Class E down to 4500ft overhead YWLM?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Here
Posts: 155
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No one does, bushy, but we are not talking about Birdsville or Oodnadatta, and I can't comment on those areas because I know nothing of them. Williamtown does have radar coverage and in such airspace, a transponder is not irrelevant.
Leadsled,
Those are pretty broad statments of fact. Care to share withn the rest of us unwashed on how you arrived at Aus being 30% more dangerous than the US. Simple ask, just a link to the website or publish some figures here that can be verifiable.
A list to make it easier-
Show us the stats, where, what website?
Then show the breakdown (separately for Australia and the US) of Mid-airs (and Airprox/NMAC's) by:-
1. Airspace category/service level
2. Collision pairs (IFR/IFR, and IFR/VFR, and VFR/VFR)
Simple answers to simple questions. Otherwise, Lies , Damn Lies and Statistics!
Similar is not the same as "the same". The figures quoted by John McCormick are about the same as other and I have, which is about 30% fewer mid-airs in the US, compared to Australia.
The difference is big enough and consistent enough that it cannot be written off as a statistical error.
A list to make it easier-
Show us the stats, where, what website?
Then show the breakdown (separately for Australia and the US) of Mid-airs (and Airprox/NMAC's) by:-
1. Airspace category/service level
2. Collision pairs (IFR/IFR, and IFR/VFR, and VFR/VFR)
Simple answers to simple questions. Otherwise, Lies , Damn Lies and Statistics!
----just a link to the website or publish some figures here that can be verifiable
Without wanting to sound smart---s, NTSB/ATSB raw data and set to work, including reviewing the ATSB report already mentioned. See if you can get the minutes of ACF meetings over recent years (by whatever name it went by at the time). McCormick wasn't shooting in the dark.
One has to be careful, one relatively recent "publication" claimed "comparable" traffic counts between YSSY-YMML and the reference route in US. When we looked a little further, the US route a five times the traffic count. I wish my bank manager would accept the proposition that five time over my OD limit was "comparable" with my limit.
Likewise, another Australian produced report on en-route mid-airs in US assumed airports were at or near MSL, all the "en-route" mid airs in the US mid-west were, in fact, collisions in the circuit or arrival/departure areas of airports, even though they were 7000' +/-or so amsl.
Start from the raw data, fortunately mid-airs are relatively rare, this is not too onerous a task.
Tootle pip!!
PS: A tip, the US operating hours/sector operated are good to something like +/- 2%, ours are far more rubbery. Rubbery to the degree that you need to do rates at the limits of the Australian data accuracy, it changes the results. Australia still comes out unfavorably, it is a matter of degree.
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: The Middle of the Road
Posts: 32
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
After tower hours, overhead Rockhampton base of Class C is also down to 4500'. Nightly DHC8s, E-Jets and King Airs are given limited time to negotiate traffic, depart and ask for clearance prior to entering controlled airspace.
It probably causes more of a drama for ATC than the aircraft, but still the practice is non-standard and causes unnecessary problems.
Rumour has it that this is talk of changing it back to the standard J curve base of class E ie 8500', but it is yet to happen.
It probably causes more of a drama for ATC than the aircraft, but still the practice is non-standard and causes unnecessary problems.
Rumour has it that this is talk of changing it back to the standard J curve base of class E ie 8500', but it is yet to happen.
Disturb' With the safer FAA NAS system when a D tower closes the airspace becomes E and the Centre controllers provide the IFR separation service- very often in a non radar enviroment.
Now I know that this must seem an impossibility to you - with the E down to 700agl-simply cannot work!.
Imagine en -route ATC's who are also approach rated!
No- lets get more G so airline pilots become the ATC er- more profits and bonuses for AsA that way!
Forget the safety aspect.
Now I know that this must seem an impossibility to you - with the E down to 700agl-simply cannot work!.
Imagine en -route ATC's who are also approach rated!
No- lets get more G so airline pilots become the ATC er- more profits and bonuses for AsA that way!
Forget the safety aspect.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Here
Posts: 155
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The problem with Wiliamtown is that "after tower hours" is after 3-4pm each Friday and all weekend, and from mid-December to mid-January the tower and control zone isn't even there. There will not even be the assistance of the TRA that existed last year.
The mix of traffic will ensure that RPT aircraft will experience more restrictions on their arrivals and departures as controllers with only Enroute ratings will run airspace that is effective half Approach and half DTI.
Flexibility enjoyed coming into WLM outside tower/approach hours will be curtailed.
The mix of traffic will ensure that RPT aircraft will experience more restrictions on their arrivals and departures as controllers with only Enroute ratings will run airspace that is effective half Approach and half DTI.
Flexibility enjoyed coming into WLM outside tower/approach hours will be curtailed.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Here
Posts: 155
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm glad you entered this thread Mr Smith. I would like to know your opinion about a projected loss of flexibility in the WLM airspace with E down to A045 due to controllers without appropriate ratings/tools, and with this loss of flexibility there being a possible drop in safety as IFR aircraft are limited in the approaches they can make at certain times of the day, and limited in the levels above route LSA they can initally climb to without clearance from ATC. Bear in mind also that these controllers are also working the PMQ and YMND/YCNK area with alot of frequency congestion and screen scale problems.
Also, would you personally prefer the WLM airspace to be tower/approach during the military Christmas stand down and on weekends and Friday afternoons?
Also, would you personally prefer the WLM airspace to be tower/approach during the military Christmas stand down and on weekends and Friday afternoons?
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: NSW- 3rd world state
Posts: 170
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I was of the opinion that Wlm was moving towards being open (Class C TWR/APP ) from 6am to 10 pm everyday including X-mas stand down as TVL does ?
If this is the case, it will be interesting to see how much airspace the TWR takes after military flying has finished. Maybe Class C to 4500 then E, etc.
Thats what used to be done on weekends for out of hours moves during the 90's exept it was higher. WLM would take up to FL120.
If this is the case, it will be interesting to see how much airspace the TWR takes after military flying has finished. Maybe Class C to 4500 then E, etc.
Thats what used to be done on weekends for out of hours moves during the 90's exept it was higher. WLM would take up to FL120.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Here
Posts: 155
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The RAAF will probably only take up to A045 for extended hours if BN CEN do take over the airspace, and it will be interesting to see how that approach environment meshes with the overlying enroute environment - 3nm sep vs 5nm, vectoring with a radar terrain clearance chart vs vectoring above the grid LSA (which is 6600ft for most of the airspace) etc.
It will also be interesting to see how a VFR overflying C airspace in E at A045 without a clearance is handled in such an enviroment.
It will also be interesting to see how a VFR overflying C airspace in E at A045 without a clearance is handled in such an enviroment.
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: NSW- 3rd world state
Posts: 170
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Only a guess but if they do extend hours I reckon they would take higher than 4500 because of the reasons you mention. If they took say 8500 and it was a Mil Restriced airspace, then class c applies, with E starting at 8500.
Also another possible problem for E to 4500 is the radar feed for BN centre, unless they get the WLM feed.
I remember that being a stumbling block during the famous 98 class "G" trial. Bn centre sent an enroute ATC down to have a look at the old SURAD to use for DTI and poor buggar nearly had a heart attack and left.
Also another possible problem for E to 4500 is the radar feed for BN centre, unless they get the WLM feed.
I remember that being a stumbling block during the famous 98 class "G" trial. Bn centre sent an enroute ATC down to have a look at the old SURAD to use for DTI and poor buggar nearly had a heart attack and left.
Coral
Re your Post 35
I’ve been told many times that the airspace between Melbourne and Brisbane is as busy as any airspace in the USA. In that case, I can’t see why the sector sizes are dramatically different to the U.S. Of course, enroute controllers will have to be trained to do approach work. That’s a basic part of NAS.
Sometimes I fly for up to fifteen minutes in complete silence when IFR. Would you agree at those times that controllers may be able to have a little more workload?
To me, we have what is like a third-world system, ie. in the enroute environment below 8,500 feet even in radar covered airspace we give no air traffic control at all. In other modern aviation countries you get superb air traffic control which uses the radar right to the lower limit of its coverage.
Re your Post 35
I’ve been told many times that the airspace between Melbourne and Brisbane is as busy as any airspace in the USA. In that case, I can’t see why the sector sizes are dramatically different to the U.S. Of course, enroute controllers will have to be trained to do approach work. That’s a basic part of NAS.
Sometimes I fly for up to fifteen minutes in complete silence when IFR. Would you agree at those times that controllers may be able to have a little more workload?
To me, we have what is like a third-world system, ie. in the enroute environment below 8,500 feet even in radar covered airspace we give no air traffic control at all. In other modern aviation countries you get superb air traffic control which uses the radar right to the lower limit of its coverage.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Here
Posts: 155
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dick,
You talk of approach rated Enroute controllers, which is fine, however the WLM airspace in question will be introduced on the 19th of November which is not enough time to actually give the controllers involved an approach rating, even if ASA did have the training capacity and staff numbers to do so (which they don't). Are you suggesting that E down to A045 requires an approach rating?
As I have outlined above, there are some major restrictions in the controller tools available to process traffic in and out of WLM. The Office of Airspace Regulation has imposed the airspace on Airservices full well knowing that an Approach rating is necessary to run the airspace for the phases of flight encountered, but they have set a date that will not allow it to happen.
My question that is the subject of this thread is "why?"
You talk of approach rated Enroute controllers, which is fine, however the WLM airspace in question will be introduced on the 19th of November which is not enough time to actually give the controllers involved an approach rating, even if ASA did have the training capacity and staff numbers to do so (which they don't). Are you suggesting that E down to A045 requires an approach rating?
As I have outlined above, there are some major restrictions in the controller tools available to process traffic in and out of WLM. The Office of Airspace Regulation has imposed the airspace on Airservices full well knowing that an Approach rating is necessary to run the airspace for the phases of flight encountered, but they have set a date that will not allow it to happen.
My question that is the subject of this thread is "why?"
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Adrift upon the tides of fate
Posts: 1,840
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Melbourne and Brisbane is as busy as any airspace in the USA
Some of the city-pairs are quite busy eg. Melb/SY, SY/Bris, but that's it. The US has many more city-pairs in the same volume of airspace. A common misunderstanding, and an excellent demonstration of how statistics can be used to baffle the uninformed.
Ferris, every IFR approach in the USA under NAS is in a minimum of class E controlled airspace.
There are many places in the US that have similar traffic densities, or even less, than our east coast city pairs.
Yet they provide a class E approach service using en route controllers.
But of course it's not possible to provide this safer service in Australia because your closed mind says so.
Make up as many excuses and cop outs as you like. I happen to know that you are wrong and there are plans in train to provide such a safer service.
There are many places in the US that have similar traffic densities, or even less, than our east coast city pairs.
Yet they provide a class E approach service using en route controllers.
But of course it's not possible to provide this safer service in Australia because your closed mind says so.
Make up as many excuses and cop outs as you like. I happen to know that you are wrong and there are plans in train to provide such a safer service.
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: various areas
Posts: 225
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mr Smith,
Plans? presumably through the required processes of consideration and consultation?
If there are 'plans in train', in the interests of open and transparent review, you should outline them here as there are large numbers of industry participants who have a right to know how they might be impacted.
I happen to know that you are wrong and there are plans in train to provide such a safer service.
If there are 'plans in train', in the interests of open and transparent review, you should outline them here as there are large numbers of industry participants who have a right to know how they might be impacted.
Mr Smith
from Testimony (FAA FY 2008 Budget )
and from Airservices Australia
So I'm not surprised that you can state
and
As has been explained to you many times before, it can be done if there are enough ATCOs available to do the job, but ASA doesn't have enough ATCOs and its' a profession that requires a long training time.
By year-end, we expect to have 14,951 controllers on board
We employ around 3000 staff, including approximately 900 air traffic controllers
... they provide a class E approach service using en route controllers.
To me, we have what is like a third-world system, ie. in the enroute environment below 8,500 feet even in radar covered airspace we give no air traffic control at all. In other modern aviation countries you get superb air traffic control which uses the radar right to the lower limit of its coverage.
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Adrift upon the tides of fate
Posts: 1,840
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
But of course it's not possible to provide this safer service in Australia because your closed mind says so.
In order to provide this same service would either mean a dramatic change in the way ATC is done, in a manner specifically recommended against in reports such as the Uberlingen report (switching between approach/enroute modes with screen scale changes) or hiring an enormous number of ATCs who will sit around totally under-utilised (affordable safety???).
Of course
I happen to know that you are wrong
Closed mind? I know exactly who possesses it.
Dick, do you have any idea how much training it will require? Have you even considered that? Do you know how thin those training resources currently are? Resources, resources, resources. For the 53rd million & whatever time. Resources.
Care to explain where that's all going to come from? You can wish all you want but that won't make them miraculously appear. This has been explained in copious detail repeatedly & all you do is chant back "closed minds" & "change resistant".
Someone is feeding you a line they know you want to hear.
Care to explain where that's all going to come from? You can wish all you want but that won't make them miraculously appear. This has been explained in copious detail repeatedly & all you do is chant back "closed minds" & "change resistant".
Someone is feeding you a line they know you want to hear.
