IFR TOPD broadcasts
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 1,569
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
oH boy it's getting quite complex here but good replies all the same. As someone said a few posts ago, what about the VFR guy who has no radio? Use 'eyeball Mk1', that's good too but it's far from perfect either. Single Pilot, (no TCAS) high workload dealing with multiple IFR traffic inbound to the same AD the poor old VFR 'Bob the farmer' is floating around out there oblivious to what's going on around him traffic wise, there in lies the real danger to ALL of us. Do we make radios mandatory? I believe so although I guess that guarantees zip really
What we 'say' on the R/T is only part of the problem.
Still such threads can only promote awareness
CW
What we 'say' on the R/T is only part of the problem.
Still such threads can only promote awareness
CW
Do we make radios mandatory?
Wally, ya need to upgrade that big Beech to PCAS at least (if only to keep up with the FTDK).
I guess the PC12 has PCAS as standard, huh! You'll be right when they upgrade the fleet!
Dr
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: (Not always) In front of my computer
Posts: 371
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Still splitting hairs.
must report position, level, intentions and estimate for
next position/destination
If this call is made to centre, the VFR pilot on area frequency will hear it also. If the call to centre only says "Left 8000, on descent placename" the intent has not been met.
As far as radials and bearings go. In my previous post I said I was talking to a turboprop driver. One would assume he knew what I meant when I reported what radial I was on. Radials do not belong exclusively to VOR stations, a radial describes any line from the centre of a circle to it's perimeter.
My TOPD descent call does not include radials, it is "BN Centre and all stations placename, ABC, an IFR XXX, 50 miles to the south west, leaving 8000, on descent inbound, placename circuit time 46, all stations placename.
Too easy
must report position, level, intentions and estimate for
next position/destination
If this call is made to centre, the VFR pilot on area frequency will hear it also. If the call to centre only says "Left 8000, on descent placename" the intent has not been met.
As far as radials and bearings go. In my previous post I said I was talking to a turboprop driver. One would assume he knew what I meant when I reported what radial I was on. Radials do not belong exclusively to VOR stations, a radial describes any line from the centre of a circle to it's perimeter.
My TOPD descent call does not include radials, it is "BN Centre and all stations placename, ABC, an IFR XXX, 50 miles to the south west, leaving 8000, on descent inbound, placename circuit time 46, all stations placename.
Too easy
IMO people are trying to stretch and 'interpret' the JEP/AIP to meet their own agenda.
FACT: When descending from class G airspace an all stations call on Centre is not required.
The only purpose of 2 min ToD call is to obtain traffic information on IFR flights from your level down to the aerodrome, as opposed to just within 1000 ft of your level in the cruise.
The system relies on 'see and avoid' for ops in class G between IFR/VFR and VFR/VFR. There is no argument that see and avoid has it's limitations but that is what we have to put up with in the cruise, as for the higher risk area of the aerodrome environment (due to higher tfc density) then a radio call for all radio equipped acft is required AT OR BEFORE 10 nm with suggestion that higher performance aircraft should broadcast well before 10nm.
The reference published by two dogs only applies to aircraft descending from controlled airspace where there is a change in responsibility for separation from ATC to the pilot and therefore the pilot must have received traffic information to enable the pilot to separate him/herself.
MHA
FACT: When descending from class G airspace an all stations call on Centre is not required.
The only purpose of 2 min ToD call is to obtain traffic information on IFR flights from your level down to the aerodrome, as opposed to just within 1000 ft of your level in the cruise.
The system relies on 'see and avoid' for ops in class G between IFR/VFR and VFR/VFR. There is no argument that see and avoid has it's limitations but that is what we have to put up with in the cruise, as for the higher risk area of the aerodrome environment (due to higher tfc density) then a radio call for all radio equipped acft is required AT OR BEFORE 10 nm with suggestion that higher performance aircraft should broadcast well before 10nm.
The reference published by two dogs only applies to aircraft descending from controlled airspace where there is a change in responsibility for separation from ATC to the pilot and therefore the pilot must have received traffic information to enable the pilot to separate him/herself.
MHA
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Aust
Posts: 378
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
An IFR aircraft in class G airspace (from the Jepps)
1. Before Changing level - ATS - Report
2. Before leaving controlled airspace on descent - ATS - Report
3. Inbound/transiting - CTAF - Broadcast
REPORT- a mandatory radio report from an aircaft to the appropriate ATS unit.
BROADCAST- a radio broadcast from an aircraft on the appropriate frequency to provide advisory traffic information to other aircraft.
The standard broadcast format is as already mentioned.
You get the same when bolding differant parts of the AIP that Two Dogs quoted.
Take the airmanship side of things out of it for a while, and you find that there is NO requirement to talk to anyone else other then ATS and known traffic. Right or wrong, I dunno.
1. Before Changing level - ATS - Report
2. Before leaving controlled airspace on descent - ATS - Report
3. Inbound/transiting - CTAF - Broadcast
REPORT- a mandatory radio report from an aircaft to the appropriate ATS unit.
BROADCAST- a radio broadcast from an aircraft on the appropriate frequency to provide advisory traffic information to other aircraft.
The standard broadcast format is as already mentioned.
You get the same when bolding differant parts of the AIP that Two Dogs quoted.
62. DESCENT FROM CONTROLLED AIRSPACE
62.1 Before descending from controlled into Class G airspace and before separation with any aircraft operating near the base of controlled airspace can be compromised, the pilot in command of an IFR flight must report position, level, intentions and estimate for
next position/destination to the ATS unit providing services in Class G airspace. If the report ismade using HF radio, a broadcast must be made on the appropriate area VHF frequency.
62.1 Before descending from controlled into Class G airspace and before separation with any aircraft operating near the base of controlled airspace can be compromised, the pilot in command of an IFR flight must report position, level, intentions and estimate for
next position/destination to the ATS unit providing services in Class G airspace. If the report ismade using HF radio, a broadcast must be made on the appropriate area VHF frequency.
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: Abeam Alice Springs
Posts: 1,109
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
........... you find that there is NO requirement to talk to anyone else other then ATS and known traffic. Right or wrong, I dunno.
Take the airmanship side of things out of it for a while, and....
Some things are just GOOD PRACTICE for one of a million reasons!
Common Sense, Good Practice and Airmanship all go together and are additional to what is written in the books. Sadly not many trainers teach outside the book these days...
I'm sorry but all your definitions of bearing are wrong. Bearing refers to the horizontal direction, either in east of west, with reference to either true north or magentic north. It is not exclusive to with NDBs and radials aren't exclusive to VORs. They just happen to be the radio navaids we use in referencing those terms.
Bearings and radials were around long before VORs and NDBs.
Bearings and radials were around long before VORs and NDBs.
Airmanship vs Correct radio telephony
This argument is just another case of 'air law by rumour'. I would suggest that good airmanship dictates knowing the requirements of correct radio telephony and only making additional broadcasts when deemed necessary. If there is one thing that this thread has pointed out is that when people subject their own opinion as law and expect others to make broadcasts when they are not required it creates a safety deficiency.
Prior to 2003 NAS stage 1 implementation, VFR aircraft used to make departure broadcasts on Centre. These broadcasts created frequency congestion and in many pilots instilled a warm and fuzzy false sense of security that they knew where everyone was which detracted from see and avoid. The fact was that many of these broadcasts did not increase safety but decreased it (non-radio aircraft / important calls being missed due to congestion / incorrect position reports).
Triadic I am not disagreeing with you that good airmanship is an area that’s in dire need of greater focus in the training environment but I believe that making unnecessary radio transmissions that contradict the JEP/AIP and NAS is an example of poor airmanship.
Risk analysis during the creation of NAS placed a high emphasis on broadcasting in and around aerodromes but not for every movement in the air where see and avoid is more effective.
In the case of an IFR aircraft on decent to an aerodrome from class G airspace :
ABC: "BN Centre ABC 2 min ToD"
BN CEN: "ABC no reported IFR traffic"
ABC: "Innisfall traffic ABC King Air 36 miles North on descent passing FL130 Circuit area 22 Innisfall"
***Any aircraft in the vicinity of Innisfall Aerodrome should be monitoring the CTAF, this includes aircraft inbound, outbound and aircraft near the aerodrome at altitudes normally used by departing or arriving aircraft***
Know the rules and stick by them
MHA
Prior to 2003 NAS stage 1 implementation, VFR aircraft used to make departure broadcasts on Centre. These broadcasts created frequency congestion and in many pilots instilled a warm and fuzzy false sense of security that they knew where everyone was which detracted from see and avoid. The fact was that many of these broadcasts did not increase safety but decreased it (non-radio aircraft / important calls being missed due to congestion / incorrect position reports).
Triadic I am not disagreeing with you that good airmanship is an area that’s in dire need of greater focus in the training environment but I believe that making unnecessary radio transmissions that contradict the JEP/AIP and NAS is an example of poor airmanship.
Risk analysis during the creation of NAS placed a high emphasis on broadcasting in and around aerodromes but not for every movement in the air where see and avoid is more effective.
In the case of an IFR aircraft on decent to an aerodrome from class G airspace :
ABC: "BN Centre ABC 2 min ToD"
BN CEN: "ABC no reported IFR traffic"
ABC: "Innisfall traffic ABC King Air 36 miles North on descent passing FL130 Circuit area 22 Innisfall"
***Any aircraft in the vicinity of Innisfall Aerodrome should be monitoring the CTAF, this includes aircraft inbound, outbound and aircraft near the aerodrome at altitudes normally used by departing or arriving aircraft***
Know the rules and stick by them
MHA
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Aust
Posts: 378
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
triadic, I of course agree with you. My point being, in a world of litigation and in an industry which everybody is quick to sprout on about 'the book' or 'the SOPs', you can't then chastise someone for doing it soley by 'the book'.
The rules are the rules and they are the bare @rse minimum and maximum you need to follow (once again, airmanship aside). Other then a poorly constructed report to ATC, these fellows did not do anything wrong (from my perspective).
I am not saying the procedures are correct, or even complete, just that they are what we have to work with.
The rules are the rules and they are the bare @rse minimum and maximum you need to follow (once again, airmanship aside). Other then a poorly constructed report to ATC, these fellows did not do anything wrong (from my perspective).
I am not saying the procedures are correct, or even complete, just that they are what we have to work with.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: aussie
Age: 51
Posts: 91
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The problem here is "airmanship" is such a subjective term..
If I make the extra calls when IFR class G on decent some would view it as good airmanship..
If I make the same calls on the same frequency (in the same weather etc)when VFR in my homebuilt, is it still good airmanship or am I dangerously cluttering up the frequency for the IFR boys..??
If I make the extra calls when IFR class G on decent some would view it as good airmanship..
If I make the same calls on the same frequency (in the same weather etc)when VFR in my homebuilt, is it still good airmanship or am I dangerously cluttering up the frequency for the IFR boys..??
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 308
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MHA - very well written. This is what we are trying to teach students. 
Unfortunately there are many phrases from the Jeps/AIPs which have been subjected to chinese whispers during the hand-me-down method of instructing.
Unfortunately there are many phrases from the Jeps/AIPs which have been subjected to chinese whispers during the hand-me-down method of instructing.
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: BackofBourke
Posts: 346
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The AIP coms section has become a joke. The phraseology sections include very few radio calls, compared to the past.
The other sad fact is many pilots do not even know the difference between "fifteen miles" and "one-five miles". However this is actually still in the text.
Sign of the times.
The other sad fact is many pilots do not even know the difference between "fifteen miles" and "one-five miles". However this is actually still in the text.
Sign of the times.
DESCENT FROM CONTROLLED AIRSPACE
62.1 Before descending from controlled into Class G airspace and before separation with any aircraft operating near the base of controlled
airspace can be compromised, the pilot in command of an
IFR flight must report position, level, intentions and estimate for
next position/destination to the ATS unit providing services in
Class G airspace. If the report is made using HF radio, a broadcast must be made on the appropriate area VHF frequency.
How does this relate to me operating IFR completely within class G airspace? I strive to make radio calls as detailed in the AIP. I know the AIP can be very difficult at times to interpret but in this case it seems quite clear.
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Darraweit Guim, Victoria
Age: 64
Posts: 508
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hair splitting really. The intent is obvious. I have bolded the bits I think reflect the intent of the rules.
Many moons ago there were Air Traffic Controllers (ATC), who looked after all the controlled airspace, and Flight Service Officers (FSO), who looked after the rest. When aircraft were descending from controlled airspace into, erm, the rest, said ATC were often loath to let the aircraft leave ATC frequencies until the aircraft had actually left controlled airspace. Quite frequently they also indicated they were far too busy to pass any traffic information the FSO was busting to tell the aircraft about, leading to more rude words on the intercoms, and a compromised traffic information service when other aircraft were operating near the base of CTA. The quoted (and imaginatively bolded) blurb was inserted into AIP (with a complementary bit in MATS) to force ATC to let aircraft talk to the FSO before they hit any conflicting traffic.
There are no more FSO with airspace of their own, but there are still situations where a different ATC will be providing services in G and this procedure is applicable.
On the other hand, I would do nothing to discourage those IFR who wish to broadcast their position when on descent. I would regard it as good airmanship, but is in no way required for flights in contact with ATC by VHF entirely in G airspace.
Outside VHF coverage your quote applies, as does the following:
AIP ENR 1.1 56.8 When a report from an IFR flight is made to ATS via HF, a broadcast on the appropriate CTAF or area VHF is also required.
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Sand Pit
Posts: 343
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Clearedtoenter
... All this blar blarr on the radio often just goes to clutter up the air waves. and is supefluous to the average VFR anyway ....
Also, on the average Centre frequency, we are often mixing it with Qantas, Garuda Virgin, United or whoever and I'm sure they are delighted to hear all these excessive blar blar blar calls ...
Excellent points. The risk of collision is minimal in our sparsely populated airspace in places like FNQ and the top end. It seems that we are often just cluttering up the airwaves with superfluous radio calls because thats what we have always done!
VFR without a radio in G is common both here and in the US where they do not have these meaningless broadcasts which from my experience DO clutter the airwaves. If VFR aircraft want some situational awareness of the enroute IFR traffic it is quite easy to simply monitor the Centre frequency (like they do in the US) to build a situational awareness picture of the descending IFR traffic.
... All this blar blarr on the radio often just goes to clutter up the air waves. and is supefluous to the average VFR anyway ....
Also, on the average Centre frequency, we are often mixing it with Qantas, Garuda Virgin, United or whoever and I'm sure they are delighted to hear all these excessive blar blar blar calls ...
Excellent points. The risk of collision is minimal in our sparsely populated airspace in places like FNQ and the top end. It seems that we are often just cluttering up the airwaves with superfluous radio calls because thats what we have always done!
VFR without a radio in G is common both here and in the US where they do not have these meaningless broadcasts which from my experience DO clutter the airwaves. If VFR aircraft want some situational awareness of the enroute IFR traffic it is quite easy to simply monitor the Centre frequency (like they do in the US) to build a situational awareness picture of the descending IFR traffic.
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Orstralia
Posts: 171
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If VFR aircraft want some situational awareness of the enroute IFR traffic it is quite easy to simply monitor the Centre frequency (like they do in the US)...
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Sitting in a hotel waiting to go to work.
Age: 44
Posts: 19
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In reply to tio540 the term " FIFTEEN MILES" & "ONE FIVE MILES" which one is the correct way to report distance and what is the reference for the AIP dont mean to be smart a@%e just genuinly want to know how to do it properly. I often hear both on the airwaves. 
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: AUS
Posts: 290
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
AIP 54 - 13 MAR 08 PART 1 - GEN 3.4 4.10 NUMERALS
and 4.11 Transmission of Numbers - more particularly 4.11.2. Even though it doesn't specifically mention 'miles'
and 4.11 Transmission of Numbers - more particularly 4.11.2. Even though it doesn't specifically mention 'miles'
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: AUS
Posts: 290
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CAR 163A Responsibility of flight crew to see and avoid aircraft
When weather conditions permit, the flight crew of an aircraft must, regardless of whether an operation is conducted under the Instrument Flight Rules or the Visual Flight Rules, maintain vigilance so as to see, and avoid, other aircraft.
Perhaps ASA might be inclined to stipulate that an appropriate report for this situation might be the same as that required in this circumstance.- AIP GEN 3.5.7 Quote2. Flights Contacting Approach Control not identified or procedural tower
_a.* (distance) MILES [DME] [RADIAL (VOR radial) or (compass quadrant from aerodrome, eg: SOUTH / SOUTH EAST, etc)] followed as necessary by: (i) MAINTAINING (or DESCENDING) TO (level)
This would have the effect of 'unreported trafffic' VFR aircraft pilots being provided with the same (meaningful/understandle to vfr only pilots) info as a procedural tower controller, so as to communicate with the inbound IFR A/C
When weather conditions permit, the flight crew of an aircraft must, regardless of whether an operation is conducted under the Instrument Flight Rules or the Visual Flight Rules, maintain vigilance so as to see, and avoid, other aircraft.
Perhaps ASA might be inclined to stipulate that an appropriate report for this situation might be the same as that required in this circumstance.- AIP GEN 3.5.7 Quote2. Flights Contacting Approach Control not identified or procedural tower
_a.* (distance) MILES [DME] [RADIAL (VOR radial) or (compass quadrant from aerodrome, eg: SOUTH / SOUTH EAST, etc)] followed as necessary by: (i) MAINTAINING (or DESCENDING) TO (level)
This would have the effect of 'unreported trafffic' VFR aircraft pilots being provided with the same (meaningful/understandle to vfr only pilots) info as a procedural tower controller, so as to communicate with the inbound IFR A/C