25 years of holding at Williamtown
Don't forget WAKE TURBULANCE.
A big jet can easily flip a small lighty flying up to 1000' or so below it's path and they would not have to be physically close either.
A 737 flies over the coast at 1,000 +, I minute later a PA28 flies under the previous path of the 737 and WAMMO.
They don't have to actually collide.
And I'd hate to be a lighty flying under a A380's path in YSSY.......yeesh.
A big jet can easily flip a small lighty flying up to 1000' or so below it's path and they would not have to be physically close either.
A 737 flies over the coast at 1,000 +, I minute later a PA28 flies under the previous path of the 737 and WAMMO.
They don't have to actually collide.
And I'd hate to be a lighty flying under a A380's path in YSSY.......yeesh.
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Jandakot, WA
Age: 24
Posts: 84
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mr Smith one reason for an apparent delay in what you believe you may have been told about Military airspace is that there is a war on
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Down Under
Posts: 139
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Walking and Chewing gum trick
Ozbiggles say...
I agree, there are - but I also think Angus Houston and his Staff Officers can walk and chew gum at the same time. They use private jets (freeing them up so they can have meetings in the sky), have drivers waiting for them on the ground (so they can use cell phones or discuss matters whilst on the road), they have dedicated Personal Assistants, large offices with attached conference rooms in different cities, runners, Officers' Clubs, etc, etc.The problem is that very few citizens make them accountable for their compensation packages and perks.
and maybe there are more important things going on.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Victoria
Age: 62
Posts: 984
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
They use private jets
have drivers waiting for them on the ground (so they can use cell phones or discuss matters whilst on the road), they have dedicated Personal Assistants, large offices with attached conference rooms in different cities, runners, Officers' Clubs, etc, etc.
The problem is that very few citizens make them accountable for their compensation packages and perks.
Many junior officers do not want to get promoted becuase the demands of the job far outweigh the remuneration offered. I think you have no idea about what you're saying.
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Down Under
Posts: 139
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Oh Captain My Captain - no, not from Walt Whitman
Captain Sand Dune says ..
Well, that makes the 2 of us then, huh? To paraphrase a famous guy - We might both be wrong but one of us HAS to be wrong.
So Captain, please tell me, according to the ANAO, the DMO cost blowouts are now at $13bn, including the frigates, the Seasprites, the M113 personnel carrier upgrade, the wedgetail surveillance planes, the Tiger helos, etc; who in Defence are accountable? Have u heard of anyone getting fired for this? Anyone?
CEO's of private and public companies do get fired - ultimately. George Trumbull (AMP), Paul Anthony (AGL), Paul Batchelor (AMP), Eddie Anywhere (TCN 9), etc. Granted, they get huge payouts, but which 1 or 2 or 3 star generals have been sacked for losing money, CD-ROMS in Qantas Club, etc? Enlighten me.
I think you have no idea about what you're saying.
So Captain, please tell me, according to the ANAO, the DMO cost blowouts are now at $13bn, including the frigates, the Seasprites, the M113 personnel carrier upgrade, the wedgetail surveillance planes, the Tiger helos, etc; who in Defence are accountable? Have u heard of anyone getting fired for this? Anyone?
CEO's of private and public companies do get fired - ultimately. George Trumbull (AMP), Paul Anthony (AGL), Paul Batchelor (AMP), Eddie Anywhere (TCN 9), etc. Granted, they get huge payouts, but which 1 or 2 or 3 star generals have been sacked for losing money, CD-ROMS in Qantas Club, etc? Enlighten me.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Victoria
Age: 62
Posts: 984
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Three letters, my friend...DMO.
An organisation stuffed with bureaucrats of the worst kind, both defence and civilian. Just about everyone I've spoken to who has anything to do with aquisition would cheerfully nuke the place. Save a bunch of money, and might actually get something done.
However with big defence purchases comes politics, and lots of it. With the politics comes meddling and procrastination of the highest order - nothing that would actually help the people who need the gear, mind! If you want to lay the blame for cost overruns, delays etc, at someone's feet, turn to the pollies. And no, you definitely won't see them getting sacked!
Easy, it was a chick! = too hard!
An organisation stuffed with bureaucrats of the worst kind, both defence and civilian. Just about everyone I've spoken to who has anything to do with aquisition would cheerfully nuke the place. Save a bunch of money, and might actually get something done.However with big defence purchases comes politics, and lots of it. With the politics comes meddling and procrastination of the highest order - nothing that would actually help the people who need the gear, mind! If you want to lay the blame for cost overruns, delays etc, at someone's feet, turn to the pollies. And no, you definitely won't see them getting sacked!
CD-ROMS in Qantas Club, etc
Control Snatch - Wrong. As with most Bases at the moment a lot of people are deployed, are about to be deployed or have just come back from being deployed. Just because the Hornets aren't deployed at the moment doesn't mean other people from the base aren't deployed. Read the paper about who is in the Ghan at the moment.
Bell - I would bet you the people who are responsible in this organisation don't get 8 hrs sleep a night, particualarly with a change of government, let alone the normal workload, let alone the war workload etc etc. I understand what you mean but to put the necessary number of people on this with the correct outcome isn't probably high on the list when people are dying, getting shot at or you have the latest cost over run to explain.
On that subject, defence doesn't make this stuff. They sign the contract and then get let down by the CIVILAN company who said they could do it, then promptly fails to deliver on time...if at all.
However there may be room for agreement on the fact the the comapany that fails to deliver should be made to cover the cost. The problem is if you want that in the contract it costs more...or they won't even try to build your new toy. A fantastic Catch 22.
Bell - I would bet you the people who are responsible in this organisation don't get 8 hrs sleep a night, particualarly with a change of government, let alone the normal workload, let alone the war workload etc etc. I understand what you mean but to put the necessary number of people on this with the correct outcome isn't probably high on the list when people are dying, getting shot at or you have the latest cost over run to explain.
On that subject, defence doesn't make this stuff. They sign the contract and then get let down by the CIVILAN company who said they could do it, then promptly fails to deliver on time...if at all.
However there may be room for agreement on the fact the the comapany that fails to deliver should be made to cover the cost. The problem is if you want that in the contract it costs more...or they won't even try to build your new toy. A fantastic Catch 22.
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Australasia
Posts: 16
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This thread has a gone a long way from where it should really be going.....
Bell Flyer is claiming that the heads of military are responsible for any cost blowout the military incurs (regardless of the meddling, lobbying and pontificating suffered from government, beurocratic process, media..) and is comparing the ADF to AMP? AGL??
Pass a Frozo is blaming SQN PLTOFFs on a $13bn DMO blowout. Please DMO, take some responsibility.
What happened to the forum of educated and experienced commercial, military and private aircrew / ATC - educating Dick about the aviation world outside of his chardonnay circle?... albeit a few years too late and to a belligerent audience.
Bell Flyer is claiming that the heads of military are responsible for any cost blowout the military incurs (regardless of the meddling, lobbying and pontificating suffered from government, beurocratic process, media..) and is comparing the ADF to AMP? AGL??
Pass a Frozo is blaming SQN PLTOFFs on a $13bn DMO blowout. Please DMO, take some responsibility.
What happened to the forum of educated and experienced commercial, military and private aircrew / ATC - educating Dick about the aviation world outside of his chardonnay circle?... albeit a few years too late and to a belligerent audience.
Thread Starter
Garudadude, I love it. Especially your statement:
You obviously don’t know me! Then again, once at a charity wine auction I did pay $1,000 for a bottle of Fanta.
It is interesting how no one has addressed the real point. That is, even if the airspace is active and needs to be of such vast size, that modern procedures (as used in other leading aviation countries) would reduce the amount of holding and waste.
…educating Dick about the aviation world outside of his chardonnay circle?
It is interesting how no one has addressed the real point. That is, even if the airspace is active and needs to be of such vast size, that modern procedures (as used in other leading aviation countries) would reduce the amount of holding and waste.
Yes, the point (or possible reasons for it) have been addressed countless times....just not to your satisfaction.
And just to clarify are you talking about all of the airspace now or just the bit you started talking about ie Holding at Nobby's?
Just to refresh your memory some of the points that have been offered
To close to the departing upwind leg.
To busy (airspace and workload to make changes that are safe).
Wake turbulence (there you go ACMS).
The what if's of engine failures.
TCAS alert.
because they can etc etc
And just to clarify are you talking about all of the airspace now or just the bit you started talking about ie Holding at Nobby's?
Just to refresh your memory some of the points that have been offered
To close to the departing upwind leg.
To busy (airspace and workload to make changes that are safe).
Wake turbulence (there you go ACMS).
The what if's of engine failures.
TCAS alert.
because they can etc etc
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Australia
Age: 46
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Watch this space
RUMOUR has it an esteemed former CASA head was heard on the airwaves as recently as this week voicing his displeasure at being held by WLM ATC. Is it true??
Sounds like a dick move.....
(pun too obvious to avoid)
Sounds like a dick move.....
(pun too obvious to avoid)
Thread Starter
Yesterday on a flight north from Terrey Hills to the Coffs Harbour area in my Agusta helicopter I was once again held at Nobbys – unnecessarily orbiting low over the water and over a beach with people on it. The sky conditions were scattered cloud below 5,000 feet.
The reason for the holding was a Brindabella Metro approaching Williamtown from the south to land on runway 30. From what I could make out he was above 5,000 feet when he overflew the Nobbys area.
Here is an interesting point. A few weeks ago (when I think the “A team” was on duty) a Virgin jet was approaching to land on runway 30. The controller asked the Virgin pilot if he could remain 1 mile to the west of the coast due to traffic in the VFR lane. The Virgin pilot agreed. I was not held and was cleared to fly along the coast at 500 feet without unnecessary delays.
Why didn’t it happen this time? Why didn’t the controller ask the Brindabella pilot whether he could remain 1 mile to the west of the coast due to traffic in the lane? I feel sure that the answer would have been yes.
On my return flight I decided not to have the almost 100% chance of holding for no proper reason at all, so I used the so-called “inland lane.” What a crock. I have never seen anything like this anywhere in the world. It must have been designed for tiger moths in the Second World War. Most of the time in the lane, at the maximum legal altitude of either 1,000 feet or 1,500 feet, it would not be possible for a fixed wing aircraft to do a safe forced landing. This lane is undoubtedly an accident waiting to happen.
You would think the lane at such a low level would follow the valleys. It actually follows the railway line which goes through two tunnels, and where the railway goes through the tunnel the lane has less than 500 feet of clearance from the ground to where you would normally be flying OCTA.
I’ve checked with people who live in the lane and they said that in the last 10 years they cannot remember a low flying military jet over their area.
I point out that when you join the lane near Mount George it is over 50 nautical miles from Williamtown Airport, and where the lane drops from 1,500 feet to 1,000 feet (what would this be for?) it is over 20 miles from Williamtown.
Perhaps the “holding” is a training and standardisation issue. Why is it that one controller can cope with a jet airliner without unnecessarily holding another aircraft, but another controller cannot cope with a small turbo-prop?
I look forward to comments.
The reason for the holding was a Brindabella Metro approaching Williamtown from the south to land on runway 30. From what I could make out he was above 5,000 feet when he overflew the Nobbys area.
Here is an interesting point. A few weeks ago (when I think the “A team” was on duty) a Virgin jet was approaching to land on runway 30. The controller asked the Virgin pilot if he could remain 1 mile to the west of the coast due to traffic in the VFR lane. The Virgin pilot agreed. I was not held and was cleared to fly along the coast at 500 feet without unnecessary delays.
Why didn’t it happen this time? Why didn’t the controller ask the Brindabella pilot whether he could remain 1 mile to the west of the coast due to traffic in the lane? I feel sure that the answer would have been yes.
On my return flight I decided not to have the almost 100% chance of holding for no proper reason at all, so I used the so-called “inland lane.” What a crock. I have never seen anything like this anywhere in the world. It must have been designed for tiger moths in the Second World War. Most of the time in the lane, at the maximum legal altitude of either 1,000 feet or 1,500 feet, it would not be possible for a fixed wing aircraft to do a safe forced landing. This lane is undoubtedly an accident waiting to happen.
You would think the lane at such a low level would follow the valleys. It actually follows the railway line which goes through two tunnels, and where the railway goes through the tunnel the lane has less than 500 feet of clearance from the ground to where you would normally be flying OCTA.
I’ve checked with people who live in the lane and they said that in the last 10 years they cannot remember a low flying military jet over their area.
I point out that when you join the lane near Mount George it is over 50 nautical miles from Williamtown Airport, and where the lane drops from 1,500 feet to 1,000 feet (what would this be for?) it is over 20 miles from Williamtown.
Perhaps the “holding” is a training and standardisation issue. Why is it that one controller can cope with a jet airliner without unnecessarily holding another aircraft, but another controller cannot cope with a small turbo-prop?
I look forward to comments.
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 26
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Are you sure that there was only you and Metro in the same area?
It's a bit like swimming with a shark.....the one you see usually doesn't bite you...........but the one you don't see...ouch......a bit like midairs.
It's a bit like swimming with a shark.....the one you see usually doesn't bite you...........but the one you don't see...ouch......a bit like midairs.
Thread Starter
Roaring Rimau, no, the only aircraft that I was being separated from was the Metro.
By the way, the tower doesn’t appear to “own” any airspace. I remember years ago we used to have this ridiculous situation at Canberra. Then the Canberra Tower was given the airspace to the control zone boundary, and pilots flying in below 3,500 feet could simply talk to the tower – and delays were completely removed.
Why doesn’t the Williamtown Tower “own” the airspace to Nobbys – or at least over the coast? I understand there was a move at one time to follow international practice and have Australian radar towers control the airspace to the first step of the zone. This has happened at Sydney Airport to the Botany Bay heads, but that is about it.
How is it that at airports in other countries, no matter what traffic is present, a VFR aircraft can fly in similar airspace in VMC conditions without being held?
When the airspace becomes a CTAF, with situations when there can be more than one IFR airline aircraft at a time, why is it that a traffic information service suffices?
The more I am told about this the more I am convinced that it is exactly as I originally said – absolute dismal leadership from the military people in Canberra. Proper procedures even copied from a country such as New Zealand would completely solve the problem.
There they are, flying around in F/A-18s, which I understood came from the United States, but they are not prepared to follow any of the US enlightened airspace procedures. Wouldn’t you think that one of them would lift the phone and speak to one of the military ATCs in the USA?
Then again, asking advice is not the way to go for people who lack ability and self-confidence.
By the way, the tower doesn’t appear to “own” any airspace. I remember years ago we used to have this ridiculous situation at Canberra. Then the Canberra Tower was given the airspace to the control zone boundary, and pilots flying in below 3,500 feet could simply talk to the tower – and delays were completely removed.
Why doesn’t the Williamtown Tower “own” the airspace to Nobbys – or at least over the coast? I understand there was a move at one time to follow international practice and have Australian radar towers control the airspace to the first step of the zone. This has happened at Sydney Airport to the Botany Bay heads, but that is about it.
How is it that at airports in other countries, no matter what traffic is present, a VFR aircraft can fly in similar airspace in VMC conditions without being held?
When the airspace becomes a CTAF, with situations when there can be more than one IFR airline aircraft at a time, why is it that a traffic information service suffices?
The more I am told about this the more I am convinced that it is exactly as I originally said – absolute dismal leadership from the military people in Canberra. Proper procedures even copied from a country such as New Zealand would completely solve the problem.
There they are, flying around in F/A-18s, which I understood came from the United States, but they are not prepared to follow any of the US enlightened airspace procedures. Wouldn’t you think that one of them would lift the phone and speak to one of the military ATCs in the USA?
Then again, asking advice is not the way to go for people who lack ability and self-confidence.
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Australia
Age: 46
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Beware Dick Bashers
Dick really has a bee in his bonnet. It's almost like he's on a wind up mission. And becoming increasingly abusive with his opinion of "the military people in Canberra" - almost slanderous one might say.
I do believe it was Dick, though, who allegedly invested close to half the Australian average annual wage in order to uncover the identity of a dick-bashing ppruner. So beware folks.... dick-bashing is not without its consequences. But I digress
Dick
Without knowing all the ins and outs of WLM, I do believe TWR owns the circuit area overland under VMC, with this airspace taken back by approach when instrument recoveries are required due weather. So you are incorrect in your assumption that TWR doesn't own any airspace - it's just not the bit that interests you.
I do believe it was Dick, though, who allegedly invested close to half the Australian average annual wage in order to uncover the identity of a dick-bashing ppruner. So beware folks.... dick-bashing is not without its consequences. But I digress
Dick
Without knowing all the ins and outs of WLM, I do believe TWR owns the circuit area overland under VMC, with this airspace taken back by approach when instrument recoveries are required due weather. So you are incorrect in your assumption that TWR doesn't own any airspace - it's just not the bit that interests you.
I question the wisdom of airing this sort of thing to the general public.
Most think light aircraft drivers are people with expensive toys, often causing noise and making a nuisance of themselves.
And if Mr & Mrs Public watched the Top Gun series on SBS, they probably now think that all the folk at places like WLM are highly trained professionals doing a serious community service to the country including potentially putting their lives on the line for us, so if a lighty including Dick Smith gets held up or diverted - so what? Whose activity provides the greater community service?
Most think light aircraft drivers are people with expensive toys, often causing noise and making a nuisance of themselves.
And if Mr & Mrs Public watched the Top Gun series on SBS, they probably now think that all the folk at places like WLM are highly trained professionals doing a serious community service to the country including potentially putting their lives on the line for us, so if a lighty including Dick Smith gets held up or diverted - so what? Whose activity provides the greater community service?
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Capricorn
Age: 57
Posts: 82
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It does not sound like you were not being separated from the Metroliner Dick.
It sounds like you were being separated from the WLM CTR, with not just one Metroliner in it at the time.
Take in all the facts Dick, not just the ones that appear convenient to your argument.
Have you ever been supersonic Dick? It takes a little while to slow down. But I wouldn't let a jet that can go supersonic get on YOUR six mate.
It sounds like you were being separated from the WLM CTR, with not just one Metroliner in it at the time.
Take in all the facts Dick, not just the ones that appear convenient to your argument.
Have you ever been supersonic Dick? It takes a little while to slow down. But I wouldn't let a jet that can go supersonic get on YOUR six mate.
Maggott17 wrote:
There are no (intentional) transonic or supersonic operations within, or anywhere near, for that matter.... the WLM CTA, so what is the point you are trying to make (apart from the obvious that all you've posted for is to join the mob mentality...)?
All S/S ops take place a set distance off-shore. When Salt Ash fires up there are abrupt vertical manouvres, but in all honesty the lowest they ever seem to get in there is around 1500'. How do I know? I live next to it and enjoy the show out my back windows daily.
Klaus Fuchs wrote:
Rubbish. They answer to the general public through the incumbent government. Dick asked a question and is due an answer. He does have a valid point in many ways.
I (like many others) have operated in (at some stage or other over recent years) most of the Military Control Zones in this country and in all honesty by far the most "different" to the normal operations is Williamtown. Do not (for even a moment) get me wrong, there are some great controllers there, just some very peculiar methods used locally from time to time.
One instance, bear in mind this is RPT ops: Had a request to change level due wx refused while an approach/departure controller was having a "light hearted" conversation with a visiting military aircraft inbound around 25-30nm the other side of the aerodrome. Came back with "Require FL140 immediately"..... her first response was "Why do you need FL140 due wx?" so then I had to explain myself without the time to do so....
It all comes down to training and education as to what civil aircraft need. If we all take a big breath and try and see it from the other's point of view you never know, change just may happen if you can all sit down and agree. For those of you unaware, The WLM CTR is a big roadblock to much of the civil VFR traffic heading north out of Bankstown and has significant impact on Cessnock and Maitland as well.
Klaus Fuchs also wrote:
Incorrect at the moment. Just yesterday was "Cleared the ILS and contact the tower at 11 DME" when we had been in IMC from around FL110 all the way down to when the HIALS swum into view at around 400 feet. Unless they are trying something new?
I know Dick Bashing is a sport to some of you, but in all honesty there are easier ways to handle traffic than "Hold at" or "Clearance not available". If civil controllers can do it on a daily basis then why do (some and only some) military controllers find it difficult to do the same thing?
Regards,
OpsN.
Have you ever been supersonic Dick? It takes a little while to slow down.
All S/S ops take place a set distance off-shore. When Salt Ash fires up there are abrupt vertical manouvres, but in all honesty the lowest they ever seem to get in there is around 1500'. How do I know? I live next to it and enjoy the show out my back windows daily.
Klaus Fuchs wrote:
And becoming increasingly abusive with his opinion of "the military people in Canberra" - almost slanderous one might say.
I (like many others) have operated in (at some stage or other over recent years) most of the Military Control Zones in this country and in all honesty by far the most "different" to the normal operations is Williamtown. Do not (for even a moment) get me wrong, there are some great controllers there, just some very peculiar methods used locally from time to time.
One instance, bear in mind this is RPT ops: Had a request to change level due wx refused while an approach/departure controller was having a "light hearted" conversation with a visiting military aircraft inbound around 25-30nm the other side of the aerodrome. Came back with "Require FL140 immediately"..... her first response was "Why do you need FL140 due wx?" so then I had to explain myself without the time to do so....
It all comes down to training and education as to what civil aircraft need. If we all take a big breath and try and see it from the other's point of view you never know, change just may happen if you can all sit down and agree. For those of you unaware, The WLM CTR is a big roadblock to much of the civil VFR traffic heading north out of Bankstown and has significant impact on Cessnock and Maitland as well.
Klaus Fuchs also wrote:
Without knowing all the ins and outs of WLM, I do believe TWR owns the circuit area overland under VMC, with this airspace taken back by approach when instrument recoveries are required due weather. So you are incorrect in your assumption that TWR doesn't own any airspace - it's just not the bit that interests you.
I know Dick Bashing is a sport to some of you, but in all honesty there are easier ways to handle traffic than "Hold at" or "Clearance not available". If civil controllers can do it on a daily basis then why do (some and only some) military controllers find it difficult to do the same thing?
Regards,
OpsN.