You Calll Yourselves Pilots
Creampuff, personally I don't think it's funny that ANYTHING flying at whatever level in the j curve doesn't have a transponder or radio. It's stupidity of the highest order.
I clearly remember a recent trip up north when a controller was becoming increasingly concerned about a possible airprox which turned out to be me and another unidentified. The problem was, the description of where it was going to happen made no sense to me because the locations were not on my plan. It was very tempting to get out the map and study the location but I kept looking outside, saw the traffic, avoided them and flew on. No doubt the poor controller had a nervous moment.
Had I got out the map, or even replied to ATC, my lookout would have been impaired. Where the transmissions beneficial? In this instance not at all.
Advocating that we all need transponders and radios in an area as vast and unpopulated as Australia will get the attention of some nodwell, increase further the cost of flying and further diminish the number of aircraft in the sky. There is no substitute for a good lookout.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: rangaville
Posts: 2,280
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bob,
Mine is an opinion only. Did it happen in the past when I couldn't see, most probably, I guess ignorance is bliss is what that situation is all about. Most of the non-radio aircraft we talk of are experimental. It is extremely cheap nowadays to install a radio, especially when you can do it yourself, handheld even. Transponders, fair enough but still cheap for experimental.
I'm not talking about mandatory radios & transponders in the GAFA.
I've had several occasions where crews of medium capacity RPT aircraft have had near hits, you can hear it in their voices, it shakes them up. One particular occasion I had a VFR identified and tracking opposite direction to a SAAB, I gave him traffic and he decided to stop his decent a thousand foot above the identified level of the VFR he never got the VFR on TCAS. The SAAB pilot was adamant he would have hit the aircraft if he hadn't had traffic issued.
I can only put my opinion forward based on my 25 years here & what I've seen. I've got an advantage in that I sit on the other side of the fence as well. ATC's are the last ones consulted whenever change that affect the industry occur. In fact, we are rarely consulted on anything. We just deal with the garbage that happens, such is life eh?
I'm also not a fan of cheap aviation, i.e. I can't afford this part, the plane will fly without it, so stuff it, I'll fly anyway. If you can't 'afford' an AFR, you shouldn't be flying etc.
How's that Tailwheel?
Mine is an opinion only. Did it happen in the past when I couldn't see, most probably, I guess ignorance is bliss is what that situation is all about. Most of the non-radio aircraft we talk of are experimental. It is extremely cheap nowadays to install a radio, especially when you can do it yourself, handheld even. Transponders, fair enough but still cheap for experimental.
I'm not talking about mandatory radios & transponders in the GAFA.
I've had several occasions where crews of medium capacity RPT aircraft have had near hits, you can hear it in their voices, it shakes them up. One particular occasion I had a VFR identified and tracking opposite direction to a SAAB, I gave him traffic and he decided to stop his decent a thousand foot above the identified level of the VFR he never got the VFR on TCAS. The SAAB pilot was adamant he would have hit the aircraft if he hadn't had traffic issued.
I can only put my opinion forward based on my 25 years here & what I've seen. I've got an advantage in that I sit on the other side of the fence as well. ATC's are the last ones consulted whenever change that affect the industry occur. In fact, we are rarely consulted on anything. We just deal with the garbage that happens, such is life eh?
I'm also not a fan of cheap aviation, i.e. I can't afford this part, the plane will fly without it, so stuff it, I'll fly anyway. If you can't 'afford' an AFR, you shouldn't be flying etc.
How's that Tailwheel?
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Sydney
Age: 60
Posts: 1,542
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It would be interesting to know the science that could compare safety outcomes per different electronic gadgets, ie: radio and transponder (as championed by Jack) on to TCAS and Flarm. 
In my experience radio is next to useless, maybe 10% effective. ( for those who champion it, just think of 50-150 gliders on area telling you all where they are!)
Transponders perhaps 15%, they need ATC to interpret.
TCAS perhaps 75%, but not many aircraft have it, ( or can have it).
Flarm used in gliders 75-80% , but almost no powered aircraft other than tugs have it.
Looking out the window in the right direction still works pretty well too!
In my experience radio is next to useless, maybe 10% effective. ( for those who champion it, just think of 50-150 gliders on area telling you all where they are!)
Transponders perhaps 15%, they need ATC to interpret.
TCAS perhaps 75%, but not many aircraft have it, ( or can have it).
Flarm used in gliders 75-80% , but almost no powered aircraft other than tugs have it.
Looking out the window in the right direction still works pretty well too!
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: rangaville
Posts: 2,280
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Most of our opinions are based on our experiences. In the end, the chance of a random mid-air are extremely remote, extremely. What complicates this is that MOST VFR aircraft are using some form of GPS, they are tracking via published IFR routes (the SAAB V's the VFR I mentioned previous) I watch it EVERY day, it's NOT random anymore. It would still be rare for a mid-air but LESS rare. If you're happy with that, fair enough. I'm not entirely comfortable with it when I'm flying BASED ON WHAT I SEE EVERY DAY (not yelling).
Tank, what you state is entirely valid,they all work to some degree.........
Tank, what you state is entirely valid,they all work to some degree.........
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: in the classroom of life
Age: 55
Posts: 6,864
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Most of the non radio experimental? Or do you mean RAAus?
I can't think f any VH-Experimental not radio equipped.
Just for clarity......yeah I know yours has a GTN750
I can't think f any VH-Experimental not radio equipped.
Just for clarity......yeah I know yours has a GTN750
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Victoria
Posts: 750
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
After many years of the absence of organised gliding from Euroa, I see it is still named as "Euroa Soaring Centre" on the WAC. Gliding clubs mainly use 122.5 or 122.7.
The VNC just calls it "Euroa" and has a PJT against it. Never seems to be much activity going on when I pass by now. Not like when I was gliding there 30 years ago.
Violet Town up the road to the east gets a mention but no info at all.
Locksley is just 9 NM west of Euroa, and Mangalore another 9 NM further on. Both Locksley and Mangalore are on 122.1. So an aircraft fitted with one radio like mine and following that track (but not actually overflying or invading the Euroa drop zone would be on what frequency:
122.5 or maybe 122.7 because it is marked for gliding;
126.7 because there is no dedicated frequency;
122.1 because within 10 NM of a CTAF with. A dedicated frequency; or
122.4 because the CAAP says that is what should be used and the CASA head just reinforced it in his monthly media blurb?
Perhaps people are so busy twisting dials they miss hearing and seeing the essentials?
Me? I'll be calling quickly on 122.1 because of the training stuff coming out of Mangalore then getting back onto Area so a nice ATC can brighten my day if needs be.
And I do have a transponder :-)
Kaz
The VNC just calls it "Euroa" and has a PJT against it. Never seems to be much activity going on when I pass by now. Not like when I was gliding there 30 years ago.
Violet Town up the road to the east gets a mention but no info at all.
Locksley is just 9 NM west of Euroa, and Mangalore another 9 NM further on. Both Locksley and Mangalore are on 122.1. So an aircraft fitted with one radio like mine and following that track (but not actually overflying or invading the Euroa drop zone would be on what frequency:
122.5 or maybe 122.7 because it is marked for gliding;
126.7 because there is no dedicated frequency;
122.1 because within 10 NM of a CTAF with. A dedicated frequency; or
122.4 because the CAAP says that is what should be used and the CASA head just reinforced it in his monthly media blurb?
Perhaps people are so busy twisting dials they miss hearing and seeing the essentials?
Me? I'll be calling quickly on 122.1 because of the training stuff coming out of Mangalore then getting back onto Area so a nice ATC can brighten my day if needs be.
And I do have a transponder :-)
Kaz
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: rangaville
Posts: 2,280
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Kaz, 122.4 with your transponder on, I'll let you know what's going on at all of those places. Be situationally aware, when I call you, you'll know I'm talking to you. When you are going to transit a CTAF, switch to the CTAF & broadcast. The PJE aircraft will be monitoring & will call you
There is one VFR aircraft whose track takes him within close proximity to YEUA, he is a regular, he calls every time and asks if there are skydive operations at YEUA. I keep an eye on him, I know who he is if I need to talk to him, if I call him he answers, Smart man
There is one VFR aircraft whose track takes him within close proximity to YEUA, he is a regular, he calls every time and asks if there are skydive operations at YEUA. I keep an eye on him, I know who he is if I need to talk to him, if I call him he answers, Smart man
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Mel-burn
Posts: 4,875
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Me? I'll be calling quickly on 122.1 because of the training stuff coming out of Mangalore then getting back onto Area so a nice ATC can brighten my day if needs be.
Why on earth would you be on 122.1 ?
Surely it's not a typo as you've written it 3 times in your post
Just typos.
I agree with the points made by Kaz, Tank and Bob.
Beware folks: There's always some electronic gadget that will save us all.
I agree with the points made by Kaz, Tank and Bob.
Perhaps people are so busy twisting dials they miss hearing and seeing the essentials?
It would be interesting to know the science that could compare safety outcomes per different electronic gadgets. … Looking out the window in the right direction still works pretty well too!
Had I got out the map, or even replied to ATC, my lookout would have been impaired. Where the transmissions beneficial? In this instance not at all.
Had I got out the map, or even replied to ATC, my lookout would have been impaired. Where the transmissions beneficial? In this instance not at all.
If you were looking for that traffic as a result of the ATC concerns, then I would suggest the transmissions were indeed beneficial. Sounds like there was an airprox (correct me if I'm wrong), but were you responding to their actions or does your normal routine prevent you from using any other equipment in the aircraft (including maps or your radio)?
Sprucegoose
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Hughes Point, where life is great! Was also resident on page 13, but now I'm lost in Cyberspace....
Age: 59
Posts: 3,485
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
I think some of you are missing the point, the idea is to have a number of defences (layers), with eyes (see and avoid) being the last line of defence. I would prefer not to be relying on my ageing eyes as the only defence, it is much easier to spot someone whom you have spoken to, been advised by ATC, or seen on TCAS. 
Tankengine, as someone who has never glided, can you tell me more about FLARM?
Tankengine, as someone who has never glided, can you tell me more about FLARM?
I'd suggest that most VH registered experimental aircraft haw newer / better avionics than equivalent VH aircraft because its cheaper because it avoids the whole CASA certification / installation rort. If CASA reduced the regulatory burden of fitting avioincs there would be an immediate improvement in safety.
As a start if CASA allowed LAME's to sign out minor modifications (as occurs in the US) it would reduce the cost of many avioinics installations by $1,000 by eliminating engineering orders for minor hardware fitment issues.
I'd also suggest that the modern practice of VFR aircraft being actively discouraged to make any radio calls is detrimental to safety. For a while after we were discouraged to make position calls, most pilots would request local QNH as a mechanism of a) confirming that we were on the correct area frequency and b) effectively providing a traffic alert for other aircraft. But that to has become actively discouraged.
When the radio boundary map was discontinued the transition to showing frequencies on the ERC charts was bungled and even now it can be difficult to find on a map - especially in flight. It would be my observation that a large number of VFR pilots do not understand (and many do not carry) ERC charts, yet that is where the area frequencies are. The frequencies are available on GPS units, but how many VFR pilots subscribe to an update service?
There is also a developing (even if misguided) culture of not using the radio to remain unseen by CASA because of the fear of punitive action by CASA.
In the old days of DED reckoning navigation, you spent nearly all of the time looking outside and we weren't as accurate at following a track. So, the chance of being in conflict with another aircraft's track was much less and the chances of seeing another aircraft were higher and our skills at changing track to avoid other aircraft were a bit better.
So, I think there has been a reduction of skill associated with the implementation of new technology. But I think CASA / ASA have also contributed by a) discouraging / making it harder to make position calls and b) only implementing the parts of GPS / transponder technology that make life easier for them. Why don't we have the same access to traffic information through GPS systems that they do in the US?
Around airports, the traffic that worries me most is RA(Aus). The radio discipline of this segment is (in my opinion) completely inadequate. As an IFR pilot, descending from high altitude at relatively high speed into an airport with local RA(Aus) traffic scares me. I think few RA(Aus) pilots understand the speed differential and big percentage don't effectively monitor the radio at all.
As a start if CASA allowed LAME's to sign out minor modifications (as occurs in the US) it would reduce the cost of many avioinics installations by $1,000 by eliminating engineering orders for minor hardware fitment issues.
I'd also suggest that the modern practice of VFR aircraft being actively discouraged to make any radio calls is detrimental to safety. For a while after we were discouraged to make position calls, most pilots would request local QNH as a mechanism of a) confirming that we were on the correct area frequency and b) effectively providing a traffic alert for other aircraft. But that to has become actively discouraged.
When the radio boundary map was discontinued the transition to showing frequencies on the ERC charts was bungled and even now it can be difficult to find on a map - especially in flight. It would be my observation that a large number of VFR pilots do not understand (and many do not carry) ERC charts, yet that is where the area frequencies are. The frequencies are available on GPS units, but how many VFR pilots subscribe to an update service?
There is also a developing (even if misguided) culture of not using the radio to remain unseen by CASA because of the fear of punitive action by CASA.
In the old days of DED reckoning navigation, you spent nearly all of the time looking outside and we weren't as accurate at following a track. So, the chance of being in conflict with another aircraft's track was much less and the chances of seeing another aircraft were higher and our skills at changing track to avoid other aircraft were a bit better.
So, I think there has been a reduction of skill associated with the implementation of new technology. But I think CASA / ASA have also contributed by a) discouraging / making it harder to make position calls and b) only implementing the parts of GPS / transponder technology that make life easier for them. Why don't we have the same access to traffic information through GPS systems that they do in the US?
Around airports, the traffic that worries me most is RA(Aus). The radio discipline of this segment is (in my opinion) completely inadequate. As an IFR pilot, descending from high altitude at relatively high speed into an airport with local RA(Aus) traffic scares me. I think few RA(Aus) pilots understand the speed differential and big percentage don't effectively monitor the radio at all.
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: in the classroom of life
Age: 55
Posts: 6,864
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Agreed with AKRO 99%
The other 1% is that the cost of a GTN750 to me or you is the same, and they both need installing. My hourly rate is more than the shop, but it gets done right the first time
As for Mr H. Hughes, that about sums it up. Recently I have been advised by ATC of several threats, some of which I and another pilot on board have never seen, even with regular updates on where to look.
The worst was almost two weeks ago, departing IFR with more than SCT at 2000 to the west of the coast. BNE CEN gives me traffic in a urgent tone of voice on a VFR climbing right through my path, and when I played this back later later and did the maths, this was almost certain to be RV confetti all over Morayfield....well the acreage parts at least.
The funny
NOT part despite not being able to spot any directed traffic before or since, this one I had not a chance of hell in seeing until we either hit or came that damned close to hitting we would have seen each others eyeballs....through the mist of the cloud!!!!
I will concede one small option, there was as I broke through later a small ravine along that track, which may have been considered clear of cloud below 3000, but FFS in a busy area this is akin to flying along a sewer pipe with nowhere to go.
Clearly not able to take avoiding action, nor listening out as BNE CEN tried to verify, it was my decision to bug out and do an orbit, which thankfully I did. Reminds me I must track that ATC down and thank him. Mind you he saved a Jaba mid-air thread, maybe not everyone is glad to hear that.
My thoughts are see and avoid is the least effective when it is not directed, and even then it is a 20% chance.
Be careful up there!
99%The other 1% is that the cost of a GTN750 to me or you is the same, and they both need installing. My hourly rate is more than the shop, but it gets done right the first time
As for Mr H. Hughes, that about sums it up. Recently I have been advised by ATC of several threats, some of which I and another pilot on board have never seen, even with regular updates on where to look.
The worst was almost two weeks ago, departing IFR with more than SCT at 2000 to the west of the coast. BNE CEN gives me traffic in a urgent tone of voice on a VFR climbing right through my path, and when I played this back later later and did the maths, this was almost certain to be RV confetti all over Morayfield....well the acreage parts at least.
The funny
NOT part despite not being able to spot any directed traffic before or since, this one I had not a chance of hell in seeing until we either hit or came that damned close to hitting we would have seen each others eyeballs....through the mist of the cloud!!!! I will concede one small option, there was as I broke through later a small ravine along that track, which may have been considered clear of cloud below 3000, but FFS in a busy area this is akin to flying along a sewer pipe with nowhere to go.
Clearly not able to take avoiding action, nor listening out as BNE CEN tried to verify, it was my decision to bug out and do an orbit, which thankfully I did. Reminds me I must track that ATC down and thank him. Mind you he saved a Jaba mid-air thread, maybe not everyone is glad to hear that.
My thoughts are see and avoid is the least effective when it is not directed, and even then it is a 20% chance.
Be careful up there!
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 490
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So an aircraft fitted with one radio like mine and following that track (but not actually overflying or invading the Euroa drop zone would be on what frequency:
122.5 or maybe 122.7 because it is marked for gliding;
126.7 because there is no dedicated frequency;
122.1 because within 10 NM of a CTAF with. A dedicated frequency; or
122.4 because the CAAP says that is what should be used and the CASA head just reinforced it in his monthly media blurb?
122.5 or maybe 122.7 because it is marked for gliding;
126.7 because there is no dedicated frequency;
122.1 because within 10 NM of a CTAF with. A dedicated frequency; or
122.4 because the CAAP says that is what should be used and the CASA head just reinforced it in his monthly media blurb?
If flying towards Locksley I would tend to be on Locksley CTAF 121.1 before 10NM (probably 12-15), to have some awareness before making a call at 10NM. So before Euroa if travelling south.
Flying away, I would probably switch to area before 10NM if there was no traffic on CTAF. However, if someone called then called inbound at 10NM and saw me going in the opposite direction they would probably want to know why I wasn't on CTAF.
What frequency is used at Euroa? Being within the 10NM Locksley CTAF the reasonable assumption would be the same frequency, but some comments imply that is not the case.
Incidentally, Euroa illustrates a problem with the idea that the frequency is based on whether the airstrip is shown on the map. The strip to the south of the highway is shown on the WAC, but not the VNC. So should users be on 126.7 or area (or, perhaps, 121.1)?
Jack Ranga:
Kaz, 122.4 with your transponder on, I'll let you know what's going on at all of those places.
In the area I fly, I hear very little useful traffic information on area. Usually, any traffic information is given relative to an already identified aircraft - so I have no idea if they might be referring to me, without knowing where the other aircraft is. I generally go with the odds and assume it isn't.
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Australia, maybe
Posts: 559
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi Jaba,
A question for you if I may be so bold.
If you were at 1,700 feet and the other aircraft was at 2470 feet, who was climbing through who's path?
The worst was almost two weeks ago, departing IFR with more than SCT at 2000 to the west of the coast. BNE CEN gives me traffic in a urgent tone of voice on a VFR climbing right through my path...
If you were at 1,700 feet and the other aircraft was at 2470 feet, who was climbing through who's path?