VFR Operations At Tamworth
Before.....
'And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the 'airways'.
And God said, Let there be 'E', and 'G' and... 'A & B & C' ......and there was
'E' & 'G' and 'A' & 'C'.
And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light VFR from the darkness IFR.
And God called the light 'E' and 'G' and the darkness He called 'A' and 'C'.
And God said, Behold.....
" I have worked for over a decade to bring in the simpler US Class D procedures"
And the Angels said -
Now look at wot you've gone and done......We'll just never get this mess sorted out again!!"
'And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the 'airways'.
And God said, Let there be 'E', and 'G' and... 'A & B & C' ......and there was
'E' & 'G' and 'A' & 'C'.
And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light VFR from the darkness IFR.
And God called the light 'E' and 'G' and the darkness He called 'A' and 'C'.
And God said, Behold.....
" I have worked for over a decade to bring in the simpler US Class D procedures"
And the Angels said -
Now look at wot you've gone and done......We'll just never get this mess sorted out again!!"
Thread Starter
Coral
What I don’t understand is that groups like Civil Air don’t really get with this and do everything they can to encourage simplicity and lack of complication. You would think that would be better for controllers, and of course it would encourage more people to fly which means more money for aviation and – dare I say it – more money for controllers.
I know there is an old school of controllers who never wanted to link their job with actual people flying. However, they are closely interlinked.
By the way, I don’t quite understand re. the RAAF. I did not know they had any Class D airspace to apply Class D rules to – which airports are you referring to?
Thanks for the comments re. the population program. It’s amazing we don’t have a plan.
But wouldn’t it be great if we could get more people flying in this country? I’m delighted to see that the Coalition has a policy to make Australia a world-leader in flying training. It’s about time! We could get many tens of millions of dollars of export income by becoming the world leader. There would be lots more traffic at places like Tamworth, and no doubt that would facilitate modern, simple procedures.
What I don’t understand is that groups like Civil Air don’t really get with this and do everything they can to encourage simplicity and lack of complication. You would think that would be better for controllers, and of course it would encourage more people to fly which means more money for aviation and – dare I say it – more money for controllers.
I know there is an old school of controllers who never wanted to link their job with actual people flying. However, they are closely interlinked.
By the way, I don’t quite understand re. the RAAF. I did not know they had any Class D airspace to apply Class D rules to – which airports are you referring to?
Thanks for the comments re. the population program. It’s amazing we don’t have a plan.
But wouldn’t it be great if we could get more people flying in this country? I’m delighted to see that the Coalition has a policy to make Australia a world-leader in flying training. It’s about time! We could get many tens of millions of dollars of export income by becoming the world leader. There would be lots more traffic at places like Tamworth, and no doubt that would facilitate modern, simple procedures.
I have a problem....
Dick, you said-
I have read and re-read said ERSA entries for YSTW...Could you PLEASE tell me where it says a departure report is required.
Section f in Para4 says that departure calls using Gate South and West are not required...no where else in ERSA does it say Departure Call is required
AIP, on the other hand says-Departure reports...IFR only....
GAAP change over says....VFR departure call, not required.
VFR departure into controlled airspace, not required because take off clearance and departure clearance incorporates it
Sooooo, either the controller has got this wrong or Mr Smith has left out pertinent information. Did you VFR depart on an IFR plan, Mr Smith?
Dick, you said-
He promptly told me that the Enroute Supplement makes it clear that departure reports are required for VFR in certain circumstances.
Section f in Para4 says that departure calls using Gate South and West are not required...no where else in ERSA does it say Departure Call is required
AIP, on the other hand says-Departure reports...IFR only....
GAAP change over says....VFR departure call, not required.
VFR departure into controlled airspace, not required because take off clearance and departure clearance incorporates it
Sooooo, either the controller has got this wrong or Mr Smith has left out pertinent information. Did you VFR depart on an IFR plan, Mr Smith?
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: London
Posts: 92
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm with you Dick.
What is wrong with all you morons? Why lamblast a guy who at the end of the day is trying to make your GA lives a little easier?
I have not lived in Australia for over 30 years, however I travel back there usually a couple of times a year (associated with aviation I might add). Each time I do I find it unbelievable the amount of burocracy and pure unadulterated bulls**t that goes on there. For such a laid back easy place to be, with about 1% of the air traffic in the US, why have such archaic rules. It is sad, just sad to say the least.
Get into the real world guys.
Rant over.
JO.
What is wrong with all you morons? Why lamblast a guy who at the end of the day is trying to make your GA lives a little easier?
I have not lived in Australia for over 30 years, however I travel back there usually a couple of times a year (associated with aviation I might add). Each time I do I find it unbelievable the amount of burocracy and pure unadulterated bulls**t that goes on there. For such a laid back easy place to be, with about 1% of the air traffic in the US, why have such archaic rules. It is sad, just sad to say the least.
Get into the real world guys.
Rant over.
JO.
Dick,
I doubt it. If there were more aircraft, there'd be more ocntrollers. They wouldn't get a pay rise. Did you ever give your staff a pay rise as the company grew?
Why does my stomach churn every time I read you talking about "simple procedures"?
You would think that would be better for controllers, and of course it would encourage more people to fly which means more money for aviation and – dare I say it – more money for controllers.
Why does my stomach churn every time I read you talking about "simple procedures"?
OZBUSDRIVER,
I can't put my hands on it now, but I'm sure we found, in the docs, that a VFR must make a departure call, departing a Class D Zone, when entering other than Class G. I'll try and find it again.
J.O.
Having been away for 30 years has protected you from most of the 'detail'. You probably only see the big headlines. The devil is in the detail.
We don't attack Dick. We just don't always agree with him. That's our right. It's very difficult to side with him when he says things like:
Before this all started, you were either IN or you were OUT. You can't get much simpler than that.
Dick,
More like quick sand Dick. Throw me a lifeline!
If you, or anyone else for that matter, can show me how the issues I described above can be overcome without requiring departure reports ... then I'm with you.
By the way, the answer isn't ... "They do it in America". I want to know how we do it ... in our particular environment.
P.S. OZBUSDRIVER might be right and all this discussion is wasted anyway.
Later On:
I found this in the CASA Class D Airspace Booklet:
As usual, CASA is confusing by omission ... what is required when a VFR departs into other than Class G ?
I'll keep looking.
I can't put my hands on it now, but I'm sure we found, in the docs, that a VFR must make a departure call, departing a Class D Zone, when entering other than Class G. I'll try and find it again.
J.O.
Having been away for 30 years has protected you from most of the 'detail'. You probably only see the big headlines. The devil is in the detail.
We don't attack Dick. We just don't always agree with him. That's our right. It's very difficult to side with him when he says things like:
What I don’t understand is that groups like Civil Air don’t really get with this and do everything they can to encourage simplicity and lack of complication
Dick,
How can tower controllers in the rest of the world operate without departure reports? Set in concrete your mind is!
If you, or anyone else for that matter, can show me how the issues I described above can be overcome without requiring departure reports ... then I'm with you.
By the way, the answer isn't ... "They do it in America". I want to know how we do it ... in our particular environment.
P.S. OZBUSDRIVER might be right and all this discussion is wasted anyway.
Later On:
I found this in the CASA Class D Airspace Booklet:
As a VFR flight, you do not need to make a departure call when
departing the control zone directly into Class G airspace.
departing the control zone directly into Class G airspace.
I'll keep looking.
Last edited by peuce; 20th Aug 2010 at 06:02.
Thread Starter
Oz, I reckon in this case the controller got it wrong. He did state something about not being required to give a departure call if going out via one of the gates- otherwise he reckoned a departure call was required for VFR.
Wouldn't you think the Tamworth ATC manager would come on under his or her own name and explain the correct procedure!
They are probably stopped by the AsA bosses from doing this!
There never should be secrecy in relation to safety issues I reckon.
Wouldn't you think the Tamworth ATC manager would come on under his or her own name and explain the correct procedure!
They are probably stopped by the AsA bosses from doing this!
There never should be secrecy in relation to safety issues I reckon.
Well, well ... from the Visual Flight Guide:
Looks like this also confirms that a Departure Report is required ... unless going straight to G.
I'm sure the Controller will graciously accept your apologies, Dick.
Looks like this also confirms that a Departure Report is required ... unless going straight to G.
I'm sure the Controller will graciously accept your apologies, Dick.
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Sydney
Posts: 133
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This whole thread is another example of Dick Smith becoming so frustrated at the rules, he switches from slagging Airservices, to the actual controllers, back to Airservices again.
The controller appears to have done nothing wrong, and so you jump up and down about the rules that exist. Mr Smith continually argues with frontline controllers about the application of the rules.
The simple fact is that a departure report (according to the rules) was required and not given, and the controller chased it up (just like all those silly "read backs").
Thems the rules. Fly by them.
As for the Tamworth ATC manager coming onto a rumour network to explain the rules to you Dick? That is ridiculous! I'm sure you can find the number and give him/her a ring if you REALLY want to find the answers.
The controller appears to have done nothing wrong, and so you jump up and down about the rules that exist. Mr Smith continually argues with frontline controllers about the application of the rules.
The simple fact is that a departure report (according to the rules) was required and not given, and the controller chased it up (just like all those silly "read backs").
Thems the rules. Fly by them.
As for the Tamworth ATC manager coming onto a rumour network to explain the rules to you Dick? That is ridiculous! I'm sure you can find the number and give him/her a ring if you REALLY want to find the answers.
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: in the classroom of life
Age: 55
Posts: 6,864
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Just to go back a few pages.........if the departure is from the CTR into G at low level, remember CTR is typically SFC to 1500AGL then no report. If you climb in the D zone into CTA...say 2500AGL.....Report is required.
Now if Dick was cleared at whatever was only 1000AGL, into G, then NO REPORT.
If the clearance was track to woop woop not above XXXX which happens to be 2500AGL and is in CTA.....even if he stayed at 500AGL the clearance was up to 2500AGL so the report is required.
So far Mr Smith has failed to tell us what exactly the ATC in the tower actually said....the devil is in the detail.
Ohhh and one more thing, from first hand experience and seeing it for real at YMLT the dawg is your best friend.....he is the king of "track via XXX not above YYY and NO DEPARTURE REPORT REQ'D " ......and you thought he was a hard case!
J
Now if Dick was cleared at whatever was only 1000AGL, into G, then NO REPORT.
If the clearance was track to woop woop not above XXXX which happens to be 2500AGL and is in CTA.....even if he stayed at 500AGL the clearance was up to 2500AGL so the report is required.
So far Mr Smith has failed to tell us what exactly the ATC in the tower actually said....the devil is in the detail.
Ohhh and one more thing, from first hand experience and seeing it for real at YMLT the dawg is your best friend.....he is the king of "track via XXX not above YYY and NO DEPARTURE REPORT REQ'D " ......and you thought he was a hard case!
J
Thread Starter
I was cleared to depart directly from class D into class G.
I think I requested to depart at not above 1000 agl but cannot remember exactly.
What lunatic came up with a system that links VFR class D departure reports with the altitude?
The CASA Office Of Airspace Regulation made sure they asked no advice from people with expertise in NAS class D when introducing these new procedures
So they have got them wrong and it is a complete stuff up!
It will be fixed second or third time around.
I think I requested to depart at not above 1000 agl but cannot remember exactly.
What lunatic came up with a system that links VFR class D departure reports with the altitude?
The CASA Office Of Airspace Regulation made sure they asked no advice from people with expertise in NAS class D when introducing these new procedures
So they have got them wrong and it is a complete stuff up!
It will be fixed second or third time around.
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: in the classroom of life
Age: 55
Posts: 6,864
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Well if that is what you requested you most likely got it, and as best I can see you were correct. Of course I could be wrong, and often are!
As for the lunatic who came up with that idea.....no idea at all. If you ask me its too confusing. I can only assume its the old GAAP being blended with old D.
As for the lunatic who came up with that idea.....no idea at all. If you ask me its too confusing. I can only assume its the old GAAP being blended with old D.
Lotsa lunatics in da world............
Thankfully - not ALL of then in aviation........although sometimes......
'E' over 'D' comes to mind...............VFR and altitudes....or maybe that shud read attitudes - mixing it with IFR....and being UNNANNOUNCED!!!
Thankfully - not ALL of then in aviation........although sometimes......
'E' over 'D' comes to mind...............VFR and altitudes....or maybe that shud read attitudes - mixing it with IFR....and being UNNANNOUNCED!!!
Dick,
Just because you don't understand it, doesn't make it 'lunacy'.
Of course communication and coordination requirements are linked to altitude ... that's what deems you to be either in or out of a particular volume of airspace ... when it's divided horizontally ... like our upside down wedding cake system.
And, in turn, which airspace volume you are in dictates what communications, separation and coordination requirements exist.
Surely you can see that ?
If you're not happy with the Tamworth setup, I'm sure that OAR would be happy to consider your alternate proposal.
Just because you don't understand it, doesn't make it 'lunacy'.
Of course communication and coordination requirements are linked to altitude ... that's what deems you to be either in or out of a particular volume of airspace ... when it's divided horizontally ... like our upside down wedding cake system.
And, in turn, which airspace volume you are in dictates what communications, separation and coordination requirements exist.
Surely you can see that ?
If you're not happy with the Tamworth setup, I'm sure that OAR would be happy to consider your alternate proposal.