It's Back!! NAS 3B coming to some airspace near you!
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Luny Tunes
Posts: 49
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's Back!! NAS 3B coming to some airspace near you!
NAS is Back!
The very strong rumour is that NAS is back in full force post Jul07. And this time the change proponents will have a stronger mandate than ever before and better advice
.
Expect the good old favourites such as E base Fl145, Class E corridors to lead the show, followed closely by E over D towers that will shrink to match the 'tried and proven' US model fo 5NM radius.
Expect the workshops to start shortly after Jul07 due to the fact that the first implementation date will be mid 2008.
Sources state that the pending federal election (and strong lobbying by interested parties) is in no way connected to this revitalised reforming of Austrlaian Airspace and procedures.
The very strong rumour is that NAS is back in full force post Jul07. And this time the change proponents will have a stronger mandate than ever before and better advice
.Expect the good old favourites such as E base Fl145, Class E corridors to lead the show, followed closely by E over D towers that will shrink to match the 'tried and proven' US model fo 5NM radius.
Expect the workshops to start shortly after Jul07 due to the fact that the first implementation date will be mid 2008.
Sources state that the pending federal election (and strong lobbying by interested parties) is in no way connected to this revitalised reforming of Austrlaian Airspace and procedures.
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: On a Ship Near You
Posts: 787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
With all the c.r.a.p. going on at ASA; good luck getting any "new" NAS reforms going; can you say short-staffed; can you say unable to organise a root in a whore house; can you say tell 'im he's dreamin.
The ink on whole service delivery line thing is still wet; why not load up the system with more issues to deal with; you know it makes sense.
When does CASA/DoTARS take over airspace?
PS Puttytat, too early, tomorrow is the right date for such a post.
The ink on whole service delivery line thing is still wet; why not load up the system with more issues to deal with; you know it makes sense.
When does CASA/DoTARS take over airspace?
PS Puttytat, too early, tomorrow is the right date for such a post.
Last edited by SM4 Pirate; 31st Mar 2007 at 06:14.
Folks,
Go to the Minister's web site, back to Truss, and have a look at the press release for 14 September 2006, the policy is there for all to see.
Amongst other things, G is the default, risk management is the order of the day. Also have a look at the OBPR Handbook, quite interesting really.
And, believe it or not, one Richard Harold Smith didn't have much (anything) to do with that policy statement. One C.Manning Esq., was at the announcement, he didn't seem too perturbed at the policy statement and its' ramifications, although some of his Regional management pilots probably had apoplexy.
Will it be as the above posts ?? Based on the policy (and OBPR MANDATORY guidelines) there could conceivably be quite a windback of C and D, particularly C in the mid-levels. Remember this will no longer involve Airservices, the implementation of Government airspace management policy will be AERU/OAM within CASA/DOTARS. Given the quite blunt policy, don't expect ASTRA naval gazing to survive.
Tootle pip!!
PS: The independent post implementation review of NAS 2C doesn't seem to have revealed the end of civilisation as we know it.
Go to the Minister's web site, back to Truss, and have a look at the press release for 14 September 2006, the policy is there for all to see.
Amongst other things, G is the default, risk management is the order of the day. Also have a look at the OBPR Handbook, quite interesting really.
And, believe it or not, one Richard Harold Smith didn't have much (anything) to do with that policy statement. One C.Manning Esq., was at the announcement, he didn't seem too perturbed at the policy statement and its' ramifications, although some of his Regional management pilots probably had apoplexy.
Will it be as the above posts ?? Based on the policy (and OBPR MANDATORY guidelines) there could conceivably be quite a windback of C and D, particularly C in the mid-levels. Remember this will no longer involve Airservices, the implementation of Government airspace management policy will be AERU/OAM within CASA/DOTARS. Given the quite blunt policy, don't expect ASTRA naval gazing to survive.
Tootle pip!!
PS: The independent post implementation review of NAS 2C doesn't seem to have revealed the end of civilisation as we know it.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Luny Tunes
Posts: 49
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SM4 Pirate, Yes the timing was off by less than 12 hours, but readers may have then thought this is a prank, which it is definitely not.
The implementation will definitely involve ASA in a large way. More E means more service when it replaces G. Low E airspace near aerodromes currently in G will require full IFR separation and therefore an increase in ATC staffing and restrictions to aircrew. There goes the cost benefit analysis!
It is usually impossible to ascertain who is behind any policy statement, maybe the Govt is getting some quality advice now that the election is approaching.
In relation to the 2C PIR, even though the civilisation is not ending, more calls are to be made mandatory(full circle already?), and there will be more education roadshows and DVDs / brochures.
The implementation will definitely involve ASA in a large way. More E means more service when it replaces G. Low E airspace near aerodromes currently in G will require full IFR separation and therefore an increase in ATC staffing and restrictions to aircrew. There goes the cost benefit analysis!
It is usually impossible to ascertain who is behind any policy statement, maybe the Govt is getting some quality advice now that the election is approaching.
In relation to the 2C PIR, even though the civilisation is not ending, more calls are to be made mandatory(full circle already?), and there will be more education roadshows and DVDs / brochures.
I'm in one of those moods
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: SFC to A085
Posts: 759
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
… just wondering ... when is the latest possible date in Nov for a Fed Election?…. assuming they go then, when would ‘caretaker’ mode start …. might look into that and corresponding sitting days!
.
… and to an extent Lead you are right OAM, CASA, DoTaRS, The Minister will all be directly responsible for the outcome! … we will simply apply the rules for the category of airspace as directed!
.
.. in the meantime, the process of ‘Americanisation’ will necessarily require a very close look at the comparative safety and efficiency outcomes of such changes … including delay comparisions of Tower, App and Enroute sequencing/separation options … I guess at some point that will need some input from those that actually provide the services!
.
… hmmmmm….. by then the restructured new ‘line managers’ will be the SME’s!
.
… anyone else joining the dots here???
.
… oh well, I guess ‘duty of care’ is gunna get another workout as a last line separation/segregation standard!
.
… and to an extent Lead you are right OAM, CASA, DoTaRS, The Minister will all be directly responsible for the outcome! … we will simply apply the rules for the category of airspace as directed!
.
.. in the meantime, the process of ‘Americanisation’ will necessarily require a very close look at the comparative safety and efficiency outcomes of such changes … including delay comparisions of Tower, App and Enroute sequencing/separation options … I guess at some point that will need some input from those that actually provide the services!
.
… hmmmmm….. by then the restructured new ‘line managers’ will be the SME’s!
.
… anyone else joining the dots here???
.
… oh well, I guess ‘duty of care’ is gunna get another workout as a last line separation/segregation standard!
Here is my suggestion for ASA Staff ....
You've spent years banging your collective heads against the proverbial brick wall in this forum, and elsewhere. Just as one catastrophic policy is averted, THEY create a new bushfire or turn in another direction ... needing the clear heads of ASA staffers and pilots to take up arms again... to help save THEM from themselves.
I say, let go ...
Let THEM bring in their new systems, let THEM hire more controllers, let THEM pay more overtime, let THEM buy more infrastructure, let THEM be delayed by restrictive procedures, let THEM get a fright in the windscreen, let THEM ...
I can't see it ever ending untill THEY see for themselves, the foly of their own making
You've spent years banging your collective heads against the proverbial brick wall in this forum, and elsewhere. Just as one catastrophic policy is averted, THEY create a new bushfire or turn in another direction ... needing the clear heads of ASA staffers and pilots to take up arms again... to help save THEM from themselves.
I say, let go ...
Let THEM bring in their new systems, let THEM hire more controllers, let THEM pay more overtime, let THEM buy more infrastructure, let THEM be delayed by restrictive procedures, let THEM get a fright in the windscreen, let THEM ...
I can't see it ever ending untill THEY see for themselves, the foly of their own making
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Calcutta
Posts: 59
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Puece,
I see exactly what you mean; just hope and prey like hell that you are not the ATC (who didn't do X) when they eventual happens
Everything that went wrong (before the rollback) was some ATC's fault, in the just culture that we have (awsure), ATC didn't monitor, weren't trained right, the ATC cancelled the MSAW/STCA/RAM, the ATC didn't use the airspace as designed, the ATC should have XXX etc.
Crikey, count me out; ECS/UAS here I come.
I see exactly what you mean; just hope and prey like hell that you are not the ATC (who didn't do X) when they eventual happens
Everything that went wrong (before the rollback) was some ATC's fault, in the just culture that we have (awsure), ATC didn't monitor, weren't trained right, the ATC cancelled the MSAW/STCA/RAM, the ATC didn't use the airspace as designed, the ATC should have XXX etc.
Crikey, count me out; ECS/UAS here I come.
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Orstralia
Posts: 171
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Fair bit of hysteria here. Bring it on, sounds like a hoot. It will only mean delays in regional terminal areas (no tower) if pilots are unwilling to use the flaky VFR procedures they (more or less) currently use in G. Procedural separation standards are a bit huge though.
E airspace over Melbourne down to 4,500, bring it on!
The only problem I had with Mr. Smith was his claims that these arrangements would save money or increase safety, when it is fairly obvious the cost will be huge and involve a decrease in safety. It still may be affordable, and will probably still be safe enuf.
E airspace over Melbourne down to 4,500, bring it on!
The only problem I had with Mr. Smith was his claims that these arrangements would save money or increase safety, when it is fairly obvious the cost will be huge and involve a decrease in safety. It still may be affordable, and will probably still be safe enuf.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Luny Tunes
Posts: 49
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
One can recall the day when the Lancair nearly cleaned up the Virgin 737 north of BN aftrer the Lancair had been given traffic several times and reported sighting the big red airframe. Even though he had it in sight he misjudged the closing speed!
All occurred in E airspace - safe enough though
All occurred in E airspace - safe enough though
I believe this is the situation.
From 1 July 2007 there will be an Office of Airspace Policy (OAP) in DoTRS, and an Office of Airspace Regulation (OAR) in CASA (takes over AERU role).
OAP responsibility is government policy on airspace matters. OAR responsibility will be to investigate changes to airspace architecture to ensure safety and cost benefit. OAR also has responsibility for regulatory aspects related to airspace i.e. declaration of permanent and temporary airspace.
For something like class E over class D for example, OAP will tell OAR to conduct an investigation as to where or if implementation would be appropriate. OAR conduct the investigation, seek input from affected parties including ASA and industry, and determin where or if at all implementation is appropriate, safe and has a demonstratable cost benefit, and provide a response to OAP. If the decision is made to go ahead somewhere, OAP will instruct ASA to implement it.
Theoretically after 1 July ASA's role reverts to simply being the air traffic service provider, and after the above processes are finishedthey are told what to implement and where.
From 1 July 2007 there will be an Office of Airspace Policy (OAP) in DoTRS, and an Office of Airspace Regulation (OAR) in CASA (takes over AERU role).
OAP responsibility is government policy on airspace matters. OAR responsibility will be to investigate changes to airspace architecture to ensure safety and cost benefit. OAR also has responsibility for regulatory aspects related to airspace i.e. declaration of permanent and temporary airspace.
For something like class E over class D for example, OAP will tell OAR to conduct an investigation as to where or if implementation would be appropriate. OAR conduct the investigation, seek input from affected parties including ASA and industry, and determin where or if at all implementation is appropriate, safe and has a demonstratable cost benefit, and provide a response to OAP. If the decision is made to go ahead somewhere, OAP will instruct ASA to implement it.
Theoretically after 1 July ASA's role reverts to simply being the air traffic service provider, and after the above processes are finishedthey are told what to implement and where.
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: On a Ship Near You
Posts: 787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Theoretically after 1 July ASA's role reverts to simply being the air traffic service provider, and after the above processes are finished they are told what to implement and where.
If ASA resources are otherwise fully used; who exactly is going to manage all of this change process; whether it be ATC HAZIDs, Mapping Data, TNAs, Training development then delivery, changes to instructions etc. Please don't say OT, we're already busting from that pressure at the coal face.
What will get priority, Route reviews, airspace change, SDE, UPRs, MLAT, ADS-B, GBAS, GRAS, CDAs, Tailored arrivals, CPDLC, Abinitio training, Experienced ATC training? All the industry needs right now is for things providing benefit to be shelved while things that cost money and provide little or no benefit, for those that pay the bills, are implemented, not!
What is the rest of the world doing? NAS is now (what) 7 years old, without review/amendment? Where do the CASR PARTS fit? What about CTAFs that probably need to be "D"; and the "Ds" that may need to be CTAFs?
Is the Willoughby report which was the 'CBA basis' going to be reviewed? Seems like the CTAF PIR was relatively competent; maybe they could do more.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Luny Tunes
Posts: 49
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Lets face it.
During the introduction of NAS 2, ATC were basically criminal.
Can I expect they will be again?
During the introduction of NAS 2, ATC were basically criminal.
Can I expect they will be again?
It would be interesting to hear how ATC were criminal in NAS. Which NAS 2 are you referring too - 2A / 2B / 2C? Which characteristic, or is this just a general whinge based on very little?
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: On a Ship Near You
Posts: 787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
For those that couldn't trawl through the link, this was in response to the event which you mention putytat:
Fancy just giving traffic in Class E to an IFR about a VFR; you should separate all remember; ya bunch of criminals.
SMITH: What the air traffic... you're saying, sure. The air traffic controller allowed the Virgin plane to descend right into the smaller plane. By the way, both planes were on radar, both planes were talking to air traffic control. The air traffic controller allowed this to happen. It's basically criminal.
They did the same thing in Melbourne a few weeks ago where they turned a small plane, under radar control, under the Virgin plane, and then let the Virgin plane descend right on the top of it again.
They did the same thing in Melbourne a few weeks ago where they turned a small plane, under radar control, under the Virgin plane, and then let the Virgin plane descend right on the top of it again.
SM4 Pirate, why don’t you tell the full story? Especially the fact that I apologised to the air traffic controllers concerned the following day on the same radio station.
What is criminal is the complete lack of training given by Airservices Australia to the air traffic controllers. As we know, Class E airspace works incredibly safely in other countries (see here) however it appears that Australian air traffic controllers are not trained when one aircraft is under full air traffic control and the other is receiving flight following, to give a simple heading so one can avoid the other. It happens all the time in the USA, Europe, Canada and New Zealand. Why can’t it happen here?
What is criminal is the complete lack of training given by Airservices Australia to the air traffic controllers. As we know, Class E airspace works incredibly safely in other countries (see here) however it appears that Australian air traffic controllers are not trained when one aircraft is under full air traffic control and the other is receiving flight following, to give a simple heading so one can avoid the other. It happens all the time in the USA, Europe, Canada and New Zealand. Why can’t it happen here?
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: On a Ship Near You
Posts: 787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dick, welcome back; I was simply highlighting the post above which made reference to the 'criminals'; I was not the one being sarcastic above bringing it up. I noted your apology at the time; no need to repeat it.
You say the ATCs are not trained correctly? Please tell me more... Your interpretation of what is correct and what isn't; is not covered in the airspace definition and or the ICAO documentation, the AIP or MATS. IFR get traffic on VFR in E, right?
If you really want "Class B services" regarding IFR to VFR in E then you need to call it something else; but that might be a unique non compliant system...
I do not believe the VFR aircraft involved in this case was subject to a "RIS" (or flight following); but was called (on the marconi radio thingy) because it was getting 'bloody close'; the pilot did respond, right? Then got the whole conflict avoidance thing wrong re judgement of the closing speed.
You say the ATCs are not trained correctly? Please tell me more... Your interpretation of what is correct and what isn't; is not covered in the airspace definition and or the ICAO documentation, the AIP or MATS. IFR get traffic on VFR in E, right?
If you really want "Class B services" regarding IFR to VFR in E then you need to call it something else; but that might be a unique non compliant system...
I do not believe the VFR aircraft involved in this case was subject to a "RIS" (or flight following); but was called (on the marconi radio thingy) because it was getting 'bloody close'; the pilot did respond, right? Then got the whole conflict avoidance thing wrong re judgement of the closing speed.
SM4 Pirate, you are right. The VFR aircraft involved was not subject to a RIS because at the time, rather than follow the proven US NAS procedures, Airservices had introduced a “one shot” system which was all but useless.
Notwithstanding this, thousands of IFR airline aircraft transit through Class E every day (see here). Every day, when Qantas flies into LA or JFK, it flies through Class E airspace. If there is a VFR aircraft in similar circumstances, the Qantas crew is given traffic and if the pilots do not sight the traffic within a reasonable time, the aircraft is given a vector – normally track shortening – to remain clear. No, it may not be the prescribed Australian system but it is simply the proven NAS system.
In all my research I cannot find any record of a midair collision between an airliner and another aircraft in Class E airspace in the USA.
It would be better if I had said that not only was it the training of the air traffic controllers that was deficient, but also the procedures which were in existence at the time.
Notwithstanding this, thousands of IFR airline aircraft transit through Class E every day (see here). Every day, when Qantas flies into LA or JFK, it flies through Class E airspace. If there is a VFR aircraft in similar circumstances, the Qantas crew is given traffic and if the pilots do not sight the traffic within a reasonable time, the aircraft is given a vector – normally track shortening – to remain clear. No, it may not be the prescribed Australian system but it is simply the proven NAS system.
In all my research I cannot find any record of a midair collision between an airliner and another aircraft in Class E airspace in the USA.
It would be better if I had said that not only was it the training of the air traffic controllers that was deficient, but also the procedures which were in existence at the time.
Last edited by Dick Smith; 4th Apr 2007 at 06:51.