sale and Amberly in this class? If your argument is correct, let's remove them from the charts and only create by NOTAM as needed. And, even with all that airspace, we still need to issue AIPs to create more MIL airspace for exercises!
2. Another unwarranted dip at VFR. Since MBZ become big CTAF - which they are effectively already - and at MBZ/CTAF is the highest probability of a mid-air, so the procedures are being enhanced, I'd say the safety factor improves. The other area where VFR and RPT mix in proximity is the CTR and that remains protected. Your second sentence is totally unwarranted, purely emotive, and I'm still waiting for something concrete to substantiate this rash assertion.
3. Change is a part of life. Learn to live with it and adapt - the dino's didn't and are perished. ATC does an excellent job but the union strength is in subscriptions which equals membership and the average union will resist any change that decreases membership. I'm not agreeing that ATC should be the decision maker on what constitutes "safety".
4. Same story. You draw a hypothetical case - and I suspect it already exists anyway with all the ultralight aircraft flying around. Is such an event a regular occurrence in the USA?
Perhaps the argument would have more substance if someone would like to offer some convincing statistics from the USA experience where their traffic volume is much higher - some details of VFR/RPT mid-airs for the past 5 years say, including where they occurred (CTAF / CTR / Class G). Then we can move from rhetoric to a discussion based on facts.
Of course, the media will rarely allow facts to spoil a good story (as with the earlier release that VFR and RPT were going to fly in the same airspace below 3300 metres - gee, golly whizz, that must have scared the travelling public to hear it will happen - oh, it's been that way for yonks hasn't it but best we don't allow that to ruin the story).
Continuing the subject of the media, and for anyone who sees or hears any media on the NAS, a warning to viewers from me who watches about ten minutes a month as I prefer to keep my brain in good shape. Some years ago a program - let's call it "An hour of lies" rather than name it - filmed a Q and A interview with one of our key people. They then went back to the studio and re-filmed the interviewer - let's call that person "non-event" rather than name them - asking slightly different questions. Then they spliced in the new questions with the answers our guy had given to the original questions.
I have done media training and - like some of the disconnected logic in some of the postings on this forum - it is amazing how the media can twist facts by use of language - eg "Brian H refused to discuss the allegation that he flew under the Sydney Harbour Bridge". Obvious public verdict - he did it!
And people really watch and believe this b#@$hit?????
If we intend to continue a logical debate, can someone please trot out some USA statistics on the NAS. Otherwise, the emotion level will continue to rise and the debate will continue in useless circles.
Cheers
BRian H
I really admire the mix of emotion and disconnected facts but in terms of the four paras of your reply, as 1 - 4 below:-
1. And are East Sale and Amberly in this class? If your argument is correct, let's remove them from the charts and only create by NOTAM as needed. And, even with all that airspace, we still need to issue AIPs to create more MIL airspace for exercises!
2. Another unwarranted dip at VFR. Since MBZ become big CTAF - which they are effectively already - and at MBZ/CTAF is the highest probability of a mid-air, so the procedures are being enhanced, I'd say the safety factor improves. The other area where VFR and RPT mix in proximity is the CTR and that remains protected. Your second sentence is totally unwarranted, purely emotive, and I'm still waiting for something concrete to substantiate this rash assertion.
3. Change is a part of life. Learn to live with it and adapt - the dino's didn't and are perished. ATC does an excellent job but the union strength is in subscriptions which equals membership and the average union will resist any change that decreases membership. I'm not agreeing that ATC should be the decision maker on what constitutes "safety".
4. Same story. You draw a hypothetical case - and I suspect it already exists anyway with all the ultralight aircraft flying around. Is such an event a regular occurrence in the USA?
Perhaps the argument would have more substance if someone would like to offer some convincing statistics from the USA experience where their traffic volume is much higher - some details of VFR/RPT mid-airs for the past 5 years say, including where they occurred (CTAF / CTR / Class G). Then we can move from rhetoric to a discussion based on facts.
Of course, the media will rarely allow facts to spoil a good story (as with the earlier release that VFR and RPT were going to fly in the same airspace below 3300 metres - gee, golly whizz, that must have scared the travelling public to hear it will happen - oh, it's been that way for yonks hasn't it but best we don't allow that to ruin the story).
Continuing the subject of the media, and for anyone who sees or hears any media on the NAS, a warning to viewers from me who watches about ten minutes a month as I prefer to keep my brain in good shape. Some years ago a program - let's call it "An hour of lies" rather than name it - filmed a Q and A interview with one of our key people. They then went back to the studio and re-filmed the interviewer - let's call that person "non-event" rather than name them - asking slightly different questions. Then they spliced in the new questions with the answers our guy had given to the original questions.
I have done media training and - like some of the disconnected logic in some of the postings on this forum - it is amazing how the media can twist facts by use of language - eg "Brian H refused to discuss the allegation that he flew under the Sydney Harbour Bridge". Obvious public verdict - he did it!
And people really watch and believe this b#@$hit?????
If we intend to continue a logical debate, can someone please trot out some USA statistics on the NAS. Otherwise, the emotion level will continue to rise and the debate will continue in useless circles.
Cheers
BRian H
CloudStreet
Mr R Smith is NOT in charge. Maybe he is behind the scenes and this we could debate.
How are your website traffic stats looking with this vigorous self promotion?
THIS airspace was stopped once when Trick Dicky was in power. Now he is again and the only way left to do something about it is go to www.australis.biz/nascomment and have your say. I am pretty sure I CAN get something done! ;-)
How are your website traffic stats looking with this vigorous self promotion?
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Perth, Western Australia
Posts: 19
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Meglomania
If you have ever taken note of the behaviour of afore mentioned Trick Dicky or read any of his biographies you would know him as a man who MUST take and be in charge...
I would love to bebate if he is in charge as they already have in Parliament.
I quote from Hansard:
Before we knew it, Dick Smith visited the Liberal Party court and soon announced that he would not run in Gwydir. We do not know what happened in those discussions but, soon after the election, the minister put him in charge of airspace design and reform. The design and development of our airspace has been outsourced to Dick Smith. The result is that not one person on the Airspace Reform Group has air traffic control or airline pilot
qualifications.
The proposed NAS system does not have widespread industry support and it will put the Australian travelling public at risk. It is one thing to lose ownership of Telstra, and it is another thing to spend millions of dollars to prop up a friend's industry; but to risk the aviation and the travelling public's safety to deliver a political outcome-in essence, to get Mr Dick Smith not to run or support a candidate in Gwydir at the 2001 election-is unforgivable.
More at the web-site & yes, the stats are GREAT thanks!
I would love to bebate if he is in charge as they already have in Parliament.
I quote from Hansard:
Before we knew it, Dick Smith visited the Liberal Party court and soon announced that he would not run in Gwydir. We do not know what happened in those discussions but, soon after the election, the minister put him in charge of airspace design and reform. The design and development of our airspace has been outsourced to Dick Smith. The result is that not one person on the Airspace Reform Group has air traffic control or airline pilot
qualifications.
The proposed NAS system does not have widespread industry support and it will put the Australian travelling public at risk. It is one thing to lose ownership of Telstra, and it is another thing to spend millions of dollars to prop up a friend's industry; but to risk the aviation and the travelling public's safety to deliver a political outcome-in essence, to get Mr Dick Smith not to run or support a candidate in Gwydir at the 2001 election-is unforgivable.
More at the web-site & yes, the stats are GREAT thanks!
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Emerald, Vic, Aust
Posts: 183
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
YET ANOTHER WILD ASSERTION
"The proposed NAS system ..... will put the travelling public at risk".
Cloudy,
Where's the data supporting this gut wrenching statement?
I'm reading all the chicken littles about the sky falling but it still looks blue (unusual for Victoria) to me.
All
Getting back to my comments yesterday, and remembering that I didn't start the rock throwing at other parties, I should have mentioned that I do read the ATSB reports quite regularly. Very instructive and potentially personally lifesaving.
One thing I haven't noted in them is many VFR NAS type conflicts. By that I mean the sort of current scenario that will lead to a higher potential risk when the NAS changes come in.
And, despite ANSA's derogatory comments about we weekend bugsmashers (and I fly mainly during the week anyway and an 8 seater isn't quite in the AUF category) I do note in those reports that even under the current rules we do have a reasonable number of "breakdowns of separation standards" or, to we realists, "near misses" between the real rulers of the skies under ANSA's aims (big jets) in CTR under ATC control.
So, neither the current system nor ATC is perfect is it? Ah well, if someone can trot out those USA statistics I asked for, perhaps we can consider the options unemotionally and logically.
Cheers
Brian H
Cloudy,
Where's the data supporting this gut wrenching statement?
I'm reading all the chicken littles about the sky falling but it still looks blue (unusual for Victoria) to me.
All
Getting back to my comments yesterday, and remembering that I didn't start the rock throwing at other parties, I should have mentioned that I do read the ATSB reports quite regularly. Very instructive and potentially personally lifesaving.
One thing I haven't noted in them is many VFR NAS type conflicts. By that I mean the sort of current scenario that will lead to a higher potential risk when the NAS changes come in.
And, despite ANSA's derogatory comments about we weekend bugsmashers (and I fly mainly during the week anyway and an 8 seater isn't quite in the AUF category) I do note in those reports that even under the current rules we do have a reasonable number of "breakdowns of separation standards" or, to we realists, "near misses" between the real rulers of the skies under ANSA's aims (big jets) in CTR under ATC control.
So, neither the current system nor ATC is perfect is it? Ah well, if someone can trot out those USA statistics I asked for, perhaps we can consider the options unemotionally and logically.
Cheers
Brian H
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: FNQ
Posts: 429
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well said Brianh.
The closest 'near hits' I have had were both in C under control. A little Cessna 152 (on approach) was joining the circuit but had got too close.
Tower (I was on Tower) hadn't seen him due sun. I spotted him and turned left (which I suppose is the worng way, but instinct kicked in and we were converging for a hit on my right) with about 100m to spare, (s)he never saw me (I asked later).
Tower "FXR why did you turn?"
Me "I don't like loud noises"
No blame really, I suppose approach weren't watching my blip??? With the new TCAS thingy this probably won't happen again.
The other was a similar incident many years ago, this time me in a 152 and a bl@@dy huge C130 popped around Cape Palleranda surprising both me and the tower. They thought he was further out ... why ... dunoo .. too low for the Palleranda RADAR perhaps????
AK
The closest 'near hits' I have had were both in C under control. A little Cessna 152 (on approach) was joining the circuit but had got too close.
Tower (I was on Tower) hadn't seen him due sun. I spotted him and turned left (which I suppose is the worng way, but instinct kicked in and we were converging for a hit on my right) with about 100m to spare, (s)he never saw me (I asked later).
Tower "FXR why did you turn?"
Me "I don't like loud noises"
No blame really, I suppose approach weren't watching my blip??? With the new TCAS thingy this probably won't happen again.
The other was a similar incident many years ago, this time me in a 152 and a bl@@dy huge C130 popped around Cape Palleranda surprising both me and the tower. They thought he was further out ... why ... dunoo .. too low for the Palleranda RADAR perhaps????
AK
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Emerald, Vic, Aust
Posts: 183
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
LONG TIME NO HEAR
Akkers
Long time no hear, thanks for the two factual examples.
In terms of someone's earlier comment re IFR dropping out of cloud onto VFR immediately below, your examples have jogged my memory that most factual IFR out of cloud problems involve commercial pressure and descent below LSALT - far higher risk of being promoted to angel status than the fictitious example quoted earlier.
Most of my near misses have been at Moorabbin GAAP with the two runways and ATC in the tower watching. Hey, I think the NAS suggests the nearer the landing/takeoff the higher the risk. More factual examples. One becomes a tad complacent when Big Brother is guarding - all comes back to see and be seen in my mind.
Hope the PhD is progressing well.
Cheers
Brian H
Long time no hear, thanks for the two factual examples.
In terms of someone's earlier comment re IFR dropping out of cloud onto VFR immediately below, your examples have jogged my memory that most factual IFR out of cloud problems involve commercial pressure and descent below LSALT - far higher risk of being promoted to angel status than the fictitious example quoted earlier.
Most of my near misses have been at Moorabbin GAAP with the two runways and ATC in the tower watching. Hey, I think the NAS suggests the nearer the landing/takeoff the higher the risk. More factual examples. One becomes a tad complacent when Big Brother is guarding - all comes back to see and be seen in my mind.
Hope the PhD is progressing well.
Cheers
Brian H
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: FNQ
Posts: 429
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Brianh and AOPA members.
I think NAS also makes circuit entry safer, providing the RPTers don't use it to scatter traffic!!
I have asked some specific map questions on the AOPA forum
www.aopa.com.au
and will take member views into account when the Board discusses this later this month.
AK
I have asked some specific map questions on the AOPA forum
www.aopa.com.au
and will take member views into account when the Board discusses this later this month.
AK
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Perth, Western Australia
Posts: 19
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
TEN News
Well, thank you for your comments. They form the kernel of tonights TEN late news story by Sharon Marshall.
Since TEN's uptake of the story many more media outlets have contacted us. After TEN airs - have your say too at www.australis.biz/nascomment
Positive or negative - your comments ARE being heard at Australis.Biz!
Since TEN's uptake of the story many more media outlets have contacted us. After TEN airs - have your say too at www.australis.biz/nascomment
Positive or negative - your comments ARE being heard at Australis.Biz!