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

Parachuting at Elwood Park

Old 8th Jan 2015, 05:57
  #21 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Skipton
Age: 19
Posts: 173
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
With all the comprehensive radio calls those guys make and the fact that its clearly marked as a danger area on charts any pilot finding himself in conflict with parachutes deserves to be shot on arrival at their next port of call. If unsure and desperate to transit some smart cookies have been calling 135.7 to ask if a drop was due, its not hard.
BlatantLiar is offline  
Old 8th Jan 2015, 08:49
  #22 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 329
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
By the comments posted thus far, it's obvious no one knows how much traffic goes through this area.
Chief galah is offline  
Old 8th Jan 2015, 10:18
  #23 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Melbourne
Age: 60
Posts: 952
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
By the comments posted thus far, it's obvious no one knows how much traffic goes through this area.
Agree 100%!

More to the point, it's the "quality" of pilots flying through this area.

Back when I used to fly around there I considered anywhere south of the EN CTR right down to Cowes (including all around the bay and the MB Training area) to be a Danger area.

It's not just the quantity of traffic; it's "where they are" as pilots. You've got English challenged guys who are taught at the sausage factories going on PPL solo flights through there.

Some of these guys have almost zero situational awareness. Couple that with an inability to fly their areoplane in a practical way (i.e. if they're taught to fly over Brighton, that's the only place they'll fly over. It's not an option in their minds to fly 1nm west of Brighton and report "1Nm west of Brighton" when contacting MB tower).

And it's not just trainee pilots. I've seen countless examples of so-called experienced PPL's and CPL's who just barge on through there without any concept that other aircraft are in the sky.

IMHO, it's an accident waiting to happen.

DIVOSH!
Di_Vosh is offline  
Old 8th Jan 2015, 11:45
  #24 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Idlewild Peake
Posts: 132
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I wonder if we should avoid the parachute danger areas or fly straight through them. The parachutists seem to think that they are entitled to priority but they are not. Others are just as entitled to use the airspace as they are. If they want exclusive use of the area, let them ask for an R area.
I think that they should operate away from congested airspace, the current arrangement near PTO is stupid.
uncle8 is offline  
Old 8th Jan 2015, 11:52
  #25 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 3,860
Received 167 Likes on 94 Posts
Radio calls?

You legally don't even need a radio to fly through there !!
Squawk7700 is offline  
Old 8th Jan 2015, 12:49
  #26 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: YMMB
Age: 58
Posts: 703
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
There is good radar and ATC in that part of the bay so you'd think that would help with traffic separation.
peterc005 is offline  
Old 8th Jan 2015, 17:19
  #27 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: moon
Posts: 3,564
Received 89 Likes on 32 Posts
DiVosh:

It's not just the quantity of traffic; it's "where they are" as pilots. You've got English challenged guys who are taught at the sausage factories going on PPL solo flights through there.

Some of these guys have almost zero situational awareness. Couple that with an inability to fly their areoplane in a practical way (i.e. if they're taught to fly over Brighton, that's the only place they'll fly over. It's not an option in their minds to fly 1nm west of Brighton and report "1Nm west of Brighton" when contacting MB tower).

And it's not just trainee pilots. I've seen countless examples of so-called experienced PPL's and CPL's who just barge on through there without any concept that other aircraft are in the sky.

IMHO, it's an accident waiting to happen.
Then why the hell allow a drop zone to be created in the first place - on the major Northern and Western approach to the busiest airport in Australia?

I don't see why I or any other pilot should have to put up with the inconvenience. just to satisfy the thrill seeking needs of a bunch of St Kilda backpacking bogans and the greed of one parachuting business whose actions have just demonstrated a complete contempt for life and limb - close it down.

Furthermore, some inbound pilots are now not tracking from Williamstown to Station Pier and proceeding down the coast to Brighton but tracking direct without a hope in hell of gliding to land if they have an engine failure and of course not wearing a life jacket.

When one of them inevitably goes in I bet CASA issues an order making the wearing of life jackets mandatory for anyone tracking North and West out of YMMB.
Sunfish is offline  
Old 8th Jan 2015, 17:35
  #28 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: nosar
Posts: 1,287
Received 23 Likes on 12 Posts
By the comments posted thus far, it's obvious no one knows how much traffic goes through this area.
Like how much? All the traffic in Australia? We have traffic here? Serious? Some of you blokes need a trip to a busy country. Australia has no traffic and a declining aviation industry.

On one breath you blokes tell me Australia's aviation industry is in decline, then on the next breath you tell me we should shut down an aviation business that is successful just because they operate where a few other aircraft fly. Drop zones are tiny and easy to avoid. Whats wrong with you guys?
Aussie Bob is offline  
Old 8th Jan 2015, 19:14
  #29 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: moon
Posts: 3,564
Received 89 Likes on 32 Posts
Aussie Bob:

Like how much? All the traffic in Australia? We have traffic here? Serious? Some of you blokes need a trip to a busy country. Australia has no traffic and a declining aviation industry.

On one breath you blokes tell me Australia's aviation industry is in decline, then on the next breath you tell me we should shut down an aviation business that is successful just because they operate where a few other aircraft fly. Drop zones are tiny and easy to avoid. Whats wrong with you guys?
You obviously are not familiar with Melbourne or YMMB. The drop zone is approximately Ten miles Northwest of the field slap bang in the middle of the CASA approved and recommended VFR coastal route to the North and West of the state.

The drop zone is approximately Two miles North of the prescribed VFR entry reporting point Brighton (BTO) for aircraft arriving from the North and West.

The drop zone is approximately One mile South of Albert Park VFR reporting point for aircraft inbound into Essendon airspace and frequently one will get "clearance unavailable remain OCTA until it is which requires an orbit to be made right through the drop zone.

The drop zone is about Two miles South East of the Station Pier VFR waypoint which is a prescribed VFR entry/exit point from Essendon controlled airspace.

To put it another way, you might as well put a drop zone in Martin Place, Rundle Mall or Fortitude Valley to get the same effect.
Sunfish is offline  
Old 8th Jan 2015, 19:38
  #30 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 3,860
Received 167 Likes on 94 Posts
In this instance PeterC I would not call Melbourne Radar "ATC."

It's glass G, no radio is even required and separation cannot be guaranteed as many (most?) aircraft going through there don't even make radio calls.

Whilst there is a listed VFR route, aircraft go in all directions so there is no guarantee anyone is following it.
Squawk7700 is offline  
Old 8th Jan 2015, 19:53
  #31 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: nosar
Posts: 1,287
Received 23 Likes on 12 Posts
Sunfish, clearly you know exactly where it is. How come, when you know exactly where it is, you have such a problem avoiding it?

Perhaps you need a GPS.

Wanting to close down a viable aviation business because you don't like its location is pathetic.

Parachutists fall through a 1 nm wide column. 5 nm is all you need to avoid them totally, like 2.5 nm either side of where they are dropping. Struth, how hard is that?
Aussie Bob is offline  
Old 8th Jan 2015, 20:22
  #32 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Oxford, UK
Posts: 1,546
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Pretty easy to get it wrong in your light aircraft, and have a nasty encounter.
British glider over France. Parachutists DROPPING THROUGH CLOUD!
One hits the glider, knocks the glider wing off....both glider pilots then take to their chutes, one of which opened about 10 feet AGL...felt like it, anyway, he testified at the French Magistrates court....where they were held to be negligent flying a glider in open airspace...under a cloud!

And I got in trouble in a comp, following another glider near a known site, warned at the briefing....still got it wrong, and went round the parachute site on the UPWIND side. I never saw anybody, but the chief parachute instructor was freefalling, saw me below, maneuvered behind me, got my tail number and called the gliding competition director. I was basted in his office and before the entire congregation the next day.

So its easy enough not to understand the requirements of this strange form of aviation. Well done all those New Zealanders who managed to exit their jump plane in time. Meat bombing, we calls it over here.....
mary meagher is offline  
Old 8th Jan 2015, 20:51
  #33 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 490
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
5 nm is all you need to avoid them totally, like 2.5 nm either side of where they are dropping. Struth, how hard is that?
Pull out the Melbourne VTC and have a look.

2.5 nm one side and you infringe controlled airspace (or at least the tolerances for your planned track). 2.5 nm the other side and you are 2.5 nm offshore at 1500 feet.

There are 4 VFR approach points for Essendon and Moorabbin within 2.5 nm.

The coastal VFR route is marked literally right through the middle of the drop zone.

It does seem like a dumb place for a drop zone.
andrewr is offline  
Old 8th Jan 2015, 21:23
  #34 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Skipton
Age: 19
Posts: 173
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Radio calls?

You legally don't even need a radio to fly through there !!
I find it a tad ironic that you're making a point that a radio is not required yet your fellow pagans are using that argument that its the "RAH RAH THE MOST BUSIEST!!!" airspace in the world.

Spot on, a carriage of a radio is not mandatory. However having the correct charts for your area of operation is. It's clearly marked.

I am definitely with Aussie Bob on this one. It is sad that in a time where Australian GA is in decline people are trying to bring down a successful and progressive undertaking.

Wednesdays event while unfortunate was a parachuting incident more so than an aviation one.

How many years has the drop zone been operating now?
How many incidents with aircraft coming dangerously close to parachutes?

I think the most dangerous phase has passed and now there is enough awareness amongst the flying community about the dropzone that it is now safer than it ever has been.

Listening to the pilots on ATC they act professional and courteous. Expediting their sortie when needed and never hesitating to go-around if there is a suspected class G conflict.

I get the feeling half of you are instructors with training standards too p!ss poor for your students to have 3/38ths of a clue about situational awareness. Bit nervous if you sign a student out they might fly somewhere where they shouldn't?

All you guys whining and moaning need to take a good hard look at yourselves in the mirror. Airmanship, get some.
BlatantLiar is offline  
Old 8th Jan 2015, 21:23
  #35 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: moon
Posts: 3,564
Received 89 Likes on 32 Posts
Aussie Bob:

Parachutists fall through a 1 nm wide column. 5 nm is all you need to avoid them totally, like 2.5 nm either side of where they are dropping. Struth, how hard is that?
As Andrew pointed out its quite hard and one day there will be an accident because the workload at this point is quite high for a beginner, say on their first solo navex:

Takeoff, climb, head for Brighton or Albert Park,, set cruise power, trim, transponder to 1200 or 0100 for YMEN from 3000, get Essendon ATIS, switch from YMMB 123.0 to YMEN 125.1 or Area on 135.7 watch for inbound aircraft on reciprocal course that you just heard on 123.0, , keep climbing for 2500 but not above.

Miss the jump call on the area frequency by one second in all your work.

Oh ****! What was that??? What...........

And a P.S., where in the hell is our great leader CASA in all this? How the hell could they approve it? Its terminally unsafe.
Sunfish is offline  
Old 8th Jan 2015, 21:41
  #36 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 490
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I get the feeling half of you are instructors with training standards too p!ss poor for your students to have 3/38ths of a clue about situational awareness. Bit nervous if you sign a student out they might fly somewhere where they shouldn't?

All you guys whining and moaning need to take a good hard look at yourselves in the mirror. Airmanship, get some.
I assume you're not including the likes of John Eacott (post 19) in that assessment?
andrewr is offline  
Old 8th Jan 2015, 21:46
  #37 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 3,860
Received 167 Likes on 94 Posts
Picture attached for those interstate whom are failing to understand what is starting to sound like the busiest and most dangerous piece of airspace in the Southern Hemisphere. Sorry I don't have a helicopter logo for John or a 172 logo for the sausage factory.

What you see here is actually quite typical for a given Saturday or Sunday.

Squawk7700 is offline  
Old 8th Jan 2015, 22:31
  #38 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: nosar
Posts: 1,287
Received 23 Likes on 12 Posts
2.5 nm one side and you infringe controlled airspace (or at least the tolerances for your planned track). 2.5 nm the other side and you are 2.5 nm offshore at 1500 feet.
Personally, I am happy with the 1 nm column. The other thing is this is predominantly a tandem thing. It is prudent with a tandem operation to have the canopy open by 4000 feet.

A brightly coloured tandem parachute drifting down vertically is infinitely easier to see than another aircraft. Please, especially in this area, look out the window folks. Hopefully do it everywhere you are VFR.

Sunny, you have my respect on this forum but here I simply don't agree with your logic. Thankfully the regulator had enough nous to allow this operation. Obviously they are not totally against aviation.
Aussie Bob is offline  
Old 8th Jan 2015, 22:39
  #39 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: AUS
Age: 39
Posts: 39
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
DZs

Haha nice picture squawk.

Some of the negativity from pilots towards skydiving sounds a lot like the negativity from the public to general aviation. Ban these 172s flying around that just get in the way of 737s.

Busy airspace? What about the dropzone operation in amesterdam that operates out of their international airport?
GTang is offline  
Old 8th Jan 2015, 23:34
  #40 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: nosar
Posts: 1,287
Received 23 Likes on 12 Posts
Busy airspace? What about the dropzone operation in amesterdam that operates out of their international airport?
Precisely! Or look at how its done in the good ole USA
Aussie Bob is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

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.