Huge Willy Airspace

[iPahlot]

Now Dick I do agree with your point that we should copy some of the more established aviation authorities. CASA and Air Services tend to behave that somehow Australia invested aviation, therefore we know better, or that they just think the air behaves differently down here.

However, the nanny state that is Australia would not really "gel" with some of these notions given the perception of safety often is more important than any real safety matters in this country.

[gerry111]

Dick,

I agree with you that the management of DSH were incompetent.

I respect your opinion regarding current RAAF leadership but happen to totally disagree with you.

They aren't incompetent, mate.

If you genuinely believe that they are, then please get on to talk back radio and prove your argument.

Sometimes I wish that I'd take up your offer to meet and talk. Perhaps over a tea or coffee? But I'd only be telling you that the world simply doesn't revolve around you. And you might not want to hear that.

[allthecoolnamesarego]

Dick,
A genuine question. What are some of the 'best practices ' you are referring to?
I'm not being smug or sarcastic, just curious.

Second question, again without malice, do you know what is going on in that Military airspace? Have you seen the multi platform and multi tasking that is going on in there?

Sometimes military and civilian shouldn't mix.

As for the incompetent leadership you speak of, I respectfully disagree.
The term 'World's best practice' can most times be replaced with 'cheapest option'. A fancy name doesn't cover what it really is.

[The Banjo]

Back Pressure wrote:

Huge Willy Dick ?

That map did not look like I expected !!!


My "Willy map" is not that big either, but big enough to fill a pram 3 times

[Arm out the window]

I even offered to fund RAAF personnel to travel overseas and see how the North American military can efficiently handle civilian traffic without constant holding.
But it has never happened- they are too insecure to ask advice and copy the best .

I think you'll find most senior RAAF leaders have either had months or years in the states on tasks, visits or exchange postings and would be well aware of how things work over there.

You have a great knack of painting the picture as you want it seen, Dick ...

offered to fund RAAF personnel to travel overseas

who? when? anyone who could have learnt anything they didn't already know?

But it has never happened- they are too insecure

Never happened, because it had already happened! but you're using this non-situation to suggest to us that:

a) You know best
b) They are incompetent
c) You tried your hardest to fix it, but to no avail.

Now, don't forget to invoke a crash and somehow link it to the stubbornness of the RAAF denying clearances to pilots in need.

[Alchemy101]

For those saying that clearance will be forthcoming if requested, even if the airspace is red - is this really the case? Quite frequently NAIPS suggests ongoing clearance 'may not be expected' for at least one of the chunks of controlled airspace there, which, given the corridor, might mean you can't proceed.

I've flown through williamtown airspace return on the VFR coastal about six times in the last year.
Once (early on a saturday) I flew through unmolested with immediate clearance.
Four times I was told to hold at either or both the upper or lower limit of the corridor for anywhere from a few minutes to ten minutes or longer.
Once I was unable to proceed due Wx along the route, and requested a turn back south. This was apparently very difficult as there was another aircraft in the corridor about 5 miles back, and I was close to 'requiring' it to get things done.
A few times I've not entered the VFR route because of the broadcasts saying that airspace is on short notice activation and is about to become active (which to the low hour VFR pilot is super unclear whether clearance will be forthcoming for the return leg), especially when the inland corridor Wx is looking poor.
Exasperated with the above, I have previously phoned the tower, who told me that even though a slice of airspace might be closed, or might not, it 'shouldn't be a worry and should be fine to get you through'

I'm more than willing to admit that my hours (or lack thereof) might be contributing to these difficulties. But when I've flown in the LA basin, I've never been asked to hold before entering a corridor, and these quite often are over airports with 50+ movements an hour.

Why is Williamtown so different? Is there a major wake turbulence problem on the coastal VFR route or something? Or do they burn up and down Nobbys beach at 500 in the jets? It's always a stressful point for planning VFR up and down the coast. Or maybe I should just ask for airway clearance, and avoid the corridor altogether. No idea if that's even possible in YWLM, I've never heard someone try it. Probably because they're sick of it as well, and fly elsewhere.

[Dick Smith]

Can someone answer. Was this activation of such a huge area for one FA18. And how did it get through the link airspace between Richmond and Williamtown.?

Also how come the home for US Navy's entire West Coast fleet at Lemoore Naval Airstation with 175 active FAA18s only requires class D airspace of 4.3 mm radius to 2700' with visual exempt class E above to 18000'?

Why can't the tower at Willy use class D airspace when there is no military traffic present as recommended by CASA?

This would reduce holding of aircraft at Nobbys and Anna Bay. One day a family with young kids is going to end up in the ocean after orbiting at 500' at Anna Bay.

[Band a Lot]

"recommended by CASA?"


Seriously Dick most things CASA recommend are stupid.

[propsmear]

Ask any civilian operator that flies there on a regular basis and they will all say the same thing, "the place is a shambles".

[itsnotthatbloodyhard]

One day a family with young kids is going to end up in the ocean after orbiting at 500' at Anna Bay.

Won't somebody think of the children?!! (Er, just why is it that they're going to end up in the ocean?)

Dick, from the fact that you don't personally approve of how a particular piece of airspace is managed, you've managed to infer that: the RAAF is stuck in the 1950s; it's amazing that it's ever been able to move on from Vampires and Dakotas; its leadership is incompetent; morale must be low; and you are concerned for the safety of those on active service overseas. Might I suggest that while you, as always, have every confidence in your opinions, you may in fact be spouting nonsense?

I'm sure that you aren't really a hysterical dill - I just can't see how coming on here and behaving like one will advance your cause. By all means ask your perfectly good questions about airspace management, but please spare us the histrionics.

[Band a Lot]

Rain, low cloud over water its can be all the same colour in a heart beat.

So it happens.


the pilot continued to track along the planned coastal route towards a thunderstorm, probably encountering conditions such as low cloud, reduced visibility and turbulence, and as a result of one or more of those factors the aircraft descended and collided with water.


https://www.atsb.gov.au/publications...-2013-063.aspx




Safety message

Tracking visually via a coastal route in marginal weather conditions can be advantageous in terms of ease of navigation and absence of elevated terrain, but can also increase the risk of spatial disorientation in the context of drastically reduced visibility exacerbated by a lack of surface definition when over water






And

One of the fatal accidents occurred on 17 November 2007 when the pilot of a Cessna 337,
registered VH-CHU, was tracking along the coast from Moorabbin, Victoria to Merimbula, New
South Wales. In its investigation into this occurrence, the ATSB found that while manoeuvring
over water at low level in conditions of reduced visibility, the pilot probably became spatially
disorientated and inadvertently descended into the water. The investigation report on this
occurrence, number AO-2007-061, is available at www.atsb.gov.au.

[gerry111]

So isn't it a good rule of thumb for VFR pilots to only fly in genuine VMC? If you find other WX challenges, then perhaps you should simply turn back?


(Of course, you would have planned for that.)


I remain eternally perplexed as to how some VFR pilots are prepared to risk their lives and (more importantly) those of their pax under those circumstances.

[Dick Smith]

So was it only one FA 18?

[iPahlot]

So was it only one FA 18?

If you had have bothered to read both of the links I posted you would know the answer to the question you repeatedly ask...

In short, no it wasn't just for 1 F18.

[wishiwasupthere]

Normal night ops from Williamtown (which happen nearly every night of the week) don't get publically notified anyway, so if the airspace is active, there's a pretty good chance there was a combination of Hornets and/or a refueller and possibly a Wedgetail operating in there. The only reason that the FA18 to Richmond was publicly notified would be that it would be such a rare event that it would be prudent to advise the locals to hopefully avoid noise complaints.

[Alchemy101]

So does anyone know why the coastal route is so low, and inflexible?

I recall heading south, after holding at Anna Bay at 1000 for about ten minutes, that my request to descend to 500 due weather was refused multiple times. Maybe it's because they wanted to keep us on radar, but was there seriously traffic below us ??

And has anyone ever been granted clearance to deviate from the corridor due weather (e.g. cutting the corner to avoid the usual Port Stephens low cloud)?

[illusion]

"my request to descend to 500 due weather was refused..."

WHAT WERE YOU DOING THERE IN THE FIRST PLACE?????

[Lead Balloon]

Holding.

The hint is in the post.

[Alchemy101]

Leadballoon - heading south in the coastal route. There were small cumulus clouds FEW at 1000 ft between Newcastle and Anna Bay, of course, when your route is exactly prescribed, surprise, a puffy bit of a fluff is right in your way. Most people would probably just hammer through it, but I try to actually follow the rules. Avoidable if I had deviated a bit out to sea (not a huge fan in a SEP) or inland (definite no-no to WLM ATC) so how is going under it unreasonable? It's not even dubious in legality.

Don't assume everyone is cutting corners in marginal visibility

[Lead Balloon]

All unremarkable, A101.

I wasn't criticising. I was responding to illusion, who I think was.

BTW, in similar circumstances I would tell WLM Approach I am descending to 500 due weather. Indeed, if the circumstances were sufficiently urgent, I would declare a MAYDAY and tell them that I am diverting to land at WLM. If the controllers and hotshots in the area couldn't manage around a slow-moving, announced and identified light aircraft for 8 whole minutes, our defence is well and truly stuffed.

I'd rather be safe on the ground, dealing with the consequences of my outrageous criminality and failure to understand the dog-and-tail metaphor, than shark feed off Stockton Beach.