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

GAAP rules changed again ?

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 20th Nov 2009, 05:22
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 84
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
GAAP rules changed again ?

Just heard YMMB ATIS - they have dropped the bit about clearance for non-active runways - does this mean CASA have retracted that silly requirement ?
Back Pressure is offline  
Old 20th Nov 2009, 05:55
  #2 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: ...outside the wall...
Age: 68
Posts: 170
Received 3 Likes on 2 Posts
Nope.... Still on ATIS at YBAF...Maybe think that pile-its at YMMB have learned the new rules by now but those at YBAF aren't so quick??????
ravan is offline  
Old 20th Nov 2009, 07:05
  #3 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Europe
Posts: 1,841
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Since were on topic, care to fill us slower away from aus people in on the new rule?
Aussie is offline  
Old 20th Nov 2009, 07:30
  #4 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 47
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Previously at a GAAP aerodrome the non-active runways were classed as taxiways and could be used as desired. Now a clearance is required to cross/enter any runway.
AlJassmi is offline  
Old 20th Nov 2009, 08:03
  #5 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Karratha,Western Australia
Age: 43
Posts: 481
Received 6 Likes on 4 Posts
The requirement is now in AIP WEF 19 Nov 09 therefore we no longer have a requirement to put it on the ATIS.

Same with the Start Approval Required for Circuits. There is a permanent NOTAM out (at least for YPJT) so we no longer put it on the ATIS. Don't turn up at the holding point without a start though or you will almost certainly be turned away.
Awol57 is offline  
Old 20th Nov 2009, 09:15
  #6 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: downunder
Posts: 20
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
What could possibly be the benefit of having to obtain a clearance to taxi past the under shoot and over shoot of a runway that is inactive and no one is using surely this is a ridiculous waste of ATC and pilots time
GAAP procedures when are they going to make their mind up and stop changing it all the time for F**K sake at YPPF the procedures have just been reversed back to what they were before the last change
Trev007 is offline  
Old 20th Nov 2009, 09:21
  #7 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Queensland
Posts: 20
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Trev007

Could you shed light on what has changed back?

Thanks
twisties is offline  
Old 20th Nov 2009, 09:44
  #8 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: YBBN
Posts: 1,022
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
when are they going to make their mind up and stop changing it all the time for F**K sake
I reckon sometime next year when it all changes to Class D

Pyro
PyroTek is offline  
Old 20th Nov 2009, 10:24
  #9 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 565
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
for F**K sake at YPPF the procedures have just been reversed back to what they were before the last change
I think Trev might be talking about the fact they have switched the inbound/outbound reporting points to the NE (Dam Wall/Substation) back to what I understand they were a few years back (inbound via Dam Wall, outbound via Substation). ASA f##ked up the latest ERSA and VTC though and didn't put the ammendments in their. The only way you would know that it has changed is by looking at the AIP SUP.
wishiwasupthere is offline  
Old 20th Nov 2009, 10:59
  #10 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: MEL
Posts: 192
Received 12 Likes on 6 Posts
Obtaining a clearance to cross the undershoots of 26R and 26L on B when they aren't active is also an absolute joke at PF
Track5milefinal is offline  
Old 20th Nov 2009, 20:44
  #11 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 171
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
BackPressure,
FWIW this is now occuring on Bankstown ATIS as well and has caused many a pilots starting up for circuits to forget to request permission. I guess ASA thinks those big signs they put up on the main airport avenues is a good enough hint as well as the brochures they send out
PPRuNeUser0163 is offline  
Old 20th Nov 2009, 23:21
  #12 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Karratha,Western Australia
Age: 43
Posts: 481
Received 6 Likes on 4 Posts
Acutally ASA assumes, perhaps incorrectly, that people will read their AIP and their NOTAMs prior to flight. Why would we keep putting it in the ATIS when its in AIP and NOTAMs.

Of course based on the number of people we have to educate everytime we are on single runway at JT I am betting the majority of people do not look at the NOTAMs prior to flight...
Awol57 is offline  

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.