Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > PPRuNe Worldwide > The Pacific: General Aviation & Questions
Reload this Page >

Australian Class E article – the full text

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

Australian Class E article – the full text

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 1st Apr 2016, 10:48
  #21 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 4,603
Likes: 0
Received 74 Likes on 29 Posts
How about. I find this really mysterious. You have obviously been involved for many years
In Airspace and attempting to stop the changes I have wanted by copying the best in the world.

Yet you post anonymously on this site and have never phoned me to have a discussion .

Who are you? Why are you secret? What's going on? Are you Voices of Reason?

Why would you do this? Is it how you run your life ?
Dick Smith is offline  
Old 1st Apr 2016, 10:50
  #22 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: SA
Age: 63
Posts: 2,363
Received 137 Likes on 100 Posts
I won!
I thought it was about safety. Safety shouldn't have outcomes expressed as winning/losing.
sunnySA is offline  
Old 1st Apr 2016, 11:22
  #23 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Melbourne
Age: 72
Posts: 774
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
A bit of paranoia creeping in.
fujii is offline  
Old 1st Apr 2016, 12:45
  #24 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Seat 1A
Posts: 8,560
Received 76 Likes on 44 Posts
Yet you post anonymously on this site and have never phoned me to have a discussion .

Who are you? Why are you secret? What's going on? Are you Voices of Reason?

Why would you do this? Is it how you run your life ?
Love it, love it, love it!!
Capn Bloggs is offline  
Old 2nd Apr 2016, 04:38
  #25 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: NT
Posts: 710
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Yet you post anonymously on this site and have never phoned me to have a discussion .
Pointless, Dick, as you are only ever on Tx.

Who are you? Why are you secret? What's going on? Are you Voices of Reason?
'We' wonder what makes you come to that conclusion, Dick.

Why would you do this? Is it how you run your life ?
Nah, Dick, I've been retired for four years, have a few wines every afternoon, read this forum and can't let people be sucked into believing that 'airspace reform' can be grounded on anything other than rigorous cost/benefit and risk analysis. That never happened with NAS and all the other previous bungles.

Once again, opinion and 'I want' just doesn't wash.

If you persist with what 'we' regard as re-writing history, 'we' will rebut.
Howabout is offline  
Old 2nd Apr 2016, 08:41
  #26 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 4,603
Likes: 0
Received 74 Likes on 29 Posts
Howabout. What would you then do with the present " half wound back" situation if you were in Mr Skidmores position? Or do you think the present airspace is satisfactory and needs no change?
Dick Smith is offline  
Old 2nd Apr 2016, 10:22
  #27 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: NT
Posts: 710
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Or do you think the present airspace is satisfactory and needs no change?
Not at all, Dick.

Given my past, my intuition tells me that the pure US CTAF model is the way to go (and I've always felt that way); and that Class E down to 700 AGL makes sense. But that is just MY OPINION!

My opinion, like yours, doesn't count for squat. Change must be predicated on analyses and facts: cost/benefit and risk analysis are the only rational determinants; not opinion!
Howabout is offline  
Old 2nd Apr 2016, 23:54
  #28 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 4,603
Likes: 0
Received 74 Likes on 29 Posts
Ok. We should be working together as we do have something in common.

Personally I don't believe we could afford to have every airport with an IFR approach with class E to 700 agl.

I prefer the Canadian system ( which parts of our NAS decision was based on) where low density airports remain with class G.

No need for low level E at places like Bourke and Birdsville.

And my opinion , like yours does count. How do you think I made the original changes? Those at CASA have no stated view on Airspace design if it involves change. Or if they have they are not game to be open about that view. Really sad.

That's why we can have an effect.

Last edited by Dick Smith; 3rd Apr 2016 at 01:46.
Dick Smith is offline  
Old 3rd Apr 2016, 04:24
  #29 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Australia
Posts: 4,955
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Why should 'deeper pockets' matter, Leady, if your argument is credible?
Howabout,
Simple, really, truth is not an absolute defence to an accusation of libel.
Better than years ago, but still not absolute, according to one of the busiest defo. SCs at the Sydney bar.
Tootle pip!!
LeadSled is offline  
Old 3rd Apr 2016, 07:13
  #30 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: YMML
Posts: 1,838
Received 16 Likes on 6 Posts
You do realise that if I give you a clearance on the ground then I can't clear anyone else in or out until I can positively establish separation? Same as if I clear you for an instrument approach I can't clear anyone else in or out until I can positively establish you've either landed or are clear of the area of conflict
le Pingouin is online now  
Old 3rd Apr 2016, 07:44
  #31 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 4,603
Likes: 0
Received 74 Likes on 29 Posts
Yes. Just like operating from Coffs.

That is if you are allowed to use proper proven procedural separation standards like they do in Canada and the USA.

And at a non tower airport it won't effect any competent pilot because they wait on the ground if someone else is shooting an approach in IMC. Once VMC exists the NAS operates like our class G airspace.

I have flown IFR in lots of terminal E in the USA. Most has zero radar coverage from the IAF. Delays are no measurably different than in Australia. Same in Canada

Open up your mind. Le Pin
Dick Smith is offline  
Old 3rd Apr 2016, 08:11
  #32 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: NT
Posts: 710
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Howabout,
Simple, really, truth is not an absolute defence to an accusation of libel.
Leady, that's real sorry crap. You've never posted anything libelous IMHO. We've had many combative disagreements, and you're views don't align with mine; but this has always been healthy debate.

How anyone could threaten you, from a 'legal' perspective, totally disgusts me. Just can't figure the motive for such a venal threat.
Howabout is offline  
Old 3rd Apr 2016, 08:18
  #33 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Seat 1A
Posts: 8,560
Received 76 Likes on 44 Posts
Once VMC exists the NAS operates like our class G airspace.
No! The only way E works like Class G is if one or both aircraft change to VFR, so waiving all "benefit". You just don't get the concept of self-segregation do you? Just because it's sky blue, doesn't mean that all we do is look out in the direction of the other aeroplane and we don't hit them. So now we have ex'IFR aeroplanes operating in a dirt-road category (VFR), clogging up the airwaves with their self-separation calls.

The other significant issue is managing CTAF traffic at the same time. I have been in the multi-aircraft scenario numerous times, where Class E would be a total embuggerance: being controlled by ATC on one radio and having to negotiate separation with a VFR on the other radio on the CTAF. That is an accident just waiting to happen.
Capn Bloggs is offline  
Old 3rd Apr 2016, 08:26
  #34 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Karratha,Western Australia
Age: 43
Posts: 481
Received 6 Likes on 4 Posts
I vaguely recall a conversation I had with a friend who had just returned from Canada after 2 years of Medical flying over there. I will be upfront and say that I can't recall all the specifics of it, so I am presuming that a few of the more worldly operators here can perhaps correct or clarify any of the following.

I seem to recall him saying that there was a bit of an unwritten rule that in VMC on approach there was an expectation of cancelling IFR and proceeding VFR so the next departure could get away into the class E. So it was a one in one out type scenario with the controller being remotely located in a tower elsewhere (I think).

Firstly, does that sound about right to anyone?

Secondly, if so, do our airlines have the scope/desire to cancel IFR on descent to make this work? Otherwise I can't see how E will be better than 1 in 1 out in IMC or VMC even with the US standards (which from memory aren't signficantly different to ours).
I asked this on page one and it has been glossed over. Is this a reasonable summation of how it works in Canada? Because if everyone is going to downgrade to VFR we don't have a problem.
Awol57 is online now  
Old 3rd Apr 2016, 08:29
  #35 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: YMML
Posts: 1,838
Received 16 Likes on 6 Posts
I love it! So the only reason it works is because they downgrade to VFR and use the same dirt road rules we use.

I can't separate the arriving aircraft from you if I don't know where you are, so they get to wait.
le Pingouin is online now  
Old 3rd Apr 2016, 09:02
  #36 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,154
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
if so, do our airlines have the scope/desire to cancel IFR on descent
Unless they have changed their position from some years ago, the answer is probably no ........

Last edited by CaptainMidnight; 3rd Apr 2016 at 09:41.
CaptainMidnight is offline  
Old 3rd Apr 2016, 09:05
  #37 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Australia/India
Posts: 5,302
Received 425 Likes on 212 Posts
And thus descend into the lowest category airspace established even in third world countries.

Must be a better way ...
Lead Balloon is online now  
Old 3rd Apr 2016, 09:13
  #38 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: NT
Posts: 710
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I seem to recall him saying that there was a bit of an unwritten rule that in VMC on approach there was an expectation of cancelling IFR and proceeding VFR so the next departure could get away into the class E.
Perfectly correct, Awol57. They can cancel IFR to avoid the 'one-in-one-out' scenario in remote places and facilitate departures as 'good neighbors.' But none of these guys have a 'death wish,' and it's not an 'expectation' in all scenarios. It's PIC judgement as to whether one cancels, has a handle on the traffic, and can make the decision in respect of safe pilot-to-pilot separation.

Something we should import with E down to 700 AGL in very selected locations. But that is just my opinion and cost/benefit and risk analysis must take primacy.
Howabout is offline  
Old 3rd Apr 2016, 09:29
  #39 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 4,603
Likes: 0
Received 74 Likes on 29 Posts
You all win.( other than Howabout) You have convinced me that the class E terminal airspace that's used in just about every other leading aviation country in the world can't possibly work here.

Just a hint of how it works overseas. When you cancel IFR in E in VMC it then works like our class G. When you are in IMC class E works exactly like class A.

But it could not possibly work here so make sure it's not even tried at even one airport- say Benalla where our present system allowed five or was it six fatalities?

Resist resist resist any change in every way you can - you and others have stopped it so far for 25 years. Wait for another serious accident with more fatalities for a Royal Commission to bring in the international proven safer system.

And our airlines already fly around in Class G now. That's just like E after the pilot has cancelled IFR. But our airlines couldn't possibly do that ! Are they that dopey?
Dick Smith is offline  
Old 3rd Apr 2016, 09:45
  #40 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Up The 116E, Stbd Turn at 32S...:-)
Age: 82
Posts: 3,096
Received 45 Likes on 20 Posts
hey Dick,

Have a look at the AOPA letter released today.....

9 recommendations.....

You'll 'lurve it'..!!

Cheers
Ex FSO GRIFFO is offline  


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.