Increasing max number in circuit at GAAPs!
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: YBBN
Posts: 1,022
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Increasing max number in circuit at GAAPs!
Just got a letter from the CASA
excerpt:
"CASA intends to issue directions to AsA increasing the cap on aircraft in the circuit from six to eight with effect from 18 January 2010. Despite the cap there will be no restriction on the number of arriving and departing aeroplanes that ATC may permit into a circuit having taken into account any relevant consideration relating to the interests of safety"
(slightly?) Good stuff for GAAP flying schools, 2 less aircraft on the ground.
Also:
The cap will be removed with the coming Class D airspace procedures, even better i suppose.
also - full text:
Civil Aviation Safety Authority - GAAP
Pyro
excerpt:
"CASA intends to issue directions to AsA increasing the cap on aircraft in the circuit from six to eight with effect from 18 January 2010. Despite the cap there will be no restriction on the number of arriving and departing aeroplanes that ATC may permit into a circuit having taken into account any relevant consideration relating to the interests of safety"
(slightly?) Good stuff for GAAP flying schools, 2 less aircraft on the ground.
Also:
The cap will be removed with the coming Class D airspace procedures, even better i suppose.
also - full text:
Civil Aviation Safety Authority - GAAP
Pyro
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: On the KOP
Age: 43
Posts: 26
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In my experience at BK I think 6 is as many as you'd want in a training circuit, especially if you've got a range of performance, any more and you start to get alot of practice at go arrounds!
For the inbound circuit 8 is far better though. I'd much prefer to be in a crowded inbound circuit than requested to 'hold' at PSP for 5 mins along with 2 other a/c as I have been twice since the 6 maximum came in. In that instance I beat a hasty retreat to the 'safety' of the training area for 20 mins.
For the inbound circuit 8 is far better though. I'd much prefer to be in a crowded inbound circuit than requested to 'hold' at PSP for 5 mins along with 2 other a/c as I have been twice since the 6 maximum came in. In that instance I beat a hasty retreat to the 'safety' of the training area for 20 mins.
Nunc est bibendum
Geez, Jandakot's going to be fun to fly around!
I for one can't wait for Class D Twr's instead of GAAP's. Gotta be safer for all.
Whenever I receive a letter from the rule makers I think oh no what have I done this time!
I wonder how the controllers feel about this?
Wmk2
Whenever I receive a letter from the rule makers I think oh no what have I done this time!
I wonder how the controllers feel about this?
Wmk2
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Peru
Posts: 27
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I for one can't wait for Class D Twr's instead of GAAP's. Gotta be safer for all.
especially when no-one seems to know -
What are the actual differences between GAAP's and Class D that can be expected?
Jay Bo
1. Taxi clearance and taxi instructions.
2. Airways clearance to enter and leave the “D” class airspace.
Just to mention the obvious that comes to mind.
Dizzy Llama
As above.
1. Taxi clearance and taxi instructions.
2. Airways clearance to enter and leave the “D” class airspace.
Just to mention the obvious that comes to mind.
Dizzy Llama
As above.
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Peru
Posts: 27
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
1. Taxi clearance and taxi instructions.
2. Airways clearance to enter and leave the “D” class airspace.
)any more!
Nunc est bibendum
Can you imagine 16 aircraft buzzing around YPJT? But I'd like to hear from any of the controllers at JT so hear their thoughts on it.
). When he did his YPJT tower rating he had ten aircraft in the circuit runway with four choppers operating inside that. At the same time there were 8-10 aircraft inbound/outbound/ transiting on the other runway with the other controller. Somehow I think they'll cope with 8 in the circuit and eight others without too many dramas. 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Alabama, then Wyoming, then Idaho and now staying with Kharon on Styx houseboat
Age: 61
Posts: 1,437
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Beans
direct.no.speed
A number of my employees are asking how much are you selling the beans for ??
If anyone is still buying the line from a certain Dick that this is going to revitalise GA overnight, I have got a jar of magic beans to sell you.
It used to get quite busy at Jandakot before the cap. We would on occasion have 10 in the circuit (all singles) plus helicopters operating inside the fixed wing circuit and also squeezing the odd ARE departure away. I don't think that is the optimum level of service that can be provided but it can be made to work.
The other runway would just process the normal arrival and departure traffic whilst this was all going on over the other side. That could mean potentially another 5-10 inbound plus departures.
Now whilst this is achieveable at Jandakot I just can't see it working at say YMMB due to their configuration and same with YSBK due to airspace limitiations. I am not familiar with YPPF or YBAF. 8 seems like a reasonable number and eventually controller discretion. We have always reduced the numbers for varying conditions, so the 8 or 10 were never hard numbers.
I guess we wait and see what ASA directs now through MATS
All of this is purely my opinion only and in no way represents the views of Jandakot tower or ASA or CASA
The other runway would just process the normal arrival and departure traffic whilst this was all going on over the other side. That could mean potentially another 5-10 inbound plus departures.
Now whilst this is achieveable at Jandakot I just can't see it working at say YMMB due to their configuration and same with YSBK due to airspace limitiations. I am not familiar with YPPF or YBAF. 8 seems like a reasonable number and eventually controller discretion. We have always reduced the numbers for varying conditions, so the 8 or 10 were never hard numbers.
I guess we wait and see what ASA directs now through MATS
All of this is purely my opinion only and in no way represents the views of Jandakot tower or ASA or CASA
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: australia
Posts: 415
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ozineurope, Nothing wrong with Perth controllers the TCU is easy to deal with despite high traffic levels early morning and late afternoon.
Jandakot is a very busy place, the intensity of traffic when 2 runways operating is challenging at times and the inbound/outbound flow control is generally very well managed in a calm way, when the Easterlies blow and Rwy 12 comes into play single runway it gets a lot more difficult, particularly a mix of high performance and C152/C172.
The Jandakot controllers handle traffic very well, minimum go arounds.
Jandakot is a very busy place, the intensity of traffic when 2 runways operating is challenging at times and the inbound/outbound flow control is generally very well managed in a calm way, when the Easterlies blow and Rwy 12 comes into play single runway it gets a lot more difficult, particularly a mix of high performance and C152/C172.
The Jandakot controllers handle traffic very well, minimum go arounds.
As far as I can see the choice of 6 a/c in the circuit was arbitrary, or at least made centrally by CASA bureaucrats. I deduce from the letter that after some sort of analsis of saftey data and some sort of consultation, they have now decided to increase the limit to 8, which I also suspect has a large degree of arbitraryness.
My question is this. CASA in one guise or another has been around for well over 60 years. Over all these years they have been (at our expense) collecting statistics of airport movements, accidents, and near misses & other incidentys via a number of different incident reporting mechanisms.
With all this taxpayer funded knowledge base, why can't they make better decisions that don't require modification within weeks or months of implementation. Indeed is this knowledge base usable or have we been funding all this activity for nothing?
I'd put the recent back track on base leg circuit entry in the same category. Why did they need to do a pilot survey? With 60 or 70 years of accumulated knowledge, why don't CASA better understand what works and what doesn't work and what's safe and not safe ?
How is traffic handling in the circuit different now to the sixties & seventies? Essentially all aircraft have radio now, and there is probably a smaller spread of ciruit speeds than there was with Tiger Moths & Comanche's sharing the circuit. Places like Moorabbin use 2 runways not 3. Shouldn't it be more straightforward now?
My question is this. CASA in one guise or another has been around for well over 60 years. Over all these years they have been (at our expense) collecting statistics of airport movements, accidents, and near misses & other incidentys via a number of different incident reporting mechanisms.
With all this taxpayer funded knowledge base, why can't they make better decisions that don't require modification within weeks or months of implementation. Indeed is this knowledge base usable or have we been funding all this activity for nothing?
I'd put the recent back track on base leg circuit entry in the same category. Why did they need to do a pilot survey? With 60 or 70 years of accumulated knowledge, why don't CASA better understand what works and what doesn't work and what's safe and not safe ?
How is traffic handling in the circuit different now to the sixties & seventies? Essentially all aircraft have radio now, and there is probably a smaller spread of ciruit speeds than there was with Tiger Moths & Comanche's sharing the circuit. Places like Moorabbin use 2 runways not 3. Shouldn't it be more straightforward now?
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Mel-burn
Posts: 4,875
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CASA really needs to have envelopes for general communication that say 'THIS IS NOT A PENALTY'. Then my heart rate will remain in the green arc while I'm opening it!
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 243
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So yet another complete waste of time.
It could of been easily handled by sending all foreign students home.
I'm thinking the collision risk would have decreased quite significantly after that!!
It could of been easily handled by sending all foreign students home.
I'm thinking the collision risk would have decreased quite significantly after that!!
GADRIVR,
What is your basis for that assumption? Strongly suggest you search the ATSB database where you will find the usual suspects are the ones that have been involved in the majority of collisions and near misses in recent times. I'll give you a clue it's not one of the international schools.
What is your basis for that assumption? Strongly suggest you search the ATSB database where you will find the usual suspects are the ones that have been involved in the majority of collisions and near misses in recent times. I'll give you a clue it's not one of the international schools.