Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > PPRuNe Worldwide > The Pacific: General Aviation & Questions
Reload this Page >

RPT Radio Calls into CTAF - Jet* Today at Ballina

The Pacific: General Aviation & Questions The place for students, instructors and charter guys in Oz, NZ and the rest of Oceania.

RPT Radio Calls into CTAF - Jet* Today at Ballina

Old 24th Dec 2008, 07:16
  #41 (permalink)  
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Australia
Posts: 49
Look I work for said company and I will admitt some of the guys I work with have bad radio skills generally. But so do other parts of aviation.

If you don't understand a call, ask the question.

Merry Christmas
Zed is offline  
Old 24th Dec 2008, 08:36
  #42 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Awstraya
Posts: 194

Read my posts carefully. I did not make the querying call and I was not stressed or distracted - I was on frequency, nearby but not in the way (124.2 covers Casino, Lismore, Ballina & Evans Head BTW). I admit I must only be an "amateur" with just over 1000 hours and a CIR maintained current "only" since 2001, but a set of DAPs is by my side when flying IFR - with the enroute plates already pulled and on my kneeboard....I do not expect other folks flying VFR X country to do the same, however.

You will be interested to know that ASA will not be updating DAPs online in the near future (or I believe making them available on line, so I also do not expect that VFR drivers to go and buy a set ....

Zed - the call may not be queried if the receiving individual does not realise that there may be a possible conflict if the initial call is incorrect. I also cannot accept that procedural matters such as these are not covered in check and training, either.

If I was a passenger on J* (and I am sometimes) I would be VERY concerned that communications OCTA and in CTAFs are not conducted routinely in a manner that reduces risk, no matter who may be listening (from other RPT to itinerant VFR RA-Aus). I would also be very concerned to find that this is not emphasised for ops OCTA. J* is not the only one concerned here, I'll admit, but the problem is unfortunately common enough for concern. That is the point of the thread.
NOtimTAMs is offline  
Old 24th Dec 2008, 10:05
  #43 (permalink)  

Join Date: May 2003
Location: Enroute
Posts: 624
Im sure there are experienced pilots that have less of a workload flying in extreme weather than a VFR pilot in Vmc
That has to be the sickest joke I have ever heard.

You were trying to make a joke, weren't you?
Jet_A_Knight is offline  
Old 26th Dec 2008, 03:22
  #44 (permalink)  
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: They seek him here, they seek him there
Posts: 131
When to Do an Instrument approach

If the weather was "severely clear" should RPT crews be conducting instrument approaches?

Have a look at CAR 166 (2)(d):

The pilot in command of an aircraft that is being operated in the vicinity of a non‑controlled aerodrome must:

unless subregulation (3) or (4) applies — when approaching the aerodrome to land, join the circuit pattern for the direction in which landing is to be undertaken on the upwind, crosswind or downwind leg;
and CAR 166 (5)

Paragraphs (2) (d) and (3) (b), (c) and (d) do not apply if:

(a) the pilot is conducting an instrument approach in I.M.C.; and

(b) the instrument approach procedure positions the aircraft to join the circuit other than on the upwind, cross‑wind or down‑wind leg of the circuit pattern.
Also refer to AIP ENR 1.1 64.2

An aircraft approaching a non-towered aerodrome for a landing
should join the circuit in accordance with para 64.5 unless it is:
a. following an instrument approach procedure in IMC;
The bolding is mine. The regs and AIP do explicilty allow the 5 mile final straight in procedure as well but the quotes were too large.

My question is do pilots have the discretion to carry out an RNAV GNSS approach at a non-towered aerodrome in VMC? One reading of the regs says no they do not.

I understand that this may be a case of inapropriate regulation but it would avoid the concerns of the originator of this thread.

NOtimTAMs, if it really is a concern to you submit a REPCON report
GaryGnu is offline  
Old 26th Dec 2008, 03:54
  #45 (permalink)  
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Qld troppo
Posts: 3,467
I have been in both positions (VFR + IFR) No way in the coldest part of hell does a VFR pilot have a greater workload than an IFR pilot, single or mulit crew (exception skydiving)
You can't compare IFR with VFR as far as the workload goes re weather etc (ulness the VFR driver has foud himself in the soup)
You guys need to move north. Having spent 35 years flying a mix of VFR and IFR in singles and twins, mostly single pilot, I gotta say that IMHO, 98% of the time, IFR is way less stressful (easier?) than VFR.

The other 2% is made up of the days when it is socked in to the deck for hundreds of miles around and the rain is hitting the aeroplane so hard that you think its gonna knock you out of the sky; and the days when you are dodging thunderstorms. Radar and/or Stormscope would help with the latter but I have rarely had that luxury.

Fortunately icing is not a common issue in the north, but does cause me some angst if I head down Mexico way. Ice was par for the course when flying in NZ, although it seemed easier to get away from it over there.

Mostly I just TO and climb out like the man says, sit up there in the cruise changing frequency when instructed, let down vis the GPS arrival. Occassionally I fly a GPS RNAV or ILS for real, but have yet to "miss".

Certainly, flying into and out of Archerfield (YBAF) is way easier IFR than it is VFR, ya just gotta remember to not say the magic word "visual" until you have it all pretty well sussed! My first departure from YBAF for almost 20 years was into an 800' overcast in a C210. Program the GPS - punch on the AP - do as the man says - too easy!

Wally, the last NDB I have flown in anger was YKID (Kidston) in a C310 on 5 July 1989. I broke out right at the minima and flew VFR to Carpentaria Downs to collect my pax.

Listening to the jet peddlers in my part of the world, they don't sound to stressed either - although I am sure there are times when the pucker factor goes up - such as getting into Brisbane when the CBs are rolling in from the west.


PS: I regularly mix with, listen to, and observe RPT and the likes of the many "Foxtrot Deltas" going in to places like Longreach, Cloncurry, Mt Isa, Roma, Hervey Bay and Bundaberg. I gotta say that I think they do a very professional job of advising their position and intentions to the other traffic, and arranging separation where necessary.

Last edited by ForkTailedDrKiller; 26th Dec 2008 at 09:48.
ForkTailedDrKiller is offline  
Old 26th Dec 2008, 04:17
  #46 (permalink)  
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Queensland
Posts: 84
Firstly, all the best to you mob for 2009.
I started a thread on a similar subject months ago with Gladstone in mind. Since that thread you can see the difference with Rpt,Local and transiting traffic giving positions and altitudes. Not hard
The word must be widespread through Pprunne.As I stated previously, the transiting traffic and some locals are not familiar with the Rnav appr. As someone stated if pos/alt was given it would make it unnecessary for verification calls. Haven't we got more than enough calls now
What disappoints me in this thread is the "us" and them" inferences.
ForF8#ksake we are all Aviators and all started with our first flight be it yesterday or forty years ago.
Have a good and safe New Year yo'all

frothy is offline  
Old 26th Dec 2008, 04:38
  #47 (permalink)  
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: YSCB
Posts: 20
Here's a thought - back to basics:

COMMON TRAFFIC advisory frequency calls:

An inadequate call should not be the starting point for an on-air debate or a trigger for a whole bunch of see and be seen aircraft to start doing some head-down in-flight research or review. Why not get it as good as possible at the first announcement. That first call is not a tick in the box; it is a prime opportunity to tell everyone interested what you are, where you are and where you are going. A pause for thought before 'transmit' may help.
BMW-Z4 is offline  
Old 26th Dec 2008, 08:51
  #48 (permalink)  
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: 41S174E
Age: 53
Posts: 2,767
Occassionally I fly a GPS RNAV or ILS for real, but have yet to "miss".
Thats amazing that you've never had to miss Doc. Mind you, I flew with a 737 Captain who told me he had never missed due weather. I find that so incredible that its hard to believe but I think he was serious! I had already missed three times that winter!
framer is offline  
Old 26th Dec 2008, 23:37
  #49 (permalink)  
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 415
If the J* crew stated that they were carrying out an RNAV approach for runway 06 surely all you have to do is look to the west for the big jet with its landing lights on? The CTAF procedures were developed by a consultant in DOTARS who had never flown anything bigger than a piston twin. The procedures are inadequate when it comes to RPT jets. If crews fly straight in via the RNAV approach then that is a predictable flight path that everyone can be aware of. As has been mentioned, if you are unsure of where the traffic is, speak up.
Lookleft is offline  
Old 27th Dec 2008, 00:21
  #50 (permalink)  
Join Date: Apr 1999
Posts: 51
Read the Original Education Material

Didn't anyone read the original education material that came out with the new CTAF calls . The education material asked all IFR pilots to give position information as beraing and distance with intentions. It also clearly stated that VFR pilots are not expected to be familiar with IFR procedures.
Mike Smith was the man responsible for the education material.
The professional pilots should be upholding the standards but sadly on many fronts they are not.
At the field where I instruct, the young IFR pilots seem to think it cool to let everyone know they are making an IFR approach by stating the type of approach they are conducting and nothing else.
ANCIENT is offline  
Old 27th Dec 2008, 01:09
  #51 (permalink)  
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Horn Island
Posts: 0
I have to say any jet crew that believe they are too busy to use quadrants in a radio call and then expand if necessary the detail of extra tracking such as DME arcs etc probably should NOT be up front.

It really is simple. rememeber some of these pilots of smaller aircraft possibly only have a few hours, maybe 1 or 2 solo. They will need consideration and will be hesitant about radio's.

Its utter garbage and I find it hard to imagine any one really believes that VFR pilots should be studying IFR charts.

Lets turn the tables, how many IFR guys do carry WAC charts or any topographical charts for all their destinations? I can tell you not many of the guys I fly with do.

I regularly drag my old WAC ouit going into Gove when the Airvan calls inbound, taxiing, departing for a place I cant pronounce let alone find on the map. That is equally as stupid as the IFR guy using weighpoints on a instrument approach.

The one thing every one seems to agree on is if wome dimwit pilot makes a call that is not clear then we should ask!

Another suggestion is to submit a report, CAIR or not. The individual pilot will most likely not even hear about it, its the system at fault and the system that needs changing. Enough reports and that MAY happen.
RENURPP is offline  
Old 27th Dec 2008, 01:13
  #52 (permalink)  
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Queensland
Posts: 84
Your right, and also page 127 of the VFG

Pilots of radio-equipped VFR aircraft must listen out on the appropriate VHF
frequency (CAR 243) and announce if in potential conflict. Pilots intercepting
broadcasts from aircraft in their vicinity which are considered to be in potential
conflict with their own aircraft must acknowledge by transmitting own callsign
and, as appropriate, aircraft type, position, actual level and intentions.
When approaching an aerodrome and in the vicinity, all radio-equipped aircraft
must broadcast on the CTAF:
• callsign and aircraft type;
• position (reported as distance with either the radial bearing, or quadrant
from the aerodrome);
• level; and
• intentions.
“Bundaberg Traffic, Zulu Foxtrot Romeo, Cessna 172, One Five miles West, Two
Thousand Five hundred, Inbound, Circuit area Bundaberg at time Zero Two”

A no brainer really, and it comes back to Wally 2's point on "Airmanship". What about we all sing from the one song sheet. It'll save a lot of angst as well as possible grief.

frothy is offline  
Old 27th Dec 2008, 08:36
  #53 (permalink)  
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: australia
Posts: 64
steady on

Go easy with the exclamation marks and bold lettering J3 it's christmas.
Murray Cod is offline  
Old 27th Dec 2008, 09:50
  #54 (permalink)  
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Here and there
Posts: 2,853
FTDK, I don't think it's so much that being IFR is busier than VFR, rather that being two pilot into a busy CTAF at 250 knots can be busier than being single pilot into the same CTAF at 180 knots. I think it stems from a couple of things. One, the procedural way the crew work make it more difficult to put things on hold while radio calls are dealt with. Two, there can be a lot more chatter involved between the pilots when establishing their situational awareness. When I'm single pilot I can very quickly disregard or listen to radio calls as I see fit and I get my situational awareness from what I hear, I can also easily massage my cockpit approach sequence to fit into what's happening around me, I don't need to explain to someone else what I am doing and keep them in the loop, and I don't need to discuss things with them in case their situational picture differs from mine. Of course there are many benefits of multi-crew operations, e.g., if my situational picture is wrong and I'm single pilot I don't have someone else to put it right, but multi-crew can get a bit cumbersome in busy CTAF radio environments.
AerocatS2A is offline  
Old 27th Dec 2008, 10:55
  #55 (permalink)  
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Sydney NSW Australia
Posts: 3,048
so where does that airmanship thread fit in here? i remember a saying, Keep it simple/ Keep it safe. now considering the situation, VFR pilots in the area, likelyhood of them NOT knowing IFR waypoints? = Very High, refering back to the KISS principle, and a little mix of airmanship, then reporting position with a IFR waypoint is probably not a good idea, especially when in reality, it possible not 1 of the VFR pilots there knew where the IFR waypoint was...

or how about this saying, when in IMC, then talk IFR, when VMC, talk VFR. what do ya think?
Ultralights is offline  
Old 27th Dec 2008, 14:53
  #56 (permalink)  
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: south pacific vagrant
Posts: 1,334
If you want your audience to understand your message, make sure you speak it in a language you know they will understand.

Works in all facets of life.

Simple really.
waren9 is offline  
Old 29th Dec 2008, 05:01
  #57 (permalink)  
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Australia
Posts: 753
A good one you hear often is "All traffic XXX, YYY an IFR important jobby is doing a sector three entry for a 27 NDB" or "YYY is in the 34 NDB holding patern", no other details given. This is normally on blue sky days, it's crap. Even IFR blokes without the relevent plate would'nt know where captain important is.
Super Cecil is offline  
Old 29th Dec 2008, 07:30
  #58 (permalink)  
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: All at sea
Posts: 1,807
Wot's this 'at TIME two zero' stuff? How's about '(place) at two zero'.

Not that insertion of the extra word is all that important as long as the message is clear, but I suggest we all refrain from putting our own spin on what should be said and just go back to the AIP for guidance, bearing in mind that it is a guidance document and does not claim to cover every situation. When the situation warrants, use plain language in as few words as possible. One of the many of my pet R/T hates is 'climbing to Flight Levels'. Another is ' an IFR Boeing 737 jet'. In the first case, totally useless information - in the second, an excess of useless information. If told it's a Boeing or an A320 or whatever, surely that's enough to tell even farmer Brown in his little Cessna that it's big, it's fast, the crew probably isn't looking out the window, they think they are more important anyway, and whether he agrees or not about the importance bit, he needs to keep clear.
Mach E Avelli is offline  
Old 29th Dec 2008, 09:52
  #59 (permalink)  
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: 41S174E
Age: 53
Posts: 2,767
an IFR Boeing 737 jet'
ha ha I've never ever heard that but if I did I'd be tempted to transmit "whoop de dooo" in response
framer is offline  
Old 29th Dec 2008, 21:16
  #60 (permalink)  
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Eastside
Posts: 595
A good one you hear often is "All traffic XXX, YYY an IFR important jobby is doing a sector three entry for a 27 NDB"
Not sure where you would hear this "often", airline schedules don't allow for pilots to tool around for the hell of it. Do it often and expect a call into the office. More likely from an IFR important jobby 310 doing an IR.

Has it been ascertained whether an earlier, perhaps 30nm call was made on CTAF that perhaps wasn't heard (it is a large and busy CTAF)?

Was the request for position clarification from an aircraft that clearly was not a conflict (eg in the circuit at Lismore)?

Last edited by grrowler; 30th Dec 2008 at 01:58.
grrowler is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information -

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.