Class D Zones for Broome & Karratha
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Australia
Posts: 743
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Class D Zones for Broome & Karratha
On 13 November 2009, the General Manager, Airspace and Aerodrome Regulation Group, signed instruments CASA OAR 192/09 (Determination of controlled aerodrome – Broome) and CASA OAR 193/09 (Determination of controlled aerodrome – Karratha). Both instruments were registered on the Federal Register of Legislative Instruments on 18 November 2009 and come into effect on 18 November 2010.
How many controller will be required for each tower? And more importantly, where are they going to come from, seeing that there is a shortage of controllers in Australia.
How many controller will be required for each tower? And more importantly, where are they going to come from, seeing that there is a shortage of controllers in Australia.
New tower for Broome, and a refurbishment of the existing facility at YPKA. Will be interesting to see if they can manage to complete the building works on time as they now have less than 12 months...
Join Date: May 2002
Location: australia
Posts: 606
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And more importantly, where are they going to come from, seeing that there is a shortage of controllers in Australia.
Don't ask about Bankstown, Jandakot, Parafield, Archerfield, Camden, etc.
There is a reason ASA have more people in 'Corporate Relations' aka Spin Doctors, than controllers in Sydney. Can you guess what it is?
If you can't dazzle with brilliance, baffle with BS.
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Queensland
Posts: 20
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Haven't you heard about the 9 new positions that have apparently been offered- that should fix Broome, Karratha, the 6 GAAPs (soon to be Class D) and Sydney.
It is all solved....
It is all solved....
Rumor has it QF is planning to increase Karratha services to 12 RTN from Perth / day by 2011
Considering they are doing 9 RTN now, that is very possible
Hedland doesn't have the traffic levels to justify...plus 2 F100 charters a week to Bali is hardly serious international status...
Hedland doesn't have the traffic levels to justify...plus 2 F100 charters a week to Bali is hardly serious international status...
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Europe
Age: 65
Posts: 136
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Knowing ASA they'll expect the controllers to fund/find thier own accommodation as the tossers in CB have very little idea where YPKA even is. And they most likely think Broome is a nice place to spend thier bonuses during the southern winter.
maybe they will use the current Karratha ARFF model - rent 3 houses and fly in a rotational crew...and GR knows where YPKA is as theres a shot of him in December AA in front of the YPKA control tower
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Wood's Hole (N4131.0 W07041.5)
Posts: 92
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The Other Chinese "Curses"
Max1
Don't forget the other two curses (in ascending order of "scariness"):
"May you live in interesting times"; and,
"May you come to the attention of the authorities".
(Apologies for the total thread-drift)
Don't forget the other two curses (in ascending order of "scariness"):
"May you live in interesting times"; and,
"May you come to the attention of the authorities".
(Apologies for the total thread-drift)
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 153
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I understand that the airspace steps down to the D zone will be class E in both YPKA and YBRM as opposed to class C as currently in YBAS, YMHB, YMLT etc. Is this not a stupid idea (regardless of the merits or otherwise of E) as there is no standardisation across the regional towers.
Is this not a stupid idea (regardless of the merits or otherwise of E) as there is no standardisation across the regional towers.
The last thing I want or need while being bossed around by an ATC is trying to avoid (if I ever see him) a "free in G" ratbag swanning through Class E without talking to anybody because that was what the airspace class was designed for.
The staff accommodation supplied by ASA. It goes under the camper van on a stick. It might suit those raafies they are trying to steal, I hear the military types usually sleep on rocks in the open and love not showering once a week. It will be like a palace.
They can't afford more since the sick leave is too high. I've been sick for a while now. I only sleep while everyone in Australia is awake. There are lots of us. Its a real disease you know. I think they call it "wedon'tworktherenomore"
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Australia
Posts: 743
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am with you Bloggs, class E outside of radar is gross stupidity. If they are spending the money to set up Class D towers to provide seperation where is the sense in having heavy RPT leave protected airspace descend into unprotected airspace and then enter protected airspace. If thats the way they intend to run these towers, they are better off going back to the CAGRO operator and saving the money.
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Behind a CB near you
Age: 44
Posts: 204
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bloggs and Dog One, i'm with you guys.
The congenital imbicility of CASA never ceases to amaze me. Why do they have to go out of their way to make it non standard and different to anywhere else and in this case provide a ring of reduced protection around the class D airspace before hitting C at the higher levels.
The congenital imbicility of CASA never ceases to amaze me. Why do they have to go out of their way to make it non standard and different to anywhere else and in this case provide a ring of reduced protection around the class D airspace before hitting C at the higher levels.
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: On a different Island
Age: 52
Posts: 311
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The reason for the airspace role back was due to lack of risk assessment turning C into E above D; ie the risk was/may have been raised without evidence of the cost benefit analysis being positive. ie you can increase risk if the cost of doing so is achieved or bettered...
Still with me...
So turning G into E is a safety improvement... therefore, you do not need the CBA. So it will be perfectly acceptable to have E over D where G currently exists; cause it's G now, E = safer than G... But just because you can doesn't mean you should. Surveillance makes E so much simpler.
The big issue is ASAs ability to staff the new facilities plus getting the new/old establishments online within the time frame. Then getting the enroute individuals trained to cope with the new E steps and the new procedures associated with the D airspace is a whole other issue.
Still with me...
So turning G into E is a safety improvement... therefore, you do not need the CBA. So it will be perfectly acceptable to have E over D where G currently exists; cause it's G now, E = safer than G... But just because you can doesn't mean you should. Surveillance makes E so much simpler.
The big issue is ASAs ability to staff the new facilities plus getting the new/old establishments online within the time frame. Then getting the enroute individuals trained to cope with the new E steps and the new procedures associated with the D airspace is a whole other issue.
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Australia
Posts: 190
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If you are going to make a change, you should be ensuring that the outcome is safe, not just safer. There's a whole lot more involved than just changing the classification of airspace.
..
..