SY localiser frequency - readback NOT required
Sidetrack
our ops manual states 2 nm is OK without informing ATC.
From the AIP
This applies when you are Identified: must advise ATC prior to initiating or changing an offset
In the real world, I guess this means you have to tell ATC of the offset before being indentified!
Easily confused with the next paragraph:
The decision to apply a lateral offset is the responsibility of the pilot in command.
Other than when an Identified aircraft initiates or changes an offset,
pilots are not required to notify ATC that a lateral offset is being applied
Captain Dart
Vol 2/2 doesn't say that at all.
Australia is obviously a state that doesn't allow it's use in remote continental airspace. Therefore you should have obtained a clearance.
As an aside some time ago our Flight Safety Department notified me that Australian ATC had 'pinged' one of my flights for having a ONE NAUTICAL MILE track offset without a clearance (our ops manual states 2 nm is OK without informing ATC).
27. STRATEGIC LATERAL OFFSET PROCEDURES
27.1 Strategic Lateral Offset Procedures should only be applied in oceanic airspace by aircraft capable of automatic offset tracking. Certain states may also allow their use in remote continental airspace − if doubt exists, clarification and/or clearance should be sought from ATC. Where part of the airspace in question is within radar coverage, aircraft should normally be allowed to initiate, or continue, the offset.
27.2 Procedure
Offsets of 1 NM or 2 NM to the right of track are authorized.
Crews are not required to inform ATC when applying the offset.
27.1 Strategic Lateral Offset Procedures should only be applied in oceanic airspace by aircraft capable of automatic offset tracking. Certain states may also allow their use in remote continental airspace − if doubt exists, clarification and/or clearance should be sought from ATC. Where part of the airspace in question is within radar coverage, aircraft should normally be allowed to initiate, or continue, the offset.
27.2 Procedure
Offsets of 1 NM or 2 NM to the right of track are authorized.
Crews are not required to inform ATC when applying the offset.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 40
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Another sidetrack....
When instructed to contact tower for landing, on first contact state your callsign only please.
The amount of crap that is passed at this stage is mind boggling.
"Sydney Tower, Qantas 2 established ILS 16R leaving 3000" or "Melb Tower, Virgin 123 right base visual approach 34".
The correct call in ALL circumstances is: "Sydney Tower, Qantas 2"
Finis, nada, zilch, caput, done. Get it?!
All the extra stuff just clutters the frequency and could prevent someone getting away (cleared immediate TO). The tower know where you are and what you're doing. Just please give your callsign when "checking in" with tower. Of all the incorrect readbacks in Oz, this would have to the one done wrong the most.
Rant over.......
The amount of crap that is passed at this stage is mind boggling.
"Sydney Tower, Qantas 2 established ILS 16R leaving 3000" or "Melb Tower, Virgin 123 right base visual approach 34".
The correct call in ALL circumstances is: "Sydney Tower, Qantas 2"
Finis, nada, zilch, caput, done. Get it?!
All the extra stuff just clutters the frequency and could prevent someone getting away (cleared immediate TO). The tower know where you are and what you're doing. Just please give your callsign when "checking in" with tower. Of all the incorrect readbacks in Oz, this would have to the one done wrong the most.
Rant over.......
Capt Fathom, as I said in a previous post, crew flying on Asian licences don't GET Australian AIP just as we don't get Bangladeshi AIP or Russian AIP; it's no good quoting them to international pilots unless it is reflected in their company publications.
Thanks Titan, my incident was some time ago and my response that it was legal was agreed with by Corporate Safety (who appended the comment 'AirServices Australia can be a bit picky sometimes'), who themselves got back to AirServices. I'm sure that Vol 2 was amended some time after.
I stand by all my previous posts and, while I hereby express my appreciation to the individual Aussie ATCO's, the rules and requirements they have to work under in many cases don't reflect 'convention' in the rest of the world.
It's now been done to death. Cheers to all.
Thanks Titan, my incident was some time ago and my response that it was legal was agreed with by Corporate Safety (who appended the comment 'AirServices Australia can be a bit picky sometimes'), who themselves got back to AirServices. I'm sure that Vol 2 was amended some time after.
I stand by all my previous posts and, while I hereby express my appreciation to the individual Aussie ATCO's, the rules and requirements they have to work under in many cases don't reflect 'convention' in the rest of the world.
It's now been done to death. Cheers to all.
'AirServices Australia can be a bit picky sometimes'
Nothing picky about that!
Join Date: May 2002
Location: australia
Posts: 606
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Captain Dart
As an Oz ATC, we just apply what we are told to apply (or should) if you have an issue with it, talk to your Flight Ops department.
It is also frustrating to us. With those pilots who have English as a first language we know it is teaching them to suck eggs, but for those whose English is a bit second rate we are just covering our backside.
It is not unusual to tell the next controlling sector to watch XXX because even though XXX has read everything back correctly we have little faith that XXX will actually do what we have instructed them to do.
It is sometimes 'embarrasing' for us to get our 'extraneous' readbacks off pilots that we know are not in any doubt about what we have instructed them to do. But when we have the level of monitoring that we do, and back office people are looking over your shoulder constantly, a controller does not have the room to assign a good pilot or dodgy pilot rating.
Don't assign us a good or dodgy worldwide rating either, we play the cards we are dealt. Otherwise it is a quiet chat in a back office.
Do you have this problem with ex-Oz ATCs working overseas. Don't think just the good ones have pissed off OS, it's just that they work in a more realistic environment.
As an Oz ATC, we just apply what we are told to apply (or should) if you have an issue with it, talk to your Flight Ops department.
It is also frustrating to us. With those pilots who have English as a first language we know it is teaching them to suck eggs, but for those whose English is a bit second rate we are just covering our backside.
It is not unusual to tell the next controlling sector to watch XXX because even though XXX has read everything back correctly we have little faith that XXX will actually do what we have instructed them to do.
It is sometimes 'embarrasing' for us to get our 'extraneous' readbacks off pilots that we know are not in any doubt about what we have instructed them to do. But when we have the level of monitoring that we do, and back office people are looking over your shoulder constantly, a controller does not have the room to assign a good pilot or dodgy pilot rating.
Don't assign us a good or dodgy worldwide rating either, we play the cards we are dealt. Otherwise it is a quiet chat in a back office.
Do you have this problem with ex-Oz ATCs working overseas. Don't think just the good ones have pissed off OS, it's just that they work in a more realistic environment.
