Class D Zones for Broome & Karratha

[Howabout]

Regrettably, ARFOR, it seems to be not much.

I had hoped that there would have been a few questions asked; some hard ones. However, we got warned by others that pre-RAPAC chest-beating doesn't always translate to action.

I wasn't there, it's not my region, so I don't know. I just thought that there was an opportunity to ask.

Maybe that happened, maybe it didn't. I don't know.

[Ex FSO GRIFFO]

Hey Mr Peuce......How goes it?

You talkin' about 12/12/'91??

'Hated' and 'fought against' it for 9 yrs.....then got redundo because of it - Dec 2000.....

Got to 'like it' then, as 'it' was by then, a lost cause, and time 'to go'....

p.s. Thanks again Dick for the 'redundo'.......a 'new' life now.....but
Aviation is all the poorer because of your changes - whatever the motivation........IMHO....!!

MANY new careers began quite successfully because of Dick, so, t'ain't all sad!
Except for those still in the industry....

(Aviation Hall Of Doom.....INDEED!!)



Sorry guys/gals....slight drift....but 'Peuce' made a good point....20 years on......and wot 'ave we got???.......

[Capn Bloggs]

CASA was made aware of the inappropriateness of E at KTA and BME, loud and clear, by the "terrier of the west". CASA was not saying much, but did distribute the Airspace Change Proposal:

http://www.casa.gov.au/wcmswr/_asset...e-karratha.pdf

Fortunately, AsA has recommended against the E airways, proposing a upside-down wedding cake with a big chunk missing to the north of KTA.

Unfortunately, there was hardly any jet-industry at the meeting (a cynic might suggest that CASA deliberately sprung it on RAPAC at the last minute) so there was no opportunity to have a meaningful discussion or come to a industry policy position.

However, we have until the 31st of March to reply to the ACP, and the chart cutoff date is June; time to put the case.

Watch this space.

[89 steps to heaven]

Just in case anyone is unsure:

E over D is an unnecessary escalation risk factor. We do not need it and we have not got the same aviation culture or training as other countries.

D steps up to C is the most efficient way to go, compatible with our current training and culture.

Cost:

No more than E over D, so why insist on a sub standard system?

[OverRun]

So NAS lives on.

In accordance with CASA policy the ultimate model should emulate identified best practice in the United States National Airspace System design

Looking at the Airspace Change Proposal (thanks Capn Bloggs for the link), the airspace redesign elements for Karratha and Broome are:

• smaller than the normal Australian control zone. With a D boundary @ A025, that'll make the zone about a 8NM radius. It is a lot smaller than the A045 and 22NM radius found at regional control towers elsewhere in Australia.
• E over D airspace
• no surveillance radar at some locations

Reading back through the thread, there is:

• no cost saving with the small control zone
• a big backward step to unalerted see-and-avoid as the only line of defence in the zone between the current 30nm radius CAGR/S at Broome and the proposed 8nm radius zone for the control tower at Broome.

This is a DOUBLE Airspace Change Proposal – the "new" NAS airspace has been hidden (or should that be buried?) in the Airspace Change Proposal to put towers at Karratha and Broome. The tower issue was generally accepted by all. But this NAS Airspace Change Proposal is something else again. There is no safety case, no modelling, no justification, no cost saving.

What I could find was in the minutes of the industry consultation at Broome last month which have just come out.

asked for each chief pilot present to advise which option for the size of control area they considered safer. While the Chief Pilots raised other issues, they, when asked in turn, advised that a control area of 8nm and 2500’ at Broome was inadequate, and was less safe than 22nm and 4500’ option for class D. All stated that the CASA model would not work at Broome due to communication traffic, it was not safe, and would cause delays.

CASA have asked for wider industry comments, so here is everyone's chance:

The OAR is sympathetic to this view, but input from the wider aviation community is sought before the final airspace structure at these locations is decided upon by CASA. Stakeholders are therefore requested to provide feedback on this issue

The details and email address are here at CASA and closing date is 31st March 2010.

This has broad implications for RPT operations in regional airspace as well. I will post a short summary in DG&P Reporting Points as the sneaky way that these changes are being tried on will have kept them from view of many.

[OZBUSDRIVER]

I give up.

Even my brethren have had enough and are now awaiting the inevitable

Is a major MAC required before the LARP model finally delivers the base line for this experiment?

[ARFOR]

Bloggs

Yes, watch this space!

OverRun

There is no safety case, no modelling, no justification, no cost saving.

Exactly! In direct contravention of the Act, the AAPS and AC 2-5-1

There is only 1 reason proper process has been 'parked', because the politically desirable E outcome won't pass muster!

Justice Gibbs [and the like] will have a field day with any individual or organisation that knew, and did nothing!

The game is not over yet though

[Stationair8]

Beware of a big push coming for a lot more "E" airspace, little rumours are starting to add up.

[Howabout]

I think that OverRun's thread on the other site is where comments should be made. This is not just GA stuff; this affects everybody. including the 'travelling public.'

Hang on, I thought that was CASA's highest priority.

Oh, silly me.

[Spodman]

E over D is an unnecessary escalation risk factor. We do not need it and we have not got the same aviation culture or training as other countries.

There is no escalation factor for E replacing G airspace which is the proposal here. Your claim is not relevant. There is no coincidence that it is being tried here. It is a way of getting the airspace arrangement desired by those pulling the handles everywhere in place somewhere.

If nobody gets killed in a week or two the arrangement will have established a baseline and it will be rolled out across the country. Then your claim has relevance, but will be countered by the week or two of presumably death-free 'trial' proposed.

D steps up to C is the most efficient way to go, compatible with our current training and culture.

Not most efficient. It is certainly safe, and I agree there is a distinct safety advantage over E over D. But much less efficient.

[Capn Bloggs]

Spod,

I was going to ask Leadsled a similar question, but as you state that C over D is:

much less efficient.

than E over D,

please justify this claim.

[CaptainMidnight]

Can we have this thread closed and the relevant posts rolled into the other one, so we have just one thread on the topic?

[AerocatS2A]

Originally Posted by Spodman

There is no escalation factor for E replacing G airspace which is the proposal here. Your claim is not relevant.

It's not really replacing G though is it? The G it's replacing is a 30nm mandatory broadcast zone in practice, if not name. The E will not have mandatory broadcast requirements for VFR traffic which means IFR traffic will possibly have no idea a VFR aircraft is in the area until the VFR gets close to 8nm/2500' from YBRM and requests a clearance from Broome Tower.

With the present G airspace everyone knows about everyone else within 30nm of YBRM, with the E airspace we won't. That's a reduction in situational awareness and therefore an increase in risk. E is most definitely more risky than the G in the specific case of YBRM.

[ARFOR]

Submissions close CoB today [Australian Eastern Summer Time]

info_oar @ casa.gov.au [<-- take the spaces out either side of the @]

Even if it is only a brief submission, have your say people.

[multime]

Congestion

Dear pruners
In the hieght of the dry in Broome i,ve negoitiated around 8 jets a day, 100,s of light C210,s all blurting out at speed an incomprehensible gibberish, as their 18 year old egoes could afford, put up with Broome Air,s arrogant new kingair wannabes, (go around twice), and all sorts of nonsense from so called scenic pilots who think its their god given right to controll the airways betweeen Broome and Cape Leveque. ! (and block the airways).
But hey i was at 80 feet on survey, what do i care.
In this neck of the woods Dick Smith is correct.
Someone will get killed.
M

[Capn Bloggs]

Multime,

Better come back to "reality" and read the thread.

Nobody is suggesting that the tower isn't warranted. The issues are the size of the zone and the type of airspace above it.

[peuce]

Here's the dollar setup figure:

Airservices has confirmed it will build a combined air traffic control tower and fire station at Broome Airport valued at almost $20 million.

It will be the first combined facility of its type in Australia and will ensure the safe management of air traffic in and around the Broome airport. A temporary tower service will operate while building works are underway with the new facility scheduled to be complete in mid 2011.

Chief Executive Officer, Greg Russell, said that the ground-based radio service currently in use at the airport would not be sufficient to cope with the increased volume of aircraft expected over the next 10 years.

“Broome Airport is one of the busiest regional airports in Australia and provides regular services to Perth, Darwin, Melbourne, Sydney and Brisbane, along with connections onto overseas destinations.

For years, this region has also been the base for extensive mining and tourism operations.

“The establishment of an air traffic control tower and fire station in Broome shows our ongoing commitment to the development and implementation of infrastructure to make aviation safer and more efficient in regional Australia,” Mr Russell said.

Airservices has been considering options for the installation of an air traffic control services and an upgrade of the current Aviation and Rescue Fire Fighting (ARFF) services for the past 12 months.

The four storey tower will be fitted out with the latest technology and be built to withstand cyclones. The facility will also include rain water collection for landscape irrigation and vehicle cleaning.

Both the air traffic control tower and the fire station will provide coverage to all scheduled passenger transport operations seven days a week. Seven air traffic controllers and 20 aviation fire fighters will be based at Broome and will work across three shifts.

“With more than 73,000 aircraft movements expected by 2025, this facility represents our ability to appropriately protect life and property at Broome Airport. It will also ensure that we are well placed to provide safe, efficient air traffic operations in the region well into the future,” Mr Russell said.

The announcement follows the recent commissioning of a new fire station in Karratha and confirmation that Airservices will also re-open its air traffic control tower at the airport.

[Ex FSO GRIFFO]

Re "Seven air traffic controllers and 20 aviation fire fighters will be based at Broome and will work across three shifts."

Nice gig!
Sure beats 3 x CAGRO's working 1 ea x 11 hour day, 3 days on 3 orf......

And VERY pleasing to hear that the new twr will be 'built to withstand cyclones'......

[peuce]

Start adding up these figures:

BRM
Tower: $20m
7 x ATC: approx all up cost $5m pa
Admin & Housing: say $1m pa

KTA
Tower refurb/re-equip: say $5m
5? x ATC : $3m pa
Admin & Housing: say $1m pa

Just added about an extra 2% to ASA operational costs
Just added about 15% to ASA Capital Expenditure for the year

Where does that come from?

Hope we're saving a lot of lives at Broome & Karattha.

[Ex FSO GRIFFO]

I hear that the deal for those who tfr to BRM is a rent subsidy rather than accomodation being supplied at a 'reduced rent' in a 'Departmental' house, as has been the past practice at such locations.

Such subsidy would want to be 'good'...and to include an Electricity subsidy for the 'wet' (aircon) as well.....

Food prices aren't too bad, with both Coles and Woollies being available - and don't forget the fishin' can be great!!

How's the training going fellas..?? On time??